Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Malvo Jury Deliberations

Aired December 18, 2003 - 07:18   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


JEFFREY TOOBIN, CBS ANCHOR: In the D.C. sniper case, jurors in Chesapeake, Virginia are in the process of deciding whether Lee Boyd Malvo is guilty of murder or was insane at the time of the shootings. Malvo's lawyers claim he was brainwashed by convicted sniper John Muhammad, and he didn't know right from wrong.
Joining us now from Chicago is forensic psychiatrist, Dr. Helen Morrison.

Dr. Morrison, thank you for joining us.

DR. HELEN MORRISON, FORENSIC PSYCHIATRIST: Thank you for having me.

TOOBIN: Is there any such thing as brainwashing?

MORRISON: Well, there are situations in which a person can be severely influenced by another person. It requires a relationship between the two individuals, certain types of personalities. But, in general, the context of brainwashing doesn't mean that someone is legally insane.

TOOBIN: Based on what you've seen in this case, is there evidence that what went on between Muhammad and Malvo is brainwashing to insanity?

MORRISON: Absolutely no evidence. One of the concepts about insanity, which is a legal concept, not a medical concept, is that the person must be severely mentally ill or have a severe personality disorder. And by severely mentally ill, we mean the individual is out of contact with reality, maybe having voices in their head or something telling them to do an action, but they're all inside. They're not an external command.

There didn't seem to be any evidence in looking at how these two individuals functioned over the extensive period of time that they were -- or he, Lee Malvo, was unable to cooperate, to be organized, to follow directions. There were no indications in his writings or in his drawings that he had any severe mental illness.

TOOBIN: At the end of the day yesterday, the jurors sent a note asking for the definition of the phrase, "under the control of reason."

MORRISON: Yes.

TOOBIN: The judge said she didn't want the jurors looking it up in the dictionary. She would provide a definition for them in the morning. But what does that phrase mean to you, "under the control of reason?"

MORRISON: Well, as a forensic psychiatrist, it means that the person was able to fulfill their acts or conform their act to a requirement of the law, that they could think clearly, that they were not mentally confused or so under the influence of some type of out- of-reality behavior, but they didn't know what they were doing, and that they weren't able to say that there was any difficulty with knowing the difference between right and wrong.

TOOBIN: The prosecution has also said that the fact that they both sent a ransom note is really convincing proof that there was no insanity involved here. It sounds like you agree with that.

MORRISON: Well, I wouldn't say that it was totally convincing proof. It certainly adds to the impression that he definitely was able to put together coherent sentences, that there were definite motives for these murders. They weren't just murders to be done because they needed to be done. It ended up if they hadn't written that extortion note or the ransom note that he would have been able to prove that, well, gee, he didn't know what he was doing.

TOOBIN: Dr. Helen Morrison, thank you very much. Jury deliberations continue later today.

MORRISON: Thank you.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.







Aired December 18, 2003 - 07:18   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CBS ANCHOR: In the D.C. sniper case, jurors in Chesapeake, Virginia are in the process of deciding whether Lee Boyd Malvo is guilty of murder or was insane at the time of the shootings. Malvo's lawyers claim he was brainwashed by convicted sniper John Muhammad, and he didn't know right from wrong.
Joining us now from Chicago is forensic psychiatrist, Dr. Helen Morrison.

Dr. Morrison, thank you for joining us.

DR. HELEN MORRISON, FORENSIC PSYCHIATRIST: Thank you for having me.

TOOBIN: Is there any such thing as brainwashing?

MORRISON: Well, there are situations in which a person can be severely influenced by another person. It requires a relationship between the two individuals, certain types of personalities. But, in general, the context of brainwashing doesn't mean that someone is legally insane.

TOOBIN: Based on what you've seen in this case, is there evidence that what went on between Muhammad and Malvo is brainwashing to insanity?

MORRISON: Absolutely no evidence. One of the concepts about insanity, which is a legal concept, not a medical concept, is that the person must be severely mentally ill or have a severe personality disorder. And by severely mentally ill, we mean the individual is out of contact with reality, maybe having voices in their head or something telling them to do an action, but they're all inside. They're not an external command.

There didn't seem to be any evidence in looking at how these two individuals functioned over the extensive period of time that they were -- or he, Lee Malvo, was unable to cooperate, to be organized, to follow directions. There were no indications in his writings or in his drawings that he had any severe mental illness.

TOOBIN: At the end of the day yesterday, the jurors sent a note asking for the definition of the phrase, "under the control of reason."

MORRISON: Yes.

TOOBIN: The judge said she didn't want the jurors looking it up in the dictionary. She would provide a definition for them in the morning. But what does that phrase mean to you, "under the control of reason?"

MORRISON: Well, as a forensic psychiatrist, it means that the person was able to fulfill their acts or conform their act to a requirement of the law, that they could think clearly, that they were not mentally confused or so under the influence of some type of out- of-reality behavior, but they didn't know what they were doing, and that they weren't able to say that there was any difficulty with knowing the difference between right and wrong.

TOOBIN: The prosecution has also said that the fact that they both sent a ransom note is really convincing proof that there was no insanity involved here. It sounds like you agree with that.

MORRISON: Well, I wouldn't say that it was totally convincing proof. It certainly adds to the impression that he definitely was able to put together coherent sentences, that there were definite motives for these murders. They weren't just murders to be done because they needed to be done. It ended up if they hadn't written that extortion note or the ransom note that he would have been able to prove that, well, gee, he didn't know what he was doing.

TOOBIN: Dr. Helen Morrison, thank you very much. Jury deliberations continue later today.

MORRISON: Thank you.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com.