By Katherine Ramsland
May 24, 2007
Much has been made of the jury's decision to take the psychological testimony offered on both sides in Peter Braunstein's trial for sexual assault and decide for themselves whether he was aware of the criminality of his acts. The defense experts insisted his symptoms and "broken brain" are consistent with a textbook case of schizophrenia. However, they did not prove that his apparent mental defect prevented him from forming intent — an interpretation his attorney added. For him, the entire defense hung on that single point.
The prosecution had an expert, too, who disagreed that Braunstein was so disengaged from reality that he was unable to appreciate what he was doing. On May 18, neuropsychologist William Barr, who'd met with the defendant four times, stated that the Halloween 2005 attack was the first step in an elaborate plan to eventually kill the Vogue editor, Anna Wintour. He was angry that this woman, along with the girlfriend who'd broken up with him, had repeatedly spurned him. Via media accounts, he'd seen Andrew Cunanan do the same thing in 1997 when he killed former lovers and ended his spree with the death of designer Gianni Versace. Evidence of long-term planning on Braunstein's part seemed clear.
 |
| Andrew Cunanan |
The accused might be a depressed narcissist with a substance abuse problem, said psychiatrist Li-Wen Lee, who observed him several times, but he did not have schizophrenia. There was no evidence of hallucinations or disorganized speech, she added, he certainly had a need for attention and admiration. In addition, he could have been malingering to get more drugs.
The fact that in four clinical settings, no one else had diagnosed schizophrenia, and that Braunstein had managed to maintain exacting and high-pressure jobs as well as get a degree, indicates that he was high-functioning. As such, he could and did plan.
Next Page
Peter Braunstein Full Coverage & Breaking News
For More Daily Crime News
default
increase
decrease
email
print