Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1958-09-14

tally Ill because he was a socio-
path.
Once in st. Elizabeths. Leach
wanted out. He tried habeas
corpus action, based on disa-
greement among the psychia-
trists on whether he was a
sociopath. They all agreed
however. he was potentially
dangerous,
Leach won that round, but
the Government appealed. The
appellate courts landmark
opinion in July refused to re-
lease Leach. The appellate
court put psychopaths in a
special class" and held that If
Ia persons mental condition
would make him dangerous to
the community, he cannot be
freed.
The effect Of this decision
would make possible lengthy
commitment Of antisocial types
sent to the hospital after in
sanity verdicts. since psychia-
trists have found no fast cure
for their particular trouble.
Criticism UnresOlyed
Still unresolved is one of the
basic criticisms leveled' at the
Durham rule. United States
Attorney Oliver Gasch and
other opponents Of the new test
claim that jurors could under
stand the simple confines of the
old "right-wrong" and ''irresist-
ible impulse" tests. but find the
broad terms of the Durham
rule "vague and confusing"
Supporters of the Durham
rule. however. contend that it
allows the psychiatrists to bring
in all facets of the workings Of
the sick mind-beyond the linn
It's of the old test which, psy-
chiatrists claim, involves more
q moral judgment than medical
symptoms.
MIR. Gasch. calling this argu-
ment another potential source
of confusion. argues back that
THE only thing that would sat-
isfy the psychiatrist would be
to testify in totality-an undi-
gested. anonymous mass of con-
illusions.
But Abe Fortas, the attorney
who successfully urged adoption
of the new test in the Durham
case, sees full psychiatric testi-
mony as presenting a full mo-
tivational setting Of the crime. +"
Mr.. Fortas comedies some
psychiatristS bog down their
testimony with overly scientific
terms, but he sees the eventual
elimination of the adversary
system of trials in insanity
cases where the prosecutor and
the defense take part in a bat
tie Of wits.
An example, of what Mr..
Fortas has IN mind was July's
45-minute trial of Edith Louise
Hough, who had been charged
with numbering her ex-finance.
The phychiatrists said she was
mentally i'll at the time of the
crime and the Government put
up no fight at all. 81
But last weeks Durham trial
was hardly what Mr.. Fortas
Ivisualizes. Through four days
of testimony. DuThafn's attor-
ney, Mrs. Jean Dwyer. fought a
battle of wits with Assistant
United States Attorney Arthur
Mclaughlin.
Courtroom observers agreed
the july's guilty verdict resulted
from Mr.. McLaughlin's three
hour cross-examination Of the
psychiatriSt who called Dur
ham mentally i'll at the time of
the crime.
Judge Matthews set aside the
|jury's verdict on the ground
that the Government did not
prove beyond a reasonable
doubt" that Durham was sane
at the time of the robbery.
Mr.. Mclaughlin argued in
vain that the jury may have
felt the psychiatrist's brief
mental examination of Durham
was worthless" but he did
spotlight a problem that con-
Germs DR.. Overholser.
The st. Elizabeths Hospital
superintendent is frankly criti-
cal of the inadeQuacy of some
of the psychiatric diagnoses
presented by private practition-
ers. And he worries about the
workload put on his staff in
examining criminal suspects in
the overcrowded wards of his
hospital.