“Then what happened?”
“Vell, as you know, the new law dat closed down all der fishink ruint the tackle shop buziness und Mr. Harris finally had to close the shop. That left Mr. Fernon without a vife, without a home und without a yob. These are zircumstances that vould paralyze any human being und bring about deep depression. Vhat made it even vorse for Mr. Fernon vas dat he had also lost his only coping mechanism. Previously, vhen things vere goink badly or he vas upset or anxious, he had alvays been able to find comfort und relief by going fishink. But since the shtate shut down all the water, he couldn’t even do that. He vas deshperate. He had novhere to turn. I haf seen people in shimilar circumstances commit shuicide”
“Did this lead you to believe that Mr. Vernon was in some sort of psychotic state at the time of his arrest?”
“Vell, it certainly suggested dat he could haf been. But I vas not ready to come to dat conclusion without further teshting.”
“So you administered the Rorschach test next?”
“Ja. I mean, yes.”
“Can you describe the Rorschach test for the members of the jury?”
“Sure. Ve show the subject a series of ten ink blots und ask him to say the first thing dat comes into his mind vhen he looks at them. In other vords, ve vant the subject to tell us vhat he thinks each ink blot suggests. There is no right or wrong answer, but if ve see a pattern in the answers it helps us to arrive at a diagnosis of psychosis or mental illness.”
“Thank you. Did you see such a pattern when you tested Mr. Vernon?”
“Oh, yes! I haf never seen anything like it. It vas the most striking result I haf ever seen. It vas extraordinary!”
“What do you mean?”
“Vell, Mr. Fernon identified nine out of the ten ink blots as troudt! He said to him the blots suggested troudt leaping, troudt rising to a fly, troudt shpawning, or parts of troudt—troudt fins, troudt gills, even the shpots on a troudt’s back. It vas absolutely amazing.”
“You said Mr. Vernon identified nine out of ten ink blots as trout or parts of trout. What did he think the tenth ink blot suggested?”
“He said it looked like a Hardy Perfect. I did not know vat dat vas, but he explained it vas some kind of device for holding a line, or something.”
“A reel?”
“Ja. Dat vas it.”
“You testified that the results of the test were extraordinary. Did they cause you to arrive at a diagnosis?”
“If they were all I had to go on, they vould haf been enough for me to make a diagnosis. But I still vanted to administer der MMPI.”
“You mean the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory?”
“Ja.”
“Can you describe it?”
“Ja, it is a very exhaustive series of nearly six hundred questions used by clinical zychiatrishts to expose pozzible mental health issues and by industrial zychiatrishts to determine perzonality traits und suitability for employment. It does this by asking essentially the same question in many different vays. There are no right or wrong answers, but taken together the answers reveal patterns that are extremely useful in exposing mental health problems und personality traits.”
“What sorts of traits and mental health problems?”
“Vell, it can indicate such traits as whether a person is antisocial, has gender-identity issues, is socially maladjusted und has problems dealing with authority figures, things like that. It can also expose mental health issues such as depression, schizophrenia, paranoia, chronic hysteria, or what is most commonly known as obsessive-compulsive disorder.”
“Can you give us some examples of how the test works?”
“Vell, let me zee. I don’t remember the questions exactly, but I can maybe give some hypothetical examples.”
“Please do.”
“Okay. Many of the questions are multiple-choice. For instance, the question might be ‘Which of the following occupations vould you prefer?’ and the range of answers would be something like ‘farmer, bookkeeper, marriage counselor or football coach.’ If a person answered ‘farmer,’ that could be an indication he or she likes to vork outside by himzelf und is probably not what you vould call a ‘people person.’ If he answered ‘bookkeeper,’ that might indicate a person who also prefers solitude but likes to vork indoors. Someone who answered ‘marriage counselor’ presumably vould like to work indoors and interact mit other people, und a ‘football coach’ vould likely be someone who likes to vork outdoors with other people. Of course you cannot draw conclusions on the basis of a zingle question, but if you ask what is essentially the same question in many different ways and get similar answers time after time, a clear pattern begins to emerge that is usually sufficient to draw a conclusion. But it takes a trained und experienced zychiatrisht to correctly interpret the results.”
“And you interpreted the results from the test you gave Mr. Vernon?”
“Ja. I mean, yes.”
“Can you tell us what they were?”
“Vell, I learned a lot of things about Mr. Fernon. The test showed very clearly that he is what you vould call a ‘loner.’ That is, he is a meek, shy person who prefers to vork alone. He is severely lacking in self-confidence und does not have a very positive image of himself. He is a very mild-mannered individual who is probably easily intimidated by more self-confident people. He likes to vork with his hands and is good at it, und although I know nothing about fly tying, I suspect he vas a fery good fly tyer. He seems comfortable vorking indoors but greatly prefers being outdoors, especially fishink. I vould say that when he was employed tying flies at the tackle shop and was free to go fishing whenever he wished, he had found his perfect niche in life.”
“But those are all personality traits, are they not? Did you also discover any evidence of mental illness?”
“Ja. I found very strong indications that Mr. Fernon suffers from severe obsessive-compulsive disorder.”
“Can you describe exactly what that is?”
“Vell, some degree of obsessive-compulsiveness is common in many people, but usually it is not considered abnormal behavior. For instance, many people have a habit of locking a door and then checking it several times before they are satisfied that it is really locked. Or they may unplug the coffeepot and then return to check several times before they are convinced it is actually unplugged. These are actually examples of mild obsessive-compulsiveness. In more advanced cases, typical behavior involves repeated hand washing until the patient’s hands become swollen, red and cracked. But in the most severe cases of this disorder, a person becomes unable to resist the compulsion to carry out behavior which may not be in his best interests, or may even pose danger to himself or others. I vould say that Mr. Fernon is such a person.”
“Let me see if I understand. Are you saying that at the time of his arrest, Mr. Vernon was in a state of such severe psychosis, suffering from obsessive-compulsiveness, that he was unable to resist the compulsion to go fishing at Youngstown Lake even though he knew it was against the law?”
“Ja, dat vas aboudt it.”
“Does this mean that he was unable to tell right from wrong?”
“Dat question vould have been irrelevant to him. It vould not even occur to him. Under the circumstances, the concepts of right und wrong vould have had no meaning to him.”
“So, are you saying that Mr. Vernon was insane?”
“Ja, I think his condition vas a form of insanity. At least temporarily.”
“At least temporarily. Does that mean he is no longer insane?”
“At the time of his arrest, Mr. Fernon was under extreme duress from a truly tragic series of circumstances vhich combined to induce a temporary form of insanity. I do not think he is still insane today because those circumstances no longer urgently apply. But dat is not to say that he might not suffer a relapse if he vas again placed under severe mental stress.”
“Thank you, Dr. Schwert. No more questions.”
It was Danning’s turn to cross-e
xamine and he was quick to attack. Right away he asked the questions I knew he would ask, trying to undermine Ziggy and make him look like a tool of the defense. Ziggy knew them too, and he was ready.
“Dr. Schwert, how many times have you testified as an expert witness?”
“Thirty-two,” Ziggy said without hesitation.
“And how many times have you testified for the prosecution?”
“None. Nobody has efer asked me teshtify for der Prozecution.”
That drew a ripple of laughter from the gallery, which ended quickly when Judge Winship frowned and lifted her gavel.
Danning could see little hope of progress if he continued on this tack, so he changed directions and began quizzing Ziggy about tests he had given Vernon, specifically whether he could be sure that Vernon wasn’t faking the answers. Ziggy cited his experience and a long list of scoring methods and other techniques used to detect fakery. “I haf a fery high degree of confidence zat Mr. Fernon vas answering honestly,” he concluded.
“A high degree of confidence,” Danning responded. “That sounds like less than a hundred percent.”
“Of course. One can never be absolutely certain. Zychiatry is not an exact science.”
“I think we can agree on that.” Danning’s head was bobbing now like a bobble head doll’s. “Would you at least agree that the defendant had a strong motivation to try to fake the test results?” he asked.
“It might appear that way to anyone who does not know Mr. Fernon,” Ziggy answered. “However, based on my interfiew with him und the teshts I described, I vould find it fery difficult to believe that Mr. Fernon is even capable of carrying out such a deception.”
“You mean he cannot tell a lie?”
“I mean he does not haf enough self-confidence to try to deceive anyone.”
“So you say. But somehow, most conveniently for the defendant, the test results showed he was incapable of obeying the law at Youngstown Lake last May 19.”
I was on my feet immediately. “Objection, Your Honor! Prejudicial and inflammatory. It was not even a question!”
“Say no more, Mr. Calloway,” Judge Winship said. “The objection is sustained. The jury will disregard the question. And Mr. Banning, you know better.”
Of course he did. And of course he knew the jury would not disregard the question. “I have no further questions of this witness,” he said.
“Any redirect Mr. Calloway?” the judge asked.
“No, Your Honor. The defense rests.”
Judge Winship asked Danning if he had any rebuttal witnesses. “Yes, Your Honor,” he replied. “The prosecution calls Dr. Charles Vist.”
Vist came forward, escorted by the fat deputy. He was a tall, thin man with enormous bushy eyebrows, which appeared to be the only hair on his head, and a long, thin, pointy nose. He was dressed in an off-the-rack gray suit, a pink shirt, and a mustard-colored tie. I wondered if he was color-blind.
Vist stated his name for the record and Danning asked his profession. “I am a psychiatrist,” he answered. Before Danning could say anything else, I got to my feet and offered to stipulate to “the eminent Dr. Vist’s qualifications to provide expert testimony,” as Danning had done with Schwert. Danning accepted the stipulation and began his questioning, extracting the information that Vist also had interviewed Garrett Vernon and then subjected him to the same tests Schwert had given, the Rorschach and the MMPI.
“And what did you learn from the interview and these tests?” Danning asked, head bobbing.
“My interview with Mr. Vernon revealed he is a very meek little man, extremely depressed from a series of misfortunes and seemingly unable to cope with them,” Vist said. “But this was surely not unprecedented; throughout his life his only coping mechanism appears to have been the pursuit of a single interest, fly fishing for trout. It seems likely that most of his misfortunes were due to neglect of everything but fishing.”
“Did your interview lead you to conclude that Mr. Vernon was suffering from any sort of psychosis?”
“No. At least not at the time of the interview.”
“Do you mean to say that it’s possible he could have been in a psychotic state earlier but was no longer in that condition at the time of your interview?”
“That is a possibility.”
“But you found no evidence that might have been the case?”
“No, I did not.”
“Did Mr. Vernon answer your questions fully, frankly and honestly?”
“I can only assume that he did. There is no way of knowing for sure.”
“So it’s possible he could have given misleading answers?”
That got me out of my chair. “Objection, Your Honor! No foundation.”
The judge looked to Danning. “On the contrary, Your Honor,” he said, “the prosecution raised this issue in its cross-examination of Dr. Schwert. That is, the possibility that the defendant might have been trying to give misleading answers.”
Judge Winship looked back at me. “He’s right, Mr. Calloway. Objection overruled.”
Danning returned to the witness. “You may answer the question, Dr. Vist. Is it possible that the defendant gave misleading answers during your interview?”
“Not that I could perceive.”
“But it is possible?”
“Oh, yes. It’s always possible that someone is lying.”
Ouch. I was afraid Vist was going to use that word. I wanted to object again, but knew the judge would probably just overrule me again—and merely add emphasis to the point Danning was trying to make. I was also watching my weathervanes, and not liking what I saw.
“Would Mr. Vernon have had a motive to deceive?” Danning asked.
“Well, given that his defense is temporary insanity, I would certainly think so.”
“Thank you, Doctor. Now, you said you also administered a Rorschach test to Mr. Vernon. Is that correct?”
“Yes.”
“And did you use the same series of ink blots that Dr. Schwert used in his test?”
“Yes I did.”
“Can you describe for us the results of the test?”
“Yes. They were quite amazing. Mr. Vernon identified eight images as different species or subspecies of trout. I have never seen such a result before.”
“That accounts for eight of the images. How did he identify the other two?”
Vist paused. “May I consult my notebook?” he asked. Danning nodded, and the witness reached inside his suit jacket, withdrew a small spiral-bound notebook, and flipped through the pages until he found what he was looking for. “Mr. Vernon identified the other two images as fly patterns,” he said, “one as something called a ‘Chernobyl Ant’ and the other as an ‘Egg-Sucking Leech.’”
“You said you had never seen such a result before. Can you elaborate on that?”
“Well, I think it’s absolutely impossible that such a skewed result could be genuine.”
“So what did you conclude?”
“I concluded that Mr. Vernon was faking his responses.”
“And after the Rorschach test, you administered the MMPI?”
“Yes.
“And this again was the same test as that given by Dr. Schwert?”
“Yes it was.”
“Dr. Schwert testified earlier that the MMPI asks essentially the same question in many different ways and the answers are then graded for consistency and to determine possible patterns that disclose aspects of the subject’s personality. Would you agree with that description?”
“Basically, yes.”
“And what did you find when you analyzed the results of Mr. Vernon’s test?”
“His answers to many similar questions were inconsistent.”
“And what did you conclude from that?
“That is usually a sure sign the subject is deliberately falsifying his responses. In other words, he was trying to be purposely misleading.”
“Dr. Vist, are you personally acquainted with Dr. Schwert?
”
“Yes, I am.”
“Dr. Schwert testified earlier that based on his interview and testing of the defendant, Mr. Vernon is incapable of deception. Would you agree with that assessment?”
“Absolutely not. His inconsistent responses to the MMPI are definitive evidence to the contrary.”
“So, based on your interview, testing, and analysis, is it your opinion the defendant was fully in possession of his faculties when he was arrested at Youngstown Lake last May 19?”
“Yes.”
“Is it also your opinion that he was able to tell right from wrong?”
“Yes, undoubtedly.”
“And is it your opinion that he was not insane at the time?”
“Well, he was undoubtedly depressed and frustrated. But not insane, no.”
“Thank you, Doctor. Your witness, Mr. Calloway.”
I wished Dr. Vist good afternoon, although I was silently hoping to make it otherwise. “You have appeared in court before as an expert witness, have you not?” I asked.
“Yes.”
“How many times?”
“I’m not certain. Thirty or forty, I would say.”
Being careful how I phrased the question so that he could not give the same answer Dr. Schwert had given, I asked if he had always testified for the prosecution.
“Yes, I believe so.”
“And how many times have you found a defendant incapable of distinguishing right from wrong?”
“Well… I don’t recall.”
“The answer is never, isn’t it Dr. Vist?”
“I don’t recall.”
“Well, let me refresh your memory. My research shows you have appeared in this court thirty-six times, always as an expert witness for the prosecution. In every single case you were asked to render an opinion as to a defendant’s sanity or ability to distinguish right from wrong, and in every single case you declared the defendant was sane and knew exactly what he or she was doing. Is that correct?”
Vist did not respond.
“Dr. Vist?”
“Well… if you say so.”
“I do. Dr. Vist, do you always testify for the prosecution because they can afford to pay you more?”
Danning got to his feet so quickly he knocked over his chair. “Objection! Your Honor, this is outrageous. There’s no foundation, it’s inflammatory, it’s prejudicial…” He finally subsided, sputtering.
Trout Quintet Page 7
