Nothing I've read has persuaded me that this is foul play and not onset of MI.
DR's situation might not be foul play, but we don't have any evidence that he was mentally ill. I know from human experience, that folks have bad days and go through bad spells. They can be "not like their normal self." This does not mean they are having "mental struggles", or "mental" anything, but simply reflects they're human. Same with everyone.
Try on this example...
I'm acting short-tempered and generally unpredictable, antsy, anxious, and argumentative today, but not "mental" anything: it's TAX season, and I made a mistake 3 years ago, I can't make it go away, and it's giving me nightmares! That explains me entirely the last few days, and "mental issue" is not it!
Plus, a diagnosis of mental illness in this case would have to come from an LE channel, e.g. by expert witness at trial, IMO. Professionals in psychology are ethically not able to diagnose someone they've never met: it's an underpinning of their profession.(See ethics sources below). If DR had his own counselor, that would be confidential, not public business.
As far as I can see, reference by any witness in this case to "mental" anything is anecdotal, and not a diagnosis. This is true even in LE write-ups, as far as I can tell, since police statements are simply phrasing of witness observations (as always in police reports) about out-of-character affect, but not any kind of professional analysis.
If something was said on the job site that hurt DR's feelings or made him angry, that's not a "mental" thing, either. In that case, I would see it as mature and professional if he left for a moment, intending to just drive around until he gathered himself. Very sensible. I would bet that DR hasn't always had a respectful reception because of his handicap, but maybe
@Laughing has perspective on this. If that was the case, what better than to get some space for a moment? And I really don't think any reliability at all can be placed on someone DR has just met describing his behavior as "odd"; how would he even know? I don't factor this remark into my thinking about this case at all, except maybe the speaker was uncomfortable for his own reasons, nothing to do with DR. E.g. I might be taken aback about a person, but that doesn't make their behavior odd; it's about me, not them.
Section 9
(b) Except as noted in 9.01c , psychologists provide opinions of the psychological characteristics of individuals only after they have conducted an examination of the individuals adequate to support their statements or conclusions. When, despite reasonable efforts, such an examination is not practical, psychologists document the efforts they made and the result of those efforts, clarify the probable impact of their limited information on the reliability and validity of their opinions, and appropriately limit the nature and extent of their conclusions or recommendations. (See also Standards 2.01, Boundaries of Competence , and 9.06, Interpreting Assessment Results .)
The American Psychological Association's Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct provides guidance for psychologists in professional, scientific and educational roles. The Ethics Code also outlines standards of professional conduct for APA members and student affiliates.
www.apa.org
