Opinion ID: 2323099
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Steven Samuel, Ph.D.

Text: The State presented Steven Samuel to rebut Armstrong's and Dudley's conclusions. Samuel, a licensed psychologist in the state of Pennsylvania, interviewed Swan twice and administered a number of tests. Samuel concluded that Swan's scoring profile was consistent with malingering, that is, that Swan tried to look very, very disturbed on the test[s]. Samuel opined that he could not agree with Armstrong's and Dudley's conclusions because Swan demonstrated malingering, and had been in prison a long period of time before the tests were administered. Samuel also concluded that he could not definitively opine about Swan's condition at the time of the murder: [Swan's] records are replete with information about his personality, his character, his legal history and so on, but there's nothing to support the conclusion that he had a psychiatric or a cognitive disorder at [the] time [of the murder]. As for the alleged neuropsychological deficits, Samuel opined: I don't believe those deficits would have interfered with his behavior on that day.