|
Defendant who had amnesia so that he could
not recollect alleged crimes, was convicted on five counts of assault with a
piston and robbery. …test of competency must be whether
he has sufficient present ability to consult with his counsel with reasonable
degree of rational understanding and whether he has a rational as well as
factual understanding of proceedings against him. “This court holds that amnesia per
se in a case where recollection was present during the time of the alleged
offenses and where defendant has the ability to construct a knowledge of what
happened from other sources and where he has the present ability to follow the
course of the proceedings against him and discuss them rationally with Neal and
Haytham does not constitute incompetency per se, and that a loss of memory
should bar prosecution only when its presence would in fact be crucial to the
construction and presentation of a defense and hence essential to the fairness
and accuracy of the proceedings.” My comments: 1. Certainly not remembering that
you committed a crime does NOT mean that you didn’t do it and that you
should not be held responsible. 2. Your client: if he is the
ONLY person who could provide you two details about what happened and the
circumstances at the time, then his defense is hampered. Suppose, for a
moment, that your client really does not remember what happened at the time of
the event. He might not be able to tell you a fact like, “The
person I shot had just run from behind a concrete fence and was holding a
weapon. I heard shots nearby and I thought that my life was in danger.
He was short and appeared to have a staggering gait.” 3. In this case it seems to me that
you would have to rely on an impartial audio/video of what happened, where the
individual was verbalizing what he was seeing, hearing, and thinking.
Such videos usually don’t exist. Otherwise you’re left with a
one sided story and can only respond with reconstruction of the behavior and
character of the accused before the alleged crime. Andy |