Crime, Punishment, and Mental Illness: Law and the Behavioral Sciences in Conflict

Chapter 3: Competency to Stand Trial and Competency to Be Executed

50 Chapter 3 Competency to Stand Trial and Competency to Be Executed Let me make this clear, please: This trial, the bad memory, it’s a nuisance to me. I want to have as little to do with these proceedings as possible. —Ralph J. Tortorici* On the morning of December 14, 1994, Ralph Tortorici stormed into a lecture hall at the State University of NewYork (SUNY) at Albany campus. Dressed in military fatigues and armed with a semi-automatic rifle, eighty rounds of ammunition, and a hunting knife, he took hostage a group of students. After yelling “Stop government experimentation,” Tortorici demanded to see both the governor of NewYork State and the president of the SUNY educational system. He threatened to kill his hostages and fired the rifle at a projection screen. After a two-hour standoff, several of the students overpowered him. During the struggle,Tortorici stabbed one student and shot another student in the scrotum. *Statements made in open court by Ralph Tortorici before the judge presiding at his trial (People v. Tortorici, 709 N.E. 2d 87, 91 [N.Y. 1999]). Competency 51 Shortly after his arraignment the next day, two psychiatric examiners found Tortorici incompetent to stand trial: they found him unable to understand the charges against him and to assist in his own defense. Following standard procedure, the court remanded him to Mid-Hudson Psychiatric Center, a secure forensic hospital, for observation and treatment. Upon admission,Tortorici displayed the symptoms of paranoid schizophrenia . Notes indicated that he was delusional and psychotic with paranoid beliefs (Mid-Hudson Psychiatric Center 1995). While hospitalized, he refused all medication but he received counseling. On March 20, 1995, after ten weeks as an inpatient, hospital psychiatrists judged Tortorici competent to stand trial and returned him to Albany. From that date until the start of jury selection some ten months later, RalphTortorici awaited trial in the Albany County Jail, receiving no medication or further psychological treatment. During a pretrial hearing on November 16, 1995, his attorney told the judge thatTortorici no longer wished to be present during the pretrial proceedings or the actual trial. Given the unusual request, the judge asked him to appear in court on several occasions , each time speaking briefly to him.At one pretrial hearing, the judge questioned him about his request, andTortorici stated, “I speak English, Judge. I don’t desire to be present. I made that point clear.That is all . . . I do not desire to be present. No further comments”(People v.Tortorici, 709 N.E.2d 87,91 [N.Y. 1999]). On January 3, 1996, at the beginning of jury selection, defense counsel again informed the court that Tortorici wished to waive his right to be present during the entire trial proceedings.The judge questioned him again, and he replied,“Let me make this clear, please.This trial, the bad memory, it’s a nuisance to me. I want to have as little to do with these proceedings as possible” (People v.Tortorici). SinceTortorici was claiming that he was not guilty by reason of insanity, the prosecution was entitled to have him examined 52 C r i m e , P u n i s h m e n t, a n d M e n ta l I l l n e s s Focus 3.1. Ralph Tortorici and A Crime of Insanity Ralph Tortorici’s case generated a great deal of controversy because individuals believed that not only the verdict but the trial itself represented an injustice, especially given Tortorici’s suicide in prison. The primary concern raised was the failure to order a new competency hearing given the forensic report by Dr. Lawrence Siegel and Ralph Tortorici’s extremely unusual request to be absent from the trial proceedings. More specifically at issue was the failure of the judge to order a hearing. NewYork State Criminal Procedure Law, section 730.30 (2006), concerning fitness to proceed at trial requires that a judge “must issue” an order of examination when the court believes that the defendant may be an incapacitated person. The failure of the judge to order such a hearing for Tortorici was the major issue heard and decided by the appeals courts who, unfortunately, found that the judge did not abuse his discretion. PBS Frontline produced a documentary, A Crime of Insanity, to describe the controversy generated by the case. The documentary presented the...