Good morning friends. I sure hope you are all well and happy. I woke up early this morning so I’m awaiting snacks from our loyal lovely
@crhedBngr I’m craving sweets. I forgot we were running low on coffee so I can hardly wait for her to arrive.
As one who unfamiliar with legalese, I went looking for Colorado law regarding competence to stand trial. I found this link routing me to a second hyperlink.
Anyone know what a “lay witness” is and how they play into the process?I’m so irritated with this woman trying to play the system. What is she gonna try next?
Competency to Proceed to Stand Trial in Colorado (CRS 16-8.5-101 et seq.)
BBM
Generally lay witnesses are fact witnesses, not opinion witnesses. Pretty much everyone who testifies is a lay witness unless they are qualified as an expert witness (or are giving "family impact" testimony at sentencing.) The qualification determines the scope of testimony allowed. Unlike expert witnesses, lay witnesses generally testify about only what they personally saw, heard and directly experienced and are not allowed to speculate.
In a competency hearing, family members, neighbors, and co-workers might be called as lay witnesses, particularly if the issue of competency is raised very soon after an arrest (or shortly after another type of legal action has commenced.)
I don't know if many "outside" lay witnesses will be involved here, partly because LS has been in custody for so long and competency for trial is concerned with her current state.
While information about past behavior is needed to make an accurate diagnosis of mental illness, usually a psychologist/psychiatrist doesn't obtain that knowledge through interviewing other people. Rather, he/she depends on the client's self-report and the historical record.
Professionals doing evaluations for court (military or civilian) or for agencies concerned with awarding benefits (e.g., social security disability) are trained to detect
malingering (essentially a fancy word for lying to obtain secondary gain.)
For example, if a client reports he's been disabled by back pain and unable to work for 2 years, but hospital records indicate he was in a waterskiing accident 4 months ago, that calls into question his self-report.
It's also often pretty easy to tell if someone is "faking bad" on psychological tests that may be administered. Of course, a savvy client could "outsmart" a test, but we don't really have any evidence to suggest LS is that type of client. And in fact, we have plenty of evidence suggesting she isn't. A broom escape? (Stupidity doesn't equal incompetence for trial. Stupid people may also be incompetent but aren't likely to "outsmart" evaluators.)
In LS's case, a guard at the El Paso County Jail might be a lay witness, for example. Sure, guards presumably have guard training and
hopefully had some in-service mental health training, but they don't have specialized mental health training of the sort that would make them an expert so far as mental competency goes. So while a guard might testify about a prisoner's behavior, he/she can't opine the behavior is representative of someone who has mental illness X or is disabled by Y.
I'm not an attorney but I do have a psychology background. I understand everyone's concerns but professionals involved in court-ordered evals are typically pretty astute. They didn't just fall off the cabbage truck yesterday.
JMO
your response. Thank you. Question: is the evaluation based on her mental condition at the time of the senseless brutal murder of little Gannon or how much she is able to understand the charges and help the lawyer defend herself?
