Crown at Toronto van attack trial says defence witness exaggerated Minassian’s ‘deficits’ in report

Never-before-seen messages sent by Alek Minassian were revealed in court today as a glimpse into his ability to empathize. Adrian Ghobrial now on the continued cross-examination of the defence's key witness on day 15 of the Toronto van attack trial.

By Michael Talbot

Warning: Details of the trial are graphic in nature, discretion is advised


In his assessment report of Alek Minassian, Yale psychiatrist and key defence witness, Dr. Alexander Westphal, concluded that Minassian’s social and communication skills are childlike, that he’s unable to feel empathy, and that he’s naive and often “baffled” when faced with simple questions.

Crown attorney Joseph Callaghan chipped away at those conclusions in court on Friday, accusing Westphal of exaggerating Minassian’s deficits to bolster a not criminally responsible (NCR) defence.

Minassian has pleaded not guilty to 10 counts of first-degree murder and 16 of attempted murder.

He admitted to planning and carrying out the attack with a rental van on April 23, 2018, but his defence team argues he should be found NCR due to autism spectrum disorder (ASD) — a defence that has never succeeded in a Canadian court.

On Friday, Callaghan delved into Minassian’s hours-long police interrogation, using portions of it to try and discredit Westphal’s findings.

Callaghan said the fact that Minassian lied during the interrogation in a bid to protect his father showed that he can indeed show empathy.

On the day of the attack, Minassian’s father, Vahe “Vic” Minassian, earlier testified that he gave his son a ride, thinking he was meeting a friend at a Chapters in Woodbridge.

But during his interrogation Minassian told a detective he walked and took public transit on his way to pick up the rental van, fearful of implicating his dad.

“Do you agree that Minassian’s lying about his father showed he has perspective and could show empathy?” Callaghan asked.

“I don’t think it required much sophistication in this context,” Westphal answered.

Callaghan also argued that the fact Minassian knew of his right to remain silent, and requested a lawyer, showed his thought process was not naive, but in fact rather sophisticated.

“I’m going to suggest that Mr. Minassian demonstrated himself to be quite thoughtful in this interview,” Callaghan argued, adding that Minassian’s “deficits in communication and social skills in life are not nearly as severe as you portray in your report.”

“I disagree,” Westphal countered, noting that Minassian was easily duped during his interrogation into abandoning his right to remain silent, instead opening up about the attack before his lawyer was present.

“I don’t see (the interrogation) as a great example of social dexterity or complex thought,” Westphal said. “The only thing I see about it … is his inability to kind of recognize that he was abandoning his right to an attorney after he asked for it. And I think that was naive of him.”

Later, Callaghan showed examples of Facebook messenger conversations Minassian had with friends, where they talk about things like computer programs and their looming careers.

“I’m going to suggest that … these messages show Mr. Minassian has very good communication skills,” Callaghan said.

“I put a lot of emphasis on the fact these are written messages,” Westphal stressed. “It’s easier for him to interact on social media than face to face.”

“But isn’t Facebook these days real life?”

“Perhaps.”

Over the course of several hours, Callaghan displayed various examples of text conversations that Minassian had with his father, and with a variety of friends, that Callaghan argued were evidence of “normal” interactions.

Westphal’s main counter-argument was that interactions via mediums like texting aren’t the same as real-life interactions and the exchanges are still “limited” and consistent with an autism spectrum diagnosis.

Callaghan once again accused Westphal of omitting evidence in his report, questioning why he left out a portion where Minassian admitted the attack was “devastating and irreversible.”

“He understood the moral wrongfulness of his actions but didn’t understand the … devastating impact it would have on peoples’ lives,” Westphal tried to explain.

CityNews reporter Adrian Ghobrial is covering the trial, follow his tweets below:

 

On Thursday, Callaghan relentlessly grilled a flustered Westphal, accusing him of cherry picking evidence from his assessment of Minassian to better fit a NCR “narrative.”

Callaghan played audio from Westphal’s assessment with Minassian. At one point Minassian says: “I didn’t feel that I had to do it”

However, Westphal’s summary notes presented to the court did not include that statement. Instead, Westphal submitted a quote from Minassian saying that once he rented the van, he felt like he “had to go through with it.”

“I’m suggesting you didn’t include this in your notes,” Callaghan said. “You only included facts that fit your narrative.”

Westphal’s main argument supporting a NCR verdict appears to be that although Minassian was not psychotic, his ASD distorted his thinking and made it difficult for him to understand his actions “from a moral standpoint.”

Most successful NCR defences involve someone suffering from psychosis — most often individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia.

“Overall, it was our impression that despite the fact that he was not psychotic, his autistic way of thinking was severely distorted in a way similar to psychosis,” Westphal summarized in his court-submitted notes.

Top Stories

Top Stories

Most Watched Today