A psychiatrist has denied that when assessing the case of a man who strangled, beat and stabbed his wife to death, he was only interested in evidence that bolstered his conclusion that the accused should be found not guilty by reason of insanity.
Dr Ronan Mullaney was being cross-examined for the second day in the trial of James Kilroy, who is charged with murdering his wife, Valerie French Kilroy, at their home in Co Mayo in 2019.
The jury hearing his trial has been told that Mr Kilroy accepts that he killed his wife.
After the killing, he was seen walking naked in a field near his home and gardaí took him to Mayo University Hospital to be assessed under the Mental Health Act for admission to a psychiatric unit.
Dr Mullaney has told the Central Criminal Court trial that Mr Kilroy was likely suffering from drug-induced psychosis at the time, which caused him to believe that his wife was involved in a plot to torture and kill him.
He said the accused did not understand what he was doing was wrong and was unable to refrain from his actions and qualifies for the "insanity" verdict.
On Thursday, prosecution counsel Anne-Marie Lawlor SC asked Dr Mullaney why he had not included in his report the evidence of Walter Moran, an insulation contractor who visited Mr Kilroy's home shortly before the killing.
Mr Moran's evidence was that the accused was acting normally, showed him which walls were suitable to be pumped with insulation, and offered to find plans for the house.
Ms Lawlor said during this period, in Mr Kilroy's accounts to various psychiatrists, he believed he was a "super villain" and recalled jumping around his house and climbing in and out of windows.
Dr Mullaney said that while a psychosis is evolving, a person can appear rational for short periods. Being able to instruct someone or being rational about a specific thing does not rule out the possibility that he was developing a psychosis, the doctor said.
"It's not impossible or even improbable," he added.
Not relevant
Dr Mullaney said Mr Moran's evidence was not relevant as he was not describing Mr Kilroy as being unwell. Mr Justice Tony Hunt interrupted to say that Mr Moran's evidence is "as relevant as anything else".
Ms Lawlor said: "You said it wasn't relevant because he didn't describe an abnormal state. Were you only interested in looking at material which bolstered your conclusion?"
Dr Mullaney denied the suggestion, saying that he had recorded a number of inconsistencies in Mr Kilroy's accounts, but he did not think a short period of rational presentation was relevant enough to be included in his report.
"I don't think it shows I'm only looking at evidence to support the hypothesis," he said.
He said he would probably include Mr Moran's evidence in his report if he were to do it again, "so you would not suggest I was only seeking to support my hypothesis".
James Kilroy (51) has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity to murdering his wife Valerie French Kilroy, who died at their home from strangulation, blunt force trauma and a stab wound to the neck.
In his direct evidence, Dr Mullaney said Mr Kilroy's use of cannabis had likely led him to become psychotic, which he said is different to intoxication.
He said a blood test carried out following Mr Kilroy's arrest was negative for cannabis, suggesting that he had not smoked for at least one week, while the symptoms of cannabis intoxication would last only hours.
Cannabis
On Thursday, Dr Mullaney agreed with Ms Lawlor that synthetic cannabis does not show up in blood tests, and it is impossible to know whether Mr Kilroy had ingested or smoked synthetic cannabis over that period.
Dr Mullaney agreed that Mr Kilroy is an unreliable historian and had given different accounts of his alcohol use at the time of the killing. He also agreed that Mr Kilroy had disregarded medical advice in 2001, following a psychiatric admission, that he must abstain from drug use.
Dr Mullaney said that it is for the jury to decide the degree of Mr Kilroy's responsibility, given that his mental state was likely related to cannabis use. However, Dr Mullaney said it would have been difficult for Mr Kilroy to foresee that he would become so disordered that he would kill his wife given that he had used cannabis for several decades without such a scenario arising.
He said there was no suggestion of domestic violence or abuse in the relationship.
Dr Mullaney agreed that in interviews following the killing, Mr Kilroy described his relationship with his wife in "idealised terms". Ms Lawlor said that in reality there was evidence of rows, worsening disharmony and complaints by Ms French that Mr Kilroy was "something of a waster" who was not performing his household duties.
Dr Mullaney said it is likely that Ms French became frustrated with Mr Kilroy's behaviour, but he did not see a compelling link between marital disharmony and the frenzied killing.
Following Dr Mullaney's evidence, consultant psychiatrist Professor Harry Kennedy was called by the prosecution. He told Ms Lawlor that he spoke to Mr Kilroy five times in early 2021.
The accused told him that he was born in England to a Presbyterian mother and Church of Ireland father. The family moved to Ireland where they inherited 100 acres and a large Georgian home in need of renovation. He was sent to boarding school in Kells aged eight.
"It had certain nightmares to it," he said, describing one teacher who liked to tickle the children. He recalled chasing his parents' car as it drove away, but he was unable to catch it.
Aged 13, he was sent to school in Belfast, but he failed his O-levels. Aged 17, his father sent him to an agricultural college in Tipperary, which he enjoyed. He began using cannabis as a student and in 2001 he got his first job as a park ranger. In September that year, he was admitted to hospital and was diagnosed with a drug-induced psychosis.
Prof Kennedy said the accused man described his drug use in the following years. By 2019, he was ingesting part of a cannabis cookie daily and sometimes smoked a potent form of the drug known as AK-47. He also had plants that he had grown himself from seeds.
The professor said there is a suggestion that Mr Kilroy was becoming dependent on cannabis in 2019 and was increasing his usage.
Prof Kennedy said it is impossible to know how much of the active ingredient is contained in any cannabis batch or even what the precise ingredient is. There is a further significant problem with synthetic cannabis which can be "very toxic", the professor said.
It was impossible to assess what Mr Kilroy had been taking because he had destroyed all his cannabis before the killing. Blood tests carried out after the killing did not reveal any evidence of cannabis, but Prof Kennedy said synthetic versions of the drug would not have shown up in those tests.
Prof Kennedy also told Ms Lawlor that, unlike Dr Mullaney, he did not presume that what Mr Kilroy told him was the truth. He said he starts with a neutral approach but "any psychiatrist, and particularly a forensic psychiatrist, must consider the reliability of what we are told".
Prof Kennedy will continue his evidence on Friday in front of Mr Justice Hunt and a jury of eight women and four men.
