With the recent killing of Halifax gay activist, Raymond Taaval, homophobic violence is once again receiving media attention.

The fact his killer, Andre Noel Denny, went missing while on a one hour’s unaccompanied pass from the East Coast Forensic Hospital in nearby Dartmouth-Burnside, and was known to be a paranoid schizophrenic who had slashed the throat of a puppy because he believed it to be the ‘devil’s dog’, has added fuel to the fire of outrage and brought to the forefront two very distinct issues: how homophobia and the accompanying violence is dealt with (not very well) and the treatment and care of individuals suffering severe psychiatric disorders.

One of the key questions in this is why Denny was on an unaccompanied pass to begin with.  Even his lawyer, Pavel Boubnov, has stated the heavy-set Denny was prone to violence when off his medication and when drinking alcohol, which was apparently the case the night of April 17th when Taaval was attacked after trying to break up a fight between Denny and another individual outside the Menz and Mollyz bar in Halifax’s gay bar district.  This does not sound like an individual who should ever have been permitted to leave the ward for any length of time, let alone without supervision.  That, right there, was a recipe for disaster.

By all accounts, Taavel was a peaceful, caring and gentle individual.  Friends and acquaintances have said they are not surprised he intervened in the fight and attempted to calm those involved.  This is what activists do...get involved.  That night it cost Taavel his life, beaten to death by a crazed individual and left to die in the street.

An accompanying issue here is the stigma attached to those suffering any sort of mental illness, but more so in dramatic cases such as paranoid schizophrenia.  One of the pivotal defenses to be used by Boubnov on behalf of his client is whether or not Denny understood the consequences of his actions that night.  If not, then he could be found not criminally responsible due to mental illness or defect.

However, this should not be interpreted as ‘having got away with it’, a common misunderstanding of the defense.  What such a finding, in fact, does is set into motion an ongoing assessment process by the Criminal Code Review Board.  That process is designed to seek rehabilitation and reintegration into society while, at the same time, ensuring protection of the public. The board can provide a range of disposition orders, ranging from absolute discharges, to conditional discharges or detainment in a secure forensic hospital.

In other words, the individual is still held accountable for their actions - as delusional as they may have been - they just are not punished in the same way an ordinary individual in full possession of their faculties would be.  The state still often maintains quite strict control over the individual, often for extended and indefinite periods of time, and may exert considerable control over the individual’s movements, including confining them.  Why this wasn’t done in the case of Denny is currently under investigation as of this writing.

Of course, the other issue that arises from this was whether or not Taavel’s murder was a hate crime.  The Halifax Regional Police are not dismissing the possibility.  Witnesses have said they heard Denny yelling "faggot" as he turned on Taavel.  One can probably safely assume, however, that Denny’s lawyer will argue, given Denny’s reduced understanding and quite possibly delusional and paranoid state at the time, he was incapable of forming the intent to kill, let alone develop the motivation of hate towards a specific group - in this case, gay men.

Those of us who take on the mantle of activism are quite aware there are dangers attached to being so public and vocal.  When I was involved with various issues ranging from sexual orientation inclusion in provincial human rights law to equal marriage it was not unusual for me to receive threatening phone calls to my home (and, yes, I was listed in the phone book; I refused not to be) and, on at least a couple of occasions, death threat letters.  I also coordinated what was then Gay Lines Calgary, an information and peer-counseling phone line and drop-in centre for gay and bisexual men located in the Old Y Centre, for many years as well as involved with the Calgary Lesbian and Gay Political Action Guild (CLAGPAG) and would walk from my residence in the Beltline along 12 Ave SW to the Old Y.  There were times, I will admit, especially after I had been in the media, that I was nervous walking to the Old Y and if a vehicle passed too close or slowed down, my heart would pound and my breathing would catch.  No doubt Taavel was likewise aware of the dangers, but it is something one learns to accept and adapt to.  One has to.  And yet none of us really expect we will be killed...not in Canada.

Then the question is, was Taavel killed because he was a gay activist or was he killed because he intervened in a fight between a deranged individual and, I gather, an unknown third party?  I would suggest he was killed for the latter reason.  Denny, whether insane or not, probably had no idea who Taavel was.

This in no way minimizes the tragedy of losing an activist such as Taavel.  Our communities don’t have enough individuals willing to stand up and speak out on our behalf as it is, so the loss of even one activist has repercussions throughout the community.  The loss, either through death as in Taavel’s case, burnout or other personal reasons an activist may be facing, leaves a gaping hole in the fabric of community with people looking for answers.

One of the answers we need to hear, and certainly the Halifax GLBTQ community needs to hear, is how and why an individual with Denny’s history was out on an unsupervised pass to begin with.  While he may very well not be held legally responsible for his actions, those tasked with caring for him and monitoring him should be.  Who authorized his pass?  Why?  Quite bluntly, what the hell were they thinking?

Part of the investigation into Taavel’s murder should involve investigating the rationale behind allowing Denny to walk out the door of a, I assume, closed psychiatric ward - unsupervised and unaccompanied - on an hour’s pass.  Someone needs to be held accountable for that.  Whether that occurs or not remains to be seen.

Of course, it is understandable that doctors want to reintegrate patients into community living where possible.  And that is a laudable goal.  The days of having someone with a mental illness locked up in an asylum/provincial mental hospital or other institution are past, by and large.  We don’t warehouse people in mental hospitals like the movie One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest portrayed.  The idea is repugnant to any right-thinking individual.  But, by the same token, there is a responsibility to ensure those being reintegrated are ready for it - for our safety and theirs.

Denny had not been allowed to leave the hospital from September 2011 until February 2012, the time between his court-ordered assessment following his attack on the dog he believed to be a spawn of Satan, and a Criminal Code Review Board hearing.  On February 20th, 2012 the board granted him a conditional discharge, meaning he could have been released at any time.  The process of reintegrating him then began.

According to the institution’s Clinical Director, Dr. Aileen Brunet, hospital staff were proceeding slowly with Denny’s reintegration and he was in the "early stages of graduated increased access to the community".  However, she did not know how frequently he had been on outside release but did state it was normal practice to start patients off with short supervised outings such as off hospital grounds for a cigarette or a coffee at a nearby coffee shop.

If individuals behave appropriately, they can then earn unsupervised outings, often several hour-long ones a day. From there, they work their way up to six overnight passes a week and eventually full release from the hospital and reintegration into their community.

This is all quite reasonable.  But somewhere along the line, Denny was not assessed properly or he was able to hide an awful lot.  His lawyer stated he was only violent when off his medication.  But he was out for several hours.  Was he not medicated prior to leaving for what staff - reasonably let’s say - assumed would be yet another one hour trip?  He also apparently consumed alcohol, which exacerbated his increasingly delusional state.  In short, he was a time bomb waiting to go off and he did go off.  And Raymond Taavel, his family both biological and chosen, and his community, paid the price.

Two lives destroyed.  Two victims, and yes, Andre Denny is a victim here as well.  Who should be held responsible for that?