STORY: "Witness for the prosecution," by reporter Russ Buettner, published by the New York Times on September 20, 2013.
GIST: "How could it be, the defense lawyer had asked, that 20 other doctors examined the defendant, a Portuguese fashion model, and concluded he was in the throes of a manic episode at the time he killed his companion — and only you determined that he was faking it? How could it be that the rule book for your profession says a manic episode can come on rapidly — and yet you insist that the book is wrong on that point? And how could you conclude that the defendant, who has a degree in physical education from a college in Portugal, learned how to invent an insanity defense in a college psychology class, without having any idea whether he even took such a class? With that, William B. Barr shifted a bit in the witness chair. He tilted his head to one side, but he did not lose his cool. “It’s my assumption that getting a general degree from a university, that chances are that someone has studied psychology,” he answered calmly......... As an expert witness, Dr. Barr is among a select group of mental health professionals in New York City who regularly play a central role in criminal proceedings, and he has become something of the go-to man for prosecutors when the mental health of a defendant is at issue. There is no record of exactly how often an expert appears for either side, but since 2000, Dr. Barr has been hired by prosecutors as a consultant in more than 100 such cases, he testified last year. Because they are hired largely by word of mouth among like-minded lawyers, it is all but inevitable that the same experts will be repeatedly called. Yet most try to avoid testifying more frequently for one side to avoid the appearance that they are tailoring their conclusions to the needs of the lawyers who most often hire them. Dr. Barr’s role is often to tell jurors that defendants who might seem mentally ill did not meet the legal definition of insanity at the moment they are said to have committed their crimes. And his testimony follows an almost predictable pattern: defendants are exaggerating a mental impairment and acted out of rage.........In the trial last fall of the Portuguese fashion model, Renato Seabra, a defense lawyer, Rubin Sinins, asked Dr. Barr if he simply “cut and paste” into his report that Mr. Seabra acted out of rage. An expert for the defense, Dr. Roger Martin Harris, the former director of psychiatric units at several local hospitals who now teaches forensic psychiatry at New York Medical College, testified that Dr. Barr was “creating his own diagnostic system” in ignoring definitions in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, sometimes referred to as the bible of mental disorders. “I respectfully think that Dr. Barr is going out of his way trying to make Mr. Seabra responsible for the crime,” Dr. Harris said."
GIST: "How could it be, the defense lawyer had asked, that 20 other doctors examined the defendant, a Portuguese fashion model, and concluded he was in the throes of a manic episode at the time he killed his companion — and only you determined that he was faking it? How could it be that the rule book for your profession says a manic episode can come on rapidly — and yet you insist that the book is wrong on that point? And how could you conclude that the defendant, who has a degree in physical education from a college in Portugal, learned how to invent an insanity defense in a college psychology class, without having any idea whether he even took such a class? With that, William B. Barr shifted a bit in the witness chair. He tilted his head to one side, but he did not lose his cool. “It’s my assumption that getting a general degree from a university, that chances are that someone has studied psychology,” he answered calmly......... As an expert witness, Dr. Barr is among a select group of mental health professionals in New York City who regularly play a central role in criminal proceedings, and he has become something of the go-to man for prosecutors when the mental health of a defendant is at issue. There is no record of exactly how often an expert appears for either side, but since 2000, Dr. Barr has been hired by prosecutors as a consultant in more than 100 such cases, he testified last year. Because they are hired largely by word of mouth among like-minded lawyers, it is all but inevitable that the same experts will be repeatedly called. Yet most try to avoid testifying more frequently for one side to avoid the appearance that they are tailoring their conclusions to the needs of the lawyers who most often hire them. Dr. Barr’s role is often to tell jurors that defendants who might seem mentally ill did not meet the legal definition of insanity at the moment they are said to have committed their crimes. And his testimony follows an almost predictable pattern: defendants are exaggerating a mental impairment and acted out of rage.........In the trial last fall of the Portuguese fashion model, Renato Seabra, a defense lawyer, Rubin Sinins, asked Dr. Barr if he simply “cut and paste” into his report that Mr. Seabra acted out of rage. An expert for the defense, Dr. Roger Martin Harris, the former director of psychiatric units at several local hospitals who now teaches forensic psychiatry at New York Medical College, testified that Dr. Barr was “creating his own diagnostic system” in ignoring definitions in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, sometimes referred to as the bible of mental disorders. “I respectfully think that Dr. Barr is going out of his way trying to make Mr. Seabra responsible for the crime,” Dr. Harris said."
ahttp://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/22/nyregion/witness-for-the-prosecution.html?smid=pl-share&_r=0
PUBLISHER'S NOTE:
Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following these issues.
I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site.
The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/
Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.
Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com
