Anthony John Wheble during his sentencing in 2022. Photo: NZ Herald/ Michael Craig
Anthony John Wheble has tried to kill two fellow inmates with shanks, sliced off parts of his own ears, an eyelid and a finger and had obsessive-compulsive thoughts about prison guards.
But, despite this pattern of disturbing behaviour the Court of Appeal remains unconvinced he is legally insane.
Now, with his insanity-based appeal rejected in a decision released this week, Wheble's orders of preventive detention and consecutive sentences for the attempted murders remain in place.
Wheble's first attempted murder occurred in October 2019 when he sliced the neck of a prisoner Diego Marques-Santos at Otago Corrections facility.
Wheble reportedly stalked his victim around the day room before grabbing him from behind and inflicting an 8cm cut to his throat.
For that offence, Wheble was sentenced to seven years.
The next vicious attack occurred in the exercise yard of Pāremoremo Prison on 12 January 2020.
The victim, Brent Charlton, had both legs in casts from an unrelated injury and was sitting on the ground when Wheble approached holding a shank.
The weapon was made from a sharpened toothbrush with a disposable razor blade inserted on the end.
Wheble kicked the victim in the forehead then lifted his head and repeatedly stabbed him in the face before letting him go and kicking him in the head a further five times.
With the victim now unconscious, Wheble held up the victim's head cutting both his eyelids and then stabbing him another 14 times in the face.
When the victim slumped over, Wheble then repeatedly sliced the right side of his neck causing a deep laceration to an artery, stepped back and kicked the victim in the head another seven times.
The assault was recorded on CCTV and despite suffering severe injuries, the victim survived and Wheble was charged with attempted murder.
Wheble pleaded guilty on the morning of his trial on 8 February 2022, and was sentenced in the High Court at Auckland to preventive detention and a minimum non-parole period of five years.
His behaviour in court was regularly disruptive and involved demands to speak with the judge, headbutting a security guard and leaping out of the dock at counsel.
Wheble filed an appeal against his conviction earlier this year arguing his guilty plea was entered without consideration of his mental fitness to plead or the potential availability of an insanity defence.
Wheble's new lawyer Annabel Creswell presented evidence to the Court of Appeal (COA) regarding his mental health, including records of longstanding psychiatric issues.
Creswell argued that his previous counsel, Baden Meyer, had requested a section 38 mental health report on three separate occasions, all of which were declined. Justice Fitzgerald, in rejecting the requests, noted that Wheble was aware of the progress of the proceedings and did not meet the threshold for such a report.
Meyer gave evidence to the COA that Wheble was fit to plead guilty and that his decision to do so was rational and informed.
Psychiatric reports submitted for the appeal revealed that Wheble had a history of schizophrenia, paranoid delusions, and other psychiatric symptoms that raised concerns about his mental state at the time of the offence and during his plea.
At a psychiatrist meeting in 2020 notes recorded him as being vague in regards to violent fantasies and alluding to "odd spiritual descriptions".
"He described his actions in relation to the incident as something spiritual where he said he had to do it to protect the people and animals outside (referring to outside prison), he denied it was planned, he said 'All my concerns will be taken care [of]'", the report said.
From 2020 to March 2022 Wheble was recorded as having several paranoid delusions, non-compliance with medication and obsessive thoughts of self-harm and by December 2022, he had cut off parts of his ears, eyelid and his left ring finger.
The COA found that despite Wheble's psychiatric history, there was insufficient evidence to prove he was unfit to plead or that he lacked an understanding of the legal proceedings. The court determined that Wheble's decision to plead guilty was rational and informed.
While Wheble's psychiatric reports indicated the presence of schizophrenia, the court found his actions during the offence and his understanding of the legal implications did not support an insanity defence.
"We are satisfied that there was no trial counsel error in failing to explore a defence of insanity. Once Mr Meyer was satisfied that Mr Wheble was fit to plead, he could not, in our view, have disregarded Mr Wheble's instruction that he did not wish to pursue a defence of insanity.
"We conclude that Mr Wheble was fit to enter a guilty plea and has not demonstrated that his counsel's conduct deprived him of a tenable defence," the decision said.
The appeal was dismissed.
* This story originally appeared in the New Zealand Herald.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.