Wednesday, 6 November 2013
ENGLISH
ABORIGINAL
CEREMONIAL
SPEAR IN LEG FOR
BERNARD COLLAERY
AT RECONCILIATION PLACE
CANBERRA AUSTRALIA OCEANIA
FOR CANBERRA'S CENTENARY 2013
5 BROCKMAN STREET NARRABUNDAH
canberraapostles.blogspot.com
canberradisciples.blogspot.com
canberranativityset.blogspot.com
canberramanurepile.blogspot.com
canberrablasphemers.blogspot.com
drstephenallnutt.blogspot.com
professorsusiehayes.blogspot.com
drjohnmcmahon.blogspot.com
rightsfor370millionindigenouspeoples.blogspot.com.au
CEREMONIAL
SPEAR IN LEG FOR
BERNARD COLLAERY
AT RECONCILIATION PLACE
CANBERRA AUSTRALIA OCEANIA
FOR CANBERRA'S CENTENARY 2013
5 BROCKMAN STREET NARRABUNDAH
canberraapostles.blogspot.com
canberradisciples.blogspot.com
canberranativityset.blogspot.com
canberramanurepile.blogspot.com
canberrablasphemers.blogspot.com
drstephenallnutt.blogspot.com
professorsusiehayes.blogspot.com
drjohnmcmahon.blogspot.com
rightsfor370millionindigenouspeoples.blogspot.com.au
rvbailiff2011actsc214.blogspot.com.au
vaticanholyseeapostolicnunciature.blogspot.com.au
"7pm'ish Wednesday 16 November 2011
Dear Bernard, YCS 98Z & YLY 777 - BERNARD COLLAERY TAX FRAUD
It is great to see you driving your red puegot. Whilst your landcruiser is parked at 35 Anembo Street. No doubt you will delight in explaining how much anal and oral and vaginal intercourse you had with Angela Magnocavallo when YLY 777 was parked overnight at 48 Anembo Street Narrabundah. ANGELA MAGNOCAVALLO has walked over to my place and told me she is suicidal since you multiple penetrated her. Or have you both said to me "You are having a relationship." If you you drive my family violence partner case 10528-9 of CC2011 to suicide I will call for you to be charged with aiding and abetting a suicide. Or did you come to tell me ANGELA MAGNOCAVALLO has suicided by 6:15pm 16 November? Or did you waiti for an hour to: - or threaten to:-
1. Punch me?
2. Get four people to do whatever they could to me?
3. To ask me how I would feel about helping you ensure ANGELA MAGNOCAVALLO has 7 orgasms everytime you take her to bed as she knows she has 7 orgasms everytime she goes to bede with me? Unlike you I am fairly fit!
4. To tell me ANGELA MAGNOCAVALLO is deceased after taking an amphetamine (speed) overdose as she feels guilty or ashamed?
As you have not penetrated ANGELA MAGNOCAVALLO for 9 months at a rate of countless orgasms a day, due to your extremely fit ability as per me than you will never enjoy the heightened quality of communication which has resulted in me asking ANGELA MAGNOCAVALLO if she will marry me, to which ANGELA MAGNOCAVALLO says "yes" before I give ANGELA MAGNOCAVALLO her next orgasm, until ANGELA MAGNOCAVALLO has at least 7.
Chief Justice Terrence Higgins can rely upon ANNE COLLAERY and similiar fact evidence to ascertain you copulate countless women, even 46 years your junior, even you clients ANAGELA MAGNOCAVALLO, 30 years your junior, when you appear in MAGISTRATES COURT DV 674 2011 and ALEXANDER MARCEL ANDRE SEBASTIAN BARKER BAILIFF can confirm your inability to provide seven orgasms to ANGELA MAGNOCAVALLO as per her long time lover, confidant and solemate.
Chief Justice Terr4ence Higgins does not need 7 High Court, 4500 Australian and New Zealand Barristers and 800 years of common law precedents prohibiting you from being allowed to practice as a solicitor for sleeping with a client ANGELA MAGNOCAVALLO and sleeping with a clients ALEXANDER MARCEL ANDRE SEBASTIAN BARKERA BAILIFF's defacto, girlfriend, lover, solemate and vegetable garden companion. A mother of our kids.
Yours sincerely
ALEXANDER MARCEL ANDRE SEBASTIAN BARKER BAILIFF
P.S. I WILL ENJOY HAVING YOU DECLARED BANKRUPT AS YOU OWE $3 MILLION AND YOU ONLY MOVED TO 5 BROCKMAN STREET TO SAVE RENT"
MAIL@ACTLAWSOCIETY.ASN.AU GPO BOX 5623 0011 612 6247 5700 612 6247 3754
UN WHO NOT GUILTY BY MENTAL IMPAIRMENT 22:31
Saturday 2nd November 2013
UNITED NATIONS WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION NOT GUILTY BY MENTAL IMPAIRMENT IS INTERNATIONAL LAW
R v ALEXANDER MARCEL ANDRE SEBASTIAN BARKER BAILIFF
[2011] ACTSC 214 (30 November 2011)
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9qsJGqRmMJbQmFjeGZxejBaYWs/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9qsJGqRmMJbSE1NM1Jpb09TM00/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9qsJGqRmMJbZnRlNkxuV0hfVFU/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9qsJGqRmMJbdlFPYXc5UEpTQTA/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9qsJGqRmMJbNkVNWTF0RmpBbEk/edit?usp=sharing
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT
No. SCC 139 of 2009
Judge: Higgins CJ
Supreme Court of the ACT
Date: 30 November 2011
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE )
) No. SCC 139 of 2009
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY )
R
v
ALEXANDER MARCEL ANDRE SEBASTIAN BARKER BAILIFF
ORDER
Judge: Higgins CJ
Date: 30 November 2011
Place: Canberra
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
The defendant is not guilty by reason of mental impairment.
MR GILL: The accused pleads not guilty to the charge. Incorporated in that plea is a plea of not guilty by reason of mental impairment, specifically due to symptoms of brain damage.
HIS HONOUR: Yes. All right.
MR GILL: With my friend’s consent at the commencement of the trial proceedings, I tender a report by Graham George.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
MR GILL: Your Honour already has the report in that bundle of documents that was tendered for the fitness to plea proceedings.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
MR GILL: It is a report dated 29 April 2011.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, I have that.
MR GILL: I tender one of the attachments referred to in it which includes the article by Mr Leeshman.
MR LAWTON: Or a reference to it.
MR GILL: Reference to an article by Mr Leeshman.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, I have that. Thank you.
MR GILL: Specifically your Honour will see that Dr George says: “Mr Bailiff has an established diagnosis of an organic mental disorder, inclusive of a persistently hypermanic to manic mood disorder in association with personality change and cognitive difficulties.” I note that the report was prepared in relation to fitness to plead, but we say that that raises the issue of mental impairment.
HIS HONOUR: Well it is the objective circumstance and the purpose for which it is prepared that is important.
MR GILL: On receipt of that report and before the commencement of the rest of the trial, I ask your Honour to permanently stay the proceeding.
HIS HONOUR: On what basis?
MR GILL: On the basis that there has been excessive delay in the proceedings.
HIS HONOUR: Unreasonable delay I think is the term.
MR GILL: The application is made in reliance on the authority of R v Kara Lesley Mills [2011] ACTSC 109 (‘Mills’) and the right that is conferred under the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) (‘Human Rights Act’) as recognised by your Honour in Mills.
HIS HONOUR: It certainly is that.
MR GILL: We acknowledge that this case does not involve the delay that was seen in the case of Kara Mills. The delay in her case was a much more grievous delay.
HIS HONOUR: Egregious, yes. There is also the question of the effect upon the fairness of the proceeding.
MR GILL: In Ms Mills’ case, helpfully, your Honour noted there was an extension to the common law jurisdiction which enabled the grant of a stay, in that there was not a necessity to find those other common law factors which had previously been required because of the right to be heard under the Human Rights Act.
The particular issue that we say arises here in contrast to Mills, is that Mills involved a relatively serious offence in relation to drug trafficking. So the offence that is brought before your Honour today does not fall into that sort of category. Even if it is not categorised as a trivial offence, we would say that in the overall scheme of matters it is a minor offence in the sense that the offence provision itself is not at the most serious order of magnitude and the particular ---
HIS HONOUR: I do recall that I dismissed a charge in relation to another person, Mr Robertson I think his name was, who was suffering from considerable mental problems. I dismissed it on the ground of relative triviality, under the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) of course.
MR GILL: Well this is likewise a damage to property type offence.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, it is.
MR GILL: But when one looks at the scope of what the encompassed damage property - - -
HIS HONOUR: Well I think I need to have more on that.
MR BAILIFF: Excuse me, your Honour. Could we seek to tender the Magna Carta for the period of time before trial happens?
HIS HONOUR: No, we do not need the Magna Carta, it has been repealed.
MR BAILIFF: But your Honour - - -
HIS HONOUR: It has been repealed. Take a seat.
MR BAILIFF: But your Honour, the Constitution is British as well.
HIS HONOUR: It is still repealed.
MR BAILIFF: We have not repealed it yet, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, we have. Go on.
MR GILL: So your Honour should have a case statement available to you.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, I have.
MR GILL: I have no objection to your Honour seeing that case statement.
HIS HONOUR: Yes. Well I presume that will be the case relied upon anyway, Mr Gill.
MR GILL: It is. There is a necessity to call Mr Franks.
HIS HONOUR: Could you give me another copy? There are so many papers in the file now. I think that the Crown would concede that those facts would be established except for - - -
MR LAWTON: Yes, there is some minor disagreement about the mechanism.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, I understand.
MR LAWTON: There is a potentially major disagreement surrounding the circumstances which lead to Mr Bailiff to act in such a manner.
HIS HONOUR: No, I understand his perception is that the structure he built was being attacked and he thought he was entitled to defend himself in respect of that, or defend the structure if you like. At law that would not run.
MR GILL: Certainly an aspect of his defence is his belief of an entitlement to act in the manner in which he acted.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, I understand that. As I say, that would not be accepted as a matter of law, but it would be seen as being generated by his organic brain damage condition.
MR GILL: Yes. Yes, and it goes to that criteria under the mental impairment.
HIS HONOUR: I would have difficulty in rejecting that I think.
MR GILL: The significance of that on the application for a stay is that when one looks at the nature of the offence and one looks at the nature of the accused, the offence itself does not fall in the degree of magnitude that one saw in the Mills case.
HIS HONOUR: It does not, no that is true.
MR GILL: Meaning that a lesser delay justifies a finding that there has been an unjustifiable delay because of the nature of the offence that is brought before the Court.
HIS HONOUR: I think that having regard to the history of the matter, on balance, I do not think a case for a stay is made out.
MR GILL: As the Court pleases.
HIS HONOUR: Mr Lawton.
MR LAWTON: Your Honour, did we mark that report of Dr George as an exhibit?
HIS HONOUR: No I have not, but I can do so.
MR LAWTON: Yes.
HIS HONOUR: All right, do you want me to mark that as Exhibit 1?
MR LAWTON: Thank you, your Honour.
EXHIBIT 1 - DR GEORGE’S REPORT
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
MR LAWTON: In terms of the case statement, as you have already said there is some disagreement about the fact that I - - -
HIS HONOUR: Some details.
MR LAWTON: And my friend does with to cross-examine briefly Mr Franks.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
MR LAWTON: I will call him now and then I understand my friend may call some evidence from Mr Bailiff in respect to the issue of mental impairment.
MR GILL: I will make a Prasad application first, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, well that may be appropriate in the circumstances, given Exhibit 1.
MR LAWTON: Yes.
HIS HONOUR: All right, okay. Proceed.
MR LAWTON: Thank you, your Honour. I call Gerald Franks.
MR BAILIFF: Your Honour if you call me I can let you know what happened as well if you wish.
HIS HONOUR: That is all right, we may not need it Mr Bailiff because I do not think there will be very much dispute about it.
MR BAILIFF: Well he had come into my house on numerous occasions with the keys.
HIS HONOUR: All right. Calm down, be quiet and we will just hear this evidence first.
MR BAILIFF: Thank you, your Honour.
GERALD DAVID FRANKS, Affirmed:
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR LAWTON
MR LAWTON: Sir, can you tell the court your full name?---Gerald David Franks.
And you are employed as a social worker at the Canberra Men’s Centre?---I am employed as a Director of the Men’s Centre, yes.
And in respect to the matter before the Court you are aware that you are here to give evidence today about a matter involving Mr Bailiff that occurred on 30 January 2009?---Correct.
And on that day you provided a handwritten statement to police about what you witnessed on that day?---Correct.
And you signed that statement noting to the best of your ability the contents of the statement were true and you are willing to give evidence about them in court?---Correct.
I will show you firstly this document, sir. Can you just confirm that that is a photocopy of the statement you gave on that day and it includes your signature at the end of the statement?---It is, and it does.
And have you had a chance to read that in relatively recent times?---Yes, I read it this morning.
And to the best of your recollection the contents are true?---Yes.
Thank you. I tender that statement, your Honour. I also hand up a typed copy of the statement which was typed a fortnight later.
HIS HONOUR: No objection?
MR GILL: No, there is no objection to that, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: That will be Exhibit 2.
EXHIBIT 2 - STATEMENT OF GERALD FRANKS
MR GILL: Just let his Honour have a chance to read that statement Mr Lawton.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, I have read that.
MR LAWTON: Yes thanks. Just to be clear, Mr Franks, the car that you were driving on that day was owned by the Canberra Men’s Centre?---Correct.
And you did not give Mr Bailiff permission to damage the car on that day?---No, I did not.
That is all the questions I have, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Thank you. Just one before you start Mr Gill. I understand there was a statement by Mr Bailiff to the effect that you could send the bill to his trustee. Did you do that?---Yes, we did, yes.
It was paid up?---Via the insurance company.
Yes, and it was paid up?---Yes, yes.
Thank you. Yes, Mr Gill.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR GILL
MR GILL: Yes, thank you, your Honour. Mr Franks you were the head lessee of that house, is that right?---Correct. Canberra Men’s Centre is the head lessee, yes.
And when was it that Canberra Men’s Centre became the head lessee of the house, roughly?---Roughly 12 months prior to that, it may have been a bit less.
And did that follow some sort of litigation about whether or not Mr Bailiff would be given a house?---The process as I recall it was that Mr Bailiff was under threat of eviction from Housing ACT and Housing ACT approached Canberra Men’s Centre and asked us if we would be prepared to provide an accommodation option for Mr Bailiff in the community, to which we agreed.
Was some sort of order made by Mr Anforth about the provision of a house for Mr Bailiff?---I do not recall.
Do you ever recall Mr Bailiff speaking to you about Mr Anforth making an order for him to receive a house?---Not specifically.
At the time of this incident was there a high degree of conflict between yourself and Mr Bailiff?---At the time of the incident? Not a high degree at the time of the incident.
Well let me ask you this. Had Mr Bailiff expressed his disagreement with Canberra Men’s Centre being on the lease?---Yes.
And he had done that on numerous occasions?---Yes.
Did he believe, in fact, that you were the person on the lease? Sorry, did he indicate to you that he believed that you were the person on the lease rather than the Canberra Men’s Centre?---That is a detail that I do not recall.
Did you visit that house from time to time?---Yes.
Did you have a key to that house?---Yes.
Did Mr Bailiff express to you that he was not happy with you having a key which allowed you entry into the house?---Yes.
Mr Bailiff expressed to you that he did not want you entering the
house?---Without his permission, yes.
Were there occasions on which you entered the house without his permission?---Never.
MR BAILIFF: Objection, your Honour. I have got the note here left in my house - - -
HIS HONOUR: Mr Bailiff, sit down.
MR BAILIFF: He is lying, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: It is not your turn yet.
MR GILL: Now, there was some sort of construction on the footpath area, is that right?---Correct.
And had there been arguments between yourself and Mr Bailiff about whether that needed to be removed?---On the day.
And did you have an argument before that time about whether it needed to be removed?---Not about the structure. About the pile of soil.
Right. And did you provide him with a deadline for removal of the
item?---I did.
All right. And what was the deadline?---I do not recall.
Did you tell him he needed to remove the structure by the end of the week? If you do not remember, you can say you do not remember?---Yes, I do not remember.
Do you remember whether or not you told him that the end of the week was to be a Thursday?---I remember giving him the details of a directive that was provided to me. The exact date, I do not recall. There was a timeline that was provided by, I believe, Housing ACT.
You seemed to indicate in your statement that Mr Bailiff made some sort of threat to harm you?---Yes.
Was that what you meant to say in your statement?---Yes.
All right. I want to suggest to you that you are incorrect when you assert that he said, “I’ll bash you”?---I have told it as I heard it from Mr Bailiff on the day.
Do you ever find it hard to follow what he is saying?---Not really. There are times when the conversation is prolonged and it does become different. In the early stages when our conversations are in a calm frame of mind, Mr Bailiff can sound particularly rational.
They were not calm this particular day, were they?---At the early stages of the conversation, yes.
How quickly did they become uncalm?---Almost instantly when he stood up and decided to go down and damage the vehicle.
That was after you had given him a directive about removal of the material?---It is as according to the statement. I talked to him about removing the material, yes.
And that was also in the context of his ongoing disagreement about you having a key to enter what he regarded as his house?---No, it was not about that at all.
How long had he been expressing to you his disagreement about you being able to enter his house?---Probably about six months. Maybe a bit longer.
However long it was, did you observe that to be something that he would become upset about?---Yes.
I come back to the incident with the car now. You say that two different rocks were put through the various windows?---Yes.
Can I suggest to you that it was one rock put through the two windows? Do you agree with that?
HIS HONOUR: In other words, it could have been the same rock he picked up again after he - - -?---Absolutely.
MR GILL: It could be?---It certainly could be.
He immediately offered compensation in respect of the damage that was done?---Correct.
And he indicated to you some purpose connected with getting into the Supreme Court when he did it?---I do not recall him saying anything about the Supreme Court. I do recall him saying, “Now I have an issue with Canberra Men’s Centre.”
MR BAILIFF: Objection, your Honour, that is so untruthful. I was there.
HIS HONOUR: All right. Just take a seat, Mr Bailiff. We will come to your case in due course.
MR BAILIFF: I just want you to know this guy is lying, or he has got dementia.
HIS HONOUR: Well, we will work that out later.
MR GILL: They are all the questions I have got for Mr Franks. Thank you, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Thank you.
MR LAWTON: There is nothing arising, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Thank you, Mr Franks. You are excused.
WITNESS WITHDREW
HIS HONOUR: Now, Mr Lawton.
MR LAWTON: That is the evidence for the Crown, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Okay.
MR GILL: Before commencing the defence case, which involves calling Mr Bailiff, your Honour, I say that the material before you is such as to justify an acquittal without hearing anything further. I rely on the authority of R v Prasad 23 SASR 161, which simply reflects what, of course, is the case in any trial, that once the prosecution case closes, the fact finder is entitled to acquit if they are not at that point persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt as to the guilt.
HIS HONOUR: The only ground upon which I could base that would be mental impairment.
MR GILL: At this point, yes.
HIS HONOUR: You understand what the consequences of that will be?
MR GILL: Yes.
HIS HONOUR: Well, let us just take that in order. First of all, mental impairment does include brain damage.
MR BAILIFF: Thank you, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: That definitely brings it within that particular concept.
You then go to section 28 of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) (‘Criminal Code’). He obviously, it would seem to me, did know the nature and quality of his conduct. Pursuant to Dr George’s reports, there may be a question about his capacity to control it. That certainly does seem to arise.
MR GILL: Certainly it seemed to represent some sort of justification for his actions.
HIS HONOUR: He certainly would not be able to reason with a moderate degree of sense or composure.
MR GILL: No.
HIS HONOUR: He obviously thought the conduct was not wrong.
MR GILL: Yes.
HIS HONOUR: Albeit objectively you cannot agree with that.
MR GILL: Yes, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Mr Lawton?
MR LAWTON: In terms of section 28(1)(b) of the Criminal Code and the qualification in subsection (2) - - -
HIS HONOUR: I’m going to section 28 (1) (c).
MR LAWTON: Are you going to (c), your Honour?
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
MR LAWTON: I thought you were dealing with section 28(1)(b).
HIS HONOUR: Section 28(1)(b) has been addressed, but I am saying that (c) seems also to be engaged.
MR LAWTON: Yes. It is difficult to divorce. We have the evidence of the prosecution. We have what was expressed by Mr Franks in that it appeared to him that Mr Bailiff decided to smash the car windscreens.
HIS HONOUR: I think that is certainly a justifiable inference. The question is not whether he did decide it but what his knowledge about the wrongfulness of his conduct was and how that was derived. That is the first point. Second, whether the conduct was in any meaningful sense of the word able to be controlled.
MR LAWTON: I submit that your Honour, at this stage, in terms of (c), could be satisfied on the prosecution case that he could control his conduct. But perhaps the issue that your Honour would still need to determine is in terms of paragraph (b) and the qualification of subsection (2). At this stage, I would say to your Honour that with respect to the application made by my friend, the evidence is not so inherently weak. It is quite strong in terms of the actions.
HIS HONOUR: I am not concerned with his actions in this respect. I accept that the actions of smashing the windscreens did take place, and it was apparently an act of will on Mr Bailiff’s part because he rejected the proposition that his structure should be removed.
MR BAILIFF: Your Honour, I gave him a chance to drive his car away after he threatened me - - -
HIS HONOUR: Okay, that is all right. I am not concerned about a chance to drive away.
MR BAILIFF: He could have driven away, your Honour. I am from Healesville, your Honour. That is where bushfires happen, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: I do not want to know about the bushfires.
MR BAILIFF: This is just when the bushfires were happening, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: I just want to listen to Mr Lawton for the moment.
MR BAILIFF: Yes, cool.
MR LAWTON: I will be very brief, your Honour. I submit on those conclusions your Honour is reaching that (a) and (c) are not enlivened but the issue still remains - - -
HIS HONOUR: Certainly I am satisfied (a) is not engaged. I am not satisfied that (c) is not engaged but that is not the question. The question is whether it is engaged. (b) on the other hand - - -
MR LAWTON: (b) is perhaps probably the pertinent one, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, it is.
MR LAWTON: And we are talking on the balance of probabilities in subsection (5). I submit that your Honour needs to hear something more before being satisfied. Of course the difficulty is that one has to divorce what Mr Bailiff has been saying in court today and other days. That is not part of the evidence before you.
HIS HONOUR: There is some question about that. I appreciate her Honour, Penfold J, was talking about that in relation to the plea. But certainly in relation to a jury trial, the conduct of the accused in court is something the jury can take into account.
MR LAWTON: That is right, your Honour. But I suppose what I am saying - - -
HIS HONOUR: With some qualification.
MR LAWTON: With some qualifications and bearing in mind that the proper trial has only commenced some 20 minutes ago. What happened this morning was separate to that.
HIS HONOUR: It was, yes.
MR LAWTON: So my submission would be that although there is some support for section 28(1)(b) being enlivened, your Honour would need to hear something more before being satisfied on the balance of probabilities that it has been made out.
MR BAILIFF: Your Honour, can I put myself in the witness box and be cross-examined by my lawyer please?
HIS HONOUR: No.
MR BAILIFF: Or barrister.
HIS HONOUR: I do not need it.
MR BAILIFF: I recall everything, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Excellent. But in this case the issue that has been raised is whether section 28(1)(b) of the Criminal Code is engaged and whether on the balance of probabilities it has been established that the person did not within the meaning of section 28(1)(b) know his conduct was wrong. For that purpose I take account of section (2) which refers to the fact that: “[a] person does not know the conduct is wrong, if the person cannot reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether the conduct, as seen by a reasonable person, is wrong.”
In my opinion, the report of Dr George, which has been tendered by the prosecution as Exhibit 1, would justify a finding consistent with section 28(1)(b). It certainly seems to me that Mr Franks’ evidence is consistent with that too. There was no rational reason why Mr Bailiff should have damaged Mr Franks’ car. I appreciate Mr Bailiff may have thought that he had a good reason. However, that is the very point: that there was not reasoning with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether this conduct, as seen by a reasonable person, was wrong. In fact, I do not think Mr Bailiff would even know what that standard meant in his state of mind.
So for that reason I do find that Mr Bailiff is not guilty of the offence charged by reason of mental impairment.
MR LAWTON: As your Honour pleases.
MR BAILIFF: Can I give the reason please?
HIS HONOUR: I have got the reasons. I do not need any more.
MR BAILIFF: But can I give you the reason, your Honour?
HIS HONOUR: No. I have already got it.
MR BAILIFF: Can I just jump in the witness box and give the reason?
HIS HONOUR: No, you cannot.
MR BAILIFF: But your Honour, I knew very well that when people are about to die in bushfires and I am being threatened by some guy in 43 degree temperature - - -
HIS HONOUR: Mr Bailiff, I have just found you not guilty. Sit down.
MR BAILIFF: But your Honour, that is not fair.
HIS HONOUR: That I found you not guilty?
MR BAILIFF: Your Honour, I want you to realise that if I gave the symptoms of brain damage - - -
HIS HONOUR: I have got it.
MR BAILIFF: Well your Honour, I meant if I gave it to you - - -
HIS HONOUR: I have got it.
MR BAILIFF: Great that you have it. And if you have the thing, the two sources where it is from, those books - - -
HIS HONOUR: I do.
MR BAILIFF: Then your Honour, you might consider putting the symptoms of brain damage in a law report, as in a decision - - -
HIS HONOUR: No.
MR BAYLSIS: This would be a common law decision, your Honour, so it has the symptoms of brain damage.
HIS HONOUR: Mr Bailiff, I have made that decision. The decision is that by reason of mental impairment, which is as a result of your organic brain damage, you are not guilty of this offence.
MR BAILIFF: But your Honour, can you not you have the symptoms of brain damage in your judgment? I mean like - - -
HIS HONOUR: I just did.
MR BAILIFF: But your Honour, you did not type what I - - -
HIS HONOUR: It is all in the transcript.
MR BAILIFF: But I did not read the symptoms of over familiarity, the callousness, the insensitivity, elevation of mood factors, euphoric. Your Honour - - -
HIS HONOUR: You have now mentioned them all, they are all on the transcript.
MR BAILIFF: Do you want me to read you all four, your Honour, so it is on record?
HIS HONOUR: You just mentioned them, Mr Bailiff, it is all on the record now.
MR BAILIFF: But the whole page, I have not read it to you, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: You do not have to.
MR BAILIFF: I mean, your Honour, the best man in relation to this is my stepfather, okay. I just need a law report to benefit others, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Okay. Enough. That is enough.
MR BAILIFF: So your Honour, I did understand that you handed down a decision.
HIS HONOUR: Okay. Now what is the next order, Mr Lawton.
MR LAWTON: Your Honour, you have made a special verdict of not guilty by reason of mental impairment. That enlivens division 13.3 of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) (‘Crimes Act’).
HIS HONOUR: Yes, obviously custody is not appropriate.
MR LAWTON: Well I think it is a non serious offence in any case, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: I am not sure about that.
MR LAWTON: It is just in section 325 of the Crimes Act.
MR GILL: Section 300 deals with serious offences.
HIS HONOUR: 300.
MR BAILIFF: Thank you, your Honour, for the decision.
HIS HONOUR: That is all right.
MR LAWTON: It is not a serious offence.
HIS HONOUR: No, it is not, you are right.
MR LAWTON: So the only option your Honour has, under section 328 of the Crimes Act, you can make an order that he submit to the jurisdiction of the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal (‘ACAT’).
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
MR LAWTON: I’m sorry, 328 refers to the Magistrates Court. It is section 323, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: That is right.
MR LAWTON: Now you do actually still have a power to detain him in custody.
HIS HONOUR: I could do that, I know, but I do not think it is appropriate.
MR LAWTON: The difference is that you might recall in the matter of R v Nicholls [2010] ACTSC 25 that section 324 makes the presumption that he will be detained in custody.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
MR LAWTON: There is not such a presumption in section 323.
HIS HONOUR: No, I understand that.
MR LAWTON: The only issue that perhaps might be of benefit, your Honour, is to perhaps hear - and my friend might have some evidence to this effect anyway - about what ACAT is doing in terms of the ongoing treatment of Mr Bailiff. You will recall from this morning’s proceedings that Dr George has expressed concerns that he does need perhaps to be better treated than he currently is.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
MR LAWTON: And whilst most of the offences for which Mr Bailiff comes before the Court cannot be considered to be at the upper end of the spectrum, one is always concerned that they may escalate in the future if that treatment is not enforced.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
MR BAILIFF: Your Honour, I will be extraordinarily, extremely well behaved.
HIS HONOUR: Well, can I make one thing clear to you. You cannot go around breaking windows.
MR BAILIFF: Your Honour, I will never do that ever again, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Good.
MR BAILIFF: I am just trying to get rid of the Canberra Men’s Centre. It cost me six grand for security expenses at my house and they came to my house all the time.
HIS HONOUR: All right. Well we do not want to know about that now, because I am just telling you that you cannot act like that, all right?
MR BAILIFF: No, I will never do that, your Honour. I will never do that. Your Honour, the longest serving police officer, that is my great-grandfather, Billy Bunker Aiden, 1832 to 1995. Your Honour, the Bailiffs went from Normandy during the intensive fighting in the Battle of Hastings. You know, a Bailiff has to go to court. So your Honour, I come from a military and legal background. I would never do such a thing, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Good.
MR BAILIFF: I only do what is required.
HIS HONOUR: Can you take a seat now?
MR BAILIFF: Okay. But your Honour can I have the symptoms of brain damage in a law report, your Honour?
HIS HONOUR: Mr Bailiff, take a seat.
MR BAILIFF: Because it is not in the law library, your Honour, and I will be so grateful.
HIS HONOUR: All right.
MR LAWTON: In terms of what the ACAT is doing with Mr Bailiff, I am afraid I need to take some instructions from my instructor who has been detained in another court.
HIS HONOUR: He may get paroled, you never know.
MR LAWTON: He might. But to get a coherent answer to your Honour I think I need to do it that way.
HIS HONOUR: All right. Well when do you want to come back?
MR LAWTON: Would your Honour allow that to occur after the lunch break?
HIS HONOUR: Well I can, or I can make it a bit later.
MR LAWTON: That should be sufficient.
HIS HONOUR: Here he comes.
MR LAWTON: If your Honour would just give me a moment?
HIS HONOUR: Yes, sure.
MR GILL: Perhaps while my friend does that, your Honour. Mr Hancock of the Attorney-General’s Office asked me to pass on that the Attorney has declined to intervene in respect to the notice to the Human Rights Act.
HIS HONOUR: Well as it happened, that was not necessary.
MR GILL: Yes.
MR BAILIFF: Sorry your Honour, we went to the library and I googled brain damage, there is nothing there in the law reports, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Okay.
MR BAILIFF: Can you help with that, your Honour?
HIS HONOUR: Yes, we will add something.
MR BAILIFF: Because my stepfather will not talk to me if I do not have a brain damage precedent, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Right.
MR BAILIFF: You know, he can give evidence if you want, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: No, we do not need him.
MR BAILIFF: But he would love a decision - - -
HIS HONOUR: I am sure he would but we do not need him. Okay?
MR GILL: Your Honour, I am told that there are no ACAT proceedings in relation to mental health. There have been ACAT proceedings in relation to a guardianship order, but not in relation to a mental health order. And we do not believe there has been any application for a treatment order for at least the last 12 months, probably longer than that.
HIS HONOUR: Well I cannot make a treatment order obviously.
MR BAILIFF: Can you send me to a neurologist, your Honour, a neurologist, Alan Leeshman in London, for the holidays?
MR GILL: So that is all I can tell your Honour about that.
HIS HONOUR: All I can do is make an order requiring him to submit to the jurisdiction of ACAT to enable ACAT to make recommendations.
MR GILL: And the question is, does your Honour want recommendations back from ACAT at the end of that process?
HIS HONOUR: And whether that is useful in the circumstances I do not know.
MR GILL: I do not know what your Honour could do if recommendations were made to you at that point.
HIS HONOUR: I cannot make a treatment order for a start.
MR GILL: No. So the legislative scheme does not quite make sense to me, I have to say your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Yes. Well there is a power to make orders considered appropriate which I assume means, amongst other things, if there was a recommendation from ACAT, I can make an order to give effect to those recommendations insofar as the power of the Court extends.
MR BAILIFF: Dr George’s report was his recommendation from ACAT, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Thank you. I have got that.
MR BAILIFF: I am being further traumatised by ACAT who do not have a neurologist and it is so upsetting.
HIS HONOUR: It is very upsetting I am sure.
MR BAILIFF: But I can give them a new precedent.
HIS HONOUR: Okay.
MR GILL: So that there is a question, your Honour, as to the utility of a referral to ACAT.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, I am thinking about it.
MR GILL: It is a discretionary resolution of the matter, and what is not before your Honour is any material which says the discretion ought to be exercised by a referral to ACAT for recommendations.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
MR BAILIFF: You can refer me to my GP over the road, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: I could.
MR BAILIFF: Alan Leeshman, sorry not Alan Leeshman, Stephen Moulding, sorry.
HIS HONOUR: Okay. I have got an idea in mind. Anything you want to say Mr Lawton?
MR LAWTON: I suppose the utility of the referral to ACAT is indeed to find out if they plan to consider an application for a psychiatric treatment order.
HIS HONOUR: Or anything.
MR LAWTON: Or anything. But obviously from the look of section 323, and your Honour might recall from the matter of R v Michael Gary Caine SCC No 214 of 2008 we referred it to the Tribunal, ACAT I should say, so that they could give an indication to your Honour what treatment would be involved and whether or not there would be some utility in the treatment of having him detained and then effectively released immediately. I do not know whether that would arise here.
MR BAILIFF: Your Honour can I offer to give evidence from the witness box, your Honour, please?
HIS HONOUR: You can offer it, but I am not accepting it. I do not see the utility of requiring him to submit to ACAT absent any application from anybody including Dr George. We could always do that anyway. It seems to me the only thing I can do, Mr Bailiff, is to extract from you an undertaking that in the next 12 months you will not engage in any criminal conduct.
MR BAILIFF: Your Honour I am working on this. I promise for the rest of my life I will never do anything except take cases to the High Court, your Honour, involving Sir Anthony.
HIS HONOUR: All right.
MR BAILIFF: And Sir Anthony and I have become friends, and your Honour can I just put on the record, it is in Hansard, in Parliament, that I am the man who took the action in the High Court that prompted every Police Commissioner in the country to contact Canberra and the Australian Crime Commission to be established. Your Honour it is on the world stage that I got the Pope’s apology to Oceania in 60 days, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Excellent.
MR BAILIFF: So whilst Phil says delusion, your Honour, it is brilliance, your Honour. Sir Anthony even said I was his brilliant law student, and I am giving his phone number and - - -
HIS HONOUR: All right, I have got your promise, have I?
MR BAILIFF: Your Honour, you have got my oath. Do you want me to get into the witness box and give oath evidence?
HIS HONOUR: Perfect. In that case, the proceedings are concluded.
MR BAILIFF: Your Honour I will never do anything, your Honour, I am really grateful, your Honour. Your Honour, can I shake your hand, your Honour? I thank you, your Honour, God bless you, your Honour.
I certify that the preceding three hundred and forty (340) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of his Honour, Chief Justice Higgins.
Associate:
Date: 30 January 2012
Counsel for the Crown: Mr J Lawton
Solicitor for the Crown: Director of Public Prosecution for the ACT
Counsel for the Defendant: Mr S Gill
Solicitor for the Defendant: Kamy Saeedi Lawyers
Date of hearing: 30 November 2011
Date of judgment: 30 November 2011
Dr Stephen H Allnutt
M.B.Ch., B, FRCPC, FRANZCP
Forensic Psychiatry
Level 5, Suite 506, 75 Miller Street, North Sydney NSW 2060
PO Box 876, North Sydney NSW 2059
Telephone: 61 2 9929 2913 Facsmilie: 61 2 99292914
10 April 2012
CONFIDENTIAL
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions
Reserve Bank Building
GPO Box 595
CANBERRA CITY ACT 2601
Attention: Ms Sian Jowit
Telephone: 61 6207 5399
Facsimile: 61 6207 5428
Dear Ms Jowit
RE: ALEXANDER MARCEL ANDRE SEBASTIAN BARKER BAILIFF
DOB: 5:54PM TUESDAY 25TH AUGUST 1970 1 hour and 57 minutes later GOUGH WHITLAM THREATENED TO BLOCK SUPPLY
Your Reference: 201210593
Introduction
Thank you for your letter dated 25 January 2012.
You requested that I provide you with a psychiatric report in relation to the accussed, Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff. This report represents a clinical evaluation conducted with the accussed at the AMC on 10 March 2012 and a telephone call on 27 March 2012. The purpose of this report is to provide an opinion with regard to his mental state at the material time of the alleged ofending.
He has been charged with a number of offences including minor theft for alleged offence that occurred on 27 November 2008, and between April 2011 and December 2011; improper use of an emergency call service for alleged offence, give false alarm of fire and emergency to other for alleged offence, contravene a protection violence order for alleged offence, trespass on premises for alleged offences.
I have previously provided a report dated 27 March 2012; this report corrects typing errors in that report.
Role Confidentiality and Consent
From the outset I explained to the accused that I was a psychiatrist requested by you to provide you with a psychiatric report in relation to his mental state. I explained to him that any information provided to me would not be confidential and could be made available to a wider public should it be tendered to Court. I formed the view that he understood this and consented to continue.
Provider No. 23951661 ABN 67 934 406 282
Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff 10 April 2012
Source of Information
I have read the Expert Witness Code of Conduct Part 28 Rule 9C and Part 28A, Rule 2 of the District Court Rules and agree to be bound by those Codes.
I had the opportunity to review:
1. Police Statement of facts.
2. The criminal history.
3, The relevant law section.
4. A number of communications it appears provided to me by you, which are written by the accused.
He was 41 at the time that I saw him he was incarcerated at the AMC; he was not seeing a psychiatrist or a psychologist regularly; he was single; he was not taking medication.
Clinical Issues
From outset it should be stated that the accused's presentation was unusual; he was wearing glasses, a hat, his effect was intense; he manifested pressured and rapid speech, he was difficult to interrupt and urgent need to speak to me about Angela Magnocavallo and from outset explained that he had previously been in a motor vehicle accident; he was overfamiliar, and perservated (returning to the same topic repeatedly) and disinhibited.
He commenced by telling me that his solicitor Bernard Collaery was involved with his girlfriend, that Bernard Collaery had been a friend for 20 years and that he was having intercourse with his girlfriend Angela Magnocavallo; he was distressed by this because Bernard Collaery was his solicitor and that having intercourse with his girlfriend was unprofessional; Bernard Collaery had been his neighbour for 20 years; he felt it upsetting that his confident Angela Magnocavallo told him she was having a relationship with his solicitor.
On one occasion Bernard Collaery came into his driveway and told him that he should punch him and that on a second occasion Bernard Collaery came and told him that Angela Magnocavallo loved him; Bernard Collaery was still involved in his case; he kept having Bernard Collaery involved because he was involved before Bernard Collaery had intercourse with his girlfriend, who had slept in his house for 9 months.
He explained that the closest person in his life, Vanessa Bayliss (his sister), was killed when he was 15 years, 108 days and 12 hours old in a motor vehicle accident, it was very upsetting for him; he was in a coma he said after this for about four weeks with loss of consciousness for four weeks and broke his arm; he stated he was "15 years, 108 days and 12 hours" at the time that it happened.
He then again returned to the issue of how upset he was about the relationship that his confident Angela Magnocavallo was having with Bernard Collaery; at this stage I noted that he appeared to me to be quite perserverative on this issue.
He then went onto state that following the accident, he had ben told that he suffered "elevation of mood, reduced concentration span, overtalkativeness, expanisiveness, overfamiliarity and euphoria"; he referred me to a book on brain damage brought out by Blackwell Press and Lishman referring particularly to page 127.
He went onto speak about Chief Justice Higgins and then went onto speak about issues surrounding World Health Organisation and what sounded to me like diagnosis criteria for International Classification for Impairment Disability Handicap.
Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff 10 April 2012
In an attempt to keep him focused I enquired about his mental state, he said at the time that I saw him, his mood was normal, he denied euphoria or depression; he thought his concentration was "good" and then went onto tell me that he read the Bible in 14 days from New Years Day and the 14 January 2012 and between 27 December 2011 and 31 December 2011; that he had also read 700 pages of a book about what the Bible explains; he said when he read, all he has to do was be away from distractions and he could focus on his reading; he had high energy levels, by way of example he explained to me that he had ridden his bike from "Canberra to Queanbeyan to Captains Flat to Major's Creek to the Araluen Valley and then to Moruya Heads"; he had got Nelson's Mandela's book "Road to Freedom" and read it on Friday night, Saturday and Sunday and then returned to Canberra by bike, covering a distance of about 452 kilometres.
He then refered back to Bernard Cumacille and Gerrard Cumacille which he said was [Bernard Collaery and] Mel Gibson's actual name and the he asked me if I had watched ABC news. [the Cumacille cousins]
He then went onto speak about David Spicer [david.spicer@abc.net.au 61 2 8333 4294 61 2 8333 3070] who he said was the first cousin of his stepfather, that David's real name was Spitzer; he was then referred to Professor Erica Bates and that her her husband had brain tumours and they did in a suicide pact in 1989; he spoke about the mother of Philip W Bates and Erica Spitzer was the brother was the brother of Dr George Spitzer when he changed his name to Spicer (anglicised) the name because he was a GP. [He played Scrabble with Dr George Spicer and beat won 2nd game.]
1989: Bates, Erica; Elizabeth Christopher; and Barry Moore: "Australian Rehearsal Techniques" in Klabbers, Jan et al (editors) Simulation Gaming on the Improvement of Competence in Dealing with Complexity, Uncertainty and Value Conflicts: (Pergamon);
1. Philip Bates Date of Admission 1979. Bcom; LLB; FACHSE; FACLM Hon. Areas of Practice. Alternative Dispute Resolution; Appellate; Commercial; Common ...
2. 1988, English, Book edition: Australian health & medical law reporter : in 1 volume / Philip W. Bates, John C. Dewdney and the CCH health and medical law ...
3. Home · All editions; This edition. 1990, English, Conference Proceedings edition: Hospital & medical negligence claims / by Philip W. Bates, Brian Bromberger ...
4. Creator: Bates, Philip; Subjects: Liability (Law); Liability (Law) - Australia.; Medical jurisprudence - Australia - Handbooks, manuals, etc. Audience: Specialized ...
5. Search. Home; This edition. 1994, English, Book edition: Brain damage : medico- legal aspects / Philip W. Bates, general editor ; Marco Migotto, sub-editor.
He said he was found not guilty by mental impairment on 30 November 2011[Chief Justice Terrence Higgins made United Nations World Health Organisation International Classification Impairment Disability Handicap law] and returned home and there was a restraining order and Angela Magnocavallo walked past his residence every single day. [Angela Magnocavallo did enjoy 7 orgasms twice or three times in my Sealy for nine months][I can bill her $7 million per seven orgasm package]
He stated that Angela Magnocavallo was his neighbour, ha had met her sister near the bus stop and had been introduced to her in about January 2011; he did not see her for a week and a week later they had coffee and then entered a relationship, which lasted between February and October 2011.
From February to October 2011 he had an intimate relationship with Angela Magnocavallo; he said at no point did she terminate the relationship.
Angela Magnocavallo told him that she used speed for about 10 years and that she supported he speed habit by having three jobs; when she said this he took it to mean that she got money to buy speed; he believed that Angela Magnocavallo left Perth to avoid being involved in a legal matter involving he supplier [trial]; he thought this was important because Angela Magnocavallo would have realised by tellling him about the speed habits and that she had three jobs; that in fact, in his view, she was dealing.
It was not until October 2011 when Angela Magnocavallo had accessed his "entire letterbox" and read all of his mail;, she wanted to access his trust account; she had met his lawyer and the public advocate; she met his lawyer, Bernard Collaery, who had breached client confidentiality, she had looked through his mail; she ascertained what his trust was.
He then again explained that previously he had been in a motor vehicle accident and was unconscious for a month; he said he now thought that his lawful entitlement as a consequence of this was "multimillion dollars"; he had never "participated" in it because he was in the "High Court"; by suing the Road Traffic Authority he would not be a millionaire, he would be a billionaire because he introduced a diode that admitted light to Mercedes Benz - Daimler Chrysler. [Mercedes Benz - Daimler Chrysler will have 7 cars chauffer me for the rest of my life each carrying a $billion in the boot for my savant]
He went onto explain that he was a "savant" when he was 19, he was offerred a million dollars to buy his firs idea [Village Roadshow]; his mother's brother (Uncle [Wilfrid] Barker) not only won the proposal to the International Olympic Committee to hold 2000 Olympics, he then raised $2,600,000,000 in media and marketing rights for the Sydney Olympics.
[Sports Marketing and Management Suite 401, Level 4, 39 - 41 Chandos Street St Leonards NSW 2065 61 2 9959 3466 61 2 9929 5218 Office Manger Kim Hogarth khogarth@smamgroup.com]
Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff 10 April 2012
He had told his mother his idea and Uncle Barker said it was a "multimillion dollar idea"; he was given a Commodore 64 computer in 1983 when he was 13; he programmed in basic and observed the Microsoft disk operating system had two spaces for dates, month and year; that in 1983 he had observed that in 31 December 1999 the date would change to 2000 thus he knew (in 1983) of the potential for the "Y2K problem"; he said that everyone then, 14 years later, spent money hiring programmers to overcome the Y2K problem; this caused everyone to be able to take lawful action against Microsoft; he then went onto state he knew this in 1983. [International Business Machines will pay me $3777 billion immediately][Microsoft will pay me $3777 billion immediately]
He pointed to a number of names on a piece of paper, one was "Bailiff"; he stated that Bailiff meant a "minor Court official with police authority"; that "Barker" meant a crier of the Court"; he stated that, as a result of the Barker's list of people in all the Courts and colonies around the world were called the Barker's List. [Bailiff's went from Normandy to England in 1066 with a Papal Bull to become King of England][I demand a Papal Bull to be become King of England, King of Kings and reside at the Vatican Papal suite immediately, do you realise who I am yet?]
He then explained that his father was posted [we drove] to Hamilton for one year, that he had gone to the Woomera Rocket Range and in the sand dunes (at age 10), he saw the sun being reflected from something, he followed the reflection and found a stone hunting tool; he realised this fitted his thumb and finger perfectly; he realised at age 10 that he was in someone else's "backyard" and the rent for this place would be enormous.
He then explained that his father had been in London and was a "bobby" and that his mother's grandfather (Billy Barker) was the longest serving Policeman in the history of Australia, serving between 1883 and 1931; at this point he urged me to read the case R v Bailiff 2011. [UN IC IDH precedent][ACTSC 214]
He then made reference to the first case he prepared in the High Court; at 21 he was contracted to
develop products that complemented Scrabble; the first case he did in the High Court was against the Chief Justice which was reported on; this case prompted every Police Commissioner in Australia to contact Canberra for the Australian Crime Commission to be established.
When he was 30 his Uncle asked him if he was doing the "Mabo" case; he was not a lawyer but his family name was Bailiff; he matched his challenge by doing a case for an Aboriginal man he prepared "a High Court Writ"; as a result all the embassies undertook investigations using international law, then took "it" back to their country and eventually there was a "Papal Bill. [Nobel Peace Prize for Pope's
Apology to China and Nobel Peace Prize for Pope's Apology to Oceania and Nobel Peace Prize for UN Covenant for Rights of 370 Million Indigenous Peoples]
I had frequently lost the thread of his account-his rapid speech made it difficult for me to follow and understand what he was communicating to me.
I asked him about Angela Magnocavallo; he stated that Angela Magnocavallo told him about her speed habit in October 2011; the moment he became aware she used speed Angela Magnocavallo got a good idea he was going to report it; he was not in a position to associate with someone who did speed because he was doing cases in the High Court. [I am not going to report it, just put it on the internet in 72 languages]
Account of the Alleged Offending
The offending period November 2008 until about December 2011; he stated that during that period time his mood was good, he did not endorse any significant depressive symptoms; he endorsed adequate sleep, appetite, energy, motivation, concentration, self esteem; he denied any interests; he denied suicidal thoughts.
He did not endorse any perceptual disturbances such as voices, visions, tastes, smells, messages from the TV, the radio or the newspaper; he did not believe that anybody was plotting to harm or kill him, he denied any external control.
Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff 10 April 2012
He denied that in that time he was utilising any drugs or alcohol.
27 November 2008
He said that he never stole anything, he was financially secure, that "the guy" at the newsagency refused to sell him stamps; [to post his rubbish] he told the owner that it "was pretty serious rubbish to be before the High Court"; he then bought a $1,000 worth of stamps elsewhere; that night he took all the owner's junk mail off the newsagents windows and signage as well and threw it in the rubbish bin because he felt disrespected; he said this was not theft; he had no intention to permanently deprive him; at that stage he was 38 living opposite the shop; he was not taking medication; he was not seeing a psychiatrist; he was working to build cases; he posted information aroung the country about cases involving negligence of the Chief Justice of the High Court because his solicitor was representing him the criminal activity to the High Court.
14 April 2011
He went to the police station; had junior person who he thought was not a police officer; he thought the only way to speak to the police officer was to make a phone call; he thought she was a junior volunteer; he made the emergency call because in phoning "000" on him; he was not prepared to put up with the insolence at Woden police station.
14 June 2011
In June 2011 he was age 40, living at home; he was not taking any psychiatric medication; he had spent most of that year removing old trees from his old block an planting different seeds and trees; he was collecting these from many different places; he said the ground in Canberra is dry so he was collecting these for his backyard to cover the ground so it did not get dry and he would have more insect activity under the leaves and increase fertility.
In June 2011 he said he had a leaf bag; he was in Canberra Avenue (at the chiropractor); he had filled about four one tonnes [sand] bags with leaves; he said he had raked up the leaves and told "the man at the gym" that the leaves were on the nature strip; he asked this person if he minded if he raked up the leaves and took them; he went into the reception and asked if he could borrow a rake; when he went in they had a bag of peanuts there and said he would be more than all the leaves in exchange for a bag of peanuts; the person told him it was only for members; the accused suggested he become a member of the gym; he said that the person's behaviour was "hostile and threatening to him"; he said this person had no idea he knew that he had illegally converted his premises into a gym; he said this person told him "if you do not leave I will call the Police", so the accused said he would call an ambulance; he took the four bags of leaves to the house next door and then hid in a caravan; explained that when someone calls an ambulance, police can hear this as well , by calling an ambulance he was also calling the notifying the police of a "problem"; this meant that when the police arrived at the gym and the person would have to explain that the police were called because a man was raking his leaves; the ambulance would also speak to the man at the gym; he hoping the police and ambulance would calm the man at the gym down; the ambulance arriving would indicate that he feared for his safety (the police had previously shot a person and made him paraplegic so this was protective for him); after the police came he went to the pictures and he was arrested later; they arrested him on the day he triple "000" after they came to his house and climbed a tree; he stated that one of the negotiating officer's had said he would like to shoot him but not have his gun with him as he was there as a negotiatior; he stated the police regularly threatened him, and climbing the tree was his only safety. [Sergeant Adrian Craft 3260 & Sergeant Harry Thomas Hains 4928]
[My solicitor Bernard Collaery Attorney - General Australian Army Special Air Serices hostage negotiator rang me whilst I was up the tree and asked me if I would get down if Sergeant Adrian Kraft 3260 agreed not to have his 12 Australian Federal Police shoot for climbing a tree to be very publically fatally shot dead at Narrabundah shops]
Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff 10 April 2012
7 July 2011
He said Andrew Jones had a casfe; when he was dragging four bags of leaves down the road Andrew Jones tooted his horn because he was dragging leaves down the road; he dragged leaves past Andrew Jones Cafe and said "fatso where do you want me to drop the leaves?", Andrew Jones had earlier tooted his horn and had got a restraining order against him; once he got the restraining order he Andrew Jones called the Police saying he had breached the restraining order, he knew that the Police taking a statement the Magistrate would dismiss this out of Court which he said happened , so Andrew Jones felt humiliated.
2 August 2011
He had been served a summons breach of restraining order; because he had been served a summons he photocopied it; he climbed a tree and got onto the first floor and through the window of the real estate agent; the restraining order said he could not walk within 10 metres so he climbed a tree to avoid breaching the restraining order and gave copies to the "Words Worth Writing Place" and gave photocopies; he then went down fire exit so he did not go within 10 metres of the cafe and on 4 August 2011, her went to Spirit and Beauty Slaon and also gave them a copy of the document; he slept in Spirit of Beauty Salon because the door was not locked to protect the white goods from being stolen, this was over the road from where he lived; on 5 August 2011 he gave a document to Danny's Bakery.
October 2011
Between October 2011 and 14 November 2011, he visited Angela Magnocavallo on numerous occasions; [he had penetrated her for nine months in his Sealy Posturepedic giving her seven orgasms every penetration ] he said he did not understand what was going on with her; in addition Bernard Collaery was lending Angela Magnocavallo his car and paying for his fuel; Angela Magnocavallo had said he would leave a note if he wanted to talk, so he left a note saying "talk" and then police came around and arrested him for trespass and served him with the restraining order so he could not go to Angela Magnocavallo.
24 December 2011
An Apprehended Violence Order was taken out against him by Angela Magnocavallo and Bernard Collaery in October/November 2011; Angela Magnocavallo lived near to him; he was sitting at the shops talking to one of his neighbours, she was 100 metres away form him; the shop was in front of his house; she walked 50 metres from him, he never left; he sat there the whole time; when he had first seen her he said to his Italian friend "Dominic [Celestino], Bernard Collaery was shaging Angela Magnocavallo"; when she came close he knew she was in breach of the protection order and he had three independent witness the breach of the order.
He said that Angela Magnocavallo made a complaint because she was a "control freak" and had presumed that he had told Dominic [Celestino] and his friend that his friend was shagging Bernard Collaery; it was in fact that he said Bernard Collaery was shagging Angela Magnocavallo and so she was incorrect; he said she made a complaint because she was angry she had no ability to control his faxes. [Every woman would love 7 orgasms]
Angela Magnocavallo made a condition that she could not visit him, so he faxed her workplace and made phone calls about what he was thinking; he explained he had been in a relationship with hter and he was communicating with her; there was no restraining order served at time.
She had asked for written consent to access his trust account; he had got written consent and tore it up into four pieces, ha had gone to the toilet and she had tried to stop him; Angela Magnocavallo was over behind and he was trying to stop her; he denied any aggression; he denied making any threats; he went to her place of employment; he said that she came out of the conference room. [I only give women $7 million for pregnancy]
[God Bless Bernard:Australian Aborigininal Law means Bernard Collaery will be ritually speared to death for crime of taking another man's girlfriend]
Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff 10 April 2012
Other Issues
In 2011 he continued to post envelopes out: he posted them he said to 659 shires, 800 police stations and a 1,000 emergency services locations; he stated the more he did this (alluding to a document he provided to me headed Royal Military College of Australia - Duntroon); he said the more pages went around the country the more the people contacted Duntroon to complain about the fact that the Australian Federal Police had proceedings against Rachel Michelle Piercey for making a false allegation that he had a gun to her head; he had reiterated that this was a false allegation.
He said the Chief Justice of the High Court and he had since become [mates] friends and this page became evidence in the Supreme Court last year.
He stated that Rachel Michelle Piercey had been dealt with; his life had been affected by her; by the time he put the case in the High Court he had been arrested by people who wanted to discredit him because he had been arrested 60 times for allegations that had no substance; he had been arrested by people who wanted to discredit him because he had proceedings in the High Court against people who were continually conspiring against him.[Rachel Michelle Piercey's solicitor Richard Refshauge was hired by the Australian National University]
The list had incited Rachel Michelle Piercey to make false allegations and that all the people on this list (the document alluded to) were communicating with each other; he did not currently believe they were still communicating but they had before.
But he was seeing injustice in that he had been bullied by society because he had brain damage.
Between August 2011 an November 2011 he had sent [faxed] Angela Magnocavallo numerous faxes; Angela Magnocavallo had been his lover for 9 months; he thought that doing this was "good communication"; he stated that it was common knowledge that no-one ever went out with friends; I asked him if he understood Angela Magnocavallo had refused contact with him and asked him if he understood "no" in terms of personal relationships; he stated "you don't understand who I am , I take the issues to the High Court, I continued to follow her because she morally came to talk to me".
Previous Psychiatric, Family, Medical and Substance Abuse History
He first saw a psychiatric on 21 September 1992 when he was admitted to Woden Valley Hospital for five days; he was not sure what the diagnosis was, he thought it was "nothing"; he did not believe he had ever received any consistent ongoing treatment by a psychiatrist.
He suffered a motor vehicle accident in 1985 [Jerrawa Creek Gunning where "superelevation in road is incorrect as the road was designed for 30 years a go when the speed limit was lower"], as already described, and told me that he had brain damage; he had never taken any psychiatric medication, he had never attempted suicide; he told me he had had neuropsychological testing which had showed frontal lobe damage. [New South Wales will pay me $7 billion in compensation immediately and $3777 billion for killing my sister Vanessa Camille Bayliss 19-10-69 7-12-85]
He denied knowledge of a family history of mental illness.
He had never abused drugs; he drank socially but drank infrequently.
He had never been diagnosed with diabetes, high blood pressure, cancer, heart disease, epilepsy, convulsions, meningitis, encephalitis, head injuries, thyroid or hormonal problems.
He denied antenatal difficulties; his thought his milestones were normal but the was born eight weeks premature.
Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff 10 April 2012
He achieved year 12: he said he had no learning problems; he was an above average student; he had no difficulty making or maintaining friends; he got on well with teachers; he was never expelled or suspended but stated that after the accident he became isolated from close friendes and spent a significant period of time in Royal Canberra Hospital: he did not endorse memory or significant behaviourial problems.
He came from a family of three; he was the second eldest; his parents seperated when he was 10; he was brought up by his mother but did continue to see his father; he denied being exposed to domestic violence, sexual abuse or physical abuse; he though the came from a loving and supportive familial environment; [He did not tell me his mother used mogadon, serepax, valium, tenuate dospan, marijuana and alcohol and bashed the shit out of him and his sister; or Vanessa said "We will walk (5.5km down Chum Creek Road Healesville) home together so we get home together as mum can not bash one of us as much as she can bash two of us."] his sister [Vanessa] died when she was 16. [due to the superelevation in the road Jerrawa Creek Gunning known as Hume Highway]
In relation to employment he seemed to be somewhat vague; he alluded to being ofered a million dollars [by Village Roadshow] at age 19 and starting his own company; he said he was employed by "numerous people" in the "private sector" but it did not appear that he could give any specific details in relation to this.
His first relationship had been in year 11 and 12 for two years, his next relationship was 12 months in 1997 and the following relationship for 9 months with Angela Magnocavallo.
Documentation Review
There was a report by Dr George dated 24 August 2003 in relation to his fitness to plead, in this report he reviewed the opinions of Dr Sidney Smith, Dr Greg Hugh and Associate Professor Cathy Pwen noting that Dr Sidney Smith saw him on 7 May 1996 and thought he had a diagnosis of manic episodes; on 14 January 1999 he saw Dr Greg Hugh who thought his diagnosis to be "contentious", considering the diagnosis of a psychotic disorder due to brain injury with delusions and mood disorder and also frontal lobe syndrome but he thought he possibly had a primary psychotic disorder; Associate Professor Kathy Owen saw him on 12th October 1999 and believed he suffered from "pseudologia fantastica", that is a factious disorder and that he suffered from symptoms of frontal lobe damage; that there was, over time an improvement in his level of cognitive function but mild cognitive impairment continued noting that he had suffered a closed head injury in 1985; Dr George was of the view that an organic mental disorder incorporating changes in cognitive, mood and personality; bipolar affective disorder and possible evidence of factitious disorder and a mixed personality disorder in the context of his brain injury; he noted that he was circumstancial, tangential, and expressed delusional ideas with grandiosity; he barely drew a breath during the interview; his affect was positive and affable; he was preoccupied with matters associated with the High Court believing the Chief Justice to be incompetent. [On the balance of probability Chief Justice Robert French would not know what a French letter was or how to use one as he does not have inquisitorial powers.]
There was a report dated 23 July 2004 by Dr George; he noted in interview he moved from subject to subject but there were no links in the different subjects; he had difficulty following his associations on occasions; he manifested grandiosity and mood elevation; he found it difficult not to draw the conclusions that he was delusional; he thought he suffered a mental illness with a mood disorer and associations with prior damage presenting with frontal lobe damage.
There was a report by Ray Lines, intern psychologist, which is dated 11 November 2004, who noted they first had contact with him on 17 September 2004 and had met him on seven occasions; he remained fixated on legal issues and the desire to make common law, and continuously informed him of his brain damage; he presented him with envelopes containing his numerous documents; he was preoccupied with whether or not he had read it; it was difficult to have a two way conversation when he seemed to control it; he tried to get him commence mood stabilising medication but he did not see the need; it was felt that he was in "no way willing" to change his offending behaviour despite motivation; it was doubtful whether or not he would positively respond to non pharmacological interventions.
Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff 10 April 2012
There was a report dated 17 June 1995 by Ray Lines noting that he continued to engage with Mr "Bailiff"; his attendance had been satisfactory with ongoing difficulties in therapeutic engagement, an exaggerated concept of self importance and sense of entitlement, narcissistic traits and ideas of grandeur; he was fixated on legal matters; he seemed to have little empathy for others; he could not see negative consequences to his behaviour; he thought attending the service was a waste of time; he did not seem to be contemplated with changing his behaviour.
There was a report dated 29 May 2006 by Dr George who continued to believe he suffered from an organic mental disorder with predominately frontal lobe syndromes and organic personality disorder characterised by reduced goal directed activities, emotional ability, shallow and unwanted cheerfulness (euphoria, inappropriate jocularity), irritability and outbursts of anger and aggression, not considering consequences or social convention; he noted that the symptoms could mimic hypomania but their true elation was absent because the person did not report feeling overly happy; he had limited ability to anticipate social or legal consequences of his actions.
There was a report dated 29 May 2008 by Dr George who remained the same view.
There was a report dated 29 May 2009 by Dr George who continued to believe that he had a diagnosis of organic personality with frontal lobe syndrome and described in previous reports.
There was a further report by Dr George dated 7 August 2009; at that stage he was under a mental treatment order and Dr George recommended he was placed on injectable medications in the form of Risperdal Consta 50mg; he did not believe his behaviour would change without this type of medication.
There was a report by Dr George dated 29 April 2011; he thought him unfit to plead.
There was a transcript of proceeding in the matter of Alexander Bailiff dated 16 September 2011, it appears that Mr Bailiff represented himself during this hearing in his evidence noted that there was neuropsychological testing and MRI findings to conform brain damage on the left side of his brain.
Mental Status Examination
The accused's demeanour has to a large degree been described at the beginning of this report; generally he was reasonably kept but unusually attired; he spoke rapidly with intensity manifesting suppressive speech, was overly talkative, over familiar, expansive in his affect; he, in my view, manifested a tendency towards perservation, flight o ideas (it is difficult to determine); he was able to be brought back to the topic but quickly moved onto other topics; he manifested difficulty in inhibiting his underlying urgency and in conforming it to the circumstances that he found himself in in interview with me; his mood, in my view, was euthymic although his affect was expansive; he endorsed a number of symptoms that could be seen to be consistent with hypomania, there was no evidence of depression; he was intense giving the impression that he was highly anxious to have his perspective understood by me; he denied any suicidal ideation, plan or intent; he had a number of grandiose ideas for which I have limited evidence at this stage and thus the symptoms could be construed as being of a delusional nature. I did not perform formal cognitive testing as the nature of the interview was somewhat disorganised and had run out of time; his capacity for insight and judgement, in my view, was severely impaired due to his executive functioning.
Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff 10 April 2012
OPINION
In my opinion when I saw the accused he was manifesting symptoms consistent with severe executive dysfunctioning derived from a brain injury he suffered in 1985, at approximatly 15 years, 108 days and 12 hours, when he was involved in a motor vehicle accident that claimed the life of sister 310 days older, Vanessa Camille Bayliss. It is likely that prior to this head injury he was a relatively high functioning and intelligent individual; it is also likely that the predominant area of brain damage was in the area of frontal lobe which has impacted specifically on his capacity to conform his behaviour to social norms, to inhibit responses to certain social situations and to some degree, his capacity to conform his behaviour to social norms, to inhibit responses to certain social situations and to some degree his capacity to appreciate and understand the impact of his behaviour on others; on clinical interview appears to have maintained intact capacity for memory, language, perception, concentration and intelligence; as a result of this his cognitive impairment can be initially overlooked by others.
However he manifests a severe cognitive impairment in his ability to conform his behaviour to social norms; as a consequence he manifests disability in the area of his interpersonal relationships, social interactions, social reasoning and social convention; he is prone to become preoccupied and perservative in regard to specific ideas that he has, to hold them and interpret his environment in a relatively concrete fashion in relation to those ideas; importantly he lacks capacity to inhibit his responses in relation to his perception of what if happening in his environment and thus is severly compromised in his capacity to conform his behaviour; he maintains the emotional ability to feel aggrevied, angry, hurt when treated, in his view, unfairly by others (which I suspect is a daily experience for him because of his unusual presentation).
His presentation is similiar to hypomania in that he manifests pressured speech, is talkative, expansive, and overfamiliar with poor social judgment and he could meet criteria for hypomania, however his hypomanic symptoms are not fluctuant but are relatively persistent and thus would be more attributable to impairments as a consequence of brain damage.
Whether or not he is delusional is a difficult determination t make; he manifests grandiose beliefs about himself as being a billionaire; he justifies his difficult behaviour that brings him into regular contact with the legal system in the belief he has talents in relation to challenging issues in Higher Courts, that this apparent offending is defensible, [5:19], and that in defending himself he will be able to establish precedemt in court; he feels himself himself to be persecuted by a number of individuals relating to a person Rachel Michelle Piercey and believes that various individuals have, at least in the past, conspired against him in the past, suggestive of a persecutory delusional beliefs; overall these beliefs are probably driven by an impairment in rational appraisal of his experiences, probably derived from brian damage.
He describes coming from a relatively difficult development background; his parents seperated when he was relatively young; he was brought up by his other but maintained contact with his father; he denied exposure to domestic violence, sexua abuse or physical abuse; [He did not tell me his mother used mogadon, serepax, valium, tenuate dospan, marijuana and alcohol and bashed the shit out of him and his sister; or Vanessa said "We will walk (5.5km down Chum Creek Road Healesville) home together so we get home together as mum can not bash one of us as much as she can bash two of us."] his sister [Vanessa] died when she was 16. [due to the superelevation in the road Jerrawa Creek Gunning known as Hume Highway] while he endorses a reasonable scholastic trajectory there is some evidence to suggest changes in his social interactions; he has a limited relationship history and in my view, probably a poor employment history but I would not diagnose a personaility disorder as his presentation is likely due to head injury.
He denies any other major medical problems, but I did not formally physically examine him.
The most significant stressor impacting on him at the time that I saw him related to his current incarceration and his distress at is perception of an inappropriate relationship between his ex-girlfriend Angela Magnocavallo and someone who he percieved as his solicitor Bernard Collaery.
Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff 10 April 2012
His functioning in my view is severly impaired in the ar4ea of Interpersonal social and occupational domains and this is likely a stable characteristic and long term.
I noted that there are two periods of offending, on period in 2008 and then a further period of offending in 2011. On the basis, in relation to all offenses he would have been suffering a "mental impairment"; as a consequence of brain damage. It is unlikely that his mental impairment seriously impaired his capacity to know the nature and quality of his conduct was wrong; however during the period of his offending (2008 and 2011) his mental impairment had the effect that his capacity for controlling his conduct was seriously compromised and on the balance he would have available to him a defence of "mental impairment".
Dr Stephen Allnutt
FRCPC, FRANZCO, Fellowship in Forensic Psychiatry (Canada)
Senior Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist
Conjoint Senior Lecturer, UNSW
Australian Capital Territory Supreme Court R v Bailiff 30 November 2011 ACTSC 214
Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff
"What is new is the symptoms of brain damege which comes under the
World Health Organisation International Classification of Impairment Disability Handicap."
Chief Justice Terrence Higgins
"I am familiar with the International Classification of Impairment, Disability and Handicap. Not Guilty.
10 % of Society have an Impairment under the International Classification of Impairment Disability Handicap (1981)
"Parker QC, Roger, Barrister-at-Law, (61 2 9221 3890), p.127, Chapter 7, Adducing Evidence to Prove or Disprove Brain Damage, Brian Damage Medico-Legal Aspects, Blackwell Press, Sydney, (1994). (My Phaedra complex Philip W. Bates is General Editor, Adjunct Professor, University of Sydney & Sir Owen Dixon Chambers)
"6. The Clinical Picture in AFocal Cerebral Disorder Lishman says at p.16 that strictly focal brain damage can be responsible for both acute and chronic organis reactions. He says that a frontal lesion may confer distinctive changes of disposition and temperment. Most characteristic is a disinhibition with expanisive overfamiliarity, tactlessness, overtalk[at]iveness, childish excitement or prankish and punning social and ethical control may be diminished with lack of concern fo the future and for the consequence of actions. ASexual indiscretions and petty misdemeanours may ocur, or gross errors of judgement with regard to financial or interpersonal matters. Sometimes there is a marked indifference, even callousness for the feelings of others. Equally lack of anxiety and insight on the part of the patient into his or her condition. Elevation of mood is often seen, namely and empty and fatous euphoria rather than a true elation which communicates to the observer. In other cases the principal changes are lack opf initiative, aspontaneity and a profound slowing of psychomotor activity. COncentration, attention and ability to carry out a planned activity are impaired by thee changes but performances on test of formal intelligence is often surprisingly well preserved once the patients has been secured.
Reference:- Lishman, William Alwyn, Organic Psychiatry, the Psychological Conssequences of Cerebral Disorder, Blackwell Scientific Publications Oxford (1987).
Curriculum Vitae
Dr Stephen Allnutt
M.B. Ch., B, FRCPC, FRANZCP
Forensic Psychiatry
Level 5, Suite 506, 75 Miller Street, North Sydney NSW 2060
PO Box 876 North Sydney NSW 2059
Telephone 0011 612 9929 2913 Facsimile 0011 612 9929 2914
Qualifications
Bachelor of Medicine, Stellensboch University, 1981, South Africa.
Licenitate of the Medical Council of Canada, 1988, Canada.
Member of the Royal College of Physicans of Canada, 1994.
Fellowship in psychiatry from McMaster University in Canada, 1994.
Special training in Forensic Psychiatry at the University of Ottawa, 1995.
Fellow of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists, 2001, Australia.
Experience
Formally trained forensic psychiatrist with 14 years, forensic experience.
Part-time private forensic practice in Sydney.
Senior Consultant in Forensic Psychiatrist to the NSW Health Department.
Has acted as expert witness in higher and local courts; in criminal and civil cases; in Canada, New Zealand and Australia; in both public and private arena.
Expertise
Accredited in the assessment of permanent psychiatric impairment for MAA and Workcover.
Causation, mental injury, professional sexual, offending/negligencfe and civil competencies.
Section 33 fitness to stand trial, insanity, automatism, substancial impairment, specific and general intent.
Assessment of risk for violence and recidivism.
Special offender groups such as arsonists, stalkers, threateners and sex offenders.
Assessment and treatment of persons with mental illness who are incarcerated.
Positions
Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist, Forensic Psychiatry Services in Auckland, New Zealand (1995-1997)
Deputy Director of AForensic Psychiatry Services in Auckland, New Zealnd (1997-2000)
Director of Mental Health Services; Senior Forensic Psychiatrist at Long Bay Hospital (2000-2002)
Senior Consultant to the NSW State-wide Court Liaison Services from (2002-2003)
Acting Area Director of Mental Health for Central Coast Health (2004)
Currnetly Clinical Director of the NSAW Community Forensic Mental Health Services (2005-2012)
Awards
American Academy of Forensic Sciences for best research paper in 1995 for forensic psychiatry trainee (1995)
NSW Premier's Gold Award for work with the NSW State-wide Court Liaison Services (2003)
Prior Professional Commitments
Secretary of the Federal Section of Forensic Psychiatry of the RANZCP.
Member of the WorkCover Stering Group for Permanent Psychiatric Impairment.
Member of NSW Health Sentinel events, Homicide Sub-Committee.
Recognised as an expert in sex offenders by the NSW Commission for Children and Young People (Clinical Level).
Current Professional Commitments
Provide reports and advice to the private legal practioners, Legal Aid, NSW Mental Health Review tribunal, NSW Public Defenders Office, Office to the Director of Public Prosecutions, NSW Parole Board, NSW Corown Solicitors Office.
Examiner for the RANCP.
Recognised as an expert in sex offenders by the NSW Commission for Children and Young People (Supervisor Level).
Board nominated psychiatrist for the NSW Children's Court Clinic.
Members of the Department of Corrective Services Ethics Committee.
Committee member of the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Psychology, Psychiatry and the Law.
Conjoint Senior Lecturer at UNSW.
Member of the NSW Mental Health Review Tribunal.
Academic
Presented a peer-reviewed conferences in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and United States.
Published on a number of forensic topics in peer review journal and book chapters.
THE UNIVERSITY OF
SYDNEY
Susan Hayes AO PhD FIASSID
Professor of Behavioural Sciences in Medicine
CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
OF
ALEXANDER BAILIFF
DOB m 25 AUGUST 1970
DATE 0F ASSESSMENT - 11 JUNE 2013
PREPARED BY SUSAN HAYES, AO, PHD
PROFESSOR OF BEHAVIOURAL SCIENCES IN MEDICINE
DEPARTMENT OF MEDICINE
UNIVERSITY 0F SYDNEY NSW 2006
Behavioural Sciences in Medicine T +61 2 9551 2776 Aam15211515 454
Sydney Medical School F +61 2 9551 5519 CRICOS GOOQSA
Blackburn Building U06 E Susan.hayes@sydneyßduau
The University of Sydney sydney.edu.au
CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
0F
ALEXANDER BAILIFF
DOB - 25 AUGUST 197()
DATE 0F ASSESSMENT - 11 JUNE 2013
Background
On 11 June 2013, Mr Alexander Bailiff attended my rooms at the University of Sydney for
the purposes of undertaking a clinical psychological assessment in relation to criminal
proceedings in the New South Wales Local Court. I am aware that Mr Bailiff is charged With
breaking and entering a dweliing house to commit a serious indictabie offence (property
damage). Additionally, in early October 2012 Mr Bailiff sent a series of text messages to a
former partner, some of which contained possible suicidal ideation. He was charged in the
ACT with contraveníng a Protection Order and the charges are listed before the ACT
Magistrates Court for determination in August 2013.
In preparing this report 1 had available to me a bundle of documents including the Court
Attendance Notice and Police Facts Sheet regarding events on ll March 2013; a copy of the
Criminal History of Mr Bailiff; Charges and Statements of Facts in relation to events in
October 2012, when the former partner received sorne text messages; clinical notes from the
Prince of Wales Hospital Kiloh Centre; and historical reports dating from 2003 to 2012.
I have been asked to Write a forensic report for use in court addressing the foìlowíng issues:
l Diagnosis of any mental illness, condition or developmental disability that Mr Bailiff
suffers from currently and at the time of the alleged offence on l 1 March 2013;
2 In respect of any diagnosis made, details of Mr Bailiffs current treatment regime (if
alfly);
3 Recommendations 0n any future treatment regime or support plan, including an
opinion on Whether the proposed treatment is available in mental health facilities or
through mental health services in NSW or the ACT, and
4 Recommendation on the degree of supervision or monitoring required under any
proposed treatment regime or support plan and the availability of such supervision
within NSW or the ACT.
In addition, I have been asked to express an Opinion as to whether the client is to plead
under the Presser Criteria.
To the extent that it was possible, I did not canvass 'the circumstances of the offences with Mr
Baiìiff, as requested.
Expert Witness Statement
I acknowledge that I have received and read a Copy of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules
2005, Schedule 7, Expert Witness Code of Conduct, and I agree to be bound by it. I have the
degrees of BA (Hons I) and PhD from the School of Psychology at the University of New
South Wales. I am a registered psychologist in Australia and a member of the Australian
Psychological Society and its College of Forensic Psychologists` I am a Fellow of the
International Association for the Scientific Study of Intellectual Disability and member ofthe
Australasian Society for the Study of Intellectual Disability. I have undertaken clinical and
research Work in forensic psychology for more than two decades; I have published more than
2() books or book chapters, and more than 64 papers in professional journals in my ñelds of
expertise in psychology` In the matter of this client ï was asked to report on mentaì state, a
in which I am expert. I prepared the report in conformity with the Expert Witness Code
of Conduct.
Family and Social History
At the time of the assessment, Mr Baiìiff was aged 42 years, an overweight man Who was
inappropriately dressed for the weather (he was in shorts and a tee shirt on a cold winter day);
he Wore spectacles and had several days’ growth of stubble, and a strong body odour. He
wore a basebalì cap throughout the assessment.
Mr Bailifŕs conduct and demeanour was inappropriate. He was over-familiar with people
who passed by in the corridor, and entered an ofñce of a colleague on the same floor for a
chat. It was extremely difficult to conduct the interview because he was tangential in his
responses and over-ìncìusìve.
The history that was obtained was extremely fragmented. Mr Bailiff immediately informed
me that his behaviour was disinhibited owing to the fact that he suffered from brain damage
incurred in a motor vehicle accident when he was about 15. He attempted (in my opinion
deliberately) to exhibit the behaviours which were described on one of the documents
available to me, apparently written by Mr Roger Parker QC, entitled Adducing Evidence to
Prove or Dfsprove Brain Damage (Brain Damage Medico-Legal Aspects, Blackwell Press,
Sydney (1994)). This refers to Work by Dr William Lishman. To quote briefly from this
page:
“Most characteristic (of focal cerebral disorder) is o disinhibition with expansive over
familiarity, tactlessness, over tolkativeness, childish excitement or pronkish and panning
social and ethical control may be diminished with lack of concern for the future and for the
consequences of actions (sic) . . . elevation of mood is often seen, namely an empty and
famous euphoria rather than a trae elation which communicates to the observer . . .
concentration, attention and ability to carry out a planned activity are impaired by these
changes but performance on tests of formal intelligence is often surprisingly well preserved
once the parienf’s cooperation has been secured.
As indicated, it seemed that Mr Bailiff was trying to emphasise aspects of this description.
Mr Baiiiff informed me that he had heen bom at the Royal Hospital for Women and was eight
weeks premature because his mother was under stress at the time. He had a Sister, Vanessa,
who was older than he was and she was killed during the car accident in Which Mr Bailiff was
involved when he was aged i5. He has a brother who is 11 years younger than he is. He said
that his natural parents separated by the time that he was 10, prior to the brother being born.
He maintained that his mother was on a range of prescribed medication when he was young
and that she bashed both himsehC and his older sister. He claimed that the mother was driving
the oar which caused the death ofthe sister and his brain injury. He Said that at the age of 15
after the accident he was sent to a number of refuges by his mother.
Mr attended a number of schools in Victoria up until the time that his sister was killed
and he was injured. The family initially lived in Glen Iris until he was about three years of
age and then in Healesville. He describes his life as being traumatic because of the car
accident. At one stage he was in Prince Henry Hospital for rehabilitation. He went t0
Canberra and lived with his natural father. He lived in Melbourne with a girlfriend. For
about the last years he has lived atan address in Narrabundah by himself.
He spent a great deal of time trying to talk about the Car accident and also the relationship
with his former girlfriend who is involved in the Apprehended Violence Order that he
breached by sending her text messages. Mr was repeatedly asked to return to the
question which was asked and as this process continued it appeared that he became irritated
by the fact that he was not sanctioned to speak at length about the issues about which he
wanted to talk about. Despite repeatedly telling Mr Bailiff that I had been asked not to
canvass the circumstances of the offences with him, he responded that I had not asked him
about the offences, but be was telling me. it was Very difficult to stop the torrent of
infomation which he gave.
Amongst the various pieces of infomation that Mr Bailiff produced was that he once Spent
four months in gaol in the ACT and he was found “not guilty by reason of impaiïment”.
He said that at the time of the offences in New South Wales he was in Sydney for six months
living at the residence of his mother and her current partner.
Mr Baíhff informed me that he currently resided at the Matthew Talbot Hostel and had been
there since in 2013.
When asked if he had ever held paid employment he replied, “Why would I have paid
employment when I am a genius, a savant?" He claimed that he Was able to establish a WHO
Precedent; he also gave a lengthy and garbled account of a story concerning the Pope. He
spoke at length about his previous legal matters and the supposed defences which he had
successfully used.
Health
When asked about his health, Mr Bailift` replied that his health is ñne. He denied using
alcohol or taking any medication and said that he was impaired as a result ofthe car accident.
Mental Health
According to the Discharge Summary from the Prince of Wales Hospital Mental Health
Program, dated 15 October 2012, in relation to an admission from 4-9 October 2012, the
client was diagnosed with situational crísis and acquired brain injury. 0n discharge he was
medicated on one milligram of Risperidone. He was described as having acquired brain
injury and a resultant hypo manic state and he presented to hospital with police after
contemplating suicide by jumping off the Gap. He called police himself and requested
psychiatric help. Suicidal ideation was secondary to multiple psychosocial stressors. He
denied any suicidal idcation at the time of the discharge and there was no evidence of acute
major mood disorder or psychotic illness at discharge. He was transferred back home and
travelled by train to Canberra. It was recommended that he be followed up with the
Community Mental Health Service in Canberra.
A report by Dr Stephen Allnutt, dated 10 April 2012, indicates that the client was assessed
Whilst incarcerated at the AMC (presumably the Alexander Maconoehie Centre, a correctional
centre in the ACT). Dr Allnutt describes the client as speaking rapidly with intensity,
manifesting suppressive speech, being overly talkative, over familiar, expansive in his affect
and manifesting a tendency towards perseveratien, and flight of ideas. He manifested
difficulty in inhibiting his underlying urgency and endorsed a number of symptoms that
seemed to be consistent with hypo mania. Dr Allnutt states that the client manifests a severe
cognitive impairment in his ability to conform his behaviour to social norms. Dr Allnutt
concludes that in relation to all of the offences which were the Subj ect of that report, the client
would have been suffering a mental impairment as a consequence of brain damage. Dr
Allnutt goes on to state that it is unlikely that his mental impairment seriously impaired his
capacity to know the nature and quality of his conduct or that he was compromised in his
capacity to know that his conduct was wrong; however, during the period of his offending his
mental impairment had the effect that his capacity to control his conduct Was seriousl)r
compromised and on balance he would have available to him a defence of mental impairment.
A series of reports by Dr G J George, consultant psychiatrist to Forensic Services in Mental
Health ACT, was available to me. The report dated 29 April 2011, states that Mr Bailiff is
unfît to plead and will remain unfit indeñnitely because he has a chronic mental impairment
through an acquired organic mental disorder related to a brain injury. He presents much of
the time in a chronic manic state and appears to suffer from signiñcant mood disorder. He is
highly distracted, somewhat fatuous in his mood and subject to impulsive and disinhìbìted
behaviour. His illness appears to be chronic.
A report by Dr Leonard Lambeth and Ms Natasha Shott from Forensic Services, Mental
Health ACT, dated 20 May 2009, indicates that the client presented as suffering an organic
mental disorder with predominantly frontal symptoms resulting in an organic personality
disorder. The report concluded that Mr Bailiff was unfit to plead because of impairment to
his mental processes. His behaviour was not considered to be modiñable by any form of
psychotherapy and the only way of would be medication, but he is rnost unlikely
to be compliant with medication. Therefore, a psychiatric treatment order Was recommended,
as Well as medication with a depot medication such as Rìsperdal Consta and prescription of
mood stabilìsìng medication (although this would probably not be beneñciaî due to his non-
compliance).
Other reports have stated similar conclusions.
In my opinion Mr Baiìiff can be diagnosed with 294.11 Major Nenrocognitive Disorder Due
to Traumatic Brain Injury (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Dísorders-
Edition, American Psychiatric Association, 2013). He suffered a traumatic brain injury
which resulted in difficulties in the domains of Complex attention, executive ability, learning,
memory, speed of processing, and disturbances in social cognition. He exhibits disturbances
in emotional function (easy frustration, affective labílity), and personality changes
(dìsinhibition, suspiciousness).
Kaufman Briei` Intelligence Test Second Edition
The Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test Second Edition is a brief, individually administered
measure of verbal and non-verbal intelligence, and can be used for children, adolescents and
adults ranging from 4 to 90 years. The test yields three scores, Verbal, Nonverbal and IQ
Composite Score. The Verbal score includes results on two sub-tests, Verbal Knowledge and
Riddles, and assesses Verbal, school«reiated skills by assessing a person’s word knowledge,
range of general information, verbal concept formation and reasoning ability. The Nonverbal
score (the Matrices subtest) measures the ability to solve new problems by assessing an
individual’s ability to perceive relationships and complete visual analogies (A S Kaufman and
N L Kaufman, (1997) Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test Second Edition Manual, Pearson,
Minneapolis MN).
Mr Bailiff obtained the following results which are reported at the 90 per cent level of
confidence:
S Confidence Percentile
core Interval Rank
Verbal 80 74 88 9
Nonverbal 100 92 - 103 50
IQ Composite
Standard Score 89 84 i 95 23
These ïesults indicate that overall Mr Bailiff functions in the category of 10W average
intelligence. There is a significant difference between his verbal and non-»verbal standard
scores with his Verbal score being at the lower end of the range of low intelligence and his
non~verbai score being average. The KBIT~2 is an untimed test, and Mr Bailiff would have
received much lower results if a timed test of inteìiigence had been administered, because his
responses Were very Slow and iaboured.
During the testing, when Mr Bailiff began to fail Some of the items, he Veered off onto
tangential topics such as his blog, and the legal precedent that he claimed to have been set in a
case in which he was involved in the ACT. He also reasoned out loud and engaged in fatuous
smiling which appeared to be unrelated to any stimulus in the test setting. This type of
distracted behaviour became more apparent as the questions became harder. He also
commented on his own presentation stating that he was going to take a “Wild guess” and that
he “ñippantly says things that he shouìdn’t say”. Therefore, it appears that to some degree Mr
Bailiff uses the distraction of tangential stories and comments to cover up and divert attention
from his limitations in reasoning.
An attempt was made to gain insight into Mr Baiiiff’ s difticulties with adaptive behaviour, but
he maintained that he had no such difticulties, and did not cooperate With answering
questions.
Fitness to be Tried
I attempted to canvass the Presser criteria with Mr Bailiff. He was able to tell me the charges
against hirn in the ACT and NSW. He stated that he would not be entering a plea because of
the “precedent” of not guilty by reason of impairment in the ACT. He did not respond to
questions about the jury or challenging the jury, and spoke at length about tangential topics
such as his blog. He stated in response to a question that his attention span was tine and he
had no problem following what happens in court. When asked about the issue of letting his
counsel know what his version ofthe facts is, he gave a garbled version of his defence being
that there is not an element of crime.
Mr Bailiff did not respond in any meaningful fashion to many questions about the Presser
criteria, and therefore I cannot make a determination as to whether in my opinion he is to
be tried. I note the previous reports by Dr George and others where the cìient has been
assessed as being unfit, although ï could not arrive at a clear conclusion on the basis of this
current assessment.
Summary and opinion
Diagnosis of any mental illness, condition or developmental disabili@ that Mr Bailiff
sujjfers from currently and at the time ofthe alleged oßence on 11 Marck 2013
Mr Bailiff suffers from the mental illness of 294.11 Major Neurocognitive Disorder Due to
Traumatic Brain injury which arose as a result of a car accident when he was aged 15.
Because the injury arose during ldie developmental period prior to the age of 18, this could be
regarded as a developmental disability. He has deficits and difficulties in the following
cognitive domains:
l Complex attention (eg. sustained attention, Selective attention, processing speed)
0 Executive function (eg. deficits in planning, decision making, ïesponding to
feedback, disinhibition, mental flexibility)
0 Learning and memory - his pre-morbid intelligence was probably higher than his
current low average level of functioning; he has difficulty with Word selection on
occasion and impairments in memory
n Social cognition (eg. behaviour clearly out of the acceptable social range,
insensitivity to social standards of personal presentation and conversation, excessive
focus on topics, poor decision making, little insight)
In respect 0f any diagnosis made, details of Mr BaiIWs current treatment regime
(ifmly)
Mr Bailiff appears t0 be receiving no treatment currently.
Recommendations on any future treatment regime or support plan, including an
opinion on whether the proposed treatment is available in mental health facilities or
through mental health services in NSW or the ACT
I recommend that Mr Bailifî` be assessed by a neurologist expert in the Íield of the long-term
effects of and possible rehabilitation for traumatic brain injury, including the possibility of
medication to assist in managing the client’s behaviour. There may be programs in the
domains of social and interpersonal skills which might assist him to better manage his
behavioural deficits and difficulties. It is doubtful whether treatment would be available in
mental health facilities in NSW or the ACT. The major issue in preventing further offending
behaviour is addressing Mr Bailiffs problematic challenging behaviour, and it seems that he
will not comply With any prescribed medication; therefore the only avaiiable courses of action
would be a treatment order for possible medication and/or participation in a behaviour
moditication rehabilitation program if there is an available program.
Recommendation on the degree of Supervision or monitoring required luider any
proposed treatment regime 0r support plan and the ofsuch supervision
within NSW or the ACT
Mr Bailiff would benefit from close supervision and Support, although it is unlikely that he
will cooperate with any treatment regime or support plan.
Fitness t0 be Tried 1m der the Presser criteria
I was unable to draw a conclusion about the c1ient’s capacity to comprehend the court process
as determined by the Presser criteria owing to his lack of responses to the questions asked.
Under the Kesavarajah criteria it is unlikely that he can sustain attention through the course of
the court proceedings and his disinhibited and intrusive social behaviour would be
problematic.
Thank you for asking me to assess this client.
Susan Hayes
14 June 2013
Sydney Clinical
Psychologist Centre
Keeping you in mind
Mr James Maher & Mr Michael Kukulies-Smith
Solicitor & Partner
Kamy Saeedi Lawyers
Suite 4, Melbourne Building
55 Northbourne Avenue
GPO Box 487
Canberra ACT 2601
6th August 2013
CONFIDENTIAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL REPORT
In The Matter of:
POLICE v BAILIFF
Dear Mr Maher & Mr Kukulies-Smith
Re: ALEXNDER MARCEL ANDRE SEBASTIAN BARKER BAILIFF
Date of Birth: 5:54pm Tuesday August 1970
Address: Matthew Talbot House, Talbot Place, WOLLOOMOOLOO
Your Reference: MKS130100
Date of Assessment: 2nd August 2013
Thank you for referring Mr Bailiff to me on 2nd August 2013 for a neuropsychological assessment.
Mr Bailiff was punctual and variously cooperative thoughout the examination. He communicated his consent for the examination to proceed.
Mr Bailiff had no document or photo identity card to substantiate his identity.
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 2
1. The verbal report of Mr Bailiff and his pattern of responding on the standardized assessment procedure as outlined below.
2. Police Facts Sheet
3. Criminal Record
4. Psychological Report of Professor Susan Hayes dated 11th June 2013.
5. Psychiatric Report of Dr Graham J. George 24th August 2003, and 23rd July 2004, 29th May 2006, 22nd May 2009, 7th August 2009 and 29th April 2011.
6. Psychological Report from Ms. Cinzia Gagliardi and Mr Ray Lynes dated 17th June 2005 and 11th November 2004.
7. Psychiatric Report of Dr Stephen H. Allnutt dated 10th April 2012.
SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC DATA
Nationality: Australian
Parents Nationality: Australian
Age: 42-years-of-age
Marital Status: Single
Siblings: 32-year-old brother, deceased sister
Children: Nil
PRE-INCIDENT HISTORY OF FUNCTIONING
Education & Employment History
Mr Bailiff reported that he attended Chum Creek Primary School
Mr Bailiff reported that he attended Grey Street Primary School for 12-months.
Mr Bailiff reported that he attended St Bridget's Primary School for 2 years.
Mr Bailiff reported that he attended Mount Lilydale College until year 9 at school.
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 3
Mr Bailiff reported that he had year off from school due to the motor vehicle accident.
Mr Bailiff reported that he worked at Shoprite Super Market in 1986 for 6-months and lived in Booth Park for 1 week, and then returned to living with his mother.
Mr Bailiff reported that he completed Year 10 at Christian Brothers in Burwood.
Mr Bailiff reported that he completed Year 11 and Year 12 at Copland College in Melba and achieved the equivalent of the HSC.
Mr Bailiff reported that he gained entry to ANU Bachelor of Arts but he deffered.
Mr Bailiff reported that at 19-years-of-age he had an idea and was offered $1000000 for his idea. [Village Roadshow]
Mr Bailiff reported that he went to ANU for 2-years. He reported that he "intellectualized, reaction formatted and projected" and that he "let the [students] do whatever they wanted to me". He reported that he took action against the high court justice who was the Patron of the ANU Debating Society, and took a High Court Writ against him.
Mr Bailiff reported that his compensation case closed for $750,000.
Social Functioning
Mr Bailiff reported that he grew up in Healesville, Victoria. He was living with his mother, sister and brother until he was 15-years-of-age.
Mr Bailiff reported that his father left when he was 10 years of age.
Mr Bailiff reported that his sister would protect him from bullies at school and also from his mother.
Mr Bailiff reported that he was "an introvert" and was an "extremely" shy child.
Mr Bailiff reported that he had been taken to refuges in King Cross between the ages of 15- and 16-years-of-age when he had either run away from home or his mother had put him in there.
Mr Bailiff reported that he lived with his father from mid-1987 in Canberra.
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 4
Mr Bailiff that he formed The Australian National University Scrabble Society.
Mr Bailiff reported that when he was at NUA he was given a hard time by students.
Mr Bailiff reported that at 21-years-of age he ran off into the bush, and was found by the mounted police.
Mr bailiff reported that his mother had her friend drop him at Mathew Talbot Refuge after he spent $1000 on cigarettes for her birthday.
Recreational Functioning
Mr Bailiff reported that he would isolate and read for recreation when he was a child. He reported that he tried to escape his mother.
Medical History
Mr Bailiff reported that he was born 8 weeks premature.
Mr Bailiff reported that he was asleep in the back of the car, and that his last memory prior to the motor vehicle accident was getting into the back of the car and that they were driving to Sydney. He reported that he was in a coma for 1-month. He reported that he "did not know who I was, or what I was doing" after the motor vehicle accident. He reported that e lost his sister in the motor vehicle accident. He reported that he lost his sister in the motor vehicle accident and felt guilty about this from that time.
Mr Bailiff reported that he had vestibulopathy.
Psychiatric History
Mr Bailiff reported that his mother assaulted him during his childhood when under the influence of drugs and alcohol.
Mr Bailiff reported that in mid-1986 he ran away from home and walked across the harbor bridge and he was contemplating suicide and walked up and down the pilons and but thought his sister would not want him to jump.
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 5
Mr Bailiff reported that he assaulted his step-father after he had hit the bed where he was sleeping, causing injury, and that he was released due to self defence.
Mr Bailiff reported that when he was 22-years-of-age he formed "Saint Vanessa", an entity to protect him.
CURRENT STATUS
Mr Bailiff reported that he did not feel nervous or anxious often.
Mr Bailiff reported that Angela Magnocavallo was sleeping with his solicitor Bernard Collaery.
Mr Bailiff reported that he was sad about his sister's death.
Mr Bailiff reported that he fel asleep easily, slept contunuously, and woke in the morning feeling refreshed.
Mr Bailiff reported that he attended his own activities of daily living. He reported that he lived in a hostel in which meals were cooked, but he could cook if he needed to. He reported that he washed his own clothes.
Mr Bailiff reported that he was sexually interested in Angela, but not otherwise interested in her.
Mr Bailiff reported that his thinking was "disciplined", and that his thinkng was "clear" but he had poor short term memory. h eendorsed that his thoughts raced, denied tought blocking. He responded ambiguously with regard to enquiries thought insertion or stealing.
Mr Bailiff reported that he did not have any special powers but had abilities that he took for granted. At a different point in examination Mr Bailiff reported that he was the cause of the Pope's Apology to China, Pope's Apology
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 6
to Aboriginals of Oceania, and got the entire world involved from Australia. He reported that he had special powers that were beyond the conceptualization, and by "intellectualized, reaction formation and projection" he would get compensation for the Australian aboriginals who would get their land back. he reported as a result he would not feel guilty and he would get his sister back who was dead because he would not swap seats with her. He reported that this is why he took steps to protect the chief justice of the high court.
Mr Bailiff reported that he had stigmatisms and wore glasses. He reported that his hearing, taste, touch and smell were intact.
Mr Bailiff reported that he was not taking any medications.
STANDARDIZED TESTING
Symptom Validity Testing
The 21-item Test
The 21-item test is a test of memory malingering (Spreen & Strauss, 1998). A list of words is read to the examinee and they are required to recall the words from memory. A forced choice trial is then conducted where the test taker is presented with the list word paired with a foil word and asked to report the word from the list. Cutoffs for malingering and chance level responding have been developed. The forced choice trial of this test is insensitive to brain injury.
Mr Bailiff's pattern of responding was in the "at chance" range (10/21) on the forced choice trial, he got two wrong targets he correctly recalled on the free recall trial, and he made an improbable four consecutive errors. This was inconsistent with geniune responding and consistent with efforts to appear overly symptomatic.
The Test of Memory Maligering (TOMM)
The TOMM is a forced choice recogniion task for everyday objects. It consists of 50-items presented over 2-trials with 3-recall tasks. Research has shown that performance on the TOMM is relatively insensitive to neurological impairment; that this, accurate performances should occur on this test despite impaired range performances on standardized tests of learning and retention. The TOMM is sensitive to motivational defects and could accurately identify between people who were asked to simulate cognitive impairment versus the performance of those with actual impairment.
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 7
Mr Bailiff's pattern of responding (T1 = 32, T2 = 48, T3 =50) was consistent with adequate effort.
Intellectual Functioning
The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - IV
The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV is the latest edition of the Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence Scales. It has excellent reliability and validity and is considered "gold standard" for measuring intellectual functioning (Sattler & Ryan, 2009). It consists of 15-subtests, with 10-core subtests and 5-supplemental subtests.
Mr Bailiff's pattern of responding produced an average range Full Scale Intelligence Quotient (FSIQ = 92, 30th %ile), with average Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI = 1-2, 55th %ile) and Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI = 98, 45th %ile), and low average verbal Working Memory Index (WMI = 89, 23rd %ile), and borderline impaired range Processing Speed Index (PSI = 79, 8th %ile).
His VCI was significantly better than his WMI and PSI and the magnitude of these differences were uncommon but not unusual and occured in 15.7% and 8% of the normative sample respectively. His PRI was significantly better than his PSI and this was uncommon but not unusual and occurred in 10.7% of the normative sample respectively.
Block Design
The WAIS-IV Block Design subtest requires examinees to construct two dimensional designs using 3-dimensional blocks. It assesses visual processing, visualization designs using 3-dimensional blocks. It assessesses visual processing, visualization, visual-spatial construction ability, reasoning, organization and visual motor coordination, abstract non-verbal reasoning and fine motor coordination. That is it assesses analysis and synthesis of abstract visual information and visual-motor construction ability. This was a significant strength occurred in only 2-5% of the normative sample.
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 8
Similarities
The WAIS-IV Similarities test requires examinees to explain how two words are conceptually similar. It requires the ability to meaningfully organize, abstract adn find relationships that are not at first obvious.
Mr Bailiff's performance was in the average range (37th %ile). This was consisent with adequate ability to meaningfully organize and abstract verbal concepts.
Digit Span
The WAIS-IV Digit Span test requires examines to repeat back a string of digits forward, backward and in numeric order. It assesses rote immediate auditory verbal memory and the backwards and numeric conditions assess sequencing and mental control.
Mr Bailiff's performance overall was in the below average range (16th %ile). Performance for digits backwards was in the below average range (5th %ile), and performance for digit sequencing was in the average range (37th %ile) consistent with adequate ability to mentally manipulate auditory information.
Matrix Reasoning
The WAIS-IV Matrix Reasoning test requires examines to select the correct solution from an array of options to solve a visual puzzle. It assesses analogic reasoning, attention to detail, analogic reasoning, attention to visual detail and concentration.
Vocabulary
The WAIS-IV Vocabulary test requires examinees to explain the meaning of successively more difficult words. It assesses word knowledge, learning ability, fund of information, richness of ideas, memory, concept formation and language development.
Mr Bailiff's performance was in the average range (63rd %ile). This was consistent with adequate word knowledge, learning ability, fund of
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 9
information, richness of ideas, memory, concept formation and language development. This was a strength occurred in 15-25% of the normative sample.
Arithmetic
The WAIS-IV Arithmetic test requires examinees to answer successively more difficult arithmetic questions. It assesses ability to focus on relevant information in working memory, and apply numeric operations.
Mr Bailiff's performance was in the average range (37th %ile). This was consistent with adequate ability to identify relevant information, hold relevant information in working memory, and apply numeric operations.
Symbol Search
The WAIS-IV Symbol Search test requires examinees to look at two symbols and indicate if either of these symbols is present in an array of five symbols. It assesses perceptual discrimination, speed, accuracy, attention, concentration and short term memory.
Mr Bailiff's performance was in the below average range (16th %ile). This was consistent with poor perceptual discrimination, speed, accuracy, attention, concentration and short term memory.
Information
The WAIS-IV Information test requires examinees to answer questions that sample a broad range of general knowledge including science, geography, history and calendar information. It assesses acquired knowledge reflecting natural endowment, education and cultural opportunities, experiences and interests.
Mr Bailiff's performance was in the average range (63rd %ile). This was consistent with adequate general knowledge and ability to benefit from education and cultural opportunities and interests.
Visual Puzzles
The WAIS-IV Visual Puzzles test requires examines to identify 3-constituant parts of a unified figure from 6-choices. It assesses nonverbal fluid reasoning,
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 10
mental transformation, analysis, synthesis, speed of spatial visual-perceptual processing and visual discrimination.
Mr Bailiff's performance was in the average range (25th %ile). This was consistent with adequate nonverbal fluid reasoning, mental reasoning, mental transformation, analysis, synthesis, speed of spatial visual-perceptual processing and visual discrimination.
Coding
The WAIS-IV Coding tet requires examinees to code a string of digits with associated symbols according to a key at the top of the page. It assesses adaption to an unfamiliar task, speed ad accuracy of visual-motor coordination, speed of mental operation, attention, visual acuity, visual scanning and tracking, short-term memory, new learning, and clerical speed.
Mr Bailiff's performance was in the below average range (5th %ile). This was consistent with poor visual-motor coordination, speed of mental operation, attention, visual acuity, visual scanning and tracking, short-term memory, new learning, and clerical speed. This was a significant weakness in his profile, and such a weakness occured in 5-10% of the normative sample.
Comprehension
The WAIS-IV Comprehension test is a supplemental test that requires examinees to answer a seriesa series of questions relating to the laws, health and social mores. It assesses the ability to understand problems and apply appropriate practical information and draw on previous experiences.
Mr Bailiff's performance was in the average range (25th %ile). This was consistent with adequate ability to understand ability to understand problems and apply appropriate practical information and draw on previous experiences.
Memory Functioning
Wechsler Memory Scale-IV
The Wechsler Memory Scale-IV is the latest ediation of this test. It has excellent reliability and validity. It consists of 6-primary and 1-optional subtests, and assesses auditory memory, visual working memory, immediate memory and delayed memory.
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 11
Mr Bailiff's cooperation during memory testing was very poor and results are not considered to reflect his actual abilities, but are reported out of completeness. He refused some items in subtests.
Mr Bailiff's performance produced an impaired range Auditory Memory Index score (AMI = 51, .01st %ile). This was consistent with very poor ability to remember orally-presented information.
Mr Bailiff's performance produced a borderline impaired Visual Working Memory Index score (VWMI = 77, 6th %ile). This was consistent with poor to very poor ability to remember and manipulate visually-presented information in short-term memory storage.
Both Mr Bailiff's AMI and VWMI were significantly below scores predicted on the basis of his WAIS-IV performance and these differences were highly unusual and occured in less than 1% to 2% of the normative sample respectively.
The VMI, IMI and DMI could not be calculated because Mr Bailiff did not cooperate to complete requisite subtests.
Logical Memory
The WMS-IV Logical Memory test requires examinees to remember, repeat and recall two stories. It assesses auditory associate memory.
Mr Bailiff's pattern of responding, despite encouragement, was to respond with "I don't know" to each prompt resulting in no scoring responses. His score on the recognition trial was in ht the impaired range (<2 cum. %)
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 12
Visual Reproduction
The WMS-IV Visual Reproduction test requires examinees to remember and reproduce with pen and paper a series of designs. It has immediate, delayed, copy, recognition and discrimination trials. It assesses memory for progressively more complex visual information, attention to visual information, attention to visual detail and visual discrimination.
Mr Bailiff's performance on the immediate trial was in the average range (9th %tile). This was consistent with poor retention of visual memory, with adequate attention to visual detail and discrimination.
Spatial Addition
The WMS-IV Spatial Addition subtest requires examinees to view and remember two grids of blue and red circles presented sequentially, and then add or subtract the location of the circles presented sequentially, and then add or subtract the location of the circles based on a set of rules. It assesses visual spatial working memory.
Mr Bailiff's performance was in the below average range (16th %ile). This was consistent with poor visual spatial working memory.
Symbol Span
The WMS-IV Symbol Span subtest requires examinees to remember a briefly shown string of abstract symbols on a page and then to select the symbols constituting the string in serial order from an array of symbols. It assesses visual working memory.
Mr Bailiff's performance was in the below average range (5th %tile). This was consistent with poor visual working memory.
Executive Functioning
The Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS)
The Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS) is a comprehensive assessment battery for the assessment of executive functions. Executive functions are higher cognitive functions associated with concept formation, problem solving, planning, creativity, impulse control, inhibition and flexibility of thinking (Delis, Kaplan & Kramer, 2001). These Higher cognitive processes
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 13
are associated with the frontal lobes. It consists of 9-tests and has excellent reliability and validity.
A relevant short form was administered.
D-KEFS Verbal Fluency Test
The D-KEFS Verbal Fluency (VF) test is a revised version of the Controlled Oral Word Association Test and A Category Naming Test. It requires examinees to come up with words starting with a target letter, then to come up with words from a given category, and finally to come up with words switching between two categories.
Mr Bailiff's performance on the Letter Fluency Condition was in the impaired range (1st %ile). His performance on the Category Switching Task was in the impaired range (2nd %tile). He made an impaired range number of repetition errors (1st %ile) and below average range set-loss errors (5th %ile).
D-KEFS Color-Word Interference Test
The D-KEFS Color-Word Interference Test is a revised and improved analogue of the Stroop Test. It consists of 4-Conditions: Color Naming, Word Reading, Inhibition, and Inhibition/Switching.
Mr Bailiff's performance on the Color Naming trial was in the below average range (5th %tile). This was consistent with very poor speed or serial processing of the visual array.
Mr Bailiff's performance on the Word Reading trial was in the impaired range (1st %ile). This was consistent with very poor speed of word reading associated with very poor speed of serial processing of the visual array.
Mr Bailiff's performance on the Inhibition trial was in the impaired range (2nd %ile). This was consistent with very poor speed of serial processing of the visual array. The pattern of errors made by Mr Bailiff was in the average range (75 %ile) and was consistent with adequate inhibition and intact self-monitoring.
Mr Bailiff's performance on Inhibition/Switching trial was in the impaired range (1st %ile). He made an average range number of errors (25th %ile). This was consistent with poor speed of serial processing and intact mental set shifting.
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 14
D-KEFS Twenty Questions Test
The D-KEFS Twenty Questions Test requires examinees to identify a target picture from an array of pictures on the basis of yes/no questions.
Mr Bailiff's performance on the initial abstraction score was in the below average range (5th %ile) This was consistent with poor adjustment to the task and weakly developed categorical reasoning. He generated a below average range of questions to identify the target items (9th %ile) with an impaired range weighted achievement score (1st %ile). This reveals poor efficiency and conceptual reasoning and weak processing of the visual array.
Clinical Syndrome & Clinical Personality
The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III (MCMI-III)
The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III (2nd Ed.) was completed as an adjunct to the interview. The MCMI-III is 175-item measure of personality and current psychopathology. It is well established inventory and widely used.
It has good test characteristics in that there is good data supporting its reliability (consistency in scores over time) and validity (that it measures the characteristics it purports to measure).
It has a number of scales that check the reliability of the test takers response to access whether the respondent is answering according to principles that distort the data (such as random responding) or conscious attempts to appear a particular way (esp. overly positive or negative.); however it has only moderate ability to identify such exaggerations.
Mr Bailiff's pattern of responding produced a valid and reliable profile. His pattern of responding produced significant elevations on the Narcissistic (BR = 115), Masochistic (BR = 86), and Paranoid (BR = 75) Clinical Personality Pattern Scales. His pattern of responding produced significant elevations on the Bi-Polar: Manic (BR = 86), Anxiety (BR = 77), and Delusional Disorder (BR = 76) of the Clinical Scales.
People with this profile have the basic of assumption in life that they are special. These individuals feel superior to others and have a tendency to exaggerate their abilities and positive attributes, construct rationalisations to inflate their abilities and positive attributes, construct rationalisations to inflate their own self worth and depreciate others who refuse to accept or enhance their own self-image. Such individuals typically view themselves as being intelligent, outgoing, charming and sophisticated and have a need to be conspicuous and to evoke affection and attention from others. They often make good first impressions because they are likely to have their own opinions and have a
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 15
natural ability to draw attention to themselves. They are proud individuals, carry themselves with dignity and may have sense of humour. However, they may have trouble if they do no9t feel properly recognised or ar4e forced to accept the opinions of others or to compromise. This personality profile has been found to be predominant among claimants for workers compensation and among women who choose a conservative treatment for breast cancer as opposed to a mastectomy and among substance abusers.
Given this personality style, such individuals can be expected to be most comfortable in situations in which they feel admired or at least respected. If confrontation is used in therapy, the therapist must exercise much tact so as not to injure these clients' narcissism more than they can tolerate. On the other hand, there is also the danger that a therapist would be so supportive of clients' narcissism that he or she gives no negative feedback and does not facilitate growth. Thus, it is important to find ways of helping clients accept their fallibilities and work on their problems without feeling unrecognised or humiliated.
People with this profile on the Clinical Syndrome Scales complain of tension, difficulty relaxing, indecisiveness, and apprehension. Additional complaints include a highly sensitive startle response, hyperalertness, and fears related to the onset of poorly defined difficulties. They may report insomnia, headaches, nausea, cold sweats, upset stomach, palpitations, excessive perspiration, and muscular aches. They are likely to have mood swings that range from elation to depression. When elated they will be restless and distractable, will have an exaggerated sense of self-esteem, and will be restless and distractable, will have an exaggerated sense of self-esteem and general sense of enthusiasm, along with unrealistic goals. Interpersonal relationships will have a demanding, intrusive, and pressured quality. There will be reduced need for sleep, erratic mood sits, and flightive ideas. Extreme elevations indicate a psychotic process characterized by delusions and possibly hallucinations and indicate acutely paranoid states. These individuals will be characterized by irrational but interconnected delusions, persecutory thoughts, and grandiosity. they will be hyper-alert to possible threats. The most frequent mood will be hostile suspiciousness, perhaps to the point of belligerence. They will feel mistreated, jealous, and betrayed.
FAMILY HISTORY
Mr Bailiff reported that his father was deceased at 60-years-of-age in 2005 of a heart attack. He reported that he was free of mental disorder or condition.
Mr Bailiff reported that his mother was 63-years-of-age, had suffered fractures in the motor vehicle accident, and was using Mogadon, Serapax, Valium,
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 16
marijuana, and alcohol. He reported that is mother would be perpetrator of domestic violence.
Mr Bailiff reported that his brother 32-years-of-age, healthy, and was free of mental disorder or condition but "was extremely traumatized".
Mr Bailiff reported that his sister was deceased at 16-years-of-age in 1985 in the motor vehicle accident. He described that his sister was his "protector".
SUBSTANCE USE HISTORY
Mr Bailiff reported that he drank 2-cups of coffee or tea per day.
Mr Bailiff reported that he did not use any substances.
FORENSIC HISTORY
Mr Bailiff reported that a woman took a "restraining order" against him because he "had brain damage".
MENTAL STATE EXAMINATION
Mr Bailiff was a 42-year-old man of Caucasian descent. He was of average height,moderately obese, with graying black hair and beard. He was bespectacled. There was no evidence of psychosis, mania or dissociation. He was over familiar, with some pressured interpersonal behaviour, pressure of speech, grandiosity, some delusional content of speech and some hyper-religiosity. There was no evidence of dissociation. He has some speech disorder, including occasional concrete interpretation, malapropisms, and perservation of speech. He seemed pre-occupied with the status of people whom he was associated frequently mentioning association with various lawyers, judges, WHO, etc and enquired about the examiners associations with institutions and people.
OPINION
Summary of Findings
Mr Bailiff was variably cooperative, had his own agenda, and behaved in an entitled way consistent with his narcissistic personality which may be a feature of the psychosis due to organic factors. he gave variable effort on his testing, and especially poor effort on tests of verbal memory. His performance on symptom validity tests revealed malingering of verbal memory, but not visual memory.
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 17
He has attempted to craft a very specific presentation with a degree of sophistication. Overall, intelligence seems to be preserved, but with reduced processing speed and aspects of working memory associated with mental control rather than information span. His executive functioning was in the below average range with impaired category fluency and category reasoning as measured by the 20 questions test; which is usually associated with deeper regions of the brain or the mediating white matter regions rather than cortical injury.
Diagnosis
Notwithstanding the over-reporting of symptoms, in my opinion Mr Bailiff meets DSM-IV for the following:
AXIS 1: Psychotic Disorder Due to General Medical Condition
Cognitive Disorder Due to Head Injury
Not Otherwise Specified
AXIS II: Personality Change Due to Head Injury Disinhibited Type,
Narcissistic Personality Disorder
AXIS III: Head Injury
AXIS IV: Legal Difficulties
AXIS V: GAF (Current) = 45
Mr Bailiff was delusional with grandiose themes and hyper-religiosity. Therefore Psychotic Disorder Due to General Medical Condition was coded in AXIS I.
Mr Bailiff's cognitive profile evidenced some consistent difficulty with categorical reasoning and semantic difficulty that would be consistent with cognitive disorder due to head injury that would be consistent with cognitive disorder due to head injury, however given the factitious and motivational difficulties, no further conclusion can be made with certitude, therefore Cognitive Disorder Due to Head Injury Not Otherwise Specified was coded on AXIS I.
Mr Bailiff had poor inhibition of social inhibition of social behaviour including over-familiarity, pressured speech, failure to adhere to social norms and boundaries, and had poor impulse control. Therefore Personality Change Due to Head Injury was coded on AXIS II.
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 18
Mr Bailiff reported a pre-morbid familial situation involving emotional deprivation, isolation, and abuse by his mother, and that he was an introverted and withdrawn child with a significant degree of social isolation. He reported adolescent trauma including the death of his sister in the motor vehicle accident. He consequently has an overcompensating mode that results in the hallmark behaviour of Narcissistic Personality Disorder including a grandiose sense of self-importance, belief that he is special and entitled to favourable treatment, a sense of entitlement, lack of empathy, and that he should be associated with other high-status people. Furthermore, this specialness is also played out in his impression formation regarding his condition. His efforts to impress as fitting a specific syndrome an by association, over-identifying with the relative who 'wrote the book' on brain injury, are behaviours consistent with the personality type and encompass the factitious overlay in his presentation. Therefore Narcissistic Personality Disorder was coded on AXIS II.
Mr Bailiff reported that he suffered head injury as the result of a motor vehicle accident and therefore was coded on AXIS III.
Mr Bailiff's current functioning was consistent with the DSM-IV descriptor "Serious symptoms (eg. suicidal ideation, severe obsessional rituals, frequent shop lifting) OR any serious impairment in social, occupational or school functioning (eg. no friends, unable to keep a job)" therefor a Global Assessment of Functioning Scale score of 45 was coded on AXIS V.
In response to your specific enquiries from your correspondence dated 31st July 2013:
"We are seeking a report in accordance with Professor Hayes' recommendation and which specifically addresses your recommendations as to a possible treatment regime, including your opinion on the appropriate level of monitoring and supervision required and the availability or otherwise of such treatment within mental health facilities or services in NSW or the ACT."
In my opinion, ideally, Mr Bailiff would benefit from a course of schema therapy for Narcissistic Personality Disorder and with regard to his offending (Murphy, McVey, & Hopping, 2012). Ideally this therapy would occur on a weekly or or twice weekly basis for 12-months, and fortnightly to monthly basis thereafter for at least 12-months. Ideally this therapist would be a member of International Society of Schema Therapists and experienced
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 19
with forensic populations. There are several such therapists available in Sydney and who could be sourced via: www.schematherapytraining.com
Mr Bailiff would benefit from treatment by a psychiatrist with an interest in cerebral disorders, such as Dr Patricia Jungfer who practices out of Burwood in Sydney, to prescribe medication and manage his case. Dr Jungfer practices from Belvedere Consulting Rooms in Burwood 61 2 9745 2811. In my opinion such treatment would best be on a weekly to monthly basis until Mr Bailiff's mental state has been appropriately stabilized. He would then benefit from review on a 6-monthly basis.
Unfortunately, there is little that can be done regarding Mr Bailiff's cognitive impairment per se. It is likely as he ages he will be at increased risk of developing dementing disorders and his risk or premature mortality is higher than non-brain injured people. He is likely to have greater management problems in later life as a natural course of age related decline in cognitive function produces further decline in his currently impairments. Relative to same aged peers he is more likely to require support services earlier and more intensively.
CODE OF CONDUCT
I acknowledge that I have read the Expert Witness Code of Conduct contained in Schedule 7 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005. I agree to be bound by the Code. To the best of my ability this report has been prepared in accordance with this code.
Yours faithfully,
Dr John McMahon
Clinical Psychologist
B.Psych (Hon), D.Psych (Clinical) MAPS MAACBT CCP
Workcover IC, MAS Assessor
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
Mr Alexander Marcel Andre Sebastian Barker Bailiff Page 20
Delis, D.C., Kaplan, E & Kramer, J.H. (2001) The Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System: Examiners Manual. The Psychological Corporation: San Antonio, TX
Lezak, M.D., Howieson, D.B. & Loring, D.W. (2004) Neuropsychological Assessment (4th Ed.) Oxford University Press: New York, N.Y.
Murphy, N., McVey, D. & Hopping, G. (2012) Using ST Principles to Increase the Therapeutic Efficacy of the Forensic Care Team's Interactions with Personality Disordered Clients. In M. Van Vreeswijk, J. Broerson & M.Nadort (Ed's) The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Schema Therapy: Theory, Research and Practice. Wiley-Blackwell. West Sussex:U.K.
Dr John McMahon D. Psych (Clinical)
Ph: 1300 550 213
Email: admin@scpc.com.au
No comments:
Post a Comment