I had to go back and re-read the MSM article I previously posted after reading OP's review!
I'm comfortable that I did not miss anything at first read:
Judge Miller observed what he described as a "theatrical performance" by a defendant due in his courtroom, and I believe he had a professional obligation to confirm that there was no medical basis for what he observed.
To corroborate his opinion, Judge Miller confirmed what has already been reported in MSM --i.e., LS had two thorough evaluations finding no significant symptoms of mental illness to prevent her trial from moving forward.
I do not see where this confirmation by Judge Miller would be deemed as reading from or disclosing the contents of a sealed medical evaluation that was actually ordered by and prepared for the court (i.e., competency evaluation).
I believe Judge Miller essentially told the People there was no basis (medical or other) for the civil hearing in his courtroom to be continued. (LS refused to enter the courtroom and most likely why Judge Miller provided additional detail).
If there's no medical reason for LS to claim an empty room was full of people, or pretend to catch butterflies, what else would it be called if not
feigning mental illness-- especially since the defendant clearly knows mental illness would cause all legal proceedings to immediately cease (pending competency evaluation)?
In other words -- been there, done that.
MOO
ETA:
Three Stooges slapstick comedy was primarily arranged around basic plots dealing with more mundane issues of daily life, a number of their shorts featured social commentary or satire
https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/behavioral_health_issue_brief_1282017.pdf
Here's the way I see it.
1. Judge Miller said he read the competency reports to substantiate his impression of LS's previous "theatrical" performance. I'd argue that's an inappropriate use of
sealed competency reports generated for a different matter under a different judge.
2. He noted one of the reports was "the most thorough" he's ever seen. Why make that kind of editorial comment from the bench? Judges usually don't make those sorts of comments about expert reports unless they must make some sort of ruling regarding an expert report in a case before them.
2. He revealed the reports showed "no significant symptoms of mental illness."
That's absolutely revealing content that had not been revealed before.
The purpose of the evaluations was only to determine if LS was competent to stand trial. Not to speak to the presence/absence of mental illness
except so far as the presence of mental illness could interfere with her ability to understand the charges against her and to aid in her own defense. So the fact she was ruled competent by Werner doesn't tell us whether she has a mental illness. It just tells us Werner believes she can understand the charges and aid in her defense.
Let's not forget that every single defendant ever found "not guilty by reason of insanity" was deemed mentally competent to stand trial. In some cases, perhaps they really weren't competent. In other cases medication or other treatment may have rendered them competent since the crime occurred.
My point is not that LS is (or isn't) mentally ill. Nor do I have reason to think she will mount an insanity or diminished capacity defense (or that she would have had she retained her public defenders.) My point is it was not up to Miller to reveal what the reports said, reports of evaluations that were done solely to help Judge Werner determine her competency to stand trial in his courtroom. Reports that were ordered sealed by Werner. If Werner thought the public and the potential jury pool should have the information Miller chose to reveal, he would have revealed it himself. So far as I know, he did not.
3. I don't see why Miller thought it was appropriate to describe in detail LS's "theatrical" behavior in an earlier hearing. That is, I guess it was in a hearing. I'm not sure why or where Miller would have observed her otherwise. But why was he in an empty room with her? (Is he sure she wasn't referring to lots of people in the courtroom when she was alone in a room connected to tbe courtroom by WebEx?) Why was her previous behavior relevant to the current property division hearing?
I had never seen details of a theatrical performance (of
that sort) by LS at a hearing reported in the news before. Did Miller think it should have been reported before? Is it possible it wasn't because no one else saw what he saw? Where and when did the performance occur and where was everyone else at the time?
And since when is he a mental health expert able to determine her "detachment from reality" is unusual? And at least with what we've read here, whether or not she was "feigning mental illness" isn't terribly relevant to the matter before Judge Miller, is it?
IF he had doubts about her competence to proceed in the divorce matter, why did he grant the divorce in Sept before her competency was determined by Judge Werner?
Specifically the news blurb said:
"
Judge Miller described the behavior he observed from Letecia, saying it was like no other "detachment from reality" he has ever seen. He mentioned a time when she was in an empty room, but said it was full of people. Judge Miller also claimed he watched her chasing what seemed to be invisible butterflies. He compared her actions to The Three Stooges. The judge believes she was "feigning mental illness," and decided that if she is competent to proceed in her criminal case, she is competent to proceed in this civil case. "We'll press on," said Judge Miller."
4. Obviously Judge Miller had to address LS's absence. And he had to decide what to do. But why not just say something like:
"LS has been found competent by Judge Werner in another matter in this county. Therefore, I believe she is competent to proceed in this matter as well. She has made the decision not to attend this hearing. That is her right. We will proceed without her."
Instead we get (in effect,
not his actual words, of course) "She's faking mental illness but acts as nutty as the Three Stooges, how dumb is that? And those reports of her mental evaluations were good, I'm telling you. One was especially thorough. Can't fool those people. They said they didn't find anything wrong with her mentally even though i saw her claiming to be surrounded by people when in an empty room and she seemed to be chasing invisible butterflies. Not dragonflies but butterflies! What a kook, but not mentally ill. I'm telling you, I know. That's not how people who've lost touch with reality act. So let's roll."
JMO. And maybe only mine ;-)
