Matthew de Grood, the man who caused the deaths of five young people at a house party in Calgary in 2014, had his appeal for more freedoms denied Thursday.
However, the board said his treatment team could allow him to move to a suitable accommodation in Calgary.
Matthew de Grood, now 31, was found not criminally responsible for the 2014 killings of Zackariah Rathwell, Jordan Segura, Kaitlin Perras, Josh Hunter and Lawrence Hong because he was suffering from schizophrenia at the time.
de Grood has been receiving treatment at Alberta Hospital Edmonton and living in a highly structured and restricted group home for a number of years, according to the appeal judgement.
At de Grood’s annual review hearing in September 2022, the board said he remained a significant risk and is not entitled to an absolute discharge, a decision which de Grood’s lawyer appealed.
Last week, Jacqueline Petrie argued that the decision was biased, unfair and that the board did not consider all the evidence.
Petrie said de Grood has been stable on medication, is at low risk to reoffend and should be allowed to live with his parents while being monitored under a full warrant.
The treatment team said de Grood had made significant progress and was, in many respects, a model patient, motivated to stay healthy and was compliant with medications, according to the judgement.
However, the treatment team said de Grood’s health is still fragile, and that when his mental health deteriorates, he is not likely to voluntarily return to hospital.
In the judgement, the team noted any disruption in medication may cause de Grood’s psychiatric condition to get worse. de Grood has also not had experience taking his medication without assistance and transitioning to a lower level of mental health care could make his condition worse, the report said.
“Dr. Manuwa, the treating psychiatrist … concluded (de Grood’s) risk of imminent future violence, if given an absolute discharge, would be low, but any future violence is significantly likely to be of high severity,” reads the judgement.
de Grood and his lawyer argued the board relied on inaccurate recitations of evidence, its conclusions were speculative and it failed to examine whether Manuwa’s testimony could be supported by other evidence.
The review board dismissed this complaint, saying the findings are factual and supported by evidence.
de Grood’s lawyer also argued the board chair, Gerald Chipeur, was biased and suggested he had connections to the provincial government, but the report said that was not enough of a reason to assume he was biased.
The proceedings weren’t fair, according to de Grood. His argument is that the victim impact statements should not have been released to the public. He had issues with other parts of the hearing but the review board did not find anything unfair about the hearing.
Finally, de Grood said the board didn’t properly assess whether he was a risk to the public as his schizophrenia had been in full remission for years, but the review found the board had considered his mental state.
– With files from Bill Graveland, The Canadian Press