4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #104

[NCWatcher]

There are tests for autism conducted by Psychiatrists assisted by Psychologists with specialist training. It's a discrete tests and isn't covering other issues such as co-morbid personality disorders or PTSD or addiction etc.

I never said there weren't tests. I said diagnosing ASD, like most mental and/or developmental disorders, can't be done on the basis of a single definitive tests or a group of tests alone. And I said as the CDC does, an evaluation for ASD doesn't have to include any traditional tests. I still say those things. Even the blurb for a commercially available observational device (ADOS-2) provided by another poster cautions it should be part of a "comprehensive evaluation" and cannot be used alone to make a diagnosis.

Clinical psychologists, psychologists trained to work with people with mental illness, actually receive more training than psychiatrists do re: doing mental health diagnosis. Psychiatry these days is very focused on using drugs for treatment. In many cases when a treatment team approach, is used, the doctoral-level psychologist does the diagnosing while the psychiatrist does the prescribing.

I would agree it's possible for an evaluation to focus only on ASD. At issue would be the referral question. Usually there are troubling symptoms and the goal is to determine why and if they are part of a known disorder. In that case, the referral question is fairly broad and looks at many possibilities. If BK was evaluated as a child, IMO the evaluation was probably broad but none of us can know for sure. But it doesn't have to be done that way.
MOO

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

That isn't quite what I mean. To say someone has autism they need to meet the diagnostic criteria accross the triad of impairments. If he hasn't had a formal assessment for autism then they cant just say he has autism as fact.

How do you know there wasn't a formal assessment?

 

[Sachi]

I never said there weren't tests. I said diagnosing ASD, like most mental and/or developmental disorders, can't be done on the basis of a single definitive tests or a group of tests alone. And I said as the CDC does, an evaluation for ASD doesn't have to include any traditional tests. I still say those things. Even the blurb for a commercially available observational device (ADOS-2) provided by another poster cautions it should be part of a "comprehensive evaluation" and cannot be used alone to make a diagnosis.

Clinical psychologists, psychologists trained to work with people with mental illness, actually receive more training than psychiatrists do re: doing mental health diagnosis. Psychiatry these days is very focused on using drugs for treatment. In many cases when a treatment team approach, is used, the doctoral-level psychologist does the diagnosing while the psychiatrist does the prescribing.

I would agree it's possible for an evaluation to focus only on ASD. At issue would be the referral question. Usually there are troubling symptoms and the goal is to determine why and if they are part of a known disorder. In that case, the referral question is fairly broad and looks at many possibilities. If BK was evaluated as a child, IMO the evaluation was probably broad but none of us can know for sure. But it doesn't have to be done that way.
MOO

Once again, appreciating a post here that explains. So, moving this into the realm of court allowed references if the defense was able to ban the use of words “ psychopath” or psychopathy or “ sociopath” sociopathy as a reference to BK , will she be banned from saying “ autistic” or Autism Spectrum Disorder for the same reason…there is no professional diagnosis?

 

[Megnut]

Bringing forward this post by @MassGuy
with the State's Response to the Defense's motion to strike the death penalty, inre autism.

A fresh read was helpful to me.

Post in thread '4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #102' 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #102

 

[NCWatcher]

Once again, appreciating a post here that explains. So, moving this into the realm of court allowed references if the defense was able to ban the use of words “ psychopath” or psychopathy or “ sociopath” sociopathy as a reference to BK , will she be banned from saying “ autistic” or Autism Spectrum Disorder for the same reason…there is no professional diagnosis?

Good question. Personally I don't think we know that yet but I expect we will have an answer from the judge before too long. While it's not clear (to me) what AT has, I think she has more from the psychiatrist and the neuropsychologist in the area of a autism spectrum dx or autistic symptoms for BK than the state does in the area of a psychopathy or sociopathy dx for him (especially since we can be pretty sure the state has not done an evaluation of BK AND neither of those those specific diagnoses are in the DSM and haven't been since 1980, long before BK was born.)
MOO

 

[Sachi]

Bringing forward this post by @MassGuy
with the State's Response to the Defense's motion to strike the death penalty, inre autism.

A fresh read was helpful to me.

Post in thread '4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #102' 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #102

This is great. Thank you! I looked at this doc https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01...fendants-MiL-13-RE-Conditions-Aggravators.pdf

 

[Megnut]

This is great. Thank you! I looked at this doc https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01...fendants-MiL-13-RE-Conditions-Aggravators.pdf

I think we haven't heard the last of this. Iiuc the State is asking for discovery from the Defense as to their experts' evaluation. Methods, findings, etc.

I think AT used her experts very carefully and very narrowly, in order to get a generic finding to re-diagnose BK with ASD (as a child) without opening the door to a full mental health evaluation because a condition like anti-social personality disorder doesn't stave the DP. Neither does ASD but, since she's attempting to lump together all individuals with ASD (despite the breadth and variety of presentations) in the hopes of appealing to... her word... the judge's humanity. Completely glossing over that fact that BK is not presently an 8 year old who can't tie his shoelaces. BK is an adult, was living independently, apparently capable of shower curtain commerce, driving, working, amassing degrees (in the State's response -- BK achieved his Master's with a 4.0). BK shows degrees of competency in planning, preparation, navigation as attested by the investigation.

She revealed her strategy, either get the judge to create law that ASD, on every level, escapes the DP, against all law to date (he has no cognitive impairment!!!) or, as revealed late in the day after her motions smackdown, force a delay. She asked the JUDGE to point her to evidence in discovery, asked the judge also to make the State mark key discovery for her. That is not how delegation works!!

She's really got less than nothing to work with.

Good luck trying to rebrand BK as a sympathetic character.

JMO

 

[Warwick7]

Admittedly, I haven't kept up with every post in this thread or all the hearings, so I don't know what's been submitted or not. But what you're posting seems to be someone's interpretation of what they read in a medical chart.

Is there some reason to believe there isn't a medical record that has not been released to the public that may or may not include ASD evaluation? You don't need "testing" to make the diagnosis of ASD. You just need an evaluation with certain objective assessments. Testing becomes important if the diagnosis is ambiguous or includes a number of co-morbidities that need to be accounted for. Otherwise, an evaluation by an expert -- psychologist, psychiatrist, or behavioral neurologist -- is sufficient.

BBM
I've been out of the loop for a day so maybe since then other information may have been posted. However, in M00, my take on your question is: The answer just might be no. If there were medical records and he was diagnosed the Judge wouldn't have responded this way:

Judge said: You've provided no expert to say he can't do this crime. All you've shown is a historical issue of not being able to tie his shoes.

Defense said: BK can't look remorseful through no fault of his own.

Judge said: Juries are instructed to rule only on evidence, not the defendant’s courtroom demeanor. It's not relevant. It's not evidence.

Defense said: media says he's evil, he's an incel.... dark eyes.

Judge said: but that's not autism.

JMO

 

[Warwick7]

How do you know there wasn't a formal assessment?

My take is Joshua Hurwit/prosecutor wanted that answer too.

And thats why he went for the throat and demanded data behind two elledged expert mental health evaluations of Kohberger.

He requested additional materials, including test results and the facts supporting the experts’ conclusions, to allow their own experts time to review and prepare a rebuttal.

He demanded it, in MOO, because he believes it doesn't exist.

 

[Nadal]

Nice. So now we have attorneys who have decided they are "neuro psychologists" who can diagnose syndromes in the DSM-V. LOL.

Does this mean that Social Workers, Mental Health Counselors and Psychologists can practice law without going to law school?! Just asking.

You don't have to go to Law School to practice law. Some study for the bar on their own, it was far more common in America in the 19th Century but some still do so today.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

So the bottom line is, they lied. They said they had two elledged expert mental health evaluations on Kohberger. Thus why prosecution (Joshua Hewitt) requested the test results and the facts supporting the experts’ conclusions...

Also, if the State can’t call him a psychopath because he hasn’t been officially diagnosed as that, the the defense should not be able to even hint at him having autism or OCD if he hasn’t been diagnosed with those either.

 

[Nadal]

Also, if the State can’t call him a psychopath because he hasn’t been officially diagnosed as that, the the defense should not be able to even hint at him having autism or OCD if he hasn’t been diagnosed with those either.

No one gets diagnosed as a Psychopath, that's an outdated term. They get diagnosed with ASPD. ASPD isn't the buzzword that Psychopath is though which is why they would want to use it, it's clearly inflammatory.

 

[MeadowMuffin]

You don't have to go to Law School to practice law. Some study for the bar on their own, it was far more common in America in the 19th Century but some still do so today.

You sure don't have to go to law school in order to represent oneself. But then that person can end up in quite the mess of their own making, and I'm thinking of Lori Vallow Daybell's disaster yesterday in court!

 

[Nadal]

You sure don't have to go to law school in order to represent oneself. But then that person can end up in quite the mess of their own making, and I'm thinking of Lori Vallow Daybell's disaster yesterday in court!

It's interesting but most people who represent themselves do fine, they aren't entirely on their own they typically have legal aide's as ordered by the Judge. It's when it is a crazy person like Lori or Charles Manson or that black man who killed his family and was screaming in court represent themselves that they do horribly and we hear about it.

One of my holy grails of trial footage is the 1985 Mafia Commission Trial, just in general because i'm interested in the Mafia but also because Carmine Persico (Colombo Boss) represented himself and he was supposedly hilariously ridiculous and was pissing off the other Bosses who felt he was making them look bad lol.

 

[SteveP]

You don't have to go to Law School to practice law. Some study for the bar on their own, it was far more common in America in the 19th Century but some still do so today.

Well, in the USA, that is only true if the individual lives in one of four states.

In California, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington, you can take the bar exam without going to law school through a structured apprenticeship program known as a Bar Apprentice.

If a person completes a state's program of taking the bar without going to law school, they can only practice law in that state. This route limits a person from practicing law in any other state in the country.

For me, if I ever need an attorney, I want one with at least a J.D. JMO

Can You Take the Bar Without Going To Law School?

If you’re keen on learning about law, you may be wondering if you can take the bar exam without going to law school. Follow along to find out!

www.juriseducation.com

 

[SteveP]

It's interesting but most people who represent themselves do fine, they aren't entirely on their own they typically have legal aide's as ordered by the Judge. It's when it is a crazy person like Lori or Charles Manson or that black man who killed his family and was screaming in court represent themselves that they do horribly and we hear about it.

One of my holy grails of trial footage is the 1985 Mafia Commission Trial, just in general because i'm interested in the Mafia but also because Carmine Persico (Colombo Boss) represented himself and he was supposedly hilariously ridiculous and was pissing off the other Bosses who felt he was making them look bad lol.

Abraham Lincoln, who, like many lawyers of his time, did not attend law school, is often credited with saying "The man who represents himself has a fool for a client."

 

[arielilane]

Such a blessing to for Judge Hippler to preside over the BK trial. He's clearly in control of his courtroom. jmo

 

[SteveP]

Such a blessing to for Judge Hippler to preside over the BK trial. He's clearly in control of his courtroom. jmo

Absolutely, and I cannot help but think that after sitting through the evidentiary hearing a couple days ago, AT, probably more than a few times, wished she had not fought so hard to get a change of venue. JMO

 

[Nadal]

Abraham Lincoln, who, like many lawyers of his time, did not attend law school, is often credited with saying "The man who represents himself has a fool for a client."

Yep, but they actually don't do that badly. They do far better in criminal cases than civil cases for some reason: "Pro se litigants may have a lower chance of success. The Louisiana Court of Appeals tracks the results of pro se appeals against represented appeals. In 2000, 7% of writs in civil appeals submitted to the court pro se were granted, compared to 46% of writs submitted by counsel. In criminal cases the ratio is closer – 34% of pro se writs were granted, compared with 45% of writs submitted by counsel.<a href="Pro se legal representation in the United States - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>33<span>]</span></a> According to Erica J. Hashimoto, then an assistant professor at the University of Georgia School of Law:"

I think this heavily goes against that saying and the general portrayal:

After conducting an empirical study of pro se felony defendants, I conclude that these defendants are not necessarily either ill-served by the decision to represent themselves or mentally ill. ... In state court, pro se defendants charged with felonies fared as well as, and arguably significantly better than, their represented counterparts ... of the 234 pro se defendants for whom an outcome was provided, just under 50 percent of them were convicted on any charge. ... for represented state court defendants, by contrast, a total of 75 percent were convicted of some charge. ... Only 26 percent of the pro se defendants ended up with felony convictions, while 63 percent of their represented counterparts were convicted of felonies ... in federal court ... the acquittal rate for pro se defendants is virtually identical to the acquittal rate for represented defendants.<a href="Pro se legal representation in the United States - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>34<span>]</span></a>

Pro se legal representation in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Maybe it was different in the 19th Century. I'd also point out that no Lawyer on Earth was getting Lori Daybell or Charles Manson off, the famous cases are typically lost causes anyway.

 

[justtrish]

He might have ALL the disorders. Jurors might even begin to feel sorry for him, if AT has her way, but there's nothing in his particular soup of disorders to divorce him from his own actions which show he knew right from wrong, he prepared for his crime and cleaned up after it.

Personality disorders do not protect one from the DP, they're not even mental illnesses they're just disordered personality types.

But I'm not even sure AT has met the threshold for her experts or her claims so we haven't seen the final draft for what ultimately the jury will even hear.

The judge did take some matters under advisement yesterday, could the Defense the extreme favor IMO of doing their jobs for them, for example highlighting the actual parts of the traffic stop video that might be peejuducial to the defendant. Asking the judge to throw out virtually every aspect of the State's case was never going to fly, but now the judge is left to protect the defendant from the Defense. Ugh.

Jmo

I suspect in all his years of studying criminal justice he has likely written papers or did assignments on crime. I am sure they could get those records and show that even if he has a disorder that makes it hard for him to understand some things, he clearly knew enough to do the assignments and write about criminal behavior. It is literally the thing that he was most interested in and he was in a doctoral program all about it. I think it would be an uphill battle for AT to make any type of claims about him not being able to know right from wrong on this one.

He was going so far as to put his trash in baggies and putting it in the neighbors trash can.. so far beyond trying to cover up something.. he knew exactly what he was doing and why he was doing it.