FL v. Markeith Loyd Trial Day 6 - Cross Exam-Dr Jethrow Toomer - Forensic Psychologist | Summary and Q&A

TL;DR

The expert witness provides testimony on the defendant's mental state, including schizophrenia, PTSD, and neurocognitive disorder, but faces questions regarding his qualifications and reliance on other expert opinions.

Key Insights

• ❓ The evaluation process for insanity includes considering the defendant's mental illness and their awareness of the legality and consequences of their actions.
• 💁 Building trust and rapport is crucial in assessing the defendant's mental state and obtaining accurate information.
• 🖤 The defendant's Facebook posts reflect a delusional system, showing a lack of logic and coherence.
• ❓ The timeline and context of memories can be influenced by mental illness and trust issues.
• 😀 The expert faced questions about his qualifications, board certifications, and financial incentives related to the case.
• 🏑 The DSM-5 is an authoritative text in the field of psychology and psychiatry, providing specific criteria for mental illnesses.
• 🤨 The expert's reliance on other expert opinions and findings raised concerns about consistency and objectivity.

Transcript

Read and summarize the transcript of this video on Glasp Reader (beta).

Questions & Answers

Q: What are the two prongs of insanity under Florida law?

The two prongs are mental illness and lack of awareness of wrongdoing or consequences. To be considered legally insane, a person must have a mental illness and not know that their actions are wrong or the consequences of their actions.

Q: Was the defendant's memory of the incident consistent during the evaluation process?

Initially, the defendant claimed to have no memory of the incident, but over the course of multiple visits, he eventually indicated what transpired. The process is not determined by a specific timeline but depends on establishing trust and rapport with the defendant.

Q: Did the expert review the defendant's Facebook posts about the murder of law enforcement officers?

Yes, the expert reviewed the Facebook posts, which demonstrated a lack of logic and coherence. While the defendant did not explicitly mention killing police officers, his posts indicated a belief that if police officers killed Black people, they should be killed in return.

Q: Did the expert diagnose the defendant with paranoid schizophrenia?

The expert initially used the term "paranoid schizophrenia," but clarified that it referred to the characteristics of the schizophrenic process. The official diagnosis is schizophrenia, which includes symptoms of paranoia and delusion.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• The expert witness discusses the two prongs of insanity under Florida law - mental illness and lack of awareness of wrongdoing or consequences.

• The witness is questioned about the credibility of the defendant's statements and memories regarding the incident.

• The expert emphasizes the importance of understanding the dynamics of trust and rapport building in evaluating the defendant's mental state.

• The witness is cross-examined on his qualifications, board certifications, and financial incentives related to the case.