VERDICT REACHED: Triple Murder Trial — KY v. Brice Rhodes — Sentencing Phase — Day Two

and blend these together always control first ask to have a glass of water up here can I go absolutely Tom Tom Tom Tom carer Ste the carbon paper out of cop um so I'm looking at just inserting the Commonwealth's introductory uh couple of paragraphs or I guess it's one big paragraph in front of the mitigating circumstances paragraph I'll wait for Tom to get back in here so that it would just go straight from you may consider such evidences you heard in the guilt phase of trial as well as the evidence you heard in the penalty phase and deciding what punishment should be fixed to defend in this case to mitigating circumstances are so Mr Griffith we're um I'm looking at just putting the introductory paragraph from the commonwealths in front of mitigating circumstances are any facts or factors about okay let me just make sure that didn't change any formatting okay I'm going to email these to all of you so you'll have them so h yeah probably all right uh Janelle's going to bring me those copies when they're done so is there anything else we need to pick up before we bring the jury in M Jones Brown you look like there might be something you're thinking about did not notice any other errors okay great all right so are we ready to bring the jury in then yeah okay all right let me just make sure my phone's out we're good to go I love this pencil was in here when I came I'm going char in Kansas missing two missing three okay for you text can you tell if it's muted on me now no it's not it's not yeah testing testing testing testing okay great thank you oh so do you mean that all of our bench conferences were being broadcast no because the white noise was on which oddly sounds like a toilet flushing when played back um but uh so no they weren't but only when the issue was when I was like typing and stuff that did sound loud when we were listening to Mr Carter's testimony again yeah and that was when I realized it when that was played back and so then I started trying to type more quietly but it's like I can't not do anything else I have to get other stuff done I'm also a typ of Judge I feel your and I type with like three fingers it's very weird it's it's whether or not you took typing which I did not same or if you're self taught s yeah thank you my mom is a typing teacher so you're good yeah that's great for for for for you're welcome appr it hey can I get you to me a favor you me a favor you give one of these to each of the lawyers and one than and then here's one for you and one for John down the wall e okay to I'm just gonna write it in does anybody have an issue with me just writing that in on page um seven instruction number eight it's still blank anr says reasonable doubt that the aggravating circumstance listed an instruction number which should be three course judge oh wait I think it's on two pages wait are seven and eight the exact same page uh one's for Jones and oh okay but I still need to write it in on both pages okay so both number three yep it's all number three but it's just missing on pages seven and eight morning I don't think thanks for checking in B for of course I forgot that these may change again shouldn't have copied them yet for for for right you may all be seated thank you Deputy good morning again is there anything anybody needs to talk to us about or report all right great right and would the defense like to call their next witness the defense calls Dr James garberina thank you doctor if you could just come right up here when you're seated I'll swear [Music] you for you s tell the truth and the old truth I do thank you you may have a SE and that's a glass of water if you need one thank you good morning doctor good morning could you identify yourself for the jury please my name is James Garbarino g r b a r i n o and what uh I'm G to have you sort of introduce yourself and in your areas of expertise and things like that U First can we start with your credentials College things like that well I went to college at St Lawrence University in Northern New York State uh long time ago got my degree in 1968 I went to Cornell University in Ithaca New York and got a master's degree in 1970 and my PhD in human development with a specialization in developmental psychology in 1973 so this is the 50th anniversary of my completing doctoral studies congratulations uh can you tell the jury what areas you have specialized in I've really specialized in all the Dark Side Of Human Experience trauma child abuse violence done work in war zones around the world in the Middle East and Central America sort of all the bad places and bad things for the last 30 years particularly focused on uh the developmental issues in children and Adolescence that ultimately lead to PE situations like this being in a courtroom uh with people facing murder charges trying to understand how they get to that point that's really been the focus in the last uh 30 years but throughout that period I've been a college professor uh teaching psychology developmental psychology at uh Penn State University University at Cornell at loyol University Chicago I was president of uh an Institute in Chicago called the Ericson Institute for advanced study and child development but as I said throughout that period I've always had one foot in the University teaching and doing research and the other foot out in the rest of the world dealing with Children and Youth in difficult situations have you received any um Awards in this area well I've been very fortunate that my work has been recognized by uh a number of professional organizations the American Psychological Association gave me their award for professional contributions to Public Service the American Humane Association gave me award for work on child abuse uh American Academy of Pediatrics gave me award for work on violence um so there's quite a few of those one that's I think sort of interesting in 2018 the American Psychological Association named me one of 33 quote influential psychologists in America not the most influential but in that group and that was particularly for the work I've done on the impact of trauma on the development of Children and Youth now we've uh brought you here as an expert for the defense is that the only sort of expertise that you do working for the defense well over 30 years it's been almost always for the defense because they're the ones who ask I have worked a couple of times as an expert witness for the state in murder cases but I think um since what I'm trying to do typically is understand how a killer got to the point where they committed homicides um hope I'm not stepping on any toes but the state typically doesn't want me to do that they they want a more simple sort of judgment so uh twice I think in 30 years I've worked for the state did you also consult for the FBI yes that was one of the organizations I consulted with with the FBI on uh School violence probably some of you old enough to remember the Coline school shooting that was something I was very involved in and I've also been a consultant to a wide range of organizations in the United States and around the world uh National Institute of Mental Health uh American Medical Association the black child development Institute uh and abroad UNICEF I went to Iraq and Kuwait for Unicef back in the early 1990s when I was focusing on children in war zones so I've as I said I've always had one foot outside University now I want to bring you in and ask you some questions about this situation about this case okay sir can you tell the jury what you examined in order to um draw some conclusions in in Mr Road's situation well you've probably become aware this is sort of an unusual case in the sense that uh ordinarily what I would do would be review uh reports and documents from other experts and uh Records educational or mental health records uh and then typically I would spend some time with the defendant one on-one talking about their Liv trying to get a some insight into them that was not possible here because of his unwillingness to meet with uh experts uh so I've relied on the very detailed information developed by the defense defense team they've done very extensive interviews with family members and others um as you'll hear later there's one particular set of 10 questions that ordinarily I would have opposed to him directly but here we had to rely on material developed by others to answer those questions um so that's the kind of information that was available to me really quite extensive um and I think it gave me a good basis for applying my an analysis to who he is and how he got to be that way and what you're referring to specifically are called the aces right well that's certainly part of it the um um if I can sort of introduce what I'm trying to do oftentimes there's a lot of information what's missing sometimes is how to make sense of it how to put the pieces together and I don't know how many of you are big math wizards but I'll give you a mathematical example um if I were to give you a series of numbers one 3 five 7 11 and 17 if you didn't know anything about numbers you might just say that's just a bunch of numbers but if you had some some arithmetic you'd say well those are all odd numbers which they are but if I excuse me but if I tell you the number two is on that list and the number nine is not well obviously they're not odd numbers because two is not you know is not an odd number and nine is so you'd be left with a bunch of numbers again it's only if you have the concept of what's called a prime number a prime number is a number that can be divided only by one or by itself then it all makes sense those are all prime numbers and you would know that between 11 and 17 there's a missing prime number of 13 so what I'm trying to do is you make sense of all this information based on uh research and Theory from developmental psychology particularly because I know we tend to think often there are senseless acts of violence but I think if you get into it you need to understand they usually make sense from the point of view of the purpose perpetrator at least while they're committing the crime so that doesn't excuse it but it's important to try to understand so I think what you just told us is it's not always merely what's there but also what you can tell is missing yeah as I said um if you knew what a prime number was you would say aha we got to go look for number 13 because it should be there between 11 and7 and that's often uh what I'm involved in doing is trying to find the missing link or the missing piece that will explain something which otherwise seems just you know senseless or crazy or just evil and those are all you know real words that we use but if you get behind that there's often a a story to be told that evokes more compassion and more uh understanding so one of the things you look for are what are called risk factors right and risk factors are things that do what what what does that tell you what does that tell us well risk factors are things that increase the odds of a bad outcome happening they don't guarantee it I mean a good example would be uh we've learned from you know Decades of research that smoking is a big risk factor for getting lung cancer doesn't mean everybody who smokes gets lung cancer my mother lived to 89 and used to say she was going to smoke on My Grave which not a very nice thing for mother to say uh but it made the point that you know she felt like she wasn't going to get lung cancer even though she smoked 19% of people get lung cancer have never smoked but we recognize even the courts have recognized that smoking is a quote cause of lung cancer so risk factors are things that increase the odds it's not a onetoone correspondence and uh as as they mentioned before there's something called the adverse childhood experience scale it's often called the aces for the initials AC and that's a way of measuring a very important way of measuring the amount of risk factors that a kid had growing up so would something like um the mental health issues not only of an individual but in their family be a risk factor yeah as I said you know we what we try to do is identify the whole package of risk factors because rarely if ever does one risk factor account for the outcome but it's as if you're building a tower of blocks you put risk factor after risk factor after risk factor and the top Tower get so tall eventually it it falls over and so it's not any one but certainly one of the risk factors is temperamental issues I don't know how many of you have children but most people have children recognize that temperament is important I have two biological children my my daughter is was a very ease baby you know in her college entrance essay she described herself as a mercedesbenz of babies to sort of change the oil and she cruises along her brother my son was a very difficult baby uh he had asthma he had projectile vomiting he didn't sleep well he was a real Challenge and the research shows for example that for easy babies like my daughter only about 10% end up with having significant adjustment problems in elementary school for difficult babies like my son was it's about 80% so again it doesn't it's not 100 to zero but it's a risk factor having a difficult temperament and in this case you know there's evidence in in Bryce's biological family of mental illness uh I believe uh at least two of his biological relatives were diagnosed with schizophrenia which is a a very significant problem with thinking and feeling again it it has some genetic basis it's some heritability of it if you have relatives who have schizophrenia your risk is greater it's not a onetoone correspondence but it's one of those blocks you know building up the the tower let's turn to um the aces themselves and can you uh you've talked about what what they are and I'm I'm going to use the the word Aces because I think you've explained what they are um but what I care about now what I want to ask you about is what those actually showed with Bryce so if you could walk us through those okay well this Aces is a a series of 10 questions they were developed by a physician in California who was trying to get some measure of how much adversity his patients had and how it was connected to medical problems so he put together this little list of 10 questions there's nothing sort of magical about them they're very straightforward they do have a number of advantages one is they never ask you to judge something as being abusive or neglectful I never use that word and that's important because if it did it would require a person to look at their experience and judge it against this Criterion of is it abusive or not it's very behavioral did this happen to you so there's 10 questions he de he developed it turned out that these it's almost a miracle these 10 questions simply yes or no are incredibly powerful in predicting bad outcomes he started with health outcomes so it's the score is from zero to 10 it's simply how many yes answers did you give and the finding was that this score predicted high blood pressure predicted susceptibility to cancer life expectancy and then it got broadened still further to look at some more sort of social problems predicting substance abuse predicting suicidal thoughts or behavior predicting depression predicting violent behavior when I say predicting I mentioned smoking before smoking quote causes lung cancer but smoking only accounts for about 14% of the differences in who gets lung cancer these 10 questions account for like 50% of the differences in who ends up depressed suicidal uh substance abusing engaged in violence so it's it's three or four times more powerful the link between the Aces and these problems than the link between smoking and lung cancer that's why they've been accepted by the Centers for Disease Control and they promote their use uh that's why I always try to get that information when I'm working on a case because it really locates the person we know that um about two-thirds of Americans get a score of zero or one I know when I've given this to my college students you know they they're doing well enough in life to go to college and come to my class and so on and you know almost all of them have a score of 01 only about uh one in a hundred people get a score of seven or more and only one in a thousand get a score of eight n or 10 so it it takes us from a general question did this person have a difficult childhood to how difficult was their childhood compared with everybody else when I've interviewed guys who've been involved in murders the average score the average score is seven which means the average guy has more adversity than 99 out of a 100 people so that's an important uh sort of Benchmark in all of this you I don't know what your scores would be but you know if we filled them out you chances are since you're functioning well enough to be here in the jury and so on you'd probably have pretty low scores some of you might have higher scores that and that would be you know congratulations for overcoming that adversity now this individual brze he again we weren't I wasn't able to give it to him directly I had to rely on information developed by the team who did interviews with all kinds of people family members and others looking at records and the conclusion was that you know he had yes to eight of the 10 questions which is worse than 999 out of a thousand people so that that's important in understanding how he got to be such a damaged person he didn't just wasn't just born in became the damaged person it was a process that accumulated over years and years and uh uh it it's very sad uh but it does help to make sense a bit of someone who otherwise would seem just you know s of a nasty evil um just simply crazy person I'd like to to turn you you said out of U out of the 10 questions and we would expect most people to score zero or one you just told us that that um Bryce unfortunately was at an eight yes can you walk us through specifically what those eight are so the jury knows what it is that that we're talking about so the first question deals with what we as Outsiders would call emotional abuse or verbal abuse again doesn't use that word abuse it ask things like you know when you were growing up to people put you down humiliate you swear at you make you feel afraid you'd be hurt so it's sort of an emotionally abusive family and and that was something descriptive his of his family uh the reports are really quite you know chilling that the family members called him dumb and stupid uh they um find the right page here uh you know that family member used to make him feel afraid that uh a family member says Bryce was curled up in a ball hiding from her uh and saying he was scared to go he was eight or nine when this occurred so there a lot of instances of that just Terror uh being put down uh being maligned being degraded so that then the on the aces that's question number one question number two has to do with being physically attacked again we would say being physically abused but doesn't ask were you abused it simply says you know were you hit left marks were you beaten these kinds of things and um the information indicated that uh he was beaten with a belt he uh uh he he would climb out a tree to get on the roof of the house to escape he was beaten intentionally repeatedly and the research is very clear that kids who are beaten like this uh it's a risk factor for later problems with aggression and and self-concept and self-esteem and all the good things we'd like kids to have um the third question deals with being sexually abused now at least he didn't have that reported so that's one of the two that he didn't have the fourth question deals with asking you know did you feel nobody loved you or thought you were special anybody did your feel protect you and we would call it emotional neglect and the um the reports all say that he felt unprotected not accepted growing up he wasn't loved by at least one of the parent figures um who would for example take the other children out and not take him with them so he would discriminate against him um you know Bry felt that somebody should have stepped in he was crying Sor there was an objection just Mr Griffin go ahead thank you I've lost track of exactly where we were I think you were talking about Asus Factor number four yes okay I think so can I go ahead yes okay yes please so the fourth one um we would call being emotionally neglected but it deals with feeling unprotected unloved uh no one thought you were special all these things that eat away at the self-esteem of of a child and again the reports from numerous people who observed him his childhood uh you know saying him saying nobody protected him he felt unprotected and unloved so I I think it's fair to make that a yes um uh it's worth noting that one of the themes in here is being rejected by key parental figures uh it's one of the few sort of universals in child development uh is that kids who feel rejected by their parents that that's a big risk factor I mean I said you know smoking accounts are about 14% of the differences in lung cancer International research done in 118 countries finds that parental rejection accounts for about 25% of bad outcomes by itself so it's almost like the worst thing that can happen to a kid is to feel his parents reject him they don't accept him and he seems to have experienced that the fifth item is physical neglect which you know is probably again it doesn't use the word neglect uh it's it happens particularly when parents have substance abuse or mental health problems and they can't take care of their children they can't protect them the question asked about things like if you were sick would somebody take you to the doctor uh so it's that's neglect and uh that seemed to be evident the sixth question has to do with parental separation or divorce now I said before two-thirds of Americans get a score of zero one if they get a score one it's typically because uh parents separated or divorced and my kids would have a score of one based on that that their mother and I divorced when they were kids um because this again is a challenge to kids it's it's a some of you may have gone through this it's a disruption in a child's life and so it it's one of these 10 risk factors uh number seven is witnessing domestic violence again doesn't say domestic violence it says was your mother or stepmother hit punched you know bitten knocked down all the things that make up domestic violence uh this alone has been shown to be a predictor of later difficulties in life and that was very clear from the reports and doctor I wanted to to follow up on what you just said um can you give the jury um some understanding of of the sort of things that caused uh you to find Factor 7 well in the reports there was a report that Bryce witnessed um a parent figure uh cut I guess his mother's hair off drag her by the hair smash her face and he remembers he reports remembering there's nothing he could do about it that's very common you know boys particularly feel like they should be able to protect check their mothers but when they can't it's often particularly disturbing and um when they get older they often get in this protective role um so in many states you know allowing your child to witness domestic violence is itself considered neglect that you're supposed to protect your child from that and clearly he was not protected from that and it happened um the eighth eth question has to do with living with somebody in your household who's a substance abuser alcoholic drug addict whatever it is um and the reports from the interviews is that his mother is was a drinker um they that The Stepfather person was into the drug scene so he clearly had that uh the ninth issue is living with mental health problems or suicide in the family uh that we gave a no to uh because there wasn't an explicit report of that but given everything else it's probably surpr would be surprising if the people in the household didn't have mental health problems given everything else that was there but to be conservative we said no to that and then the 10th question has to do with a family member going to prison and here his stepfather figure went to prison so that's how we got to a score of eight it's a very sad litany um you know when I was a professor at loyal University in Chicago one of the things I did was to found the University Center for the human rights of children in part because you know these are all things that we would hope children have a right not to experience and when you pile on this much uh it's a bit like each yes answer is like handing the kid a rock and telling him to carry it around in his backpack and you carry one rock all right it's it's a rock but you're carrying eight rocks around it's not surprising that kids stagger under the weight of this but they're carrying this weight around and often they don't realize that it's not normal to have that weight um I often will ask guys I didn't get a chance to do that here but you know of a hundred guys you knew growing up how many had eight or more risk factors and they might say 80 out of 100 and then I'll say what about if we gave this to 100 guys at random in the whole population how many do you think in general would have this and uh they might often say 50 out of a 100 when I tell them it's one out of a thousand they're often shaken and stunned remember one guy in Chicago who's a imagine you're sort of stereotype of a gang banger really tough bang gang banger kind of guy I forgotten if he was Crips or Bloods or something his score was 10 and this you know tough guy when I explained to him what that meant he started to cry I mean I I always carry tissues around when I go into to a jail or prison for that reason nobody had ever explained to him he was carrying this weight on his shoulders all the time it's not surprising that people break down the good news is that for most people it's possible to recover from this but basically one of the things it means is taking that backp off taking out the Rocks one by one and finding some way to deal with it or make your peace with it so you can walk upright without being weighed down by that and doctor I wanted oh it's okay I didn't want to interrupt you but I wanted to ask some follow-up uh questions and one was you actually found you gave the answer no to people with uh mental health problems in the household given what you do know about the family members and the history of schizophrenia could you have found yes for that well the question asked somebody in your household and it wasn't clear there was somebody in the household there were people sort of around him um but given other things it would be surprising if though you know family members these family members were really given a clinical assessment it would be surprising if they didn't end up with some issues um but again I'm trying to be conservative about this and and saying no to that one uh you know as for being sexually abused there's no evidence of that sure um it's possible but uh again trying to be conservative and not overcore this so your conservative conclusion of how Bryce scored on the aces was that he scored eight out of ten yeah which is more than which is one in a thousand people have that kind of score so you know I actually I started using this because you know sometimes people would say well lots of people had difficult childhoods and they didn't kill anybody so I wanted a way to say this isn't some generic difficult childhood I mean I had a difficult mother you know I had some things my parents were separated for a while but this is a whole other league this is um you know being crushed under the weight of this uh adversity which uh only one in a thousand kids growing up have to deal with now you were just telling us that um that it's difficult but possible for people to to deal with these things what um how are you able to tell that someone is able to process and deal with these things well within research there's a term that's called resilience a lot of people know that word it means the ability to overcome adversity you know there's a sense in which human human race wouldn't have survived if we didn't have resilience because you know think back to the caveman days you know your your daughter is taken by a saber-tooth tiger you know whatever it is if people just gave up generically you know we wouldn't be here today so there is a thing called resilience but there is research on what are the foundations for resilience uh one of the foundations for Reser for resilience is at least an average level of intellectual ability and that makes sense because it's sort of saying you know who's more likely to overcome problems somebody with one hand tied behind his back or somebody with both hands free and having at least average intellectual ability is like having both hands free uh now in Bryce's case you know there there's a lot of IQ scores given for him U uh they they range quite a bit but they're all sort of On The Low End some of them are very very very low and one of the experts who did that testing thought you know he was trying to make himself look worse but there is there a low scores going back to when he was 10 when he was a teenager before you could expect that he was deliberately trying to sabotage an IQ test and they're pretty low you know they're uh there's a very famous study done by a guy named Arnold samarov that looked at this idea of risk accumulation in relation to IQ scores and they looked at eight different risk factors uh low educational attainment in a parent uh uh rigid and punitive sort of abusive parenting a whole bunch of them and they found that if you had none of these risk factors the average IQ scores were 119 you know we say 100 is average but that's average for the whole population so people without any of these risk factors you know tend to be very smart that's the average some are smarter some aren't as smart we had four risk factors the average was was 100 and that's the gold because for resilience you need at least average intellectual ability by the time you get to five risk factors the average was 85 which is significantly below average and again it's like having one hand tie behind your back so that's certainly one of them another one is having somebody who is sort of crazy about you and thinks you're really special another one is having some special talent or ability and I want to jump in just make sure that what you're talking about now is clear you're talking about um things that would make someone resilient yeah and and um and indicate that someone might be able to overcome or deal with their trauma right yes yes and you said the first one of those was low intellectual functioning yeah that's the first risk to this um I mentioned there were eight of these factors in that study and Bryce had all eight of them so it wouldn't be surprising if his intellectual ability was was hampered by that uh a second one is at least one person who's crazy about you can you explain what that means I'm sorry can you explain what that means what is a person who's crazy about I was going to try to okay okay you know if you go to somebody's house and they have young children you often see they've they've taped the child's drawings on the refrigerator you know and to an outsider it look like scribbles but the parent says you know this is my kid's drawing and you know kids know that they're special I mean my my Italian grandfather was buried with a picture of me and in his arms and that's always stuck with me that you know my Italian grandfather really thought I was special so having at least somebody in that role is really important uh it's hard to see that uh um you know Bryce really had that his mother in one of the report says his mother expresses love and concern for her son but the relationship was so difficult at one point she sought a protection order against him so it's hard to see had that demonstrating some special talent or ability some kids at sports music art uh I remember visiting a really Dysfunctional Family Once in the Bronx in New York City and the one girl who was doing okay she was a track star and in this chaotic dirty apartment there was one corner with her track trophies and stuff and that you know that was a special thing that she had and contributed to resilience another thing contributes is I'm sorry educational development educ you know good education uh and as you get older reading and writing uh you know thinking this is one of the resources for overcoming adversity and did he have that um no he seemed to have difficulty with that I think there's uh a lot of school failure he didn't go that far in school uh all kinds of problems in school um so I think you know he didn't really have that growing up a supportive Community um people rally around you and sometimes it's uh older mentors or you know clergymen or whoever it is other people Bryce doesn't seem to have that and in his case it seems to be compounded by this paranoia that he expresses of distrust of people and it's very hard for people to support somebody if they distrust people generally push them away um and uh the last one on This research that I'm particularly drawn to is a positive approach to life people would just have a sort of you know sometimes people use the word spunky they just have a positive view of life and they can overcome stuff a term that's used in the field is hardiness and that suggests somebody who has this positive view that they can manage things and so on so you put these things together and they're sort of foundations for resilience growing up but there're also foundations for resilience in Rehabilitation later on in adulthood and in adulthood sometimes you can compensate for things that you didn't have in childhood which is you know why people do sometimes get better as they age they overcome adversity and Trauma so you've indicated that based on uh the materials you examined in your expertise that he scored very high on the the aces yes and I think you just told us that also he scored unfortunately very low on on his resilience that' be my conclusion yes can you tell us the effect that that would have on someone as they go through life well I think you know the effect depends in part on where you where you grow up what the rest of your environment is like let me give you an example of that if if by age 10 a kid is showing a chronic problem of aggression bad behavior acting out violating the rights of others if they see a psychologist they might diagnose them with something that's called conduct disorder it's a fancy label but it just means that you've observed a pattern of aggression bad behavior acting out violating the rights of other these are the kids who you know by age 10 are getting set to the principal they're being spelled from school you know they may get juvenile delinquent see things so we know that if you get to that point by age 10 that on average about 30% of those kids will end up as seriously violent delinquents 30% three and 10 but that's but nobody lives on average everybody lives somewhere so the search finds if you live in a very positive supportive neighborhood you know the no crime or low crime and a lot of positive role models and all of that it's not 30% but 15% of those kids who end up in serious violent delinquents who have that problem at age 10 if you live in a dysfunctional neighborhood with crime and violence and bad negative Role Models it's not 30% but 60% so the odds that the same kid would end up having serious violent delinquency is four times greater in one neighborhood than they are in another and so we always have to look at what's called the context of any of these individual things um I'll give you this one more example if I may about that um I mentioned schizophrenia before about half of the people who get diagnosed with schizophrenia hear voices the technical term is auditory hallucination people generally haven't studied what the voices say because they're voices in people's heads but some anthropologists did and they looked at people who hear voices in three different cultures in the United States in India and in Ghana which is in northwest Africa and what they found is amazing again these are schizophrenics who we think of being you know crazy and disconnected from reality in the United States 70% of the voices for schizophrenics were telling them to commit acts of violence against themselves or others 70% in India it was only 20% in India most of the voices are telling them to do things like clean your house better which is annoying but not dangerous and in Ghana it was only 10% of the voices urged violence in Ghana the voices are mostly thought to be positive conversations with God so I mentioned it because you know the the society you live in can have an effect on how your trouble expresses itself for schizophrenics 70% of the voices here tell them to hurt people themselves or others in India it's only 20% in Ghana it's only 10% so being a schizophrenic here is more dangerous than it is being a schizophrenic in India or Ghana so the context is always important and I think in in the case of Bryce you know the context was working against him to make things even worse uh so it it gets less and less surprising that we're sitting here today so I want to turn um you now to the Future this jury has found Bryce guilty and they're literally going to sentence him um that's that's what what we're here for one of the things that it is important for them to understand is whether there is hope for Bryce in the future can you explain um from your expertise and your conclusions um bry's path to Improvement in the future well obviously it looks pretty bleak right now that's for sure but there is you know research shows that development can turn turn into a positive direction in adulthood uh there's a very famous book called the brain that changes itself it it's research about how bra human brains in adulthood can change in response to changed experiences and each chapter deals with one chapter deals with having a stroke and how certain experiences can help your brain repair on the negative side there's a chapter dealing with pornography that watching pornography can affect the way your brain deals with sexual stimulation so the good news is that in a positive supportive therapeutic environment even damaged people can get better uh there's a form of therapy called cognitive behavioral therapy that tries to change way people think and that can be very successful if you get it it can change the way you think which can change the way your brain works which can change your behavior there's also the issue of maturing that um uh By the time people reach for 40 particularly if they've had you years of prison at 40 that itself can put them in a lower category for problems so it's quite remarkable a lot of the cases I work on our teenagers who've committed murders I mean you know they do some terrible stuff I remember in one case the judge said in sentencing a 15-year-old you there's no possibility of you ever reforming you know you're just a a lost cause and now 25 years later that same individual has been going back for resentencing because not only did he rehabilitate but he became a remarkable person now that may be a rare case but it does happen and that's one reason why I think it's good to leave open the door for this kind of improvement not to guarantee it but to say at some point there should be another look at Bryce to see if he's as terrible in 20 years as he was when he did these terrible crimes um because it is it does happen sometimes it's almost miraculous that you you look back and think wow I wouldn't have predicted this um the younger they are at the time of the crime often the more the prospect is the fact that he was what 26 I think at the time from from the point of view of brain development that's still pretty young research shows that you can't really presume a mature brain until about age 25 uh you know we have 18 as a marker but the science says is 18 is not not a scientific cutof Point uh just a couple of years ago the American Psychological Association looked at the evidence again and said for example is scientifically we shouldn't have a death penalty until at least 21 and other researchers have say you should push that to a higher level so in a sense that's good news being relatively young means he's still immature and the research also shows that the more adversity you have the more it slows down the process of brain maturation so at 20 six you know he still may have been immature and he may as he matures develop resources that we can't see right now uh that would improve his uh his ability to be a safe member of the community no guarantees in fact if you know if you had to bet you know if I had to bet my firstborn male child on this I would not want to offer up my son and say oh yeah this guy's going to be okay but I think we need to leave the door open uh based on you know the science of development thank you doctor I don't have any further questions stay there prose good morning doctor good morning as you said you did not interview the defendant correct that's correct you reviewed interviews of his family members and other sources about him yes so this is all sort of collateral information in a way gathered by the mitigation specialist particularly who in my experience over 30 years have shown themselves to be very reliable information gatherers did you conduct any interviews yourself no and did you listen to the interviews or did you read a summary of the interviews I think I read summaries or couple of case transcripts but mainly summaries okay did the information come predominantly from his stepmother and his brother I think if I recall correctly those were two sources but there were others as well um I'm sure that you know the defense could provide a list of all of them but it's not I think it's not just from a couple of sources um so but you had to rely on what was provided you didn't get to do follow-up questions um to further analyze your 10 factors no I think this was the information seemed pretty clear particularly with respect to uh responding to the adverse childhood experience scale so I felt pretty confident that this was uh solid information to go on uh you know ideally I might have spent a couple of hours with him but even then I'd still rely to a large degree on information collected by others I think that we are um in possession of the same background interviews but did you read an interview from Chandler James his brother well I'm going to be a little hazy on The Who and the what but um if it's if it's in the packet then I'll go stipulate that okay and do you remember there was a paternal grandmother maternal Uncle paternal paternal grandfather another Uncle um stepbrother and stepmother those sound familiar I'm not trying to qu you on it but thank you um was the information about the emotional abuse mostly based on his Stepmother's report of him not wanting to go back to his mom's house curling up in all on that one occasion well I think that was a very you know Salient a very uh poignant example uh we're talking about question number one uh I think there were there were other things around other things that were other sources and other reports but certainly that incident is a particularly uh Vivid one and as it says in my report that I was reported by a stepmother Anna yes and the um the physical um I don't know if you I don't think you characterize it it as abuse but physical treatment um you're basing that on his brother's report that their father disciplined them with a belt correct I think that's one of the reports okay um you often Brothers have I mean they have the most direct access to some of these experiences obviously um but you're basing this on what other people reported well you're basing this on a summary of what other people reported to the mitigation Specialists yes I say in most cases it comes directly from the individual but then the usual criticism is well how do we know they're telling the truth so I'd say in some ways this might even be more reliable than if we just had his reports on these things because particularly in his case where a couple of the experts thought there was some mingering going on you know we'd want to have collateral support if it was just coming from him it would be nice to have it coming from him in addition to others but I think I think the jury could be very confident that this is a pretty accurate picture of of what the people said to the mitigation specialist yeah what they said and I think probably what he experienced and the domestic violence in the in his mother's home um what we know is that his stepfather was abusive to his mother correct and he witnessed that I believe so yes okay um and there doesn't see besides the belt discipline there doesn't seem to be any allegations of abuse within his father's home correct uh I don't recall that um and it based on these interviews it seems like at least in his father's home people did demonstrate love and affection for him his his stepmother certainly presents a glowing picture of their family life yeah I think that that's possible there one compens compensatory element of his experience but uh um you know one way to think about it if somebody punches you in the face the fact that somebody else doesn't punch you in the face that's good but doesn't really care if the fact somebody punch you in the face in in your studies of of criminal behavior is it the case that some types of crimes um have a strong correlation with uh well let me give an example when you look at people who and obviously this has nothing to do with this case when you look at people who are sexually abusing children do you often find that they were sexually abused as children yeah I believe it's identified as a risk factor for later sexual abuse and of course almost everything sexual is often in another category um right so if the offense and sexual that often opens up a lot of other issu issues about Rehabilitation and isn't it the case that there's a high correlation between people who witness domestic abuse as children and later participate in domestic abuse I both on victim and perpetrator sex I'd say there's certainly a it's a certainly a very significant risk factor but like all the risk factors it's not a onetoone correspondence and so in for someone from his background it would not be surprising to learn that he grew up and um got arrested for domestic violence uh or other things along those lines because those are risk factors in his background right it would not be surprising um what about his background explains the brutality of these murders well you know I'm I'm not sure but my my hypothesis would be that uh he experienced one experienced a lot of brutalization himself two these underlying mental health problems distorted his thinking and feeling but three being particularly still in that young category I mean the things that the immature brains are most problematic about are one what's called good decision making it's called a executive function it means how well do you weigh costs and benefits but the second thing is really it's called affective or emotional regulation and it has to do with being emotionally competent and certainly um these crimes of brutality often involve people who seem emotionally incapable of understanding what they doing or regulating their behavior so I think the emotional regulation part of it could certainly fit into you know brutality and in the the studies the recent um not not necessarily recent but past 20 30 years studies on brain development especially in adolescent males um there's a lot of talk about the um development of the brain up till about age 25 with impulsive decision making that often leads to criminal conduct correct well certainly impulsive but the other word that the Supreme Court used was impetuous which means acting without care so sometimes you know there's planning for a crime but then the crime itself is is not impulsive in the sense it was just on the spur of the moment but it is impetuous in the sense that it shows not taking care not you know not caring about uh what you're doing or the outcome and the young brains are particularly uh prone to that yes thank you I have no further questions no other questions than to thank you honor all right we are going to take a 10-minute break if you could please be back outside the courtroom doors at um 10:25 thank you John our um next witness is going to be by Zoom do you want to um move I don't want to step on your toes I'm not going to move it would you me to move the TV and turn it on um actually if you can put it somewhere where I can see it while I get it up and running and then we'll move it to where the jurors can see it thanks go ahead Dr James can you hear me I can okay great just wanted to check and then I will okay perfect yeah no I I will I'll move I want to move this so I can see see her yeah that makes sense I don't need to move and then I'll try to keep the camera view here so that Dr James can see you as well okay great Dr Garbarino are you sticking around it's fun with me I just wanted to speak with you with everybody before you left do you want to come on up in case you need to leave I know do all right for the jury jurors are present your honor thank you de Mills everybody can be seated ladies and gentlemen our next witness is going to be testifying via Zoom U Mr Gus are you ready to call your next witness yes judge yes sir all right and your next witness is Dr joet James Dr James if you could please raise your right hand do you swear to tell the truth and the whole truth I do thank you Doctor Mr Gus thank you uh Dr James if you have any difficulty hearing me uh just let me know okay okay can you identify yourself for the record sure um so my name is joette James I am um a clinical psychologist and also a board certified clinical neuros psychologist all right and can you walk us through your educational background sure I received my uh PhD in Clinical Psychology in 2003 um after completing um an internship in Clinical Psychology um I also completed a two-year post-doctoral Fellowship in pediatric neuros pychology um from Children's National Medical Center in Washington DC um I obtained my PhD from Northwestern University uh medical school um uh since that time um I have um so complet once I completed my um PhD I also um became board certified in neuros pychology and clinical neuros pychology through the American Board of Professional Psychology and that was 10 years ago in 2013 okay have you had any other uh have you had things that you specialized in as part of your professional development yes uh my area of specialty as a neuropsychologist um particularly coming from a pediatric background has been in developmental disorders as a neuropsychologist we tend to focus in two areas one is um conditions neurological conditions which begin early in development or prenatally so that would include things like um attention uh deficit hyperactivity disorder ADHD a ISM Spectrum disorders learning disabilities and intellectual disability which we used to refer to as mental retardation um the second area that uh neuros psychologists will often deal with are what we call acquired injuries to the brain this would include things that um like severe head injuries as as you would see in a car accident brain tumors Strokes seizure disorders we say acquired because these are conditions that tend to that have happen afterwards right after someone U and can happen at any time during the lifespan um so it can happen those can happen in childhood they can happen in adolescence or adulthood I tend to focus on developmental disorders at first group um although I do will occasionally see someone for example that has had a stroke or or some kind of um other uh condition that affected the brain later in life and you're testifying today as an expert witness um you've testified as an expert witness before many times uh probably at least 50 times all right can you tell the jury what um the purpose was of your role in this uh in this case sure so I was asked to um make a determination as to whether um Mr RADS met criteria for an intellectual disability as I said um that is is a disorder or diagnosis that we used to call mental retardation intellectual disability can you explain to the jury um and and it may be self-evident but I think it's good to make sure what an intellectual dis disability is sure so um an intellectual disability is a a a neurological condition and it can happen um through I mean most often uh it is um so it's a developmental Disorder so again part of that group that I said um shows itself in early childhood intellectual disability can have many many causes it can be genetic it can uh um be actually from um psychosocial conditions poverty it can um result from lots of different uh situations it has many what we call causes or ideologies but it is a lifelong condition um and it begins in in development at some point in that what we call developmental period which is sort of broad now because we know that there isn't a a a fine bright line where all of a sudden you become an adult but generally um within the first 20 years of life you're gonna you're going to notice this problem and it is it really speaks to uh delays in multiple areas of functioning um delays in language and communication skills delays in academic skills delays in social skills delays in one's emotions and emotional control um and the formal criteria for intellectual disability actually comes from two places one we have um the diagnostic and statistical Manual of mental disorders um that's now in its fifth edition text revision so its short form is called the DSM 5tr and it's that's kind of like for psychologists and psychiatrists kind of our Bible um Ag nooses and then for mental retardation or intellectual disability there's actually another source of information for that and that's the American Association of intellectual and developmental disabilities the a aid and both of those sources Define what id is that's exactly where I was gonna uh go so in order to determine that someone is intelle intellectually disabled um you look to the scientific basis and though they lay out the test right right so both of those sources the dsm5 the Bible for Psychiatry and psychology and the a Aid they both have manuales that have the definition the clinicians definition for ID the scientific definition and that is number one the person has to have an IQ um that is significantly deficient um so when we talk about IQ we talk about that's the way that we measure uh intellectual functioning um through a test that looks at things like um one's problem solving reasoning um ability to learn from experience um thinking judgment Etc and that intelligence is represented by what we call an IQ test and um intelligence quotient um so you need to show significant deficits typically in the range of um below the second percentile or so which means that you know 98% of the population is as basically smarter than you are and that's a score of approximately 70 to 75 but it depends on the test and then the second area or what we call the second prime of intellectual disability refers to how someone is in their daytoday life so you have to have a low score on the IQ test but you also have to show in your day-to-day life in those areas I talked about before communication and language and social skills and your ability to take care of yourself and your um ability to solve uh to to um to to uh do things like how you are in your community and accessing Your Community Resources your ability to control and regulate your emotions your work skills your academic skills so like everyday kind of abilities and then the third what we call prong of the definition is that the the problems have to be evident in the developmental period and that's because it's it's a disorder beginning in childhood um that will differentiate ID from something that starts later like for example you're 30 and then you have a brain tumor and the the the brain tumor destroys part of your brain and then now your IQ is really low that's not an intellectual disability because it didn't start in the childhood period I want to go back to what you were calling the second prong and just make sure that it's clear um I don't know that you gave us what the its title what did what when we talk about deficit did did it sorry um it's called adaptive functioning so the first PR is intellectual functioning and the second prong is called adaptive functioning my apologies no you're fine let me take that adaptive functioning I just want to make sure that it's clear so intellectual functioning is something that IQ right you and and I think everybody's heard that term mean people people use that in in common language adaptive functioning on the other hand is not something that people people talk about and and say but I think you just described ad depth of functioning is the ability to um deal with everyday life and everyday life situations is that am I is am I making it too simple no that's absolutely true um everyday life across lots of situations so your communication your social skills your emotional regulation skills your um how you do in school like your academics your work everything so if somebody has a significantly deficient IQ and they also have problem uh issues dealing with everyday um life and it manifests during the developmental period meaning when they're when they're younger that person is um potentially intellectually disabled correct okay it's what again what we used to call mental retardation but now call intellectual disability okay in order to make that determination for Bryce um what did you do or what did you um examine I uh was provided with a number of Records Associated um uh with with Bryce so school records I looked at Medical Records I looked at previous psychological evaluations that he had had and and um uh uh record uh not trans recordings but um summaries of uh adaptive functioning interviews that had been conducted with people who uh know him very well so these would be relatives of his and I also interviewed his mother and did what is called a formal assessment of adaptive functioning it's a specific test we have as neuropsychologists a few test of adaptive functioning um the one that I used is called the vinand Adaptive Behavior scales and I asked his mom to actually focus on a particular period when Bryce was 15 years old okay and from uh well in addition when you looked at those records did you find any previous um diagnosis of uh any conditions yes uh um rice was previously diagnosed with ADHD and with a bipolar disorder and what is ADHD so ADHD stands for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder it's a developmental Disorder so it's again one of those disorders that um it clinicians and and late people notice in the childhood period it begins in the childhood period um it is it's it's um I think a lot of people still use the term add um but that's kind of an outdated term um and and with folks that have ADHD they can have more problems with the attention part which we call predominantly inattentive presentation but a vast majority of people with ADHD are what we call combined presentation which means that they have problem problems with focus and attention and listening and following instructions but they also have problems with um restlessness impulsivity um kind of doing things before thinking um they often find themselves you know as children often are are the kinds of kids that will just um be not able to sit still or run across the street and someone has to grab them um they just have a lot of hyperactivity and restlessness as an adult um what people describe as more of an internal restlessness like they just feel jumpy and and Restless in their head but you might not see that in their body and a lot of people with ADHD have trouble with just regulating their skills like regulating their emotions they're kind of people who um are too much or too little they have kind of trouble maintaining that even Keel and that's true about their impulses too and you said bipolar disorder can you uh flesh that out for the jury yeah bipolar disorder is a mood disorder it's what we call a mood disorder and that can happen at any age it's different from a developmental disorder like ADHD meaning that we see it in childhood now you know mood disorders run in families so some of the most sever mood disorders actually do start in childhood um and um but a mood disorder can happen really at any time it can happen even in reaction to um something really bad happening in your life um especially if that reaction um like a depression or a sadness is even more than what we would expect or lasts longer than we would expect for the bad thing that happened um so like depression bipolar disorder is a problem with regulation of mood it's a little bit as I said with people with ADHD they kind of have that problem anyway but um it's a little it's like much more challenging um if you have a mood disorder you have periods where um you might be quite up and excited and positive um sometimes for some people even what we call Grand oopes where they feel like they're super powerful and better than everyone else um but sometimes it just means that a person has an elevated mood and they feel good or sometimes it can just mean that they're really irritable and touchy and they get kind of um you know it's it's it it they are easily set off and angry and irritable and then people with bipolar disorder the by by meaning too um have also have periods of time when they're very sad and they're down and they um don't feel good about themselves and um sometimes they can be so down that they contemplate suicide or even attempt suicide um but have a hard time getting out of bed have a hard time doing things just know have um have trouble with getting started on things and kind of the will to do activities that they would normally do when their mood isn't so down so um that's what bipolar disorder is and you can have um people with more extreme mood swings and then you can have people that are just as I said more of this sort of irritability all the time kind of Brewing under there and u based on your expertise and what you did and examined in this case were you able to reach a conclusion regarding um Bryce Bryce's intellectual disability yeah yes from all of the information that I reviewed and the interview with his mother it was my conclusion to a reasonable degree of psychological certainty that um Bryce met criteria for the diagnosis of intellectual disability and continues to so I want to break down a little bit how you were able to reach um this conclusion okay so can you explain a little bit based on on what you did and what you saw how you were able to reach this conclusion what about the the evidence so I reviewed multiple um IQ tests so remember I had said earlier that um IQ stands for intellectual quotient and it's our best way of getting at that first prong of difficulties or deficits with thinking and reasoning and problem solving and learning from experience um and so the best way to understand that is administering and um individually administered test of of what we call intelligence of those Concepts um and so Bryce has been had um evaluations of his intelligence since June of 2001 when he was 10 years old up until December of 2021 when he was 31 years old so he's actually had six separate assessments of his intelligence using similar measures when he was young the child version was used and then when he was older beyond the age of 16 the adult measure was used so I was able to review those um six separate um uh administrations of his IQ that I found in records and some um through reports written by the doctors themselves um so that's that first prong um and then in addition to that there were were a lot of um uh reports in the um interviews done with family members that talked overall about um some of those aspects of of intelligence like grasping Concepts um um being able to for example his maternal Uncle T talked about just difficulties with teaching Bryce to sweep or um he just wouldn't be able to get it he talked about Bryce using his hands the wrong way when trying to learn how to sweep and and so this gets at this idea of of being able to understand broader Concepts to learn which is part of intelligence um planning his paternal stepbrother talked about he would make a plan but it would be not very well thought out part of intelligence is planning um and organization um another um relative talked about lack of awareness ESS and insight um and and so those are all broad Concepts associated with Intelligence being able to kind of understand things grasp Concepts plan reason so that's that first prong of intelligence I want to stop and and ask you another question though about that first prong um was there evidence that um in what you looked at that there were times that um price did not fully meet the effort expected in some of these tests yes yes there there were um in the uh evaluation that was done 10 years ago um in October by Dr Riley um and in the evaluation that was done more recently two years ago um by Dr Williams um both of those doctors did indicate um some concern conerns about Rice's effort in the testing can you explain a little bit to the jury about why um you were able to reach a valid result granted you're talking about two tests you you told us you looked at six but I'd like you to explain if you could the um about the the effort component right so you know one of the things that we want to we when we want to come to conclusions about any data we want to make sure that that data is valid that that data is telling us something that is truth um and so um when someone it when there's any suspicion that someone isn't putting forth their best effort and and and that doesn't necessarily mean that um they're not putting their best effort or best foot forward because they they are deliberately trying to do so sometimes it it can be that it can be conscious but sometimes people don't put forth best effort because um they're not super invested in the process or um sometimes it's because they're really tired or depressed or it's because they um H are don't have a good rapport uh with the examiner and then that's actually something specifically we call stereotype threat which can happen when the examiner and the person being tested are from different ethnic backgrounds um it can change somebody's effort create more anxiety um in the testing process so there's lots of reasons why people don't put forth best effort another reason can just be because that person has um trouble you know regulating and keeping their emotions on an even ke which in my opinion uh is is what impacts price because um when someone has uh uh difficulties with everyday thinking reasoning problem solving um it's it's it's the encounter during the testing very difficult questions and if you're someone that is um easily set off or irritable um then you know that can be a challenge when you're testing someone so that's that sort of concept of effort and in Bryce's case there were as I said the two more recent evaluations where the doctors con expressed concern about that but you were able to view uh many more than just those two tests you were able to view I believe you said six yes yeah and yeah yes I was and um is there in fact a relationship between intellectual disability itself and some of the way that people measure things like effort absolutely one of the biggest concerns um in what we call Performance validity testing or effort testing um in people with lower IQs is that they tend to produce a lot of what we call false positives so they um uh they will seem on effort testing we have specific tests that look at effort um and and it's and it one of our concerns always that we're looking for is making sure that we don't um say that someone with a low IQ is not performing at their best when they really are there is and that's what a false positive is it it's identifying someone as not trying um when they really are trying and that is most much more likely to happen with people with who have low IQs because they have low IQs so what a test that would seem very easy for someone who doesn't have mental retardation or intellectual disability is actually a little hard it's harder for someone with um a lower IQ and so they may look like they're not trying when they really are my conclusions about prices IQ are based on the bulk of the evidence that I have I had six IQs there were two that there were some concerns about effort one of those doctors that had concerns about effort actually said you know if we retested him in a year or so I would expect that it wouldn't you know that he would have an IQ that is is actually in the intellectual disability range and so you know there was a consistency in um generally lower scores that I felt confident about that we would still still say Bryce met the criteria for that prong one that prong one being deficits in intellectual disab intellectual functioning and we're using the uh term effort testing right but another term for that right is malingering yes that is that would be at the extreme end of conscious deliberate not putting effort into the testing so that's mingering is like one of many reasons that people don't put forth best effort as I said they could also be because they're they they're they're having trouble with emotional control or and things are hard and they don't want to do them or because um they don't have a good relationship with the examiner and um they feel you know very nervous or they're not invested or they're tired or in pain I mean there are lots of reasons why people don't put forth best effort mingering is only one okay you were just expressing sort of uh the effect that intellectual disability itself has ironically on testing for intellectual disability um are there some other myths about intellectual disability that it would be good to explain uh to the jury yeah um I mean I I feel like like many developmental disorders um part of the problem is that people have a part particular idea when they think about a developmental disorder um like autism and um like intellectual disability and traditionally and even like schizophrenia which is not a developmental disorder um we all of these sort of mental conditions people have like a stereotype in their head for ID um or mental retardation what people often think of is the person who is very severely or Prof profoundly mentally so that would be someone who can't walk or can't talk is in a wheelchair can't feed themselves um needs 24-hour care and might have like physical Stigmata um that tells you that something is wrong with them like for example Down syndrome which is all typically associated with intellectual disability many people think oh well if you're intellectual disability if you have the intellectual disability you're going to look funny something's going to I'm going to be able to tell in your face or your body that something is wrong and all of that is actually not true the vast majority of people with intellectual disability 85% look totally normal they don't have anything physically you can't tell um uh you know um and many people with intellectual disabil can read and write in fact the vast majority um 85% again are able to achieve reading and writing skills up to like the sixth grade level so you know they're literate not great but literate um and and can walk and talk and you know don't look necessarily on at first glance and that's a thing at first glance that something is wrong with them so you're saying it isn't always obvious on surface correct so let's talk a little bit about um Bryce's adaptive functioning okay sure all right adaptive functioning is broken down into different areas and so what I'm going to do is ask you about some of those areas and um then you just tell us what you were able to conclude about those all right okay okay one of those areas I believe believe is communication is that correct correct all right can you tell the jury what you were able to determine from the evidence about his ability to function in the area of communication so I looked at some of the um uh the various um interviews that were done with family members for example his half brother his step brother his stepmother and um looks at uh and uh some of the things that they were saying about him and um so what I found was that there was cons were consistent uh reports of problems with communication which is both um understanding of language comprehension and also what someone is able to express so for example um he was variably described as not being a good communic Ator bad at listening and comprehension and this is um by the way across his life so you know um at different points when he was a little kid but also as a young adult um folks talked about you know him not being employable um just because he doesn't have the communication skills to deal with people he didn't have this is his uncle saying that he didn't really have the capacity to understand um what was going on that um his mom talked about how she took him um to a interview with a manager um as an adolescent kind of exploring the job idea of him having a part-time job and at the interview um she described his his expressive language what he was able to say as lacking when the manager was asking him questions and and noted that generally rice didn't start conversations with adults so all those things kind of brought together this idea that of both difficulties in um listening and understanding as well as expressing himself when you say didn't start conversations with adults um is that something that you expect um from somebody who is intellectually disabled yes um yes you know it's interesting a lot of folks with ID are described as quiet um and they're they're quiet often because they don't have a lot to say and it's hard for them to express themselves verbally organize their language put their thoughts into words is someone with intellectual disability more likely to communicate than with people who are are their age or in fact younger yes yes there's one of the red flags of intellectual disability actually is um gravitating towards younger peers and more socially immature peers because they just literally cannot keep up they they cannot keep up with the demands um that same AG peers would have at at all stages of development so that's when they're kids but also um you know more critically during adolescence because that's a time when um you know peer relationships become extremely important up until you know young adulthood not sort of 22 23 well during that time period relationships with peers romantic relationships Etc become really um salian and important to people and if you just don't have like the skills to keep up um then you're you're you're going to be quiet you're going to be withdrawn um or you might gravitate to to younger people so someone in their 20s might actually tend to socialize with people who are in their teens for example yeah because they they're they're at the more of the same level you know the demands aren't that of of a similarly aged person in their 20s who are going to be much uh more subtle more nuanced and conversation um and it's just it's just easier and it's also one of the things that people do when they have intellectual disability often is try to mask those problems and it's easier to mask those problems when you're associating with people younger because you don't have to you don't have to work as hard um um to to to try and keep up you don't have to you know have to put on that try to put on that pace I'm gonna move you to um another a different aspect of um of functioning and that's functional academics can you explain to the jury what what functional academics means sure it's it's basically when we think of um like foundational um skills needed for learning in Reading Writing math um and the translation of those into independent functioning um as a child and over time so for example um an adult uh sort of translation of mathematics would be having a bank account um being able to you know kind of read and understand contracts and um and um uh pay bills and that sort of thing um as a kid it's the it's more of those basic Reading Writing because when you're a kid your your work is really school so um so it's it's reading spelling math um and you know as you get older you start to have a more applied use for that and and how did he do in functional academics well we know that from school records as early as a second grade um brace had pretty significant um academic deficits across the board so um I looked at second grade scores that showed on standardized testing um below low average skills um across language math and social studies ranging from the fifth percentile to the 14th percentile um and he really struggled across the board he had special education services in childhood um his mom noted that she tried to enroll him in GED classes um as a young adult but was told that his academic abilities as a young adult were even too low and that he actually needed to take remediation classes and this is evident if you look at um Dr Riley's um assessment of Bryce in 10 years ago so 10 years ago uh his um his scores would have been around um 23 at the time his reading comprehension was measured then at below the second grade level and his math was at the early first grade level and individuals family members in his life um that was again another consistent theme about him performing poorly in school um he was described as a terrible student learning disabilities classes um not particularly good at reading or writing or academics in general and his younger brother actually would help him sometimes um which is pretty telling so again this IDE aide that um you know he just wasn't grasping academic Concepts at his um at his grade and age level such that even his younger brother were was able to do the kinds of um academic tasks that he couldn't another area of of adaptive functioning is called social can you explain what you're looking for um in that area sure I mean social an easy one because it's kind of self-explanatory but um so it means you know get how a person gets along with people how they um their in social interaction skills it's having friends it's um spending time with those friends um you know um it's it's um also got a component that we measure that's more about more surface like being polite um and also you know social relates to things like gullibility um um being easily taken advantage of by others not recognizing the motives of others and also poor social judgment choosing people to be friends or associating with people who um may not be the best for you um so social skills is um you know really relates to all of those actually it's I guess it's more complicated than I originally described but yes that's social skills and then how did he do in that area again um you know looking at both vinand um a mom's rating of him at the age of 15 but also um relatives that uh in their interview discussed significant social deficits talked about trouble with sharing um um Mr James talked about Bryce not not being not being taught how to form happy relationships um he had trouble making friends friends at school um even sought out conflicts where it was clear he wouldn't Prevail so you know again we see that a lot if in folks that have lower IQs they struggle to make friends um and they they want they have low self-esteem and they want to prove themselves but you know seeking a a conflict is not the best way to do that so shows really poor judgment um uh his um romantic relationships were described as juvenile um um others talked about him always seeming um M little bit immature and struggling to socialize um and and um being the least intellectually capable despite being the oldest and when you say least intellectually capable despite being the oldest you mean of the of the siblings correct okay the last area I want to ask you about in adept functioning is what's called self-direction can you tell the jury what that means yeah that's a really super complicated way of just saying being able to handle um to regulate yourself so um they regul and and the term executive functioning is is part of that I I think that's a lot in um popular literature right now this concept of executive functioning which is basically your ability to um regulate your emotion regulate your impulses um initiate tasks without you know someone constantly having to light a fire under you to get you going um or remind you to stay on task attention is part of self-direction any anything you have to think about that is related to regulating and executive functioning when you have good executive functioning skills those are really key to being able to do well in real life if you have trouble controlling your emotions or your impulses or your attention that's going to interfere with your success in day-to-day life so that's what self-direction is and then how did Bryce do in self-direction um this was actually one of the areas in which he struggles the most um and um again when you think of his um diagnoses of ADHD and bipolar disorder those are both reflecting problems in in self-direction bipolar mood regulation um ADHD more attention regulation so since he was younger school records from childhood through adolescence shows problems with um controlling emotions being able to focus his attention being able to sustain his attention um he couldn't focus in the classroom but he also struggled to focus even on um sports like football practice he was imp impulsive and impatient as a child and that continued into adulthood um Mr rhs described Bryce as having trouble with concentration and said that there were things that he wanted to try and wanted to do but could not follow through um he was described as quick to anger and his mother in rating him that at 15 actually rated him as functioning almost like a like a preschooler essentially even at f being he was more like a like a preschool kid when it came to self um regulation and self-direction so she said um he was at 15 never able to control his anger um when there were unexpected changes in plans he was never able to control anger when he couldn't get his way um he was never able to Think Through consequences before acting so you told us that you with all of this work and all of this uh evidence you were able to diagnose him as with an intellectual disability but intellectual disability affects different people in different ways um some people are able to overcome those things can you explain to us um what the effect if you had an in intellectual disability what the effect of also having bipolar would be would that sure okay yeah I'm sorry I I couldn't hear you for a second that's fine oh you still can um can you uh explain to us the way a bipolar um condition would interact with someone's intellectual disability oh yeah okay um yes so uh with with a bipolar disorder or mood disorder um you know then and intellectual disability it it makes it even more of a struggle to um to manage emotions so you know in in both cases you tend to be more led by your emotions um versus using the parts of your brain that are associated with things like making sound decisions considering future consequences of AC when you have um both a mood disorder and intellectual disability it's like a double deficit really um because we use um uh with the intellectual disability piece um you don't have the Reserves as far as your cognitive reasoning ability and your language ability to do things like self-talk in a conflict situation or in a potentially dangerous situation or when emotions are running High you don't have the access to the to the parts of your brain that are saying oh you know what this is probably not a good idea when you're emotionally riled up you know what I need to calm down that's selft talk um and and um the intellectual disability because of those deficits in language and reasoning make it harder to talk yourself down it makes it harder to negotiate a social conflict or negotiate a challenging situation that's going to come out in a good adaptive way you're more more likely to kind of be led around um by the nose of your emotions um and and more susceptible to um those mood changes and and and the problems with impulse control that those mood changes will bring or or the problems in managing anger that those mood changes bring so we've been talking about um how Bryce got here and what makes Bryce Bryce but this jury and unfortunately I don't know that you can see the jury but they're right here this jury has found him guilty of these charges and the task that lies before them is to determine what the punishment should be so one aspect of that you've explained in great detail know but another question that they have is can Bryce improve can is Bryce capable of of getting better I'd like you to address that if you could sure so as I said you know ID is a lifelong um condition developmental condition but what we do know is that people with ID uh require um support um and and that and the the folks that do have that support do do better do much better um and they can um and that that support can can just be you know um advice or a lot of folks with ID tend to gravitate towards people who are older um more experienced from the advice standpoint not not from the socialization standpoint but um that support can be um some someone who helps them talk through um decisions that they need to make um and it's also really about skill building learning skills learning skills to control emotions learning skills to recognize when you're getting heated up inside um and you need to do something about it before you before you know before you become really angry or before you say something or do something that you shouldn't so so so it's skill building that can be done more formally through therapy through Psychotherapy with a therapist that has an eye to an experience in understanding people with developmental disorders you need someone ideally with that expertise who can modify or adapt traditional therapeutic approaches to for someone with ID for someone who may not have the language or may not have the uh you know the the more nuanced thinking so there are therapeutic approaches like cognitive behavioral therapy or dialectical behavioral therapy um those are fancy terms that mostly mean teaching someone how to be more mindful of their emotions how to recognize their emotions how to um be able to exert better control over their emotions understand the relationship between their emotions and their thoughts um and why might behave in certain ways so help someone develop more insight which would help Bryce tremendously um and then of course on top of that would be medication would be there are a plethora of medications that really help people better control their emotions and and also better focus their attention they're not um magical pel pills but they help um and they and especially in combination with as I said some the the therapeutic approaches I just talked about so um you talked about the creation of support um yeah so medication would be one way that that support um could exist right correct um I think you told us therapy right just now correct um is it fair to say that counseling um in different ways could also provide some additional support yeah that's what I meant by therapy um okay also participation in in various programs that could be offered by the Department of Corrections could provide that support right correct I um understand that there are programs related to um especially group programs around anger management for example and um also resources that would be available um ongoing resources if someone um after years was returned to the community right correct yes yeah well we call those wraparound services so um It's a combination of um check-ins and therapy and Medicine um and then for people with intellectual disability you want them to you want them delivered in what's called a wraparound way where there's a team and there's coordination and there are a number of programs in the community that provide that so you're testifying that with the right combination there's still hope for Bryce in the future absolutely thank you I have no further questions do anyone cramin good morning doctor good morning so uh you reviewed a number of reports correct correct um you reviewed both the the school reports and the reports from doctors um regarding the previous testing correct um and you reviewed some interview some summaries of interviews correct correct is the only interview you did the interview with his mother Les rhods correct was that um over the phone or by video conference it was in person oh okay and then you did not interview you did not have the opportunity to interview the defendant correct uh no and that was because he refused to be interviewed okay um so as you didn't get to observe him um in any sort of environment for the Adaptive function portion of this you werei on word from other people correct uh I did but that it wouldn't be appropriate to um this is a developmental Disorder so as I as I indicated so would be wouldn't be appropriate to base his adaptive functioning on current uh any any current observations particularly in an incarcerated setting which doesn't approximate the real world so for the um the tests that assessed his IQ um we have six different test results um starting with the 2001 tests when he was 10 years old um and on that one he had a full scale IQ of 90 which is in the average range is so that that's correct it would need to be adjusted however for the Flint effect um so the actual IQ would be more appropriately in 86 and there's a um a range where you can um have confidence in the result of five points plus or minus on each of these results isn't there the range depends on the particular test in the DSM and the aid it's approximately five but that's because if they were to list all of the confidence intervals which is the range that you're talking about for individual tests it would be pages and pages and pages so in the DSM and the um and the aid they say about five and for the um results in the 80s those are considered low average um 70s is considered borderline so 7s is considered borderline according to the Wexler but someone with an IQ in the 70s can still be considered ID because the diagnosis of ID is in the DSM 5 and the aid the diagnosis of ID is separate from the labeling or description of an IQ according to the test so the Wexler test can refer to an IQ in the 70s as borderline but a borderline an IQ in the 70s can still meet criteria for ID okay under the diagnostic criter the second test we have results from is from 20 four um and is it correct that we don't have details about this test we just have the result that it was a full scale IQ of 80 again uh we don't have the you know we don't have the um actual test itself but Flynn corrected I just want to make sure that we're getting looking at the right colum it actually should be a 79 um and for the rest of these we do have more information about them right up from the doctors that that test we just simply have the result not the write up correct as part of a School record in 2007 when he was 16 there was a test by Dr Burger um and did you is that one that you reviewed it's yeah there was I I can't recall what it was that I reviewed but it was the details of the IQ which was a 72 okay third it's 74 uh with Flint effect to the 72 it's it's actually a yeah it's actually a 72 if if it's more correctly viewed okay and on that report Dr berer said that the defendant did not appear to be motivated to perform well did not increase his effort for more difficult tests therefore the results of his intellectual and academic testing should be interpreted as cautious estimates of his actual abilities indor performance at this time is that correct that's correct he did not indicate that it was an invalid score he said it should be interpreted with caution and the 2013 test was actually taken as part of um uh his application for disability benefits correct that's correct okay um and then for the 2013 test uh with Dr Riley that one there was great concern from Dr Riley about about the results and um he actually said the client may not have given his best effort tended to exaggerate memory problems performance May reflect an attempt to present himself in a most unfavorable light in order to receive services or special considerations the current test results are believed but a gross approximation of the cognitive and academic strengths and limitations that the Mr RH brings to training and employment isn't that correct yes and he indicated that re-evaluation in one year may reveal borderline or mildly impaired intellectual functioning um he also said that the results were most likely invalid of of this test correct that's that's correct and he said that re-evaluation in one year would likely produce results that were in the intellectual disability range but he also said that even a provisional diagnosis of borderline or mentally impaired intellectual functioning was not really warranted on page seven he may have said that yes and again I think it's really important to because all neuropsychologists do this we're not looking at individual scores we're looking at them as as a whole so when I make an evaluation of that prong one it's looking at all of bry's scores not just one and taking into account as I did in the chart some of the concerns about effort but nevertheless there is a consistency there that his IQ scores show deficits in intelligence and then the final test was in 2021 uh with Dr Williams and there was also a concern about effort in that test as well correct yeah that's a correct and the score that was produced again shows a good consistency of intellectual deficit thank you doctor I have no further questions uh no other questions thank you all right Dr James thank you for being with us but do not have any further questions and you are free to go thank you very much have a good day thank you all right you all want to come up for just a second all right are there any other Witnesses for the defense Ron that's the end of the defenses case for mitigation thank you Mr griffth all right we're going to go ahead and break for lunch we will have one witness when we come back and then you will get the case for deliberations again um I'm going to ask you to be back outside the courtroom at 12:30 pm okay thank you right yeah I'm G is there anything that we need to discuss before I go off the Record thank you all all right anything I need to take out before the jury comes back back in okay I'll just wait until he gets up Dr Allen's on his way up from the elevator so we just GNA wait till he gets here placing my glasses I think I left my other glasses in my office I'll be right back okay you need to stand yeah when I'm nervous sometimes I just standing up okay okay for all right jury thank you everybody can be seated do any jurors have anything they need to discuss with the court all right great I understand that the Commonwealth has a rebuttal witness thank you Alan your right hand you were to tell the truth and the whole truth I do thank you doctor good afternoon hi could you introduce yourself to the jury please my name is Timothy Allen I'm a psychiatrist at a facility called kcpc which is a state hospital what does it stand for the Kentucky Correctional Psychiatric Center and what happens there so we do competency to stand trial and criminal responsibility evaluations by court order throughout the state what is the education and uh training that you have for this position so I graduated from uvl um 1994 degree in political science then I went to UK College of Medicine where I got my uh MD in 1998 and then I did a four-year Psychiatry residency at uh UK and then a one-year forensic psychiatry fellowship at tulan University in New Orleans so I've had a medical license in Kentucky since 1999 and I'm board certified by a national group called The American Board of Psychiatry Neurology in general Psychiatry forensic psychiatry and brain injury medicine how long have you been with kcpc started there in July 2003 so into 20 years and are you the only doctor there no so there are um two other Forensic psychiatrists um and then we have two U nurse practitioners and we have several psychologists so um it's there's a whole team and are there other employees as well right we have social workers nurses Correctional staff it's it's a fully staffed hospital that's also on the grounds of a prison uh did you have occasion to evaluate the defendant Bryce roads at the request of the court in this case I did he came to our facility on two occasions uh in 2019 and again in 2022 and so I saw him for about a month each time um and I saw him several times during each one of those hospitalizations and during those times did he live at your facility yes so he's there again for about a month 24 hours a day so um so he lives on a unit with with 11 other people they have sort of a a common area they have their own rooms they go to Recreation they they um they have activities during the day and they have have a treatment team a medical treatment team that I'm the head of that we see them at least once a week address any psychological or medical conditions um and so we have you know literally 24-hour observation of the person for a month at a time and in his case two different months what did you um what did you notice about his ability to interact with other people whether staff or peers um well generally we saw Mr rhods function highly um he's articulate he could explain himself he could communicate well um uh he performed what we call activities of daily living they have to do their own laundry you have to line up at the certain time you have to know where to be for your meals and your meds and all those sorts of things there's obviously some structure to it but also we have people with low intellectual abilities that we have to assist on these things on a daily basis um they need extra help reminders of where to be what to do how to function Mr rhods had none of those um he was interactive with me he um again could express himself very clearly um and and so he was never somebody who needed special services that we ever saw as intellectually impaired in any manner he could function fully um again with his peers with the staff throughout his nearly two months with us and did you or somebody on your team analyze um his intellectual whether he had an intellectual disability yes so we administered some psychological testing um some of which the results of you've probably heard about already it's one of the multiple psychological test batteries he's undergone in his life and um let me flip to the right Pages here um so let's see so the testing we did was um in December of 2021 so it was his second admission and this is Dr Williams our head of psychology um and whenever we give psychological tests an IQ test being sort of the most prominent one we've T talk probably heard about today you have to give measures of effort because if I give you a simple math test and I ask you what two plus two is and you don't want to get the right answer you can say five right so it's really easy if you don't check to have somebody not give your full effort so we have to give those measures of effort and we did um or Dr Williams did and we got a full scale IQ of 73 which formally falls in the borderline range but he gave poor effort and we give specific measures to look for that these are not something we've created it's they're published they're used everywhere across the country in every University so he failed those measures of effort so that suggests that 73 is a low estimate of his true ability um and so and and when we look at his and then we compare how he's behaved for the month or two he's been with us compared to that test we again believe that 73 is not a true score it's suppressed on Purpose By him now granted that happens a lot you when you're when you're in the kind of situation we're in you expect those things to sometimes happen um because people are under a lot of pressure all that sort of thing but the bottom line the important thing to realize is that 73 is an absolute minimum and if we only know that score we think he's better than that or higher than that but we just don't know how high luckily we have some other information to tell us is um is it possible to fake up on an IQ test no if if you could fake better than your true ability well then everybody do it right so whatever if you take an IQ test you can only get up to your full ability these aren't these aren't tests where you can like guess a couple questions and get a significantly higher score there's an error of Five Points so if your realiz Q's 100 you could maybe get 105 but probably you're going to get a one 991 something like that um you can't fake a one 120 if you're 100 um and remember 100 is average that's the average of all of us you know the whole country so um so generally your highest score if you've taken it a bunch of times is closest to your real score did you look uh did you look into whether the defendant was suffering from any mental illnesses yes so that's something we are concerned with all the time and we treat people um with mental illness constantly I'd say about 80% or 85% of the people we treat we or we see we treat for a mental illness with some medication and therapy and other things we even treat people who don't want to be treated because that we see the illness but they don't admit it so that's a that's a whole process we have to go through sometimes um in this case Mr rhods reported some anxiety and I believe he has anxiety I think there are some records to suggest he has anxiety I think uh he's under a lot of stress and has been for several years while he's facing these charges that's stressful um so we treated him for anxiety at one point I think in the first admission we gave him a anti-depressant selecta for anxiety this last time we treated him with Vistal I think which is a mild anxiety medicine um and I think he he preferred to be on the medicine it was helpful but really anxiety is all we saw we didn't see any evidence of depression or Mania we didn't see evidence of psychosis like hallucinations or delusions these are all things we look for in every single person um whether they reported or not we didn't really see any of those things um did he did he have any other Psychiatric diagnoses so um so I diagnosed him with the last time sure I got M yes reports right with um really three things uh one was adjustment disorder with anxiety that's you know you're under a ton of stress and you have some psychiatric um symptoms that are more than you might expect just for the stress the second is antisocial personality disorder which is a history of sort of flaunting the rules and not really going along with societal norms and that sort of thing and then the last one was polysubstance use disorder which is drug abuse um if it if if you use drugs and it affects your functioning you can meet that diagnosis and did you see any evidence of bipolar disorder I did not I'm aware that that's been diagnosed in the past um in in childhood in adolescence and from my experience um children who are having behavioral problems if their parents take them to a mental health professional they will often get diagnosed with something uh it may be oppositional defined disorder but bipolar is a common mental illness diagnosis that's given sort of as a let's see a provisional diagnosis and then they try to treat the child to see if you can really affect their behavior um but as an adult that's never really appeared anywhere in any documentation about Mr rhs he's never sought treatment because when we talk about bipolar we're talking about really the two poles of it depression and Mania and so we're not we haven't seen any evidence of either of those uh as an adult and he's been incarcerated I think since 2016 so he's been seen by jail staff medical staff by kcpc by many many people and no one during that past seven years has said he looks depressed he looks manic or he has symptoms of bipolar and what would be an example of mania so Mania is sort of the opposite of depression you know depression is run down feeling bad Mania is full of energy um and so these people people who are truly manic you you don't miss it it's not subtle they may only sleep one or two hours a day they they're moving around constantly they're agitated they speak fast they they look hyperactive but in the most severe sense that you could ever imagine um I teach medical students I'm like this is one of the diagnoses in medicine that you can see as soon as you walk in the door from AC across the room you don't miss Mania it's it's severe and it can get to the point where it affects your thinking you can get delusional you very often people become grandiose I have a lot of money I'm very powerful all that sort of thing so so Mania is hard to miss number one and number two is almost always results in a psychiatric hospitalization somebody you know somebody sees you goes that's not right I'm going to get an miw I'm going to send them to the hospital I'm going to have the police take them or an ambulance take them uh we don't have any evidence like that for Mr did you review um the defendant's interview with police in May of 2016 I did did you see any evidence of either the depression or the Mania in that dur in that interview no um so yeah so I looked back at my notes um and and I actually reviewed the videotape of this and I've reviewed the transcript of it um Mr rhods was not agitated he was actually very calm he uh was articulate with the police officer um he you know denied knowledge about the the charges and and and had relevant questions about it um he was not talking fast he was not hyperactive he was not delusional I didn't see any evidence for that and certainly no evidence depression um so did you conclude um as a result of your two examinations month-long examinations of the defendant does he due to any intellectual deficit lack the ability to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the law I found no evidence for those things I thought you know he could appreciate his criminality he could um uh conform his conduct to the crime law regarding mental illness Andor intellectual deficit that was going to be my next question thank you no further questions Dr Aran it's good to see you again hello um I understand that you work for kcpc that's right I think we use that phrase so often it stands for Kentucky Correctional Psychiatric Center that's right and this is a state run hospital it is um and the hospital uh there there are evaluations conducted there for pre-ra clients that's right and uh there's impatient treatment provided yes and I think all patients at kcpc are court order patients that's right and you've worked there for over 20 years now I have um so fair to say that you testify for the state quite a bit well I I I guess uh it may be semantics but I I've testified hundreds of times I've done over 2,000 evaluations um sometimes I'm called by the prosecutor sometimes by the defense because my report goes really as court ordered for for the judge and for the court but you are typically called by the Commonwealth more commonly yes so part of your job is to conduct evaluations for the state or the court yes um and you come across a wide variety of psychiatric illnesses in that work that's true substance use disorders mood disorders anxiety disorders yes trauma Related Disorders absolutely and neurocognitive disorders yes and you've admitted at a at a prior hearing that you are not an expert in uh intellectual disability specifically not specifically I've not done specific research on it it's something I deal with you know pretty much on a weekly basis um as far as treatment and and that but I don't have you know beyond the typical psychiatrist any specialized training or knowledge about intellectual disability Let's uh discuss your evaluations um for a little bit I I want to make sure I understand first that you you don't work alone at kcpc that's true um you work with a team yes um but the total amount of time that you spent with Bryce um would you say was about an hour hour and a half so in in in at least one of I mean if you add up all the time I spent with him it's probably like in the first admission he was there four weeks so it's probably a total of about two to two and a half hours and then the second admission he was only there I think well it was it was let me get my dates right second admission I think was shorter it was only about two weeks so that's probably more like two hours or an hour and a half so the total over those two times may have been three and a half four hours okay I want to take you back through your evaluations okay first would you agree with me that paranoia can be a symptom of mental illness yes and paranoia can impact someone in a number of different ways I agree and it could impact someone's ability to participate in an evaluation sure it could impact their ability to take the tests that you um administered could and based on your evaluation Mr rhs demonstrated several aspects of paranoia I yeah I think we've discussed this in a previous hearing even um yeah I mean there's some there's some um of his behaviors that I guess theoretically could be related to paranoia that's I don't disagree with that so if we look to the uh first report from 2019 I'm looking at page seven okay um he indicated that one of his habits um was to lay out traps in his room right yes in in his room at kcpc that's right so he's he's talking about um behavior that he's demonstrating or or talking about demonstrating while he's at kcpc that's right um and at kcpc he's in a a locked room he yes and despite being in this locked room he had a a standard practice to lay out these trps yes and um the reason that he did that was to know if other people had come into the room that's right this locked room yeah um if people had touched him or his his things right and he also indicated to you that there were multiple times that he thought that someone had been in his room yes um that someone had touched his soap I think that sounds right um and that would be paranoid Behavior generally yes and you didn't bring this up while you were testifying just now no um because being incarcerated um sometimes you know in some ways paranoia is healthy you have to watch out for yourself you have to be concerned about the actions of others um and so you know there there's a certain degree of that that's understandable um so I didn't find it raised to the level of what I considered mental illness or something I would treat in the second report um which was completed 202 3 um you indicate on page two that he uh wakes up during the night to keep people from harming him find that it's down at the bottom under the hospital course did you say it said wakes up oh oh I see it y wake up every 30 yep I see what you're saying yes so is that correct that he would wake up every 30 minutes worrying that people were trying to harm him that's that's what he reported uh we don't watch them that closely they do have regular checks through the night but but you know we don't have confirmation of that but I can't deny it either and that behavior or that belief um could be another classic paranoid belief uh I mean it it would be pretty unusual it's hard to wake yourself up even if you truly are paranoid but I I'd say it could be yeah and additionally in that same um evaluation the second evaluation I believe in multiple places he he talked about believing that people were trying to poison him yes um and that's another classic example of a paranoid belief that one I agree it's that's pretty classic and you've encountered that paranoid belief before sure and I'm I think I'm looking at page six um where he indicated that he specifically believed that the prosecutor was trying to poison him yes and that the prosecutor was in a conspiracy with other people trying to poison him right and obviously you don't believe that that was actually occurring I do not um and so his belief that multiple people were trying to poison him is a classic paranoid belief could be yeah and paranoia is a symptom of someone who is bipolar it can be especially if you're actively man in the first evaluation from 2019 on page seven you indicate you reference his uh skin condition right I'm probably going to say it incorrectly filic ulitis that's perfect actually and um he indicated that he believed it bled or did not bleed depending on his belief in prayer right and he indicated that if he prayed then it did not bleed and if he failed to pray then it did bleed yes and is not a rational belief that's not very rational and I believe you testified to um from the 20323 report on page two that he was having anxiety and and panic symptoms yes and he was given medication for these symptoms he was and there was a a reported Improvement of his symptoms great I want to talk next about hallucinations okay in 2019 in the first report on page to when he's meeting with the team he talked about hearing voices uh Whispers he did and he talked about seeing things he called them Shadows yes and he saw he he saw things moving these aren't the Shadows that your I might see right and uh that's that's a little bit out of the norm that's out of the norm and as a doctor you might refer to those as hallucinations right so if they're if they're sort of out of thin air out of nowhere they're hallucinations if they're a misperception of actual things we call them Illusions so the classic example is when you hear a gust of wind and you think you hear a baby cry but it's really just the wind or you know you see a shadow and you think it's a person um I'm not sure which of those it is but it's unusual it's not normal next I want to talk about some of the testing results and you're not the psychologist um you didn't administer these tests yourself personally that's correct um he W um Bryce was administered an IQ um test he was and his score um the full scale score on page four is 73 yes and that falls into the borderline range it does you also administered the abos test right and you indicated that he scored very low on this measure right and that test is solely subjective report from his mom um but she she basically scored him that her response is Discord him as being very having very low adaptive functioning and the aboss test is is trying to assess um real life situations yes um and you also testified earlier that when you observed him and when your team observed him in a structured prison-like environment at kcpc you saw him able to follow the rules yes but that's not what the aboss is trying to measure agreed it's it's a different environment so the fact that he may have had the ability to follow rules at acpc where everything is structured and routine does not undermine the aboss test so they're not directly correlatable so I I agree with you there now you wouldn't expect somebody who you see no deficits to be so impaired as as reported by a mom um but so the difference is pretty Stark it's it's dramatic um but they're not a oneto one so I acknowledge that that it's not a perfect comparison and you don't believe that you have an measure on the aboss test yeah that's true um I think you know when you're asking number one for Mom's opinion when she knows the circumstances and number two is she's having to remember when he was a kid and how he's been functioning maybe years ago so there's memory issues there for any of us you know how do you remember what your sibling or child acted like seven years ago that's kind of a hard thing so there's a lot of difficulty the boss is not perfect it's the best thing we have but it's it is just a questionnaire really and and you've testified previously that the true above us score could be low or below average that's true let's look at page seven and you've also testified about this before there's an example um you provide there in reference to the aboss test you reference um a trust fund kid right performing poorly on sections of the aboss uh because they maybe wouldn't need to work right and that's your comment your example yeah that's my examp and you acknowledged that that wasn't perhaps the right thing to say that is not a comparison for for Mr rhods I tried to pick a comparison that is totally unrelated to him um so that's that's kind of the reason I chose it I didn't want to draw a parallel in any way this it just shows you that um you know if you say well somebody's not functioning because they never had a job well what if they never looked for a job never if they never wanted a job so the boss will say you're impaired because of that but it may be because you didn't want to because you made money other ways so again there's impreciseness um that we have to consider and you don't actually administer this aboss test yourself I didn't Dr Williams um did by questioning uh Mr rh's mother and um you don't routinely administer the abos I do not and um you also don't administer the IQ test yourself I'm yeah I'm not even qualified to administer the IQ tests um you have to be trained very specifically to administer IQ tests and other cognitive test like that um I look at the results all the time but I don't administer them and do the raw data and all the calculations um and one thing that that could impact someone's IQ during the developmental period is the onset of a mental illness yes and some mental illnesses do not manifest until later in life right um yeah there typically there sort of spikes um different periods of of life where mental illnesses Spike and one of them is the sort of transition from Teen to adulthood 192021 so that's a common time where some things emerge um there's other spikes like later in life in your 60s so which obviously aren't an issue here and bipolar disorder um especially in males can manifest around age 19 or 20 that's true and that could impact someone's IQ score over the long term yes if you have especially if you have a very long period you've not been treated you've had severe swings mood and several manic episodes that can cause sort of permanent cognitive impairment I also want to talk about the Tom test and that that that stands for a test of memory malingering yes and I believe in your report you indicated that he passed this test he did and these tests um you call them mingering tests right but they're really they're tests of effort yes um and and maybe engagement in the process yes and you can't yourself determine from these tests themselves why someone might give poor effort I agree with you you can't determine the motivation that's right and symptoms of a mental illness could impact someone's motivation uh they could an intellectual disability could impact someone's motivation um yes but we have a little clearer data that tests like the Tom which he passed and the VIP the one that he failed they've been measured in people with intellectual disabilities and found to be relevant but um so I think it's a that's a little bit different than somebody who has like maybe a delusion that the person given the test is trying to you know kill me you may not have cooperate with that person so you agree that paranoia could impact someone's motivation could yeah there's a lot of documents um in this case um you've been given uh records from Bryce's past yes um including pass evaluations yes and um adaptive functioning documents some yeah but you didn't have the chance to review those until after you completed your report I think that's true and you yourself are not an expert in adaptive functioning not not more than any other psychiatrist I mean I think psychiatrists we deal with it gener frequently but there are people who subspecialize in that and I'm certainly not one of those that's why you have doctor I think you you mentioned her earlier Dr Jacqueline Williams she's an expert in this area um I yes and then again she administers the test which I don't and so you have her on staff because you don't know enough about this material that's her area well again she she knows more that's for sure and so you're not really qualified to give a diagnosis on intellectual disability oh well no I disagree with that I mean intellectual disability is something again I deal with every day uh I think we're I get to split her hairs because you know it's talk about an expert and I think very often we talk about expert being in my world we think about expert is somebody who's published 40 articles on something um but but I diagnose intellectual disabilities all the time I look at IQ test results on a routine weekly daily basis so I am absolutely qualified both to assess intellectual deficits and to diagnose it but there certainly are people who have more specific expertise like administering the test and that sort of thing and you did tell us earlier that you are not an expert at intellectual disability again not Beyond other psychiatrists no read on no problem Dr alen you're free to go thank you for being here good to see you all right so um the only thing that we have remaining to do are closing arguments from the attorneys and then you will um be able to go start deliber ations but I want to give you all the opportunity to take um a restroom break if you needed or to make any calls or anything so I'm just going to give you five minutes maybe and then come back in front of the courtroom doors all right see you in five uh is anybody using Jacob El reading instructions reading instructions just my feel it thank you W Mills all right we can all be seed does anyone have anything they need to report all right um in just a moment you will hear closing arguments from the attorneys just as I said to you during the um guilt phase of the trial closing arguments are not themselves evidence um but certainly there are a way for the attorneys to argue to you what they believe the evidence showed and how you should apply that um I will need to read the instruction questions to you before I do that I wanted to ask bl's one thing that I just remembered I'm so sorry can you all come up all right I will begin reading the instructions again you all have a copy your forers will remain the same uh when you are finished deliberating you will let Deputy Mills know and we'll have you return to the courtroom and then once again you'll have the official copy all right instruction number one aggravated penalty and mitigating circumstances you have tried the defendant Bryce rhods and have returned a verdict finding him guilty of the murders of Christopher Jones Maurice Gordon and Larry Ordway from the evidence placed before you in that trial you are acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the the crimes themselves you have now received additional evidence from which you shall determine whether there are mitigating or aggravating facts and circumstances bearing upon the question of punishment following which you shall fix a sentence for the defendant for the offenses of murder in considering such evidence as may be unfavorable to the defendant you will bear in mind the same instruction that was given to you in the first stage of this trial proceeding to the effect that the law presumes a defendant to be innocent unless and until you are satisfied from the evidence Beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty you shall apply that same presumption in determining whether there are aggravating circumstances bearing on the question of what punishment should be fixed for the defendant in this case you may consider such evidence as you heard in the guilt phase of trial as well as the evidence you heard in the penalty phase in deciding what punishment should be fixed for the defendant in this case case mitigating circumstances are any facts or factors about Bryce roads the crime or the case which do not justify or excuse the offense but which In fairness and mercy lessen or reduce his responsibility or moral culpability for the crime or which demonstrate that he is someone whose past or present circumstances indicate that he should receive a penalty other than life without the possibility of parole or life without the possibility of parole for 25 years in fixing a sentence for Bryce rhods for the offense of murder you shall consider such mitigating or extenuating facts and circumstances as have been presented to you in the evidence and you believe to be true a unanimous decision as to the existence of a mitigating factor is not required each juror is free to make their own individual determination as to the existence of mitigating evidence proof Beyond A Reasonable Doubt is not required for mitigation evidence to be considered instruction number two statutory mitigating circumstances you shall also consider the following statutory mitigating circumstances which you believe from the evidence to be true a at the time of the offense the capacity of the defendant Bryce rhods to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of law was impaired as a result of bipolar disorder or other mental illness even though the impairment of the capacity of the defendant to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or conform the conduct to the requirements of the law was insufficient to constitute a defense to the crime B at the time of the offense the defendant Bryce rhods acted as an accomplice in a capital fence committed by another person or other persons and you may consider the relative culpability and sentences of all defendants see at the time of the offense the capacity of the defendant Bryce rhods to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or conform his conduct to the requirements of law was impaired as a result of intellectual disability even though the impairment of the capacity of the defendant to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or conform the conduct to the requirements of the law was insufficient to constitute a defense to the crime D the Youth of the defendant Bryce Rose since at the time of the crime he was 26 years old e any other circumstance or circumstances arising from the evidence which you the jury or any of you individually found to be a mitigating factor or a factor in support of leniency instruction number three aggravating circumstance in fixing a sentence for the defendant Bryce rhods for the offense of the murder of Christopher Jones Maurice Gordon and Larry Ordway you shall consider if you believe it to be true from the evidence Beyond A Reasonable Doubt the fact that the defendant committed the offenses of murder intentionally and that offense resulted in multiple deaths instruction number four fear or prejudice is not to influence decision in reaching your decision on punishment you are cautioned that you are not to be influenced by any Prejudice or fear of later criticism instruction number five concurrent versus consecutive for each count you shall State whether the sentence you recommend is to run concurrently at the same time or consecutively one after the other successfully with successively without interruption or combination thereof in your discretion instruction number six probation and parole probation the defendant Bryce rhods will not be eligible for probation under any circumstances in this case under a term of of years 20 to 50 years Bryce rhods would be eligible for parole after serving 85% of the specified number of years life on a sentence of Life Bryce rhods could not be considered for parole until he had served 20 years the parole eligibility life without possibility of parole for 25 years on a sentence of life without the possibility of parole for 25 years Bryce robs could not even be considered for release on parole until he had served 25 years life without possibility of parole on a sentence to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole Bryce roads will never be considered for parole eligibility does not mean parole consideration for parole does not mean that it will be granted on sentences of imprisonment for life or life without the possibility of parole for at least 25 years Bryce rhods could be imprisoned until his death instruction number seven authorized sentences count one as to Christopher Jones you may fix Bryce Road's punishment for the murder of Christopher Jones at confinement in the penitentiary for a spec specific term of years not less than 20 nor more than 50 or confinement in the penitentiary for life or confinement in in the penitentiary for life without the benefit of probation or parole until he has served a minimum of 25 years or confinement in the penitentiary for life without the benefit of probation or parole but you cannot fix his sentence at confinement in the penitentiary for life without the benefit of Probation and Parole or at confinement in the penitentiary for life without the benefit of parole until he has served a minimum of 25 years um unless you are satisfied from the evidence Beyond a reasonable doubt that the aggravating circumstance listed in instruction number three is true in its entirety in which event you must state in writing signed by the forers that you find the aggravating circumstance to be true Beyond A Reasonable Doubt instruction number eight authorized sentences as to count to Maurice Gordon you may fix Bryce Ro's punishment for the murder of Maurice Gordon at confinement in the penitentary for a specific term of years not less than 20 nor more than 50 years or confinement in the penitentiary for life or confinement in the penitentiary for life without the benefit of Probation and Parole until he has served a minimum of 25 years or confinement in the penitentiary for life without the benefit of Probation and Parole but you cannot fix a sentence at confinement in the penitentiary for life without the benefit of probation or parole or at confinement in the P Penitentiary for life without the benef benefit of parole until he served a minimum of 25 years unless you are satisfied from the evidence Beyond a reasonable doubt that the aggravating circumstance listed in instruction number three is true in its entirety in which event you must state in writing SED by the forers that you find the aggravating circumstance to be true Beyond A Reasonable Doubt instruction number nine authorized sentence count three Larry Ordway you may fix Bryce Road's punishment for the murder of Larry Ordway at confinement in the penitentiary for a specific term of years not less than 20 nor more than 50 or confinement in the penitentiary for life or confinement in the penitentiary for life without the benefit of probation or parole until he has served minimum of 25 years or confinement in the penitentiary for life without the benefit of probation or parole but you cannot fix his sentence at confinement in the penitentiary for life without the benefit of Probation and Parole or at confinement in the penitentiary for life without the benefit of parole until he has served a minimum of 25 years unless you are satisfied from the evidence Beyond a reasonable doubt that the aggravating circumstance listed in instruction number three is true in its entirety and which event you must state in writing signed by the for person that you find the aggravating circumstance to be true Beyond A Reasonable Doubt instruction 10 authorized sentences count for tampering with physical evidence you may fix Bryce Road's punishment for tampering with physical evidence at confinement in the penitentiary for a term of years not less than one year nor more than 5 years instruction number 11 authorized sentences count five abuse of a corpse Maurice Gordon you may fix Bryce Road's punishment for abuse of a corpse at confinement in the penitentiary for a term of days not to exceed 365 days instruction number 12 authorized sentence count six abuse of a corpse Larry orway you may fix Bryce Road's punishment for abuse of a corpse at confinement in the penitentiary for turn of days not to exceed 365 days instruction number 13 verdict the verdict of the jury must be in writing must be unanimous and must be signed by one of you as four person the instructions are Then followed by verdict forms for each count and a final verdict form for the total sentence would the defense like to make a closing argument yes ahead of course um ladies and gentlemen of the jury we've just discovered that there's a a bit of a typo in your verdict forms so what I'm going to do is simply reprint those pages and give it to um our forers so you will have the copy with the proper verdict forms okay let me just make sure that didn't change all of our formatting yes page numbers are exactly the same okay so this Pages 10 through 16 thank you de nails so you can just Swap this out for your other copy all right you may proceed thank you I just wanted to make sure he knew how to float Anna Bryce's stepmother told you yesterday about teaching Bryce how to float she wasn't trying to make Bryce swim team captain she was simply trying to make sure that he knew how to float and we don't let the people that we love drown I was swim team captain when I was in high school and I was also a lifeguard for six years and I agree with Anna that it is very important that we teach our children how to float in the six years that I lifeguarded I was very fortunate that I only had one jump in rescue and I remember it very vividly the young man that I pulled out of the water that day he didn't know how to swim he just drifted into the deep end it was a YMCA there was a line that cut up between a five six feet to the 10t and he went over the line and and didn't know how to swim he didn't know how to float he was okay I blew my whistle I jumped in I pulled him out and we filled out an incident report and while I was finishing the incident report he went back to the pool deck and before I had the chance to finish completing the incident report I heard the whistle blow again and when I came out back to the pool deck I saw that my fellow lifeguard was in the water with this young man again pulling him out of the water a second time and before that young man left the pool that day he tried to get in the water for a third time to an outsider to an onlooker who didn't know this man it didn't make any sense why would this young man who did not know how to swim did not know know how to float keep getting back in the water and trying to go to the deep end what was wrong with him was he trying to play games with this did he want to drown why did he keep doing this it doesn't make sense if you don't have context I had the chance to speak with him while we filled out that incident report and I came to learn that he didn't come to the pool on his own he came to the pool with an assistant with a a case worker someone that helped him with his everyday living activities helped him manage his money helped him get on the bus and helped him get his exercise and they were working together on learning how to float how to swim and his goal was to one day perhaps learn to swim in the deep end now I have no idea whether that was something that this young man was capable of but he clearly wasn't capable of it at that time at that time he did not know how to float but he didn't understand that all he wanted was to to keep on the the progress that he'd been working with his casew worker all he wanted was to show that he could do it he was not he couldn't understand that he couldn't magically decide to do something and then be capable of it he didn't understand all those steps that he still had to take if he was indeed able to take those steps Anna told us about Bryce she said I just wanted to teach him how to float and that's really just another way to say I just wanted to teach him how not to drown and that's what Anna told you that she was doing making sure Bryce stayed afloat making sure that he didn't drown in the water and unfortunately I don't think that the water was the only place the Bryce was drowning I think from the evidence that you've heard over the last two days yesterday and today that from a very young age Bryce has been drowning he's been trying to stay AF flat he's not been trying to swim he's not been trying to reach the deep end he's been just trying to stay a float and before I go any further in discussing Bryce's life and the decision that you're ultimately going to make today in this case I want to be very clear about what this part of trial is about and what it's not about and and what I'm here asking you to do this phase of trial that we've been doing this week since Monday is not about accountability you've already found Bryce accountable you listened to the evidence last week and on Monday and you made your decision Monday night the decision that you have today is punishment and nothing that we presented to you over the last two days and nothing that I'm going to discuss with you now is meant to take away from that accountability or that loss of life horrible things were done in May of 2016 an innocent man was gunned down in the street and two teenagers were then brutally murdered and you've held Ry accountable for his participation in these murders the murders of Christopher Jones of Maurice Gordon and Larry orway you've heard from their family members those who have lost their loved ones and I'm going to leave it to the state to discuss that loss because that's their place the state now wants you to lock Bryce up they want you to lock him up and throw away the key and they want you to be angry I want you to think about how many decisions you've made out of anger and about how many of those decisions that you've later come to regret why why do we pause why do we stop why do we take a breath because when we act out of hate and anger we lose empathy we lose our heart so when someone's life Bryce's life his life and his freedom is at stake I'm asking you to do something different something difficult something that may be uncomfortable I'm asking you to hold on to your empathy and your heart because no matter what Bryce did on his worst days Bryce is still a human being and so I'm asking you to make a rational decision I'm not asking you to let him walk out of the courtroom today I couldn't even if I wanted to that's not an option available to you I'm not asking you to give him a total sentence of any specific term of ears let's not forget that there is now no small sentence available to Bryce now the minimum available to you to punish Bryce is 20 years on on each count and 20 years is a long time but I'm not asking you for 20 years I'm asking you to give Bryce a chance at parole I'm asking you not to give him life without the possibility of parole I'm asking you to keep empathy and your heart close at hand when you decide what punishment to give him and I'm asking to have just a little bit of Hope for Bryce hope that with medication he can overcome the symptoms of his mental illness his bipolar disorder hope that with therapy and the help and support of his loved ones like Anna that he can learn how to manage his emotions to regulate himself in times of stress and manage to live in this world with his mental illness and his intellectual disability hope that with the passage of time the passage of at least 20 years that he will change and that he will change because he will have something to work towards something to make him work and work hard on his own Rehabilitation a chance just a spark of hope a parole one day never a guarantee just a simple spark of hope a reason to think to reflect and to work hard on who he wants to be punishment without understanding is not Justice it is Vengeance and all I'm asking you to do today is to give Bryce consideration I'm asking you to Grant him Mercy I'm asking you to give him hope until today since 2016 the weight of his life and what happens to him has been in the hands of legal teams of the state and the defense but the end at the end of these closing arguments that weight will be passed to you and it is a heavy weight I know we've carried it for a long time now and so while I won't talk for too long today I do need to make sure that I passed along what we would like you to know about Bryce and make sure that you know what you can take into consideration when you make your individual decisions I want you to take your time with that decision and not to feel pressured to reach your verdict to take your time to carefully weigh the evidence that's been presented to you Bryce's future his life is at stake and I want you to carefully weigh all of the evidence that's been presented to you last week in this week I understand that the state wants to punish Bryce but I want to make sure that that punishment is one of Justice not one of Vengeance and it isn't an easy task and the law does require you to make a few more considerations before you return a verdict as his punishment and you've sworn an oath to follow that law to consider all of the evidence that's been presented to you to consider the full range of penalty you're required to consider the minimum just as much as you're required to consider the maximum the law tells you in your jury instructions on page four instruction number four that your vote as as to penalty as to punishment cannot be out of prejudice or fear of later Prejudice or later criticism your vote cannot be based on what everyone out there thinks it is your individual moral decision not anyone else's and I'm asking you to vote for a chance for Hope and for an ounce of Mercy I'm asking you to vote from your heart from your own moral compass and I'm asking you to be willing to do what is uncomfortable and the law may require you to not fear criticism and what everyone else out out there thinks and that's not easy to set that aside but it is what is required of you today giving Bry a chance at parole is the right choice in this case it might be an uncomfortable choice but it is the right choice and it is the right choice based on Bryce's intellectual disability on his bipolar disorder and the overwhelming amount of trauma and abuse that flooded his up in your jury instructions you'll read on page four instruction number three that you have to make a determination as to an aggravating circumstance even if you make this finding even if you find this aggravating circumstance there is no automatic penalty you may still fix his punishment at a sentence of 20 to 5050 years at life life without the possibility of parole for 20 years sorry for 25 years or like without the possibility of parle at all you are also required to consider any mitigating or extenuating facts and circumstances that have been presented to you in evidence and that you believe to be true and a mitigating circumstance and am going to read on page one a mitigating circumstances is any fact or factors about Bryce about Bryce rhods about the crime or the case which do not justify or excuse the offense but In fairness and mercy lessen or reduce his responsibility or moral culpability for the crime or which demonstrate that he is someone whose past or present circumstances indicate that he should receive a penalty other than life without the possibility of parole or life without the possibility of parole for 25 years anything that you've heard you could decide you could find is a mitigating effect or circumstance and you don't all have to agree as to those mitigating circumstances are facts six of you could find that his mental illness is a mitigating circumstance and six of you could find that his intellectual disability is admitting any circumstance you don't have to agree as to the mitigation as to the mitigating circumstances you do have to agree ultimately to a penalty there are certain mitigating circumstances that you are specifically required to consider and those are on page three of your instructions you are required to give consideration to Bryce's bipolar disorder his relative culpability and his intellectual disability this week you've heard additional evidence evidence about Bryce about his intellectual disability and his bipolar diagnosis and I know that it's it's hard to go back to last week and to think about the evidence presented to you then but in order to consider as the law requires you to do so these three mitigating circumstances in particular I'm asking you to think again about what you heard last week in light of what you've heard this week last week the state would have you believe that Bryce was The Mastermind the adult the one in charge telling everyone what to do the leader and they told you this was because he was the adult that it was strange for this adult to be hanging out with teenagers we already know from last week that that Bryce wasn't the only adult present there at least two other adults who were present the night Larry and mauce were murdered at least two other adults about which we know very little and now you know more about Bryce and you know about his capacity his reduced capacity due to his mental illness and intellectual disability I'm asking you to reflect on what you heard from Dr James about about Bryce's intellectual disability this morning she told you that Bryce struggles intellectually and that he has a low IQ and the state wants you to believe that that his IQ is maybe a little higher and maybe it is but not much higher it's still a low IQ score Dr James told you that it is not uncommon for someone with an intellectual disability like Bryce to spend time with people who are younger it makes sense we like to surround ourselves with people that are perhaps of similar functioning we know that Bryce doesn't like to be embarrassed or do things that he isn't good at or that he's afraid of it makes sense that he would want to surround himself with people that that he could perhaps keep up with with teenagers people he could maybe feel equal to not behind Bryce struggles with thinking we know he struggled with school with his homework and with basic tasks Anna told you yesterday about her experience struggling with Bryce or with Bryce struggling from a parents perspective and Dr James today told you that not only does Bry struggle intellectually but he struggles with what she calls adap functioning his ability to function and do day-to-day everyday tasks and Dr James conducted an an in-person assessment with Bryce's biological mother Lana who was with Bryce throughout most of his childhood Dr James reviewed documents from Bryce's childhood and memorandums from his family members and she found that he had severe deficits in the areas of communication functional academics the social Arena and self-direction Bryce struggles in just about every area of Life BR Bryce is continually trying to stay above water to not drown to Simply function in everyday life it's harder for Bryce than it is for most of us and on top of that he has a mood disorder a bipolar disorder and you heard that from Dr James as well and Dr James told you how that mood disorder interacts with his intellectual disability compounding the challenges and difficulties that he has navigating everyday life and managing emotion and his reactions you've held Bryce accountable for his actions in May of 2016 and I'm not asking you to rethink that decision I am asking you to take all of this that you've heard this week into consideration when you make your decision you can take into consideration in your decision The Plea deals that are in evidence and you can still review those if you'd like to and I encourage you to do so if you want to see them again anwan Carter and jaor Taylor each received 10e sentences I believe one served three years one served about six and a half now those sentences are not available to price but you can consider how they were punished when you decide how to punish price even if you find the aggravating circumstance you are still required to consider Bryce's intellectual disability and his bipolar diagnosis we talked a lot about credibility of witnesses last week in in our Monday and when you want a diagnosis when you want help and the right treatment who do you go to maybe for a cold or the flu you go to a generalist something quick something cheap something easy but if you think there's something more serious wrong with you if you suspect cancer or something really serious wrong with you who do you go to do you go to a generalist a jack of all trades or do you go to a specialist someone whose career and study and expertise is in your treatment your diagnosis and your condition the state brought in the state's witness Dr aan from the state hospital and he told you what he thought about Bryce and his intellectual disability and his bipolar disorder but Dr Allen is not an expert in intellectual disability you heard from Dr James this morning a neuros psychologist whose specialty is in intellectual disability and neurodevelopmental disorders and she told you how she reached her finding and the basis for that by name intellectual disability and she also told you about a prior diagnosis that Bry has of bipolar disorder rice has an intellectual disability and bipolar disorder and Dr James told you how these impact him each of these either of these on their own could be a mitigating circumstance a reason you could decide to give Bryce less than a sentence of life without the possibility of parole and Bryce has not only one of these two he has both the law also requires that you consider any other circumstance from the evidence which you as an individual or as a jury find to be a Meda factor or a factor in support of leniency Bryce has always been struggling to keep his head above water we are most vulnerable when we are children when we are children we rely upon our parents on the adults in our lives to keep us safe to love us to nurture us and and to help us build resiliency I don't know what word or words the state will use to describe rise now the government tends to like labels defendant accused convicted broken mentally ill is it is easier to lock someone up and throw away the key when they are reduced to a label I do not describe briy as intellectually disabled as mentally ill or any worse label I will not reduce him to his worst moments or his weaknesses or his diagnosis and I ask that you do the same that you recognize him as he is a human being who as a child suffered great trauma and who has a mental illness and who has an intellectual disability when you make your decision today you will not have to explain it or justify it it is your choice people with mental illness and intellectual disability and extreme trauma are not going anywhere they're not I think maybe we all wish that no one had to go through those adversities that no one had to have such disadvantages or hardships or burdens or experience so much trauma I think we all can agree on that but but they do and and these people will always exist and so we have to remove the stigma around these disorders and treat them with empathy and from our hearts people like Bryce need help more assistance than most of us more help simply to not drown in the hardships any of us may face on a day-to-day basis through no fault of Bryce's own he started this life behind he never had a chance drowning before he could ever learn to float let alone swim and just because he has a mental illness an intellectual disability and because he experiences the effects of trauma does not mean that he doesn't deserve to be punished just because he never had a chance doesn't mean he didn't have a choice the law does demand however that you take it into consideration Bry does not need to be locked away forever what did Bryce not have control over as a child abuse trauma the lack of effective and consistent intervention at a young age lack of the right diagnosis and medication at a young age lack of consistent love and nurture and the chaotic environment that he lived in Dr Garbarino an expert in trauma spoke to you this morning as well and he told you about Bryce's trauma he told you about adverse child experiences we call them Aces these are experiences that many of us may have one or two of and and he told you that but he also told you that one in a 100 people have a score of seven or more and that only one in a thousand has a score of eight nine or 10 and he told you Bryce's score Bryce has a score of eight adverse childhood experiences so when I say that Bryce never had a chance when I say Bryce started from behind and when I say that Bryce has been just barely managing to not drown or perhaps has been drowning that is why I don't want to go through each individual adverse touted experience because you've just heard that testimony but what you heard from Dr Garbarino as he talked about each factor was a glimpse into the chaos and abuse of Bryce's life of his childhood we heard from Anna yesterday that she knew that there was abuse going on in his mother's household and Dr Garbarino told you today that Bryce's stepfather would emotionally abuse Bryce alienating him from his own family Bryce was made to feel that he wasn't loved he was alienated by those who were supposed to protect and love him Anna told you about the time that his mother came to take BR home how Bryce cried and how he didn't want to go and about that custody battle that should never have happened in front of a child that way he was afraid to go home that was the type of environment that he grew up in one he was afraid to return to he was punished with physical violence and his stepfather physically abused his mother and because Bryce's mother was in an abusive relationship dealing with her own very violent trauma and survival Bryce was left unprotected unprotected to to observe the brutal violence committed by his stepfather against her he saw him cut his mother's hair off you heard that today drag her and smash her face that's something none of us want any child to ever have to witness for us witnessed this experience and my much more and so his development was stunted it was changed he was developmentally crushed by the adversity and Trauma that he experienced in his childhood on top of his mental health and intellectual disability I've asked you to have hope for Bryce and Dr Garbarino and Dr James have told you that there is hope Bryce is not a lost cause he has overwhelming challenges that he's going to have to overcome and decide for himself to overcome and he cannot do it alone Dr Garbarino and Dr James told you that he does have the capacity for change the capacity for hope he needs to be medicated and he needs therapy and he needs time and no matter your decision today he's going to have access to those three things he can receive medication and therapy in prison and he's likely going to serve at least 20 years so he's going to have plenty of time in prison the time that he needs to work on himself and he can also receive and be ordered to maintain his medication and his mental health treatment if he is ever granted fruitful his stepmother Anna will also be there if he's pared she told you that she's been in the mental health profession in this area in Indiana M for 28 years and she can help and and she wants to help Ry connect with mental health profession professions in the area sorry with the resources available to him and if he fails to do what he is told his parole can be revoked and he can be sent back and if he doesn't try in the first place if he doesn't try medication if he doesn't try therapy if he doesn't try the programming that's available to him in the Department of Corrections if he doesn't apply himself he may never be fooled which is why I'm asking you to give him that chance that hope to work with voice give him a purpose to work towards to keep him on track he has a lot to overcome and it may seem insurmountable to you it may feel easy to give up on Bryce and to do as the state asks you to throw away the key but I'm asking you not to the law does require you to consider all of the evidence from all of the witnesses and to take into consideration ry's mental illness his intellectual disability his relative culpability his trauma and anything else from the evidence presented to you that in your empathy and your whole heart you find cause for leniency I want to end by taking us back to what Anna told us about Bryce's brother Bryce's brother came to their family at about the same time that Bryce himself did and his brother also struggled with school she told us that he had behavioral outbursts as well Anna wanted both Bryce and his brother to stay with them to attend a good school with good resources to be assessed and to receive help at school to be loved and nurtured and above all else safe we know that when Bryce was was with Anna he came out of his shell he let down his guard he got just a taste of what it was like to be loved to be safe and protected but Bryce did not get to be with Anna for very long his brother did his brother stayed and his brother went on to excel at Sports and at school and is now a professor and you know our Bryce is Bryce is right here sitting here today his fate in your hands with love with intervention with treatment and consistency Bryce's brother was able to find resiliency and eventually stability that led to his success and I think the evidence presented to you over the last two days shows that while Bryce did not have the love intervention treatment for consistency in his childhood that he can find those things in his future behind bars in a correctional setting and that he will have the best motivation if you grant him the mercy of a chance at poal to work towards on Monday you didn't have the opportunity to know right to take into consideration his life and his mental health just as any onlooker at the pool that day at the YMCA when I had my first rescue just as any onlooker did not have the opportunity to understand the young man that I pulled out of the pool and then got back in the water two more times you did not on Monday have the opportunity to understand Bryce I mean you now had an opportunity you know more about who Bryce is I wish that 9-year-old Bryce was here and that he could tell you from his heart what his life was like and what he was going through at that time but but nine-year-old Bryce isn't here and we can't save nine-year-old Bryce but there is something that we can do because I think Bryce is is still drowning and it may take some time for him to learn to float again but I ask you to give him that chance to show that he can change I'm asking you to give him a chance at pool a chance at life a chance at Hope ladies and gentlemen I'm not asking you to lock him up and throw him away the key what I'm asking is that you impose legally allowable sentence at the conclusion of this proceeding where he has been given the due process that we all enjoy in this P are sentences allow to in this case his parole eligibility would be 85% of the sentence but will cap with a parole eligibility of 20 years so once it passes 24 years for the rest of that 25 years 40 years years his parole eligibility is 20 years so he meets the board in 20 years life for the parole eligibility is also 20 years life without parole for 25 years so it's a fiveyear difference between that life and this type of life and then the final possibility life without P at all and that is what we are asking we are asking for that for a number of reasons that I will go through here obviously you also consider whether these sentences run concurrently or consecutively to each other and you consider the sentences for the other crimes I'm going to focus on this because this is obviously the bulk of what we're talking about here now when you are making a determination as you see from your instructions you are allowed to consider the things that you have heard in the entire trial you are allowed to consider the horrific nature of these murders you are allowed to consider the effects on the family you are allowed to consider Christopher Jones father of s grandfather granddaughter that he never got to meet brother you're allowed to consider Larry and Maurice Sons grandsons Brothers have a little sister they never met named Lisa their lives cut so tragically short you can consider all that and yes you can consider the mitigating factors if you believe them to be true now one of them listed here is that at the time of the offense the capacity of the defendant to appreciate the criminality of his conduct his conduct the requirements of the law was impaired as the result of po disorder or other mental illness and you heard from Dr Allen that that was not and Dr Allen is an expert just not in the administration of IQ tests but none of the people you heard from today administered I test Dr Allan as opposed to the other two experts did have the opportunity to observe the defendant to speak with the and he concluded that to the extent that the defendant had bipolar disorder at all if that was even true he was not actively suffering from it at the time of these murders he was not impelled by bipolar disorder to commit these murders he was not in a manic episode he saw the interview that occurred two days later you saw the interview as well and Dr Allan told you that Mania is appearent even a casual Observer and you could tell from your own observation of that interview he was not excited not um suffering from some need to speak he was he was calm he was answering questions as you would expect somebody in an interview so you can consider this I would ask you to consider the veracity of it and find that it is not true based on Dr Al's testimony the same for C I'll skip to C and that is um that an intellectual disability caused him to be unable to appreciate the criminality of his conduct or conform his conduct through of the law now there's no doubt that there's some intellectual um challenges the experts disagree on the severity of those you've heard that it's hard to get an actual read because of his lack of effort the IQ test the earliest one when he was 10 years old showed an IQ um when effect for 86 taking below average range and dran told you you can't fake up indicates that range down to 86 would be a more accurate representation because that is the highest one and that is before he had motivations in all the subsequent tests they were things like trying to get disability um benefits or when he was 16 and in school or when he was facing so he had reasons to put in less than a full effort from those what regardless of what his level of is he still had the capacity to appreciate this conduct was wrong he still had the ability to make different choices about this conduct and So based on what Dr Allen told you I would ask you to cross out sea true as well now to return to be at the time of the offense the defense acted as an accomplice in a capital offense committed by another person he was the one they were the sure take into consideration their sentences they each got 10 years served until he was paroled Anan at his 18th birthday was placed on probation and we'll see what happens down the road from that but this total sentences were 10 years on charges of the facilitation of M so that's 10 years for being forced by Bryce rad to take a knife and stab people that he had already killed yeah they should have said no they should have banded together tried to get out of the situation they should have when he left from there to clean run out onto Brownsboro Road and flag down a car and ask that driver to call 911 they didn't they're paying a price but if they want you to consider those charges those sentences relative to what he should get 10 years for being en forced make two or three St wounds what does he get for 21 st wounds for Larry eight plus for Maurice shooting Christopher Jones a lot more than those boy [Music] schs is the Youth of the defendant if you consider 26 to be young in this context any other circumstances you've heard about his childhood this I believe Cuts both ways no child should have to see his mother be the victim of domestic violence situation that's awful that that happened and that's probably why we see domestic violence charges in his history that explains that also there were parts of his childhood that he could have turned to to make different choices he had a loving stepmother sounds like his father was very involved um how all children get trips to Disney World and get red Harry Potter at night so I I don't know how you choose um a lot of what we know from these last two days come from reports about what happened for instance we've heard no direct testimony of what exactly was going on with his mom uh we've heard what his stepmother told the interviewers so way that how you will and again I'm not saying that there wasn't trauma in this childhood but there's nothing from that that indicates he doesn't have control over his decisions so you consider mitigating circumstances that you believe to be true and there's no system in Kentucky where you add some points take away some points based on uh you know like three years for this minus five years for that no you just consider the whole of it as you decide where in this range choose fixen the aggravating circumstance that is listed here is whether you believe that the defendant committed the offenses of murder intentionally and that they resulted in multiple deaths and this is something you consider two days ago you were to liberating and these were intentional murders that obviously they are multiple murders so hopefully that won't take you that long to reach that same decision and what that under the law what that allows is these two um additional penalties here that wouldn't be allowed if those were not the case so if you don't find that to be true these would be your choices if you do find that to be true you also get life without for5 or life without par um and again I I believe that you have already found this I hope that you will continue today to find this aggravating circumstance to true you are allowed Ed to consider his past criminal conduct which started he was 18 with intimidation three counts possession of a handgun without a license for which he got four years he also around that same TI period committed four counsil robbery confinement which he got 12 years but was probated and that is of interest to us because he later violated that pration in 2013 which he would have been 22 then his birthday is September 1st 90 so august2 he committed a assault fourth domestic violence he violated his probation twice in that case at age 23 he committed two counts of battery resulting in bodily injury received a year and a half violated his probation in 2014 so age 23 Anda forth domestic violence again and he violated his probation in that case then at age 25 he murdered the government of two different counties gave him chance after chance on probation and every time he violated that probation he was not able to live under the conditions brought back to cour chance after chance and it didn't stop what happened here and that is one reason that I'm asking you to give a sentence of life without the possibility for all because we already know that did not the supervision of the probation and parole offices of two counties did not reform his actions and did not stop so you allowed to consider all this so then you just go through the instructions just like you did when on Monday um they're all listed here verdict form number one you pick if you do or do not find the aggravated circumstance of intentional multiple murders and then um on the corrected copy you will see that there is a list where you check which one of those penalties that you believe that it should be I don't know how how a family processes the loss of any loved one to violence I'm sure you never fully get over but at least the family of Christopher Jones can say to themselves the last he was still conscious the last thing he heard was officer Frank say hang in their body the last thing he felt was offic Will of Larry and Maurice have no such peace theirs not they each died alone and betray people they trust they each died knowing the other was somewhere in that room and not knowing what would happen to the other they each died horrific horrific thats and I do not think that the ren family theway family should ever have to go to sleep at night not knowing there are multiple reasons for the prison system Rehabilitation is one punishment is one removal is one and I would argue that the two ladder are what is most important in this case I don't want you to punish out of passion or anger but out of justice for what he did to these three people and to their whole famili and I ask you to remove them for life without the possibility of goal never have to worry about this again ladies and gentlemen you will begin your deliberations again now same thing as last time if you have any questions or anything need to report just knock on the door and let know we need fin the oh yeah thank you all right if you all could please stay close by um I will let you know as soon as we have a vered oh e [Music] Anna Bryce's stepmother told you yesterday about teaching Bryce how to float she wasn't trying to make Bryce swim team captain she was simply trying to make sure that he knew how to float and we don't let the people that we love drown I was swim team captain when I was in high school and I was also a lifeguard for six years and I agree with Anna that is very important that we teach our children how to float in the six years that I lifeguarded I was very fortunate that I only had one jump in rescue and I remember it very vividly the young man that I pulled out of the water that day he didn't know how to swim he just drifted into the deep end it was a YMCA there was a line that cut up between a 56 ft to the 10t and he went over the line and and didn't know how to swim he didn't know how to float he was okay I blew my whistle I jumped in I pulled him out and we filled out an incident report and while I was finishing the incident report he went back to the pool deck and before I had the chance to finish completing the incident report I heard the whistle blow again and when I came out back to the pool deck I saw that my fellow lifeguard was in the water with this young young man again pulling him out of the water a second time and before that young man left the pool that day he tried to get in the water for a third time to an outsider to an onlooker who didn't know this man it didn't make any sense why would this young man who did not know how to swim did not know how to float keep getting back in the water and trying to go to the deep end what was wrong with him was he trying to play games with this did he want to drown why did he keep doing this it doesn't make sense if you don't have context I had the chance to speak with him while we filled out that incident report and I came to learn that he didn't come to the pool on his own he came to the pool with an assistant with a a case worker someone that helped him with his everyday living activities helped him manage his money helped him get on the bus and helped him get his exercise guys and they were working together on learning how to float how to swim and his goal was to one day perhaps learn to swim in the deep end now I have no idea whether that was something that this young man was capable of but he clearly wasn't capable of it at that time at that time he did not know how to float but he didn't understand that all he wanted was to to keep on the the progress that he'd been working with his case worker all he wanted was to show that he could do it he was not he couldn't understand that he couldn't magically decide to do something and then be capable of it he didn't understand all those steps that he still had to take if he was indeed able to take those steps Anna told us about Bryce she said I just wanted to teach him how to float and that's really just another way to say I just wanted to teach him how not to drown and that's what Anna told you that she was doing making sure Bryce stayed afloat making sure that he didn't drown in the water and unfortunately I don't think that the water was the only place that Bryce was drowning I think from the evidence that you've heard over the last two days yesterday and today that from a very young age Bryce has been drowning he's been trying to stay afloat he's not been trying to swim he's not been trying to reach the deep end he's been just trying to say a [Applause] float and before I go any further in discussing Bryce's life and the decision that you're ultimately going to make today in this case I want to be very clear about what this part of trial is about and what it's not about and and what I'm here asking you to do this phase of trial that we've been doing this week since Monday is not about accountability you've already found Bryce accountable you listened to the evidence last week and on Monday and you made your decision Monday night the decision that you have today is punishment and nothing that we've presented to you over the last two days and nothing that I'm going to discuss with you now is meant to take away from that accountability or that loss of life horrible things were done in May of 2016 an innocent man was gunned down in the street and two teenagers were then brutally murdered and you've held Bryce accountable for his participation in these murders the murders of Christopher Jones of Maurice Gordon and Larry orway you've heard from their family members those who have lost their loved ones and I'm going to leave it to the state to discuss that loss because that's their place the state now wants you to lock Bryce up they want you to lock him up and throw away the key and they want you to be angry I want you to think about how many decisions you've made out of anger and about how many of those decisions that you've later come to regret why why do we pause why do we stop why do we take a breath because when we act out of hate and anger we lose empathy we lose our heart so when someone's life Bryce's life his life and his freedom is at stake I'm asking you to do something different something difficult something that may be uncomfortable I'm asking you to hold on to your empathy and your heart because no matter what Bryce did on his worst days Bryce is still a human being and so I'm asking you to make a rational decision I'm not asking you to let him walk out of the courtroom today I couldn't even if I wanted to that's not an option available to you I'm not asking you to give him a total sentence of any specific term of ears let's not forget that there is now no small sentence available to Bryce now the minimum available to you to punish Bryce is 20 years on each count and 20 years is a long time but I'm not asking you for 20 years I'm asking you to give Bryce a chance at parole I'm asking you not to give him life without the possibility of parole I'm asking you to keep empathy and your heart close at hand when you decide what punishment to give him and I'm asking you to have just a little bit of Hope for Bryce hope that with medication he can overcome the symptoms of his mental illness his bipolar disorder hope that with therapy and the help and support of his loved ones like Anna that he can learn how to manage his emotions to regulate himself in times of stress and manage to live in this world with his mental illness and his intellectual disability hope that with the passage of time the passage of at least 20 years that he will change and that he will change because he will have something to work towards something to make him work and work hard on his own Rehabilitation a chance just a spark of hope a parole one day never a guarantee just a simple spark of hope a reason to think to reflect and to work hard on who he wants to be punishment without understanding is not Justice it is Vengeance and all I'm asking you to do today is to give Bryce consideration I'm asking you to Grant him Mercy I'm asking you to give him hope until today since 2016 the weight of his life and what happens to him has been in the hands of legal teams of the state and the defense but the at the end of these closing arguments that weight will be passed to you and it is a heavy weight I know we've carried it for a long time now and so while I won't talk for too long today I do need to make sure that I passed along what we would like you to know about Bryce and make sure that you know what you can take into consideration when you make your individual decisions I want you to take your time with that decision and not to feel pressured to reach a verdict to take your time to carefully weigh the evidence that's been presented to you Bryce's future his life is is at stake and I want you to carefully weigh all of the evidence that's been presented to you last week and this week I understand that the state wants to punish Bry but I want to make sure that that punishment is one of Justice not one of Vengeance and it isn't an easy task and the law does require you to make a few more considerations before you return a verdict as his punishment and you've sworn an oath to follow that law to consider all of the evidence that's been presented to you to consider the full range of penalty you're required to consider the minimum just as much as you're required to consider the maximum a law tells you in your jury instructions on page four instruction number four that your vote as to penalty as to punishment cannot be out of prejudice or fear of later Prejudice or later criticism your vote cannot be based on what everyone out there thinks it is your individual moral decision not anyone else's and I'm asking you to vote for a chance for Hope and for an ounce of Mercy I'm asking you to vote from your heart from your own moral compass and I'm asking you to be willing to do what is uncomfortable and the law may require you to not fear criticism and what everyone else out out there thinks and that's not easy to set that aside but it is what is required of you today giving Bryce a chance at her role is the right choice in this case it might be an uncomfortable choice but it is the right choice and it is the right choice based on Bryce's intellectual disability on his bipolar disorder and the overwhelming amount of trauma and abuse that flooded his upbring in your jury instructions you'll read on page four instruction number three that you have to make a determination as to an aggravating circumstance even if you make this finding even if you find this aggravating circumstance there is no automatic penalty you may still fix his punishment at a sentence of 20 to 50 years at life life without the possibility of parole for 20 years sorry for 25 years or life without the possibility of parole at all you are also required to consider any mitigating or extenuating facts and circumstances that have been presented to you in evidence and that you believe to be true and a mitigating circumstance and I am going to read on page one a mitigating circumstances is any fact or factors about Bry about Bry roads about the crime or the case which do not justify or excuse the offense but In fairness and mercy lessen or reduce his responsibility or moral culpability for the crime or which demonstrate that he is someone whose past or present circumstances indicate that he should receive a penalty other than life without the possibility of parole or life without the possibility of parole for 25 years anything that you've heard you could decide you could find is a mitigating effect or circumstance and you don't all have to agree as to those mitigating circumstances or facts six of you could find that his mental illness is a mitigating circumstance and six of you could find that his intellectual disability is a mitigating circumstance you don't have to agree as to the mitigation as to the mitigating circumstances you do have to agree ultimately to a penalty there are certain mitigating circumstances that you are specifically required to consider and those are on page three of your Tre instructions you are required to give consideration to Bryce's bipolar disorder his relative culpability and his intellectual disability this week you've heard additional evidence evidence about Bryce about his intellectual disability and his bipolar diagnosis and I know that it's it's hard to go back to last week and to think about the evidence presented to you then but in order to consider as the law requires you to do so these three mitigating circumstances in particular I'm asking you to think again about what you heard last week in light of what you've heard this week last week the state would have you believe that Bryce was The Mastermind the adult the one in charge telling everyone what to do the leader and they told you this was because he was the adult but it was strange for this adult to be hanging out with teenagers we already know from last week that that Bryce wasn't the only adult present there at least two other adults who were present the night Larry and Maurice were murdered at least two other adults about which we know very little and now you know more about Bryce and you know about his capacity his reduced capacity due to his mental illness and intellectual disability I'm asking you to reflect on what you heard from Dr James about about Bryce's intellectual disability this morning she told you that Bryce struggles intellectually and that he has a low IQ and the state wants you to believe that and the state wants you to believe that that his IQ is maybe a little higher and maybe it is but not much higher it's still a low IQ score Dr James told you that it is not uncommon for someone with an intellectual disability like Bryce to spend time with people who are younger it makes sense we like to surround ourselves with people that are perhaps of similar functioning we know that Bryce doesn't like to be embarrassed or do things that he isn't good at or that he's afraid of it makes sense that he would want to surround himself with people that that he could perhaps keep up with with teenagers people he could maybe feel equal to not behind Bryce struggles with thinking we know he struggled with school with his homework and with basic tasks Anna told you yesterday about her experience struggling with Bryce or with Bryce struggling from a parents perspective and Dr James today told you that not only does Bryce struggle intellectually but he struggles with what she calls adaptive functioning his ability to function and do day-to-day everyday tasks and Dr James conducted an an imperson assessment with Bryce's biological mother Lana who was with Bryce throughout most of his childhood Dr James reviewed documents from Bryce's childhood and memorandums from his family members and she found that he had severe deficits in the areas of communication functional academics the social Arena and self-direction Bryce struggles in just about every area of Life BR Bryce is continually trying to stay above water to not drown to Simply function in everyday life it's harder for Bryce than it is for most of us and on top of that he has a mood disorder a bipolar disorder and you heard that from Dr James as well and Dr James told you how that mood disorder interacts with his intellectual disability compounding the challenges and difficulties that he has navigating everyday life and managing emotion and his reactions you've held Bryce accountable for his actions in May of 2016 and I'm not asking you to rethink that decision I am asking you to take all of this that you've heard this week into consideration when you make your decision for okay Mike Brown thank you for the gift thank you for the gift very thoughtful thank you for the gift would you mind to let John know that once Mr rhs is out I'm going to talk to everybody before I bring the Cherry in all right so I understand that we have a verdict from the jury as to sentence uh first of all I want to thank all of you um for sitting through emotional testimony without disrupting the trial I appreciate that very much uh and I sincer cly hope that that continues once the jury is back in once you leave this courtroom you are free to have whatever reaction you would like to have but while in the courtroom I ask that you not have any reaction to whatever the verdict may be we're ready for all right for the jury thank you Deputy Mills can I'll be seated has the jury reached a verdict yes ma'am thank you Mr for person if you could please hand the verdict forms to Deputy Mills thank you sir Council would you all approach for just a moment all right in the matter of Commonwealth of Kentucky versus Bryce rhs the jury's verdict is as follows count one murder as to Christopher Jones we the jury do find Beyond a reasonable doubt that an aggravating circumstance exists in this case and fix the defendant's punishment for the murder of Christopher Jones at life without the possibility of parole for count two as to marce Gordon we the jury do find Beyond a reasonable doubt that an aggravating circumstance exists in this case and fix the defendant's punishment for the murder of Maurice Gard Gordon at life without the possibility of parole as to count three murder Larry Ordway we the jury do find Beyond a reasonable doubt that an aggravating circumstance exists in this case and fix the defendant's punishment for the murder of Larry Ordway at life without the possibility of parole 4 count 4 tampering with physical evidence we fix the defendant's punishment for tampering with physical evidence at 5 years count five abuse of a corpse marce Gordon we fix it defendant punishment for abuse of a corpse at one year or 365 days count six abuse of the corpse Larry Ordway we fix the defendant's punishment for abuse of the corpse at one year or 365 days we the jury further recommend that the punishments fixed for the defense defendent as set forth above be served as follows all sentences to be served consecutively meaning one after the other it's signed by the forers as to all counts I will now ask each of you if this is your verdict it's okay yes ma'am all right jurors um thank you for your service I will be speaking with you a little bit further in just a few minutes I'm going to have you go back into the deliberation room and I'll be in there in just a few moments to speak with you just for a little bit thank you all right y canot be SE uh anyone who wishes to leave now may do so we need to set a separate date at which uh the court will have final sentencing what sort of um timetable judges probation on PSI um so ordinarily would pass six to8 weeks and I think in this instance it would be prudent to go into mid to late March if that's acceptable for you all and should we perhaps put this case on in the afternoon where we have um a little more time and a little more open of a courtroom that's fine all right how about March 13th at 1:30 that works for us you're right March 13 1:30 p.m. is there anything else that we need to address from any party judge there are a number of other cases that were assigned to different courtrooms judge cuningham just took them all to make this easier I will make an offer on those if so that we can wrap it all up in if they so choose otherwise I guess they'll have to be redistributed back to their respective courtrooms no problem um anything from the defense I just wanted to if we could have those all set on the docket that day as well that we actually have already discussed that with the clerk we will have all of the remaining cases on the docket that day U Mr rhs I do also want to advise you although you have very good attorneys and I'm sure that they have or will discuss this with you as well um but you absolutely have the right to appeal um just like with this case if you are unable to hire an attorney for that appeal then the court will appoint an attorney to represent you knowing these lawyers I'm sure that they will walk you through that and talk with you about that um and we will see you all in March thank you thank you

Channel: Law&Crime Network

Views: 204,814

Keywords: law and crime, law and crime network

Id: C-FtHSPwMSI

Length: 402min 45sec (24165 seconds)

Published: Wed Dec 20 2023