Has the Not Criminally Responsible Defence Ever Worked in Canada?

It has, but far less often than most people think. The NCR defence succeeds in less than a quarter of the cases where it is raised, and it is raised in less than 1% of cases overall.
The defence of not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder is one of the most misunderstood parts of Canadian criminal law. Media coverage makes it seem like the defence is used constantly and succeeds regularly. The numbers tell a different story.
According to Statistics Canada, the plea rate for the mental disorder defence is less than 1%. Of those pleas, only about a quarter actually succeed. The defence is rare, and successful outcomes are rarer still.
When it does succeed, it is in cases where the defendant was suffering from a serious and intense mental disorder and lacked the mental capacity to understand what they were doing or to know that it was wrong. A diagnosis alone is not enough. The disorder has to have been severe enough at the time of the offence to strip the person of their ability to distinguish right from wrong.

Cases Where the NCR Defence Succeeded
The following are real Canadian cases where courts found the defendant not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder. Each involved a severe psychiatric condition that the court determined removed the person’s ability to understand the nature of their actions or know they were wrong.
Matthew de Grood (Calgary, Alberta)
De Grood stabbed five young adults to death at a house party in what was called Calgary’s deadliest massacre. He was charged with five counts of first-degree murder and was assessed as mentally fit to stand trial.
The court found that de Grood intentionally committed the acts, but that he was experiencing a psychotic episode during the killings. He believed there were werewolves and vampires threatening his life. His schizophrenic condition led to a finding of not criminally responsible.
De Grood was sent to a psychiatric facility. His case is subject to periodic reviews by a review board that determines whether conditions of his detention should change.
Gregory Allan Despres (Minto, New Brunswick)
Despres stabbed a couple in their home in New Brunswick. His mother and lawyers argued he was unfit to stand trial due to paranoid schizophrenia, which his mother believed began when he was 17.
At his first trial, the judge ruled Despres unfit to stand trial. After several months of treatment, he was found fit and a new trial was ordered. At the second trial, the judge found Despres guilty of murder but ruled that his actions were a result of his mental disorder. He was found not criminally responsible and is being held at a treatment facility.
Glen Race (Halifax, Nova Scotia)
Race was charged with murdering two men. The judge ruled that his schizophrenia overpowered his ability to understand right from wrong. Race believed he was on a mission and claimed to be a vampire slayer. He was declared not criminally responsible for his actions.
Allan Schoenborn (Merritt, British Columbia)
Schoenborn was charged with killing his three children. He was experiencing psychosis at the time and believed he was saving his children from physical and sexual abuse. The court found his mental illness serious enough to support a finding of not criminally responsible.
Schoenborn was placed in a psychiatric hospital and has been granted escorted day passes. His treating physician has stated that his condition has improved, but further improvement must be shown before any changes to his status.
Vincent Li (Manitoba)
Li was charged with killing a man sleeping next to him on a Greyhound bus. He told the court that a voice in his head said the victim was an alien and a force of evil who needed to be destroyed. The judge found that Li suffered from an intense mental disorder and ruled him not criminally responsible.
Li was sent to a mental health facility immediately after the decision. In February 2017, the Manitoba Criminal Code Review Board granted Li an absolute discharge, meaning there are no legal restrictions on his independent living.
When the NCR Defence Fails
A mental health diagnosis does not guarantee an NCR finding. The court has to be satisfied that the disorder was severe enough to prevent the person from knowing what they were doing or that it was wrong. If the evidence does not meet that threshold, the defence fails.
Elaine Campione (Barrie, Ontario)
Campione was charged with drowning her two daughters during a custody battle with her ex-husband. She faced two counts of first-degree murder.
During her trial, evidence showed that Campione had attempted suicide, experienced delusions that people were trying to kill her daughters, and exhibited extremely bizarre behaviour. She was diagnosed with unspecified psychosis, post-traumatic stress disorder from spousal abuse, depression, and an eating disorder.
Despite these diagnoses, the court ruled that her mental illness was not serious enough to prevent her from knowing right from wrong. Campione was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment.
What Happens After an NCR Finding
Being found not criminally responsible does not mean walking free. It means the person is placed under the jurisdiction of a provincial or territorial review board rather than the correctional system.
In most cases, the individual is sent to a psychiatric facility. The review board conducts periodic assessments to determine whether the person should remain detained, receive conditional release, or eventually be granted an absolute discharge. These reviews consider the person’s current mental state, their treatment progress, and whether they pose a risk to public safety.
An absolute discharge, like the one granted to Vincent Li, means the person is no longer subject to any conditions or supervision. These outcomes are uncommon and only occur after extensive review.
If You Are Facing Charges and Mental Health Is a Factor
The intersection of criminal law and mental health is one of the most complex areas of the justice system. Whether the issue is fitness to stand trial, an NCR defence, or mental health as a mitigating factor at sentencing, how these arguments are raised and supported makes a significant difference in the outcome.
Contact Pyzer Criminal Lawyers for a free consultation to discuss your situation.

This article provides general legal information only and should not be construed as legal advice. Laws and their interpretation may change, and the application of law to specific circumstances requires professional legal assessment. If you have questions about a legal matter, please contact us for a free consultation.

Jonathan Pyzer, B.A., L.L.B., is an experienced criminal defence lawyer and distinguished alumnus of McGill University and the University of Western Ontario. As the founder of Pyzer Criminal Lawyers, he brings over two decades of experience to his practice, having successfully represented hundreds of clients facing criminal charges throughout Toronto.





