Opinion ID: 781722
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Hegarty's Testimony

Text: 228 Murad also argues that the District Court abused its discretion when, at the suppression hearing, it failed to give sufficient weight to the testimony of one of his expert witnesses, Dr. Angela M. Hegarty. Hegarty testified that, although Murad admitted that he sometimes lies, she believed that Murad most likely had been tortured in the Philippines. ATr. 4969, 4983. Hegarty diagnosed Murad as suffering from, among other things, post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of his torture. Yousef, 925 F.Supp. at 1071. Based on her opinion that Murad was suffering from mental disorders, Hegarty concluded that he lacked the capacity to voluntarily and knowingly waive his rights. Hegarty Psychiatric Legal Report on Murad of Aug. 20, 1996 at 36. 229 After reviewing Hegarty's opinions and conclusions, the District Court discounted her views about Murad: 230 As with many other psychological disorders, there is a great possibility that a patient suffering from these disorders may in fact be malingering. Although Murad admitted to Dr. Hegarty that he sometimes lies, and that he in fact lied to Dr. Fredrick, who had conducted a prior evaluation of Murad, Dr. Hegarty stated that if she knew that Murad had lied about his arrest in the Philippines, she would have just considered that another lie that would not change the conclusions of her report. I believe that Dr. Hegarty was bamboozled by Murad and I therefore must give little weight to her testimony and her conclusions. 231 Yousef, 925 F.Supp. at 1071 (internal citations omitted). 232 We conclude that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in finding that Hegarty had been bamboozled and consequently discounting her testimony and conclusions. The Court was entitled to give whatever weight it thought appropriate to Hegarty's opinion, see, e.g., United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315, 329 (2d Cir.1993), particularly because Hegarty's opinion was principally based on her interviews with Murad — whose testimony the Court found to be riddled with inconsistencies and, as a whole, not credible, see Yousef, 925 F.Supp. at 1069. 233