RNZ earlier revealed the man – who was made a special patient under the Mental Health Act after his first killing – was recently found not guilty of murder by reason of insanity for a second time after killing someone he believed was possessed.
RNZ is unable to publish details regarding either killings because of an appeal against name suppression that is due to be heard by the Court of Appeal.
‘Perfectly fine’
Rachel (not her real name) met the man via online dating about 18 months before the second killing.
The man, who was going by a different name, seemed “perfectly fine”.
“He was very loving and caring and treated me incredibly well.”
Rachel, who has a young daughter, says the man doted on them both and was always willing to help.
It wasn’t until about six weeks before the second killing that the man told Rachel he had killed someone more than two decades ago.
“I thought it was a joke ... I laughed and he said ‘I’m not lying, you can look it up if you want to’.”
Horrified at discovery
Once she realised he was telling the truth she screamed at him and told him to leave. She then read up on the case and was “horrified” at what he’d done.
A couple of days later she went and saw him to find out why he did it.
“He just said that he knew he was really unwell back then, and he tried to get help and admitted himself, and they kept wanting to release him. He said he begged them not to let him out, that he was telling them he didn’t feel well, that he wasn’t right.”
Rachel said she believed after speaking with him, and reading up on the case, that his mental health had been “mishandled really badly”.
“I could definitely see the failures that had happened to him [and the victim].”
Changing behaviour
Around the same time, Rachel started noticing changes in the man’s behaviour. He started becoming delusional and irrational. It appeared to coincide with his consumption of marijuana increasing a lot higher than she had noticed before.
Then, about two weeks before the second killing, he was admitted to a mental health facility following an altercation with a relative.
Following his admission she became “very scared and very terrified”. About a week later he was released.
The man contacted Rachel once he was released and she went to visit him to find out what had happened and see how he was.
“He was talking about weird things and didn’t really make any sense. He seemed very unwell.”
Rachel felt she was at “massively high risk” and was worried what he might do to her.
“Progressively every day things were getting more worse and more scary and that’s when I, for the first time, went s***, I’m in trouble. I knew I had to get out, but I knew I had to do it carefully.
“I couldn’t notify authorities, because if he found out it could have turned really bad. So I needed to work out quietly how I was going to exit without alarming him and angering him.”
A knock on the door
A day after he was released the man sent Rachel a message saying he didn’t love her any more and wanted to break up.
The following morning, about 4.30am, Rachel woke up to tapping on her ranch slider. She got up and he was standing outside. He said he’d been drinking with his friend all day and night and he’d been sick and then drove to her place. He ended up staying the night.
Two days later she was doing her front lawn when she saw him sitting in his car on the road watching her. Rachel asked him what he was doing, and he replied: “Oh, I love you and I want to be with you”.
She told him he was stalking her and was being “creepy”. He took off, but she then saw him again about an hour later across the road. She told him to go away, and she would see him later on.
The next night he visited her home after repeatedly asking to come over. The couple were arguing back and forth in her bedroom.
Rachel said she told him she did not think the relationship was working and he needed to leave.
He refused to leave, and asked her what she was going to do about it.
She threatened to call the police and then he left.
Agreed to help
The following morning, the day of the second killing, he called to say he needed someone to pick him up as he had driven out of town and his car broke down.
Rachel said she was reluctant to help him, but eventually relented. However, when she got there he wasn’t there.
He eventually called her and said his phone had gone flat and he got a lift with someone else.
She didn’t see him until that evening about 5.30pm. He made himself a chicken sandwich and about 7pm they went to bed.
According to court documents, the victim had been stabbed to death within an hour before he arrived.
Rachel said he appeared to be okay, but was fully clothed in bed. When she asked why, he said it was in case he needed to leave quickly.
He then started whimpering and said someone “told me to do it”.
Police, dogs and guns
Rachel fell asleep and woke up about 1am to get some water when she saw lights coming from outside.
“I woke him up and said ‘there’s all these lights and things and he just got up and shot out and then suddenly there’s armed offenders squad and dogs and guns being pointed and stuff like that.”
Rachel asked the police what was going on. It wasn’t until the following morning she found out he had killed someone.
“I was in disbelief, I was sickened and distraught.”
Rachel said the man should not have been released from the mental health facility five days before the killing.
“I don’t know how they couldn’t have noticed how he was unwell unless he put on a really good show.”
She believes there has been a “massive” failure in the mental health system.
“It failed him, it failed everybody twice.”
‘Sad all around’
Rachel said she often wonders whether he may have killed her as well. She is in therapy and says she’s “a mess”.
“I feel sad. I feel sad for the victims, I feel sad for him. I feel it’s just sad all around really.
“He was unwell, and he just wasn’t given the care that he should have been given.”
In ruling the man was insane for a second time, Justice Karen Grau said there was no question that he was responsible for the killing.
The judge said the criminal charge “could not unpick what has happened in the system and what could and should have done, but it is hoped that answers will come, both for the whānau and for the wider community”.
The defendant was described as a “caring person when he was well”. But, at the time of the killing, he was “clearly unwell”.
To be released into the community after being designated a special patient, requires the sign-off of the Minister of Health, the Attorney-General and the Director of Mental Health. The man was released more than a decade ago, and later had his status changed to being a patient under the Mental Health Act.
At the time of his second killing, he was subject to a Community Treatment Order.
Urgent review called
After RNZ revealed the man’s offending, chief victims adviser Ruth Money called for an “urgent review” of forensic mental health services.
Director of Mental Health, Dr John Crawshaw, earlier said they were limited in what they could say regarding the case as there was ongoing legal action and name suppression in place.
Crawshaw confirmed there were specific processes set out under the Criminal Procedure Act and the Mental Health Act that must be followed when the status of a special patient is reviewed or changed.
“The thresholds for decision making under the act are long-standing. These processes are always followed.”
When a patient was moved from special patient status, they were frequently subject to continued compulsory treatment orders, Crawshaw said.
“The Ministry of Health has provided information to the Minister of Mental Health about some aspects of this case under the no surprises principle, but it has not provided a formal briefing. The event and investigations all began prior to the current minister’s time in office.”
A Health New Zealand spokesperson said an external review of the care the patient received leading up to their offending was in progress.
-RNZ
