BY MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT. AND YOU HAVE BEEN SITTING HERE DURING THE DAY AND A HALF OF HEARINGS THAT HAVE PRECEDED YOUR ARRIVAL ON THE WITNESS STAND, HAVE YOU NOT?
THEN YOU HAVE NOTICED OF COURSE THAT WITHIN THE PAGES OF THE PROSECUTION'S BRIEF IS THE DULUTH, MINNESOTA, POWER AND CONTROL WHEEL?
YOU HAVE SAID THAT SYNDROMES OF THIS TYPE INVOLVE ALL ASPECTS OF ATTEMPTS TO CONTROL THE VICTIM BY THE BATTERER, TRUE?
ALL RIGHT, FINE. YOU ARE AWARE OF THE REQUIREMENT IN THE AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION THAT FOR A PSYCHOLOGIST TO GIVE AN OPINION RELATING TO AN INDIVIDUAL, A PERSONAL EXAMINATION IS NECESSARY?
HAVE YOU EVER ASKED THE DEFENSE IF THEY HAD ANY COUNTERVAILING EVIDENCE WITH RESPECT TO THE PROFFER YOU HAVE HEARD THAT WOULD TEND TO CAST DOUBT UPON THE INCIDENTS ALLEGED?
-- THAT WOULD PROBABLY HAVE BEEN AS A RESULT OF THE ORDER OF A JUDGE OR BECAUSE HE FELT HE HAD A PROBLEM AND WANTED YOUR HELP?
BY MR. BAILEY: HAVE YOU FREQUENTLY BEEN CALLED UPON TO GIVE OPINION IN CASES WHERE YOU'VE HAD NO CONTACT WITH EITHER OF THE SUBJECTS?
WOULD YOU AGREE THAT IN ORDER TO HAVE A BATTERER IT IS NECESSARY TO HAVE A BATTERED WOMAN ON THE OTHER SIDE?
OKAY. DO YOU KNOW OF ANY INSTANCE WHERE NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, THE DECEDENT, WAS EVER DESCRIBED AS OR DIAGNOSED AS A BATTERED WOMAN?
OBJECT, YOUR HONOR. THIS GOES BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS HEARING AND IT GOES BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THE TESTIMONY THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED.
WE ARE BEYOND THE SCOPE OF HIS EXPERT TESTIMONY IN A GENERAL SENSE. YOU ARE GOING INTO SPECIFICS REGARDING THIS CASE. DO YOU REALLY WANT TO GET INTO THAT?
MAY I SUGGEST THIS, YOUR HONOR? I GATHER THAT WHAT THE PROSECUTION IS INVITING THE COURT TO DO IS TO SAY THAT EVEN IF INADMISSIBLE ON OTHER GROUNDS AS PART OF A SYNDROME, THESE ACTS SHOULD BE KNITTED TOGETHER AND THEREFORE COME IN. IF I AM MISTAKEN, I'M SURE I WILL BE CORRECTED, BUT I HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT IS WHAT COUNSEL IS ABOUT. IN ORDER TO ASSESS WHETHER OR NOT YOU WOULD WANT TO MAKE SUCH A RULING AND THE PERIL THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE TO STRIKE IT LATER ON IF THE FACTS TURNED OUT TO BE DIFFERENT, I SIMPLY WOULD LIKE TO TEST THE SITUATION WITH THIS EXPERT.
AND I DO FEEL IT A HONOR TO BE ABLE TO STAND UP IN COURT AND DISAGREE WITH MR. BAILEY. IN THEIR BRIEF THE DEFENSE BROUGHT FORTH A SOCIAL SCIENCE ARGUMENT BASED ON, AS WE SAW IN COURT LAST WEEK, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT EMPIRICAL DATA, AND IN THEIR BRIEF AND IN THEIR ARGUMENT AND IN MR. UELMEN'S ARGUMENT THEY HAVE ASKED THIS COURT TO MAKE FINDINGS SPECIFICALLY LINKED TO THAT ARGUMENT, NOT AS TO THE SPECIFICS OF THIS CASE, BUT AS TO THIS -- THAT ARGUMENT. WE ARE PRESENTING EVIDENCE, I HAVE BEEN ARGUING TO THIS COURT FOR THE PAST TWO DAYS, WITH REGARD TO THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT ARGUMENT IN THE HEARING HERE AND HOW IN A GENERAL SENSE THAT IN A GENERAL THEORY THESE INCIDENTS -- STRIKE THAT. IN A GENERAL SENSE, IN A GENERAL THEORY, HOW DIFFERENT TYPES OF BATTERING MIGHT BE CONNECTED TOGETHER WITHIN A DESIGN; NOT AS TO THE SPECIFICS OF THE CASE HERE.
IS IT PART OF YOUR SCIENCE, DOCTOR, TO TRY TO IDENTIFY CHARACTERISTICS OF BOTH VICTIMS AND BATTERERS?
OKAY. THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS YOU WOULD EXPECT TO FIND IN A PERSON THAT HAS BEEN BATTERED, CORRECT?
AS SET FORTH IN HER BOOK THE BATTERED WOMAN, WHICH IS VERY WELL-KNOWN IN YOUR PROFESSION, IS IT NOT?
AND SHE HAS DETAILED WHAT YOU SHOULD LOOK FOR, BOTH AS TO THE VICTIM AND THE BATTERER, THAT IS, CHARACTERISTICS -- I BELIEVE COMMON CHARACTERISTICS OF BATTERED WOMEN, SHE LISTS NINE. ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THEM?
RIGHT. WELL, MY MEMORY COULD USE A LITTLE BIT OF REFRESHING ACTUALLY IN TERMS OF THOSE NINE CHARACTERISTICS.
DO YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION OR EVIDENCE BEFORE YOU AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE VICTIM IN THIS CASE HAD LOW SELF-ESTEEM?
YOUR HONOR, OBJECTION. WE ARE GOING INTO THE SAME MATTER OF INQUIRY, UNLESS YOU WANT TO OPEN IT UP TO ALL THIS, BUT WE ARE GOING INTO EXACTLY THE SAME LINE OF INQUIRY.
MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT, COUNSEL FOR THE PEOPLE JUST DETAILED THINGS THAT ARE LOOKED FOR, SCALES THAT ARE USED, MULTIPLICATIONS THAT ARE USED TO TRY AND IDENTIFY BATTERERS. I THINK I AM ENTITLED TO GO INTO THAT SUBJECT AS FAR AS HE'S THE ONE THAT PUT THE POWER WHEEL IN HIS BRIEF.
AS TO DIAGNOSING A PERSON, UNLESS WE WANT TO GET INTO TESTIMONY ON BOTH SIDES AS TO PROFILING THIS PARTICULAR DEFENDANT AND THIS VICTIM. THAT IS A VERY DIFFERENT SET OF FACTS THAN SAYING ARE THERE CERTAIN -- THESE ARE NINE CHARACTERISTICS OF A BATTERED WOMAN. WOULD YOU AGREE THAT THESE ARE NINE CHARACTERISTICS OF A BATTERED WOMAN IN ANY GENERAL POPULATION OF BATTERED WOMEN? I DON'T HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO THAT QUESTION WHATSOEVER. TO NOW TAKE ANOTHER STEP AND SAY LET'S LOOK AT THIS CASE WOULD BE LIKE FOR ME TO SAY DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION ABOUT MR. SIMPSON RIGHT NOW, WHICH I DIDN'T DO. THAT IS TWO VERY, VERY DIFFERENT THINGS, AND THE SECOND ONE ISN'T GOING TO BE OFFERED HERE.
IF IT PLEASE THE COURT, I HAVE ALREADY DEVELOPED HE COULD NOT ETHICALLY GIVE AN OPINION ABOUT MR. SIMPSON BECAUSE HE HAS NEVER EXAMINED HIM, AND I DON'T INTEND TO ASK THAT QUESTION. I'M ASKING ABOUT A SCIENCE OF STUDYING AND DEFINING BATTERED WOMEN AND BATTERERS WHICH THE PROSECUTION HAS MADE RELEVANT.
OKAY. DR. WALKER'S LIST IS THAT BATTERED WOMEN HAVE LOW SELF-ESTEEM, THAT THEY BELIEVE ALL THE MYTHS ABOUT BATTERING RELATIONSHIPS, THAT THEY ARE TRADITIONALISTS ABOUT THE HOME, THEY STRONGLY BELIEVE IN FAMILY UNITY AND PRESCRIBED FEMININE SEX-ROLE STEREOTYPE, THEY ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE BATTERER'S ACTIONS, THEY SUFFER FROM GUILT, YET DENY THE TERROR AND ANGER THAT THEY FEEL, THAT THEY PRESENT A PASSIVE FACE TO THE WORLD BUT HAVE THE STRENGTH TO MANIPULATE THEIR ENVIRONMENT ENOUGH TO PREVENT FURTHER VIOLENCE AND BEING KILLED, THAT THEY HAVE SEVERE STRESS REACTIONS WITH PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGICAL COMPLAINTS, AND THAT THEY USE SEX AS A WAY TO ESTABLISH INTIMACY, AND THEY BELIEVE THAT NO ONE WILL BE ABLE TO RESOLVE THEIR PREDICAMENT EXCEPT THEMSELVES.
NOW, TURNING OVER TO PAGE 36, DO WE HAVE A SIMILAR LIST DEFINING WHAT WE MIGHT EXPECT TO FIND IN A BATTERER?
WE HAVE A LOW SELF-ESTEEM, BELIEVES ALL THE MYTHS ABOUT BATTERING RELATIONSHIPS, IS A TRADITIONALIST BELIEVES IN MALE SUPREMACY AND THE STEREOTYPED MASCULINE SEX ROLE IN THE FAMILY, BLAMES OTHERS FOR HIS ACTIONS, HIS PATHOLOGICALLY JEALOUS, PRESENTS A DUAL PERSONALITY, HAS SEVERE STRESS REACTIONS, DURING WHICH HE USES DRINKING AND WIFE BATTERING TO COPE, FREQUENTLY USES SEX AS AN ACT OF AGGRESSION TO ENHANCE SELF-ESTEEM IN VIEW OF WANING VIRILITY, MAY BE BISEXUAL, DOES NOT BELIEVE HIS VIOLENT BEHAVIOR SHOULD HAVE NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES.
ALL RIGHT. NOW, DO I CORRECTLY UNDERSTAND THAT AS TO NEITHER THE VICTIM IN THIS CASE NOR THE DEFENDANT HAVE YOU ATTEMPTED TO MAKE ANY ANALYSIS OF THESE CHARACTERISTICS?
HAVE YOU MADE ANY REFERENCE IN THE TESTIMONY GIVEN TODAY TO THE SO-CALLED POWER AND CONTROL WHEEL WHICH APPEARS IN THE BRIEF OF THE PEOPLE?
AND THAT SOMEBODY THAT HIT NONE OF THE POINTS ON THE CHECKLIST WOULD PROBABLY BE EXCLUDED AS A CANDIDATE?
WHAT PERCENTAGE OF POINTS DO YOU LOOK FOR BEFORE YOU THINK YOU MAY HAVE A CANDIDATE THAT NEEDS FURTHER EXAMINATION?
WE DO NOT USE THAT SCALE OR DIAGNOSTIC PURPOSES. WE USE IT FOR DIDACTIC PURPOSES WITHIN A TREATMENT PURPOSE. FOR DIAGNOSTIC PURPOSES WE USE A VARIETY OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN PRESENTED HERE TODAY AND THAT I HAVE NOT DESCRIBED.
ALL RIGHT. NOW, IN ORDER TO PROPERLY ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OF ANY BATTERING IN THIS CASE --
-- YOU WOULD HAVE TO FOCUS YOUR ATTENTION, FOR AN EXAMINATION PURPOSES, ON THE DEFENDANT, CORRECT?
WELL, I THINK UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCE THAT THE PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS THAT WE HAVE USED TO DETERMINE WHETHER A MAN HAS WHAT WE CALL PROPENSITY FOR ABUSIVENESS OR NOT WERE NOT DESIGNED TO BE USED WITH A PERSON IN MR. SIMPSON'S CIRCUMSTANCES.
OKAY. SO IF THIS WERE YOUR CASE, SO TO SPEAK, AND WE HAD ASKED YOU TO EXAMINE MR. SIMPSON TO GIVE US AN OPINION, THERE ARE NO PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS THAT YOU WOULD HAVE CAUSED TO BE ADMINISTERED TO LEARN ABOUT HIS PERSONAL TRAITS?
I WOULDN'T USE THE ONES THAT WE TRADITIONALLY USED IN OUR RESEARCH TO DIAGNOSE A PROPENSITY FOR ABUSIVENESS WITH A MAN WHO WAS INCARCERATED UNDER THE CONDITIONS THAT MR. SIMPSON IS FACING. I WOULDN'T HAVE FELT THAT WAS FAIR TO HIM AND I WOULDN'T HAVE USED THEM UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES.
IS IT BECAUSE OF HIS PRESENT CONFINEMENT THAT YOU WOULDN'T USE THEM OR BECAUSE OF THE CHARGES PENDING OR FOR SOME OTHER REASON?
ALL RIGHT. NOW, RELATING ONCE AGAIN TO YOUR EXPERIENCE, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE BULK OF IT IS WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE DEFINED AS BATTERERS, EITHER BY THEMSELVES OR BY A COURT?
SO THAT WHEN THEY COME TO YOU, YOU KNOW WHAT THEY ARE? YOU ARE NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTION IS THIS PERSON BATTERED?
WELL, OKAY. LET ME JUST SORT OF QUALIFY THAT SOMEWHAT. WE HAVE OF COURSE GONE OUT AND COLLECTED CONTROL GROUP DATA FOR OUR TESTS SO WE HAVE ADVERTISED IN NEWSPAPERS. WE'VE GOT BLUE COLLAR MEN, WE HAVE GOT MEN FROM EVERY WALK OF LIFE, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO GIVE THE SCALE OUT TO MEN WHO ARE SELF-DEFINED BATTERERS, SO WE HAVE SAMPLED ACROSS THE BOARD TO CORROBORATE THE SCALES.
OKAY BUT IN HOW MANY CASES IS SOMEONE SENT TO YOU AND YOU HAVE DISCHARGED THEM AS NOT BEING A BATTERER? IN OTHER WORDS, A MISTAKE?
HAVE YOU DONE STUDIES OR READ ABOUT STUDIES WHERE THERE WAS AN ATTEMPT TO PREDICT, FROM INFORMATION GAINED ABOUT A BATTERER, AS TO WHAT FUTURE CONDUCT THERE MIGHT BE?
POSTDICTION STUDY, A RETROSPECTIVE PREDICTION STUDY. IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT I MEAN IS THAT WE GO OUT AND COLLECT ALL THE DATA ON THE MEN THAT WE THINK ARE ABUSIVE. SOME OF THEM ARE IN TREATMENT GROUPS AND SOME OF THEM ARE MEN THAT HAVE ANSWERED NEWSPAPER ADS. WE DO THE PSYCHOLOGICAL PROFILES ON THESE MEN AND THEY WE TRY TO PREDICT WHETHER THEIR WIVES ARE GOING TO TRY TO CLASSIFY THESE MEN AS ABUSIVE OR NOT. OUR ACCURACY RATE IS AROUND 88 PERCENT.
WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS, IS IT PART OF YOUR RESPONSIBILITY, WHEN YOU TREAT SOMEONE WHO HAS ALLEGEDLY MADE SOME KIND OF THREAT OR ENGAGED IN SOME KIND OF VIOLENCE, TO PREDICT WHETHER IT WILL ESCALATE TO ITS ULTIMATE FORM?
NOW, WHAT DO THOSE STUDIES SHOW ABOUT YOUR ABILITY TO EXAMINE SOMEONE AND PROJECT WHETHER THEY WILL OR WILL NOT ENGAGE IN SERIOUS --
OKAY. SUPPOSING IN THE COURSE OF RUNNING YOUR CHECKLISTS, YOUR OWN OR DR. WALKER'S OR WHICHEVER ONES YOU USE --
-- I THINK YOU HAVE SAID IN THE -- AND THE LITERATURE SAYS THAT BATTERERS LIKE TO CONTROL ECONOMICALLY THEIR VICTIMS TO A DEGREE --
-- GENEROUS, GIVING, PASSES TITLE ON POSSESSIONS, GIVES BEFORE BEING ASKED, ET CETERA, DOES THAT FLY IN THE FACE OF BATTERER'S SYNDROME OR CAN IT BE AN EXCEPTION?
WELL, IT IS AN INTERESTING QUESTION. WHAT -- I HAVE TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT PERSON AND I WOULD HAVE TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE MOTIVATION IN GIVING, BECAUSE I'M SURE YOU ARE AWARE, THE MOTIVES FOR GIVING ARE NOT ALWAYS WHAT THEY APPEAR TO BE. SOMETIMES THERE CAN BE A CONTROL MOTIVE BEHIND THE GIVING OF MONEY AS WELL, SO IT IS HARD TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION IN THE ABSTRACT.
THAT'S RIGHT, OR EVEN IF YOU GAVE ME MONEY YOU MIGHT HAVE SOME CONTROL OVER ME BECAUSE I WOULD OWE YOU SOMETHING. I WOULD FEEL INDEBTED TO YOU.
I GUESS I WOULD HAVE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE REASONS WHY YOU ARE GIVING ME MONEY. I MEAN, IT IS REALLY HARD TO COMMENT ON AN ABSTRACT CASE.
I'M GIVING YOU A CONDOMINIUM, A PORSCHE, A MERCEDES AND A FERRARI, ALL IN YOUR NAME. IS THAT ECONOMIC CONTROL?
KEY QUOTEIF THERE WERE ABSOLUTELY NO STRINGS ATTACHED, THEN I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU, THAT THAT WOULD SEEM TO BE MAGNANIMOUS TO THE NTH DEGREE AND NOT A TYPE OF CONTROL.
KEY QUOTENOW, YOU HAVE, I BELIEVE, SAID THAT TERMINATION OF A RELATIONSHIP WHETHER BY DIVORCE OR REJECTION OR ANYTHING ELSE, IT IS AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT USUALLY FOR BATTERERS THAT MAY TRIGGER THEIR CONDUCT?
AND THAT JEALOUSY AND OFTEN VIOLENCE RESULTING IN JEALOUSY RESULTING IN TURN FROM THE INSECURITY OF A PERSONAL IS OFTEN TYPICAL AND AGAIN A TRIGGER OF SOME VIOLENCE?
HOW MANY OF THE BATTERERS THAT YOU EXAMINED HAD COME UPON THEIR EX-WIVES PERFORMING A SEX ACT AND DONE NOTHING ABOUT IT?
OH, I WOULDN'T -- NO, I WOULDN'T SAY IT NEVER HAPPENED. I JUST WOULD SAY, NO, I CAN RECALL IT BEING RECOUNTED TO ME IN TREATMENT GROUPS, OKAY, BUT WE NEVER COUNTED THEM UP. WE NEVER MADE A SYSTEMATIC STUDY.
WELL, AGAIN, I GUESS IT REALLY DEPENDS ON HOW THE SITUATION IS BEING HANDLED. I MEAN, IF I JUST SIMPLY WALKED AWAY FROM IT AND WAS UNFAZED BY IT, NO, IT WOULD BE ATYPICAL.
BUT YOU DON'T DO THAT IN THIS CASE. YOU COME BACK THE NEXT DAY AND VERY CORDIALLY GREET THE BENEFICIARY OF THE FELLATIO.
AND THE SAME WITH THE WOMAN, NO ANGER, NO CRITICISM, EXCEPT FOR THE WELFARE OF THE CHILDREN. YOU READ THAT, DID YOU?
BY MR. BAILEY: IF ONE WERE TO HYPOTHETICALLY LEARN FROM A CLOSE FRIEND THAT HE HAD BEEN HAVING RELATIONS WITH AN EX-WIFE AND NOT REACT, THAT WOULD BE SOMEWHAT ATYPICAL FOR A BATTERER, WOULD IT NOT?
YOU AND I ARE BUDDIES. I AM GETTING DIVORCED. I AM DIVORCED. AND YOU AND I HAVE A COUPLE ONE NIGHT AND SAY, YOU KNOW, I WAS WITH GRETA LAST NIGHT AND SHE WAS GREAT.
YOU HAVE I THINK FOCUSED YOUR MAIN CONCERN IN BATTERERS ON THE NEED TO CONTROL ECONOMICALLY AND IN OTHER WAYS, RIGHT?
WHEN ONE SHOWS NO INTEREST IN THE CONDUCT OF THE ALLEGED OBJECT OF THE BATTERING, IS THAT NOT INCONSISTENT WITH THE SYNDROME?
HAS REASON TO BELIEVE SHE IS COMING IN AT 3:00, 4:00 OR 5:00 IN THE MORNING, BUT DOESN'T DO OR SAY ANYTHING ABOUT IT, THAT IS INCONSISTENT, ISN'T IT, WITH THIS FIERCE JEALOUSY THAT IS PART OF WHAT YOUR STUDY?
DOES IT MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE, WHEN YOU EVALUATE ONE OF THESE CASES, AS TO WHAT THE HISTORY OF THE SUBJECT IS?
YOU MEAN THE MAN'S PERSONAL HISTORY OR THE VICTIM'S HISTORY, THE HISTORY OF THE RELATIONSHIP?
IF ONE WERE IN THE BUSINESS WHERE OTHERS WERE CONTINUALLY TRYING TO BEAT, HURT AND BREAK HIM AND ONE DIDN'T REACT IN ANGER, WOULDN'T THAT BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE KIND OF FRAIL PERSONALITY THAT WE FIND IN BATTERERS?
NOT NECESSARILY, BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK THAT IS TRUE, AND DR. WALKER MENTIONS THIS ALSO IN HER CHECKLIST, THAT IS, THERE DOES SEEM TO BE ALMOST A KIND OF DUAL PERSONALITY WHERE THE RAGE IS DIRECTED PRIMARILY TOWARDS AN INTIMATE WOMAN, SO THESE MEN DON'T ALWAYS DEMONSTRATE ANGER AGAINST OTHER MEN, EVEN MEN WHO ARE ENGAGED IN PHYSICAL PURSUITS WITH THEM.
YEAH. THAT'S RIGHT. THAT WOULD NOT -- BECAUSE A MAN IS PHYSICALLY ABUSIVE AT HOME DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT HE WOULD SHOW AN ANGER RESPONSE IN HIS INTERACTION WITH OTHER MEN.
IT IS DEBATEABLE. THERE SEEMS TO BE A KIND OF PERMISSION TO DO CERTAIN THINGS AND NOT DO CERTAIN OTHER THINGS. IF YOU KICK ANOTHER PLAYER WITH A SKATE, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT IS A NO-NO, BUT IF YOU GET INTO A FIST FIGHT WITH SOMEONE YOUR SIZE AT THE BLUE LINE, THEN THE REFEREES LET THAT GO BECAUSE IT IS GOOD FOR THE GATE, SO --
IS THAT NOT AWARDED TO THE PLAYER IN THE NATIONAL HOCKEY LEAGUE WHO SHOWS THE LEAST PROPENSITY --
-- THAT HE IS SELECTED BECAUSE OF HIS GENERAL EQUANIMITY IN THE FACE OF CONTINUOUS ASSAULTS AND HIS GOOD SPORTSMANSHIP AND FAIRNESS AS WELL AS HIS ABILITY.
IN OTHER WORDS, WOULD YOU BE SURPRISED TO FIND THE WINNER OF THE LADY BING TROPHY BEING AN ASSAULTIVE PERSON?
UMM, THE LAST BOOK I WROTE ON THIS, THE PRINCIPLE DANCER OF THE NEW YORK CITY BALLET HAD JUST BEEN ARRESTED FOR WIFE ASSAULT. I WOULD NOT BE SURPRISED.
NO, I JUST PUT IT IN THE BOOK TO SHOW THE FACT THAT THERE REALLY ARE TWO PERSONALITIES AT WORK HERE AND YOU SIMPLY CAN'T DRAW CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THE INTIMATE PERSONALITY FROM WHAT GOES ON IN TRANSACTIONS OUTSIDE THE HOME.
RIGHT, BUT EVEN DR. WALKER IN HER LIST MENTIONED THIS KIND OF DUAL PERSONALITY AS BEING TYPICAL OF BATTERERS.
BUT IF THE DUAL PERSONALITY ISN'T THERE, THEN THE PEACEFUL CONDUCT IS CONTRAINDICATED IN A BATTERER, IS IT NOT?
WELL, YES, BUT I THINK THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE IS THAT IT IS FREQUENTLY THE CASE THAT THE DUAL PERSONALITY IS THERE AND TO DRAW CONCLUSIONS OR INFERENCES ABOUT WHAT THE MAN IS LIKE IN TERMS OF HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH HIS WIFE ON THE BASIS OF HOW HE IS AND HIS INTERACTIONS WITH MEN IN THE PUBLIC WORLD IS ERRONEOUS AND THAT IS SORT OF ONE OF THE MYTHS THAT THE RESEARCH IN THIS AREA IS TRYING TO DISPEL.
THE TWO PERSONALITIES ARE -- YOU SIMPLY DIDN'T PREDICT ONE FROM THE OTHER.
WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS THAT IN SOME PEOPLE THOSE TWO OPPOSITES CAN LIVE TOGETHER, IN NORMAL PEOPLE THEY DON'T LIVE TOGETHER, PEOPLE WITH ONE PERSONALITY?
OKAY. NOW, HAS IT EVER BEEN PART OF YOUR BUSINESS TO DEAL NOT WITH BATTERERS AS SUCH, BUT WITH PEOPLE WHO HAVE COMMITTED HOMICIDE?
ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY OF THE CHECKLISTS THAT HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED AS TO WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN PEOPLE WHO HAVE RECENTLY COMMITTED A HOMICIDE?
BY MR. BAILEY; IN YOUR FIELD MOST OF THE HOMICIDES THAT YOU WOULD COME IN CONTACT WITH WOULD BE RELATIONSHIP HOMICIDES, WOULD THEY NOT, AS OPPOSED TO PAID ASSASSINATIONS?
AND IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT THERE ARE SOME DEFINITIONS OF PERSONALITY TRAITS, NOT PERSONALITY, BUT TRAITS OR ACTIONS OR CONDUCT, THAT ARE LOOKED FOR --
CAN YOU TELL US JUST OFFHAND HOW MANY PEOPLE YOU HAVE EXAMINED THAT HAVE RECENTLY COMMITTED A HOMICIDE, SAY, 48, 72 HOURS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IN A WEEK?
WITH REGARDS TO SOME TYPE OF SYMPTOMS BEING PRESENT? ALSO RELEVANCE OBJECTION TO THIS TYPE OF QUESTION.
WELL, I HAVE INTERVIEWED FOUR PEOPLE WHO HAVE RECENTLY -- WHO HAVE RECENTLY COMMITTED HOMICIDES.
BY MR. BAILEY: AND DID YOU FIND CERTAIN CHARACTERISTICS ATYPICAL OF THEIR FORMER PERSONALITY THAT WERE PRESENT THAT YOU COULD TRIBUTE TO THE EXPERIENCE?
THEY WERE SLIGHTLY -- WELL, THE PROBLEM IS THEY WERE REALLY SORT OF DIFFERENT HOMICIDES. TWO OF THEM WERE PARRICIDES. ONE OF THEM WAS A MAN WHO KILLED HIS WIFE AND TWO OF HIS KIDS AND THEN TRIED TO KILL HIMSELF AND THE GUN WOULDN'T FIRE. SO IT IS HARD TO SORT OF GO ACROSS COMMON CHARACTERISTICS FOR ALL OF THESE CASES.
BY MR. BAILEY: WOULD YOU SAY THAT A TRAINED PERSON IN YOUR FIELD OR IN THE FIELD OF PSYCHIATRY, WHICH IS CLOSELY RELATED, IS IT NOT, WHO HAD INTERVIEWED 400 PEOPLE WHO HAD JUST COMMITTED A HOMICIDE WOULD BE OF VALUE IN ANALYZING THE PERSON YOU HAD BEFORE YOU?
THANK YOU. NOW, I BELIEVE IN YOUR DIRECT EXAMINATION YOU RELATED THE FACT AND YOU CERTAINLY HEARD ARGUMENT HERE THAT THE GAPS IN INCIDENTS MAY OR MAY NOT BE RELEVANT IN THE QUEST FOR AN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION OF BATTERING, TRUE?
ARE YOU SAYING THAT EVEN THOUGH PEOPLE ARE INTERACTING ON A REGULAR BASIS THAT THE INCIDENTS OF VIOLENCE MAY BE VERY WIDELY SPACED?
THE INCIDENTS OF VIOLENCE MAY BE WIDELY SPACED WHILE OTHER FORMS OF ABUSE ARE OCCURRING IN THE INTERIM.
OKAY. DID YOU, IN REVIEWING MATERIAL IN THIS CASE, HAVE HANDED TO YOU ANY DEPOSITIONS FROM THE DIVORCE PROCEEDINGS, JUST YES OR NO?
ALL RIGHT. DID YOU EXAMINE SOME DOCUMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN OFFERED UP BY THE PROSECUTION AS EXHIBITS IN THIS CASE, THOSE BEING LETTERS WRITTEN BY THE DEFENDANT AND STIPULATED TO AS HIS HANDWRITING, TO THE VICTIM OF THE 1989 INCIDENT?
I WOULD INFER FROM THAT THAT THERE WERE NO INCIDENTS OF PHYSICAL ABUSE TO SUPPORT THAT CLAIM, YES.
BY MR. BAILEY: OKAY. AND YOU DO KNOW THAT AS OF JUNE 11, 1992, THE VICTIM IN THIS CASE SAID "NOTHING HAS HAPPENED TO ME OF A PHYSICAL NATURE SINCE 1989"?
NOW, DOCTOR, I TAKE IT THAT IN THOSE CASES WHERE A HOMICIDE HAS TAKEN PLACE AND YOU WERE CONSULTED THAT THE QUESTION PUT TO YOU IS WHY? IS IT CONNECTED, IS IT RELATED TO PRIOR CONDUCT, ET CETERA?
HAVE YOU ANY EXPERIENCE IN IDENTIFYING THE PERPETRATORS OF HOMICIDE BY VIRTUE OF RESORT TO THE SYNDROME?
ALL RIGHT. SO THAT YOUR EXPERTISE IS NOT IN DECIDING IF SOMEBODY COMMITTED AN ACT BUT GENERALLY WHY?
AND VERY FRANKLY, IN YOUR ENTIRE SCIENCE NO ONE HAS DEFINED AN ABILITY TO ANSWER THE QUESTION "IF" AS AGAINST WHAT?
DO YOU KNOW OF ANY STUDIES OR PUBLICATIONS OR LEARNED PAPERS THAT INSTRUCT YOU IN YOUR ILK AS TO WHAT STEPS TO TAKE IF SOMEONE COMES TO YOU --
-- WITH SOME FACT THAT MAY OR MAY NOT SUPPORT BATTERY AND ASK YOU TO USE THOSE TO IDENTIFY A PERPETRATOR RATHER THAN TO EXPLAIN HIS MOTIVATIONS? YOU SAY YOU HAVE NEVER DONE IT. I'M ASKING YOU IF THAT THERE ARE STUDIES THAT ENABLE PEOPLE TO DO IT?
ANY STUDIES THAT ARE KIND OF CHECKLISTS TO A CERTAIN EXTENT THAT WOULD CAUSE A THERAPIST TO LEAN TOWARDS, YES, THIS PERSON PROBABLY HAD DONE IT, OR NO, THEY PROBABLY HAD NOT? IS THAT BASICALLY IT?
IT IS ONE THAT HAS BEEN DEVELOPED BY DANIEL SONKIN WHO IS A CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST IN SAUSALITO. IT IS A LEGALITY CHECKLIST THAT HE HAS WORKED ON IN CASES OF THIS SORT.
OKAY. DO YOU KNOW IF DR. SONKIN HAS EVER CLAIMED THAT ABSENT ANY OTHER EVIDENCE IDENTIFYING A PERPETRATOR THAT ONE COULD DO IT FROM EVIDENCE OF A BATTERING SYNDROME?
OKAY. SO BY THE WAY, DOCTOR, I ASKED YOU YESTERDAY INFORMALLY IF YOU COULD POINT ME IN THE DIRECTION OF SOME OF YOUR MANY WRITINGS THAT WOULD BE RELEVANT TO WHAT WE ARE HERE TO TALK ABOUT TODAY.
CAN YOU NOW DEFINE WHICH OF YOUR WRITINGS WE MIGHT READ THAT WOULD HELP US ON THIS SUBJECT?
NOT ONLY DO THAT, BUT I GUARANTEE TO GIVE YOU AN AUTOGRAPHED BOOK TOMORROW IN COURT.
KEY QUOTEAND A LIST OF EVERYTHING ELSE THAT MIGHT POSSIBLY BE RELEVANT. I HAVE ASKED TO HAVE A COUPLE OF BOOKS FED EX'D HAD DOWN BECAUSE I WANT YOU TO HAVE THEM.
THE PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS THAT WE HAVE USED TO DETERMINE WHETHER A MAN HAS WHAT WE CALL PROPENSITY FOR ABUSIVENESS OR NOT WERE NOT DESIGNED TO BE USED WITH A PERSON IN MR. SIMPSON'S CIRCUMSTANCES.
TOO MANY FALSE POSITIVES. TOO MANY FALSE POSITIVES.
I'M GIVING YOU A CONDOMINIUM, A PORSCHE, A MERCEDES AND A FERRARI, ALL IN YOUR NAME. IS THAT ECONOMIC CONTROL?
IF THERE WERE ABSOLUTELY NO STRINGS ATTACHED, THEN I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU, THAT THAT WOULD SEEM TO BE MAGNANIMOUS TO THE NTH DEGREE AND NOT A TYPE OF CONTROL.
NOT ONLY DO THAT, BUT I GUARANTEE TO GIVE YOU AN AUTOGRAPHED BOOK TOMORROW IN COURT... I HAVE ASKED TO HAVE A COUPLE OF BOOKS FED EX'D DOWN BECAUSE I WANT YOU TO HAVE THEM.