Opinion ID: 2633370
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Expert Witnesses Called by the Defense

Text: Dr. Robert Gardner conducted a presentence diagnostic evaluation of defendant for Humboldt County in 1977 following defendant's conviction of assault for hitting a woman on the head with a baseball bat. Dr. Gardner testified defendant was obviously depressed. Defendant said he had assaulted his wife several times and had volunteered for the Army in order to be killed. Dr. Gardner concluded defendant had suffered a psychotic depressive reaction and probably had an underlying psychiatric disorder of an unspecified type and might be on the verge of becoming psychotic. Dr. Gardner stated in his report that defendant was at that time a danger to others. Although he did not find defendant was suffering from schizophrenia, he did not rule it out. Dr. Alfred Owre, Jr., was the chief psychiatrist for the Department of Corrections, California Men's Colony in San Luis Obispo in 1977 and evaluated defendant for parole suitability. While incarcerated at the Men's Colony, defendant was not taking any prescribed medications, such as antipsychotic medication. Dr. Owre noted defendant was in school while in prison and received satisfactory work reports. He concluded defendant was a person without psychiatric symptomology except in his distorted relationships with women. Quoting from his 1977 report, Dr. Owre noted that, regarding relationships with women, defendant derives pleasure from suffering at their hands, but [w]hen stressed he derives an emotional relief from inflicting pain upon them. This is sexualized. His 1977 diagnosis was that defendant suffered from a passive aggressive personality with depressive and then sadomasochistic features. A secondary diagnosis was that he bore [a]ggressive sexuality towards adult women, manifested by attempted rape. Defendant presented no signs of schizophrenia to Dr. Owre. Dr. Owre found defendant was not depressed or suicidal, and he testified defendant did not complain of hallucinations or delusions. On redirect, Dr. Owre opined that defendant was definitely out of reality contact and that, as he was observing him in the courtroom, Dr. Owre believed defendant was suffering from a chronic [u]ndifferentiated schizophrenic condition. He is responding to internal messages. He shows a dearth of body sensing movements. He appears to me to have deteriorated markedly since we last had him [at the Men's Colony]. A year after Dr. Owre's evaluation, in 1978, Dr. Jack Tolchin also conducted a periodic mental health evaluation of defendant at the California Men's Colony for the Community Release Board. He agreed with Dr. Owre's previous diagnosis of a passive aggressive personality with sadomasochistic features or depressive features or both. This condition was not a mental disease or defect but was instead a personality disorder. He did not find defendant to be schizophrenic, but admitted defendant's personality disorder was very severe. Dr. Tolchin recommended defendant continue in therapy and be monitored on parole by a psychiatrist. Dr. George Chappell, a psychiatrist, was appointed by the court to examine defendant to determine his sanity in connection with his 1981 crimes in Ventura County against David Galbraith and Michelle D. [12] Dr. Chappell testified defendant told him he was taking 600 milligrams of Mellaril, an antipsychotic medication. Defendant told him he could not shave with a mirror because when he looked at his own face, he heard voices telling him to cut his own throat. Defendant reported to Dr. Chappell hearing two voices, one male and one female; defendant claimed he had heard the voices over a period of years and months. Dr. Chappell had had serious questions as to whether [defendant] heard voices because there was no direct evidence of his having heard such voices and it was unusual that defendant had not complained to people close to him (like his wife) about the voices. Defendant told Dr. Chappell that he had been taking amphetamines for the previous 18 months to stay awake while driving. Amphetamines would probably aggravate an already existing psychosis, but Dr. Chappell did not believe defendant suffered from schizophrenia or any other psychosis. Dr. Chappell believed defendant was malingering or faking some of his symptoms. He found defendant was legally sane at the time of the Ventura County crimes. Dr. Theodore Donaldson, a clinical psychologist, also examined defendant for insanity in connection with the Ventura County crimes. In addition to interviewing him, Dr. Donaldson gave defendant the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory and the Rorschach Projective Personality Test. Defendant told him the voices in his head argued over whether to rape Michelle D, the victim in the Ventura County case, and the bad voice won. Defendant knew the rape was wrong but did it anyway. Dr. Donaldson thought defendant might be fabricating the auditory hallucinations; he concluded defendant suffered from a mixed personality disorder, depressive neurosis, and a long history of amphetamine abuse. Persons suffering from a personality disorder such as defendant's usually had a very small built-in set of morals and values and a lack of impulse control. He did not think defendant was schizophrenic. Like Dr. Chappell, Dr. Donaldson concluded defendant was not suffering from a mental disease or defect and was not insane in connection with the Ventura County case. Dr. Rolland Rose, a psychologist, conducted a diagnostic placement evaluation of defendant in 1981 at the California Institute for Men in Chino, a state prison. Dr. Rose had no personal recollection of defendant, but testified from his 1981 report. He found defendant exhibited an intense hostility toward women and diagnosed him as suffering from a passive aggressive personality with schizoid features and sexual sadism, which he explained was a character disorder and not a mental disease or defect. He admitted that one bearing such symptoms could be suffering from schizophrenia in remission and that the character disorder Dr. Rose diagnosed could be superimposed on a psychotic disorder. Dr. Jack Shonkwiler, a psychiatrist, testified he was presently working under a restricted license and was being supervised at a clinic by two other doctors. He testified he had examined defendant in connection with the team of defense experts, including Drs. Lundgren, Dietiker, and Cholet and Mr. Powers. He interviewed defendant and defendant's mother and sister, and he viewed videotapes of defendant answering questions pursuant to the Vietnam Era Stress Inventory. He also examined reports from prior mental health evaluations of defendant and his medical and military records. Dr. Shonkwiler found defendant was flooded with fantasies, images, visions of [a] sadistic sexual and aggressive nature and he has essentially no control. He noted that the fact defendant had close blood relatives who were schizophrenic gave him a marked predisposition to have schizophrenia. Dr. Shonkwiler's final diagnosis of defendant was paranoid schizophrenia and post-traumatic stress [disorder] (PTSD). He explained that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3d ed. 1980) (DSM-III) [13] required evidence of the presence of at least one of six diagnostic criteria under subdivision A for a diagnosis of schizophrenia and defendant fit all six categories. [14] He had bizarre delusions (he thought he could communicate with his mother telepathically); he had grandiose delusions (he believed he could hold off police with explosives made from household objects like bicycle tires and detergent); he had auditory hallucinations involving two or more voices; and he had markedly illogical thinking. Defendant fell somewhat into subdivision B, and there was evidence of subdivision C although such evidence was not dramatic. For this latter criterion, Dr. Shonkwiler noted defendant's social isolation, his blunt or flat affect, and his belief in telepathy. Defendant did not suffer from manic depression so subdivision D did not apply. Dr. Shonkwiler examined defendant when he was 38, so onset of symptoms occurred before age 45, fulfilling subdivision E. Defendant did not suffer from an organic mental disorder or retardation (subd. F). Dr. Shonkwiler also opined that, in addition to schizophrenia, defendant suffered from full-blown post-traumatic stress [disorder]. The witness explained that defendant's emotional detachment from his wife and children and his generally constricted affect were both indicative of PTSD. Defendant's memory impairment, difficulty concentrating and expressions of survivor guilt, apparent from the videotapes of defendant taking the Vietnam Era Stress Inventory test, were likewise consistent with PTSD. Dr. Shonkwiler testified that defendant's chosen profession as a long-haul trucker could be viewed as a means to avoid intimate relationships, which was consistent with the PTSD characteristic of avoiding activities that arouse recollection of the traumatic event. Dr. Shonkwiler surmised that defendant's amphetamine abuse may be related to a sleep disturbance, a common feature of PTSD. The witness admitted there was no evidence defendant displayed hypervigilance, or an exaggerated startle response, or that his symptoms intensified when exposed to events that symbolized or resembled the war experience, three additional symptoms of PTSD. He testified that defendant's abusive childhood predisposed him to have PTSD. Dr. Shonkwiler also found defendant's amphetamine abuse was a factor in the crimes: My understanding was that [defendant] would have a quart jar with amphetamines, ephedrine, maybe some valium, some elevil [sic ], and would go 20 hours without sleep, driving a long range truck. He would just grab a fistful and stuff it [in his mouth]. He didn't even know what he was taking. I am saying that what he did may have been 30 percent schizophrenia, 30 percent post-traumatic stress, 30 percent child abuse and the rest amphetamines and sleep deprivation. But who knows what was happening back there in '81, like a half-hour, hour before he murdered Radford or kidnapped Levoy. Maybe he shoved some amphetamines in him, which would make amphetamines 90 percent of what he did. Dr. Shonkwiler opined that if defendant was taking antipsychotic medication during prior mental health evaluations, his symptoms would have been masked. Dr. Shonkwiler concluded that although defendant knew right from wrong, he was unable to conform his conduct to the law. As a result of his abusive childhood, schizophrenia, PTSD, and amphetamine abuse, defendant had [v]ery poor impulse control. He is functioning at the level, the earliest level of a child wanting something and reaching for it. No gratification delay, very poor impulse control. The witness concluded defendant was legally insane. Dr. Kathe Lundgren, a clinical psychologist, interviewed defendant and administered a series of psychological tests to him at the request of defense counsel. She concluded defendant had one of the most severe personality disorders and that [a] perceived threat to his source of affection or love, even a slight frustration could set him into a violent act or a socially unacceptable act. Remember, that this is perceived stress, and besides his personality disorder is the psychosis, which twists reality, so even though you and I might not see something as being threatening or frustrating, in his twisted perception of it, it could be that it is frustrating to him. She concluded defendant suffered from chronic undifferentiated schizophrenia with a sociopathic, antisocial personality. Dr. Lundgren opined that defendant attempted to fake being sicker than he was, but she determined this was just an aspect of his mental illness. She was not prepared to give a professional opinion whether defendant was legally insane. Dr. K. Edward Dietiker, a psychologist, testified he was a member of the defense team of experts that examined defendant. He also administered some psychological tests to defendant. He concluded defendant suffered from paranoid schizophrenia. He opined that under certain circumstances [it would be] very difficult for [defendant] to hold his behavior in conformity to the law. I think that may [vary] from one situation to another, but certain situations that involve him in the sexual sadistic controlling kinds of relationships, it may be virtually impossible. Dr. Dietiker did not express an opinion about whether defendant was insane at the time of the crimes. Dr. Byron Wittlin, a psychiatrist, testified he worked at a Los Angeles area Veterans Administration hospital and treated PTSD patients and Vietnam War veterans. He examined defendant and read several reports and previous mental health evaluations of defendant. He believed that when defendant entered the military, he was already suffering from a psychotic illness and explained that the stress of combat could aggravate a preexisting psychotic condition. He concluded defendant suffered from schizophrenia, paranoid type, as well as PTSD, but he could not determine whether defendant was legally insane. Dr. Clyde Donahoe, a psychologist, testified he also worked at a Los Angeles area Veterans Administration hospital and treated PTSD patients. He examined defendant, administered psychological tests and reviewed his military records. In addition, Dr. Donahoe administered psychophysiological tests, measuring defendant's heart rate and respiration while he was shown a series of pictures, some of which portrayed scenes from the Vietnam War. Defendant self-reported on the Traumatic Violence Scale to Dr. Donahoe that he had either participated in or witnessed these items: Killing of women or children, mutilation of dead bodies, mutilation of live people, inadvertent air strikes or ambushes on own or friendly troops, use of white phosphorous or napalm, torture of prisoners, mercy killing, watching a buddy die in a gruesome manner, leaving one of the civilians to die, taking human body parts as trophies, bagging dead bodies, deliberate killing of old women, men or children . . . and the routine killing of prisoners. Dr. Donahoe concluded to a reasonable medical certainty that defendant suffered from delayed PTSD. He did not know whether defendant suffered from PTSD in 1981 when the crimes occurred, but admitted that he could very well have had the disorder then. Dr. John Wilson, a clinical psychologist, works with veterans and is an expert on PTSD. He developed the Vietnam Era Stress Inventory (VESI), a diagnostic tool consisting of several hundred questions to help determine if a person suffers from PTSD as a result of service in the Vietnam War. He interviewed defendant and examined police reports and the numerous previous psychological evaluations of defendant. Defendant reported to him that he had served as a combat engineer, stood perimeter guard duty and encountered incoming mortar and sapper fire, [15] participated in unit patrols that encountered anti-personnel weapons, engaged the enemy in a fire fight, was a tunnel rat (i.e., he entered underground tunnels constructed by the Viet Cong) and checked enemy base camps, and was a demolitions expert. Dr. Wilson opined that these experiences were consistent with the dates of service in defendant's military record. Dr. Wilson testified defendant has paranoid schizophrenia in addition to post-traumatic stress disorder and a mixed personality disorder. All three coexist. He opined that defendant was absolutely not faking the symptom of thought broadcasting, that is, the belief that people know his thoughts. Dr. Wilson explained: [Defendant's] affect was so intense that when individuals try to make [sic; mask?] their emotions, their affect [does not] quite correspond to the content of what you are saying and his was so spontaneous and his speech so pressured that that's very characteristic of someone who is suffering from this disorder. Dr. Wilson opined that defendant's schizophrenia began developing very early in childhood as a result of sexual and physical abuse by his parents, especially his mother. In response to this upbringing, he began to express his sexual and aggressive feelings by engaging in antisocial behavior, as that was more comfortable than dealing with the deeper level of his personality, where he is terribly confused and loses touch with reality, and then begins to hear voices and other things. His war experiences fed into his underlying psychosis in two ways. First, they gave sanction to his violent impulses. Second, the stress of war removed whatever remaining controls he had over his impulses. What we now have is an individual with pre-existing psychotic tendencies, learned psychopathic antisocial personality disorder kinds of traits, but with no means to modulate them, because the effect of the war stress was to pull away those tenuous controls, ego controls, ego defenses, so that in one sense what we have is now this interplay. The post-traumatic stress disorder causes him to feel vulnerable. He re-experiences images, nightmares, feelings connected to Vietnam. Those make him feel vulnerable. That then feeds back into the psychosis, so he begins to have hallucinations and hear voices. To cope with that, he behaves in an antisocial way. So the three [psychological conditions, namely schizophrenia, PTSD, and personality disorder,] literally feed into each other. Dr. Wilson concluded defendant was legally insane because, although he could distinguish right from wrong, he could not conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. He had read the reports of the four experts later called by the prosecution, Drs. Cutting, Criswell, Burdick and Matychowiak, and concluded they were incorrect in concluding defendant was sane, and that all four experts overlooked defendant's PTSD. Defendant's final sanity phase witness was Dr. Harry Kormos, a psychiatrist. He is an expert on PTSD and the psychological problems of veterans, and had worked with hundreds of veterans. He reviewed 10 to 12 inches of documents relevant to defendant, including defendant's past mental health evaluations, the police reports of the crimes, defendant's military record, and videotapes of defendant answering the VESI questions. He also interviewed defendant for two hours. He found defendant's responses on the VESI videotapes to be sincere and consistent with those of other PTSD sufferers. He concluded defendant suffered from paranoid schizophrenia and chronic PTSD. Dr. Kormos explained that only a minority of psychologists and psychiatrists at the time (1985) were well versed in PTSD and that it was a common error among psychiatrists to focus on a patient's childhood and ignore the psychological problems stemming from combat service in Vietnam. In addition, if defendant was taking an antipsychotic drug like Mellaril, the drug could have masked the symptoms of schizophrenia by reducing the intensity of symptoms. Dr. Kormos concluded: I consider [defendant] to have been, at the time that [the crimes] took place, to have been aware of the requirements of the law but unable to conform to those requirements.