Subscribe to trusted local news

In a time of both misinformation and too much information, quality journalism is more crucial than ever. By subscribing, you can help us get the story right.

  • Subscription costs less than £1 a week with an annual plan.

Already a subscriber? Log in here.

20

Oct 2021

Last Updated: 20/10/2021
Crime
Crime

Harrogate murder accused had 'impaired judgement', court told

by Calvin Robinson

| 20 Oct, 2021
Comment

0

Daniel Ainsley, 24, had "impaired judgement" in the lead up to an alleged murder on Harrogate's Mayfield Grove, Leeds Crown Court was told today. Mr Ainsley denies murder on the grounds of diminished responsibility.

dan-ainsley-and-mark-wolsey

A man accused of murder on Harrogate’s Mayfield Grove had “impaired judgement” before killing his victim, a court heard.

Daniel Ainsley, 24, of no fixed address, is on trial charged with murdering 48-year-old Mark Wolsey in his bedsit on March 5.

He denies murder on the grounds of diminished responsibility due to an “abnormality of mental functioning”.

John Harrison QC, for the defence, called Dr Harry Wood, a clinical psychologist, to give evidence to Leeds Crown Court this morning.

Dr Wood told the court that after interviewing Mr Ainsley he concluded that the defendant had a personality disorder that stemmed from “his traumatic upbringing”.

He also told the court that his opinion was that Mr Ainsley interpretation of the events inside Mr Wolsey’s flat before the alleged murder were “directly influenced by his personality”.

Dr Wood said:

“He considers himself vulnerable and believes that others are likely to behave in an abusive and attacking manner towards him.”






Read more:







Dr Wood said that if Mr Ainsley’s account were to be accepted then his judgement “would be impaired as a result of a personality disorder”.

When questioned by prosecutor, Mark McKone QC, Dr Wood said he accepted that Mr Ainsley’s actions in the lead up to the alleged murder showed he was "in control".

But, he told the court that the defendant's judgement when arriving at those decisions was impaired.

Dr Wood said:

“The judgement Mr Ainsley made was irrational because of the bias in his thinking that comes from his personality disorder.”


He told the court that the defendant’s view of a “proportionate response” was “distorted”.

The prosecution argued that Mr Ainsley “knew what he was doing was wrong” and was capable of making rational decisions.

The trial continues.