A judge has upheld a publication ban on evidence from a mental fitness hearing for the suspect in the Vancouver Lapu Lapu Day festival attack. The attack, which occurred on April 26, resulted in the deaths of 11 people when an SUV drove through a crowded street.

Judge Reginald P. Harris ruled on Wednesday in provincial court that Adam Kai-Ji Lo is fit to stand trial. He faces 11 counts of second-degree murder and 31 counts of attempted murder. On Thursday, Harris reaffirmed that the evidence presented during the fitness hearing, including testimony from two forensic psychiatrists, will remain confidential until the conclusion of Lo's trial.

Harris expressed concerns about the potential for prejudicial information to influence jurors if the evidence were made public. He noted that the case has garnered significant public interest, which could lead to extensive discussions about the hearing material. "To set aside the ban and combine the materials with what has already been stated would increase the risk of an unfair trial from occurring," he said.

The judge emphasized the need to balance the rights of freedom of expression with the right to a fair trial. He acknowledged the importance of transparency but concluded that the benefits of maintaining the ban outweigh the negative effects. "I understand and am troubled about limiting freedom of expression or delaying it for a period of time," Harris stated. "That said, when I place all of the balance in recognizing risk, what has been released, the measured release of information, and the fact that information will ultimately be available, in my view, the benefits of the ban outweigh the negative effects."

A media consortium challenged the publication ban, arguing that it is essential for the public to understand the court's decisions. Consortium lawyer Daniel Coles expressed disappointment with the ruling, stating, "Judge Harris had a hard job to do, balancing on the one hand the rights of a fair trial of Mr. Lo and the rights of British Columbians and Canadians to know what happened in this courthouse."

Coles argued that maintaining a publication ban creates a void where rumors and misinformation can spread. He emphasized that allowing media coverage is crucial for public interest, especially since many people cannot attend court proceedings.

Defense lawyer Mark Swartz and Crown prosecutor Michaela Donnelly opposed lifting the ban, with Donnelly asserting that protecting the accused's right to a fair trial is paramount. The court is scheduled to reconvene on October 30.