Conflicting testimony of expert witnesses can sink an insanity defense
Summary from United States, from articles in English
|
July 28, 2006: Naveed Afzal Haq barges into the offices of the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle and opens fire with a handgun, killing employee Pamela Waechter and wounding five others before surrendering to police. (article 3)
Aug. 2: King County prosecutors charge Haq with nine felonies, including aggravated first-degree murder, five counts of attempted murder, kidnapping, burglary and malicious harassment, the state's hate-crime law. (article 3)
Aug. 10: Haq tries to plead guilty during his arraignment, but defense attorney C. Wesley Richards raises concerns about Haq's mental competency. (article 3)
SEATTLE - A judge declared a mistrial Wednesday in the case of a man who stormed into a Jewish center two years ago and shot six women, killing one, as he ranted against Israel and the Iraq war. (article 2)
In the Naveed Haq case, which ended in a mistrial today, it seems jurors became hopelessly mired in a bog of conflicting diagnoses and medical opinions that bubbled up from a handful of expert witnesses during six weeks of testimony. (article 5)
Conflicting expert testimony is one of the major challenges of a successful insanity defense, said Jim Hardisty (article 5)
|
Event tracking:
Story keywords
|
Haq, Insanity, mental, Jurors, testified |
Source articles
- Seattle, state need to support Mental Health Transformation Project (seattletimes.nwsource.com, 06/02/2008, 488 words)
- Mistrial in case of Seattle Jewish center shooter (seattletimes.nwsource.com, 06/04/2008, 547 words)
- Seattle Times Newspaper (seattletimes.nwsource.com, 06/04/2008, 323 words)
- Judge declares mistrial in the case of Jewish Federation shooter (seattletimes.nwsource.com, 06/04/2008, 1370 words)
- Conflicting testimony of expert witnesses can sink an insanity defense (seattletimes.nwsource.com, 06/04/2008, 306 words)
|
|
