Article by Rosie DiManno for The Star seems to indicate that the prosecution will likely bring in their own forensic psychiatrists during rebuttal. The whole article is interesting.
Mr. Magnotta was in a psychosis on May 25, 2012, Allard told court. He knew what he was doing but he didnt know it was wrong because his perceptions were off.
He was assuredly living in the real world, but that reality was psychotically skewed. He knew right from wrong but was incapable of applying that knowledge in the moment in the hours because, to use Allards term, the schizophrenia was prevailing.
And, here was the money-shot so to speak for the defence: The illness is responsible for the five crimes on the indictment.
Jurors can accept or reject this conclusion. The prosecution will rebut later on with forensic psychiatrists of its own, which is inevitably what occurs tit-for-tat medical expertise in these legal circumstances.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...tta_tried_to_seduce_prison_nurse_dimanno.html
Mr. Magnotta was in a psychosis on May 25, 2012, Allard told court. He knew what he was doing but he didnt know it was wrong because his perceptions were off.
He was assuredly living in the real world, but that reality was psychotically skewed. He knew right from wrong but was incapable of applying that knowledge in the moment in the hours because, to use Allards term, the schizophrenia was prevailing.
And, here was the money-shot so to speak for the defence: The illness is responsible for the five crimes on the indictment.
Jurors can accept or reject this conclusion. The prosecution will rebut later on with forensic psychiatrists of its own, which is inevitably what occurs tit-for-tat medical expertise in these legal circumstances.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...tta_tried_to_seduce_prison_nurse_dimanno.html