Miscellaneous Court Matters
Pre-trial
- Defense: Last night, the state filed a subpoena duces tecum (SDT) with the guards for raw data from the MMPI-2 that Dr. Torres may be in possession of. Defense believes they dealt with that issue previously.
- That data can be given to experts for evaluation; defense is asking for the SDT to be quashed. He has not had a chance to talk to Dr. Torres but he assumes the State Hospital’s position has not changed and they don’t want to disseminate the raw data from psychological testing.
- The literature they were basing some of their diagnoses on was one article specifically dealing with the MMP2 and that certain scores on that, and the article says which ones that you’re looking at are… generally, DID is hard to score on the MMP2. This article that was relied upon by Dr. Grey has certain scores on it that are higher for people they believe are malingering so all I’m asking is strictly for the raw data on the MMP2 which is a multiple choice questionnaire that people fill out and they score it a certain way. He wants the raw data for cross examination purposes. This is something very specific in relation to an article that says her score doesn’t fit more with what this article says would be malingering. He has a social worker who has some experience in scoring it. It’s not copyrighted or anything like that.
- Judge Werner says what you’re asking for is what article was it that said that perhaps the MMPI-2 would not be applicable and you wanna see that article so that you can -
- Defense has the article. It says certain questions on the MMPI-2 if answered in this way indicate malingering, others indicate a more legitimate DID. The article says what questions indicate this one way or anything and Dr. Grey relied upon that article to come to his conclusions.
- Judge Werner wants report and article; not getting to Dr. Grey today. SDT is for Monday. He just picked a day he thought would work but doesn’t need it Monday. He doesn’t think they will get to him next week.
Post-trial
- Juror 12 is being questioned; Judge says she did the right thing.
- She knows witness Happ because 3 years ago she was a worship leader at a church. Stefanie’s mother in law attended the church but she did not. Her mother in law was getting up in years and wanted to discuss her wishes for her funeral while she was alive. Her father (the pastor), her mother, and she were at Stefanie’s house to talk to her mother in law about her funeral plans. They were there for a few hours. Then last October the same person had an adult daughter that passed away from cancer. This juror sang at the funeral and hugged Stefanie at the funeral.
- She would be able to judge her testimony the same way as other witnesses. Nothing makes her believe or disbelieve her innately.
- Judge Werner has juror wait in the jury room - all rise for juror 12.
- Prosecution is fine, says juror was conscientious and only had two passing encounters.
- Defense wants to have her excused. They are not alleging bad faith but it is more than a passing connection. She was helping with end of life planning, a religious connection. This is an expert witness not just any witness. It’s not just credibility but expert opinion. Their final peremptory challenge was between her and another juror. Had they known they would have used it on this juror.
- State also brings up that Letecia has been making hand motions, flipping the bird to the expert witness or to the family. Asks court to admonish her.
- Judge Werner: “Ms. Stauch what you need to understand is I can control the conduct of a lot of people in the court room, including yours. Don’t do that. Don’t show that kind of - don’t be making disrespectful motions. If that continues I can have you removed and we will have this trial without you and you will be in a holding cell at this jail and every time there is a break I will bring you up and ask you if you can conduct yourself.”