Posted on 12/11/2003 7:52:38 AM PST by Calpernia
CHESAPEAKE, Va. (AP) -- Sniper suspect Lee Boyd Malvo has mental diseases that left him "psychologically numb" and legally insane because he couldn't tell right from wrong, a defense psychiatrist said.
During the months he lived with convicted sniper John Allen Muhammad starting in 2000, Malvo lost his sense of identity and became vulnerable to Muhammad's wishes and "intense, coercive persuasion," psychiatrist Neil Blumberg testified Wednesday in Malvo's murder trial.
Malvo's dissociative disorder that allowed him to tune out reality, his depression and a childhood "conduct disorder" of shoplifting and cat-killing all meant Malvo was "unable to distinguish between right and wrong and was unable to resist the impulse" to commit the sniper killings in 2002, Blumberg testified.
Blumberg, who spent 50 hours with Malvo over 20 interviews, said he believed Malvo was legally insane. The standard for legal insanity in Virginia is an inability to distinguish right from wrong at the time of the crime.
Psychiatrist Diane Schetky, who twice interviewed Malvo, also testified that she believed Malvo was unable to tell right from wrong.
Malvo's defense is expected to rest Thursday, and prosecutors are expected to call their own mental health expert.
Malvo, 18, is charged with capital murder in the death of FBI analyst Linda Franklin, who was shot on Oct. 14, 2002, outside a Home Depot.
Defense mental health witnesses have testified that Malvo was indoctrinated by Muhammad, who treated him like a son, and was taught by Muhammad that right and wrong are artificial concepts created by the government.
Malvo's attorneys argue that he is innocent by reason of insanity, and say Malvo latched on to Muhammad because his childhood of loneliness and uprooting left him malleable and without a father figure. Malvo told the psychiatrists that he and Muhammad planned to wage a war for racial justice against America.
"He was merged with Mr. Muhammad. He was acting as his proxy. They were one and the same. He was like a puppet in his hands," Schetky said.
She also said, however, that she believed Malvo knew killing Keenya Cook was wrong. Malvo told the doctors that he shot Cook in the face in Tacoma, Wash., eight months before the shootings around the nation's capital.
Schetky said Malvo believed he had no choice but to obey Muhammad's killing order. Blumberg said he thought Malvo did not know the killing was wrong.
Malvo also had misgivings about the shooting of a middle school student in Bowie, Md., during the sniper spree, Schetky testified. Malvo told her he thought shooting children was "very wrong," and that he was relieved Iran Brown didn't die.
Prosecutors argue that Malvo was a willing participant in the shootings, and Commonwealth's Attorney Robert F. Horan Jr. suggested Tuesday in cross-examinations that Malvo's emotional conflict in the school shooting indicated he understood the moral implications of his actions.
A jury convicted Muhammad last month and recommended he be put to death.
Copyright 2003 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Easy one to disprove. If he truly didn't know right from wrong, why did he hide his actions? A person with this condition wouldn't feel any need to hide his actions of murder, any more than he would feel the need to hide breathing. He would calmly walk about the streets, shooting people without concern of being seen.
If he didn't do anything wrong, why was he hiding. The next point is that it was well advertised that these killings were wrong and we know he can read and had computer in his vehicle with access to the media sites. Who did they think we were talking about? Plus, his threatening letter says "I'm going to do something BAD if you don't pay the money.
Yea, he's a sicko all right but he knew exactly what he was doing, did it several times and PLANNED it.
Solution; put him on trial for murder with a jury of his peers, twelve men and women who are psychologically numb and legally insane.
In its 1995 session, the New Mexico legislature pondered and passed a bill that set limits on the testimony of psychologists in court. Senate bill 459, written by Richard Romero, included the following language:
"When a psychologist or psychiatrist testifies during a defendant's competancy hearing, the psychologist or psychiatrist shall wear a cone-shaped hat that is not less than two feet tall. The surface of the hat shall be imprinted with stars and lightening bolts.Although the Senate passed the bill by voice vote, and the House voted 46 to 14 to make it official, NM Governor Gary Johnson vetoed it.
"Additionally, a psychologist or psychiatrist shall be required to don a white beard... and shall punctuate crucial elements of his testimony by stabbing the air with a wand." Before the expert's testimony about competency, the bill specified "the baliff shall contemporaneuosly dim the courtroom lights and administer two strikes to a Chinese gong."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.