VERDICT WATCH CO - Gannon Stauch, 11, found deceased, Colorado Springs, El Paso County, 27 Jan 2020 *Arrest* #67

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Is it safe to believe that instead of the prosecution suppressing the video, they decided to use it as a means to expose the expert and/or content in an unfavorable light? I think Dave Young is a seasoned trial attorney and I am impressed!
Exactly. He knows how to pick his battles.

IMO, we can say the same about DA Allen where the prosecution could have long ago motioned for sanctions against the defense for discovery violations for repeatedly failing to file the expert witness's report pursuant to Rule 16.

However, given this was the defense's only expert witness, sanctioning the defense by striking their sole expert witness would have likely resulted in the defense motioning for dismissal of the case because they lost their only witness -- essentially a dismissal by default, and where a dismissal w/out prejudice would require the prosecution to start all over again. Instead, the prosecution allowed Dr. Lewis to continue even after filing her report only 4 days before trial!

Again, although we witnessed many transgressions here, one has to know how to pick their battles, and I think the prosecution did an excellent job with an NGRI defense. We don't see many of these cases. MOO
 
Last edited:
enemata
hint- not for sodomy



 
I hope, in their closing statements, the prosecutors ask the jury to consider why she had to strike so many blows to such a small body? Why did she have to stab him 18 times? Why after that, why did she then have to strike him 4 times with some blunt force object, bashing in his small, still growing little skull? And then after that, why did she have to shoot him? The defense would have you believe it was because she was being irrational. Or psychotic. But here's the real reason why she struck him so many times.

Little Gannon was born just one and half pounds. He was so tiny that no one expected him to live. But that little tiny baby, that little tiny boy you could hold in one hand, he wanted to live. He wanted to live. He fought so hard - day after day - growing ounce after ounce - to live. He refused to give up.

And 11 years later, when the stepmother who hated caring for him, who despised having to help him with his stomach issues, who resented being his "babysitter", who said in a google search that she didn't like him, who was furious with his father, and hated his mother, when she decided to end his life, he fought!

Oh he fought. Just like he did 11 years ago. He fought for his life. He fought back against those stabbings, all 18 of them. We saw the proof of it on his hands, and his little fingers. And then he fought back against the blows, all four of them, he fought to keep his heart beating. He fought to keep breathing.

And when she heard those breaths, those last gasps for air, realizing that he was still alive, she ran upstairs and got the gun. The one wound he couldn't fight back against.

Gannon wanted to live. In the face of all her anger, and hatred, and resentment, and selfishness - despite it all - he wanted to live.

It wasn't psychosis. It wasn't insanity. It wasn't irrationality. No. She wanted him dead. It was his love of life, his fight to live, that caused her to have to deliver so many blows. He wanted to live.
This moved me to tears. Thank you for putting things so eloquently. Gannon only wanted to live, to stay, to see his mom. He fought so hard.

Which Letitia couldn't stand. She wanted it to be easy for her. Why wasn't it easy?

I am not a religious person but I am praying that the jury puts this woman where she truly belongs. In prison, LWOP.
 
Question 6 - so according to Dr Lewis, everyone who commits violent acts is psychotic. WTH. Violence is not a necessary symptom of psychosis. She is frightening.

I think she means more than just the violence. She means all the incomprehensible, contradictory things T. said about it (so far as Dr L even read those reports). She can see that T. is not DID (and so refuses to give that diagnosis, ultimately). She seems to think she can keep researching T. (somehow re-ordering the tests she asked them not to do).

I do wonder if she had a medical license (to allow ordering the tests). Surely lawyers themselves cannot order an MRI or PET or similar?

I think Dr L thinks that her own interviews with T. show that T. is "psychotic." What I see, though, is what Freud and others have called "borderline" psychosis (one foot in reality, one foot out of reality).

This paper (2013) concludes (paraphrasing): "These symptoms are sometimes referred to as "pseudo-psychotic" or "psychotic-like", terms that suggest a distinction from those seen in primary psychotic disorders. Recent research, however, has indicated that there is more similarity between pseudo-psychotic symptoms in BPD and "true" psychosis than originally thought."

Wikipedia article on this disorder is pretty much up-to-date. From that article:

"The DSM-5 recognizes transient paranoia that worsens in response to stress as a symptom of BPD.[9] Studies have documented both hallucinations and delusions in BPD patients who lack another diagnosis that would better account for those symptoms"


While it is true that BPD people are more likely to self-harm than to harm others, there's quite a bit of research on Borderline PD people who murder. The way I understand the literature, BPD murderers are often classified or diagnosed as having multiple PD disorders, most notably Antisocial PD and Schizoid PD (and I personally see signs of Schizoid in T.)

^2021

The following article summarizes research on BPD criminal violence and says that when they are violent toward others, it can be "extreme."

^1993

Note that the research on BPD and violence spans a long period of time. The literature on murder and BPD is more recent. Maybe Dr. L hasn't read it. The below article from 2009 summarize a lot about BPD and criminality:


It's important to remember that of all diagnoses, BPD is one that is almost always associated with some other, co-morbid Dx (or several of them). Antisocial PD and Narcissistic PD are common co-morbidities. Schizoid PD is also common (hence beliefs that the dead can be raised).

IMO. To my knowledge (and I keep looking - I'll do more looking today), no court has had a NGRI by reason of Borderline (or any other) PD. I'll start with this 2020 article to back up my point (made in other posts) that people found NGRI are increasingly called "psychopaths" (a non-DSM term) due to this overlapping and bewildering but fully antisocial set of symptoms. It focuses on women who end up in prison.


I don't think any jurisdiction allows "psychopathy" as a NGRI Dx, which is why I believe the Defense in this case needed to go elsewhere for its Dx.

IMO.
 
Exactly. He knows how to pick his battles.

IMO, we can say the same about DA Allen where the prosecution could have long ago motioned for sanctions against the defense for discovery violations for repeatedly failing to file the expert witness's report pursuant to Rule 16.

However, given this was the defense's only expert witness, sanctioning the defense by striking their sole expert witness would have likely resulted in the defense motioning for dismissal of the case because they lost their only witness -- essentially a dismissal by default, and where a dismissal w/out prejudice would require the prosecution to start all over again. Instead, the prosecution allowed Dr. Lewis to continue even after filing her report only 4 days before trial!

Again, although we witnessed many transgressions here, one has to know how to pick their battles, and I think the prosecution did an excellent job with an NGRI defense. We don't see many of these cases. MOO
Well summed up. It was all something of a "never interrupt your opponent whilst they're making a mistake" stance.
 
Doctor Lewis' responses are terrible. She's basically claiming/implying only she has the expertise to diagnose DID. Only she knows the difference between malingering and true symptoms. There are actually defined tests for malingering. MMP-2 specifically tests for that, I seem to recall (from Dr Curry's testimony in the DeppVHeard trial).

Notice how she's speculating about the victimisation of Letitia rather than Gannon in the first question. Basically excusing any sexual abuse she may have perpetrated on him. "If she did bad things to him it's because she had bad things done to her first." Even though she only has letitia's word for those childhood claims. Remember she did not interview Al or Harley or other relatives. And yet she claims one of the other factors in determining her opinion was the observation of her behaviours by others.

But everyone else (family, clinicians, LEO) has said she did not ACT psychotic, nor present any behaviours which might be unusual for her nor show evidence of alters.

We've seen video footage for ourselves if Letecia prior to her meeting with Lewis when she started presenting her 'crazy'.

Good god, both of these woman are frauds. I truly hope someone (with the proper authority) reports Dr. Lewis to the relevant licensing boards. She needs to be investigated for unethical behaviour. I presume they won't bother because of age but she's obviously peddling dangerous false and unsupported theories while advocating for people who have committed some of the most violent and depraved crimes. Her attitude towards Hitler explains her whole world view. It's a dangerous mindset that should not be encouraged. All just my opinion.
Here's what I know to be true: A board of medicine can take away one's license to practice medicine, but the degree of MD was earned and awarded to by the university. And a degree is something that cannot be taken away.
 
And I'd like to thank the mods for allowing us to vent and use any of the many different Dx proposed at various times during this trial, as well as related conditions and common sense terms for the same behaviors.

Our discussion today (and that banner in Colorado Springs) and @LightandReason 's post all have me in a very positive mood. While I hate to wait through the weekend, I'm used to it. I think T. knows she's going to prison. She's highly dangerous and fits no known model of insanity that meets CO's criteria.

IMO.
 
Exactly. He knows how to pick his battles.

IMO, we can say the same about DA Allen where the prosecution could have long ago motioned for sanctions against the defense for discovery violations for repeatedly failing to file the expert witness's report pursuant to Rule 16.

However, given this was the defense's only expert witness, sanctioning the defense by striking their sole expert witness would have likely resulted in the defense motioning for dismissal of the case because they lost their only witness -- essentially a dismissal by default, and where a dismissal w/out prejudice would require the prosecution to start all over again. Instead, the prosecution allowed Dr. Lewis to continue even after filing her report only 4 days before trial!

Again, although we witnessed many transgressions here, one has to know how to pick their battles, and I think the prosecution did an excellent job with an NGRI defense. We don't see many of these cases. MOO
Unlike in other jurisdictions, same state...
Imagine if the flower petal had been representing her?
I can't shake that scenario from my 'Latin ' head all day...
 
I hope, in their closing statements, the prosecutors ask the jury to consider why she had to strike so many blows to such a small body? Why did she have to stab him 18 times? Why after that, why did she then have to strike him 4 times with some blunt force object, bashing in his small, still growing little skull? And then after that, why did she have to shoot him? The defense would have you believe it was because she was being irrational. Or psychotic. But here's the real reason why she struck him so many times.

Little Gannon was born just one and half pounds. He was so tiny that no one expected him to live. But that little tiny baby, that little tiny boy you could hold in one hand, he wanted to live. He wanted to live. He fought so hard - day after day - growing ounce after ounce - to live. He refused to give up.

And 11 years later, when the stepmother who hated caring for him, who despised having to help him with his stomach issues, who resented being his "babysitter", who said in a google search that she didn't like him, who was furious with his father, and hated his mother, when she decided to end his life, he fought!

Oh he fought. Just like he did 11 years ago. He fought for his life. He fought back against those stabbings, all 18 of them. We saw the proof of it on his hands, and his little fingers. And then he fought back against the blows, all four of them, he fought to keep his heart beating. He fought to keep breathing.

And when she heard those breaths, those last gasps for air, realizing that he was still alive, she ran upstairs and got the gun. The one wound he couldn't fight back against.

Gannon wanted to live. In the face of all her anger, and hatred, and resentment, and selfishness - despite it all - he wanted to live.

It wasn't psychosis. It wasn't insanity. It wasn't irrationality. No. She wanted him dead. It was his love of life, his fight to live, that caused her to have to deliver so many blows. He wanted to live.
Thank you for this.... I'm sitting her crying, it is so beautiful.
 
If you've ever listened to the Court's juror instructions, one of the benefits of a juror is they get to decide on the credibility of the witness when weighing any evidence presented.

Results from recent research provide there are four main source factors that jurors base their judgments on regarding expert witness credibility and they are knowledge, trustworthiness, confidence, and likability.

IMO, the jurors won't have any trouble weighing the credibility of the defense's expert (Dr. Lewis) against the prosecution's experts, who disagree with Dr. Lewis's diagnosis that LS was insane. It's really no contest.

 
Excellent post.

And shows her absolute cunning.

She didn't want out (of work) for a day. She needed at least a couple of days off. Ironic since she herself had decided the week prior apparently not to take the job. T didn't want to work ever.

This is all very transparent. Job hopping, making up stories to cover for quitting..
.
I do think T was picking up what AS was putting down --- her hair trigger for abandonment. I do believe she was weighing her options. For maximum effect. Kidnap the kids. Give them back to LH. Note the irony -- LH was her archenemy. Until AS started to reject her. Transferred her anger straightaway to AS. Now she'd use LH to serve the ultimate diss on AL -- tear his children away. I think the moment it unraveled is when she clocked Gannon.

"He wasn't supposed to die."

Translation: he was supposed to die. Just not like he did.

He was supposed to die in a fire. Where she'd have a baby burn, the hero who tried to get everyone out of the house. (Welp -- her own words "I got the safe people out first." Even in a lie, her motive speaks.) Then he was supposed to die of an overdose, she just didn't know where or how to leave him that way. Then he was supposed to die from stab wounds, only the knife wasn't deep enough, he was fighting back, so she gunned him with he butt end of a gun before gunning him with the front end. Absolute frenzy of cruelty

I think she feels exonerated because it didn't go as planned. There was only one outcome by about 9 pm that Sunday. Remove Gannon. Get AS back. AS was a prop that T needed in order to look like something.

Every next-action stemmed from that.

Jmo
I think, perhaps, LS hated LH most of all. Unfortunately, she took all of that hatred and jealousy out on innocent, precious Gannon.
 
If you've ever listened to the Court's juror instructions, one of the benefits of a juror is they get to decide on the credibility of the witness when weighing any evidence presented.

Results from recent research provide there are four main source factors that jurors base their judgments on regarding expert witness credibility and they are knowledge, trustworthiness, confidence, and likability.

IMO, the jurors won't have any trouble weighing the credibility of the defense's expert (Dr. Lewis) against the prosecution's experts, who disagree with Dr. Lewis's diagnosis that LS was insane. It's really no contest.

I agree 100% that it is no contest. These jurors are seemingly attentive and invested.
 
Question: Will there be Impact Statements?

I've followed many, many cases throughout my XX years, but this is the first NGRI. AS did an outstanding job advocating for Gannon, but the jury hasn't heard from Landen. Al stated that Gannon was a "Mama's boy." Press conferences where Landen spoke left me feeling her sorrow and outrage. Hers is a powerful voice that will affect the jury.
 
I personally doubt that Dr Lewis still holds a license to practice medicine.

She can still be Board Certified (I do wonder if she is or if, like some other older doctors I know, she just thinks she is). If she took the certification exam 9 years ago, she's still certified (it lasts for 10 years). OR she can submit CTE units (I think there may be specific classes, with quizzes - I've taken some myself, just for fun - they aren't particularly difficult, IMO). I just hope she, herself isn't teaching any of those classes!

I wonder if that's why she withdrew her request for the neuro testing. The clinic may have rejected her out-of-state license OR checked with her own state's licensing board before processing (if they have reciprocity with where ever she lives).

If a doctor no longer has a license to practice (or it's been limited by their state due to various issues), they don't have to announce it. They can still call themselves a doctor and still say they are Board Certified and they can still take the Board's tests. I think Dr L thinks of herself as a researcher of high standing, in her field of study (disassociation).

IMO.
 
Question: Will there be Impact Statements?

I've followed many, many cases throughout my XX years, but this is the first NGRI. AS did an outstanding job advocating for Gannon, but the jury hasn't heard from Landen. Al stated that Gannon was a "Mama's boy." Press conferences where Landen spoke left me feeling her sorrow and outrage. Hers is a powerful voice that will affect the jury.
Victim impact statements are given at sentencing after a verdict has been reached (& can be given at parole hearings too.) I may be wrong but I don't think the jury will be involved in recommending the sentence no matter the outcome on the NGRI plea.
JMO
 
Excellent post.

And shows her absolute cunning.

She didn't want out (of work) for a day. She needed at least a couple of days off. Ironic since she herself had decided the week prior apparently not to take the job. T didn't want to work ever.

This is all very transparent. Job hopping, making up stories to cover for quitting..
.
I do think T was picking up what AS was putting down --- her hair trigger for abandonment. I do believe she was weighing her options. For maximum effect. Kidnap the kids. Give them back to LH. Note the irony -- LH was her archenemy. Until AS started to reject her. Transferred her anger straightaway to AS. Now she'd use LH to serve the ultimate diss on AL -- tear his children away. I think the moment it unraveled is when she clocked Gannon.

"He wasn't supposed to die."

Translation: he was supposed to die. Just not like he did.

He was supposed to die in a fire. Where she'd have a baby burn, the hero who tried to get everyone out of the house. (Welp -- her own words "I got the safe people out first." Even in a lie, her motive speaks.) Then he was supposed to die of an overdose, she just didn't know where or how to leave him that way. Then he was supposed to die from stab wounds, only the knife wasn't deep enough, he was fighting back, so she gunned him with he butt end of a gun before gunning him with the front end. Absolute frenzy of cruelty

I think she feels exonerated because it didn't go as planned. There was only one outcome by about 9 pm that Sunday. Remove Gannon. Get AS back. AS was a prop that T needed in order to look like something.

Every next-action stemmed from that.

Jmo
You've always had T's number and saw straight through her. I've often thought why not just give the children back to their mother? Landen was crying for them!

There was a pretext call and toward the end, T was wailing with a blood curdling pitch. I heard her cry to Al, "I tried so hard." Similar to an extinction burst where a BPD has no choice but to realize they went too far and there is NO going back. Yeah, she tried so hard to eliminate her perceived threat to having all of Al's love and attention. And to be honest, from that dreadful Sunday until her arrest, T was hopping and on the move. She tried so hard to get away with what she did. She just brutally murdered a man's beloved son, then asks him if he is cheating on her (???) That was her only moment of psychosis (IMOO).

If the jury comes back with NGRI, I think the earth will be knocked off-balance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
149
Guests online
1,327
Total visitors
1,476

Forum statistics

Threads
605,765
Messages
18,191,811
Members
233,527
Latest member
Solalla
Back
Top