Appendix — Bell v. Thompson

a

| (0) NOV 18 2005

No. 04-514

In the Supreme Court of the United States

RICKY BELL, WARDEN

Petitioner,

Vv.

r GREGORY THOMPSON,

Respondent.

EDITOR’S NOTE

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari

to the United States Court of Appeals

for the Sixth Circuit

THE FOLLOWING PAGES WERE POOR HARD COPY

AT THE TIME OF FILMING. IF AND WHEN A BETTER

COPY CAN BE OBTAINED, A NEW FICHE WILL BE

; APPENDICES TO

, RESPONDENT'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION

ISSUED.

ee

g

: :

-

Ss aS wo Y TI Tw Tol Own

ORDER

Petitioner Gregory Thompson (“Thompson” or “Petitioner”) was convicted of first degree

murder and sentenced to death by the Criminal Court of Coffee County, Tennessee. Petitioner is

currently confined at the Riverbend Maximum Security Institute in Nashville, Tennessee. Thompson —

has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus and requesis an evidentiary hearing on his competency

to be executed [Court Pile No. 1}. Petitioner has also filed s motion for stay of execution [Court

File No. 2], based on s claim that he is incompetent to be executed. See Ford v. Wainwright, 477

U.S. 399 (1986). Petitioner has paid the $5.00 filing fee.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2251, the Court GRANTS a brief stay of Thompson's execution that

SHALL expire atomatically upon the issuance of an order by this court denying Thompson's

petition but that shall remain in place upon the issuance of an order granting Thompson's writ of

habeas corpus [Court File No. 2].

The Clek is DIRECTED to fax an executed copy of this Order to Warden Ricky Bell,

Riverbend Maximmm Security, Nashville, Tennessee; to the Attorney of General of Tennessee; and

Ms. Danna C. Hansen Chavis of the Federal Commmnity Defender Service in Knoxville. The Cak

is DIRECTED to serve a copy of the entire file in this action by certified mail on the respondent and

Attomey General of Tennessee. .

h is furtha ORDERED that Respondent SHALL submit his response within ten (10)days

from the date of this order.

The case is referred to the Magistrate Judge for the disposition of all non-dispositive motions.

ENTER:

EE

CURTIS L COLLIER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

| in Case 1:04-cv-00177 Thompson v. Bell “Order on Mo

***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** You may view the filed documents

once without

charge. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document

during this

first viewing.

U.S. District Court (Live Database)

Eastern District of Tennessee

Notice of Electronic Filing

The following transaction was received from ALR, entered on

6/21/2004 at 3:05

PM EDT and filed on 6/21/2004

Case Name: Thompson v. Bell

Case Number: 1:04-cv-177 http: //ecf. tned. uscourts. gov/cqi-

bin/DktRpt.pl1738604

Document Number: 4

Copy the URL address on the line below into the location bar of your

Web browser

to view the document:

Docket Text:

ORDER granting a brief stay of Thompson's execution that shall expire

automatically upon issuance of sn order by this court denying

°

—- but shall remain in place upon issuance of an order granting

hompson's ’

Cee 2 Deere cangED Cave and the Respondent shall submit his

re thia

j Bony from the date of this order; case referred to the Magistrate

or

the di tion of all non-dispositive motions. Signed by Judge

Curtis L Collier

on 6/21/04. (ALA, )

The following document(s) are associated with this transaction:

Document description: Main Document

Original filename: n/a

Electronic document wry +

(STAMP dcecfStamp_ID-1062680380 [Date=6/21/2004) [FileNumber=78533-

0)

[b0c14 —* , rrrcssssait SCOd7b2ef413544£S8df9dbaeeldce99de0bcS97f18

0§53bdcdb

£d0£83207£9648299f14651ec4 2926976aab2b796713e0d47) }

1:04-cv-177 Notice will be electronically mailed to:

Dana C Hansen Chavis

dana_hansen@fd.org,

Shaclott_Swanger@fd.orgsMelinda Christian@fd.orgsMichele Daniel@fd.or

9

1:04-cv-177 Notice will not be electronically mailed to:

Leonard Green

United States Court of Appeals

For the Sizth Circuit

100 East Fifth Street, Room 532

Potter Stewart U.S. Courthouse

Cincinnati, OB 45202-3988

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR COFFEE COUNTY

MANCHESTER, TENNESSEE

GREGORY THOMPSON,

as

)

Petitioner,

¥ )

Respondent MAY 29 2001

Gry

_ PETITION FOR WRIT OF ERROR CORAM NOBIS

Hearing Requested

Comes now Petitioner, Gregory Thompson, through undersigned counsel pursuant te

T.C_A § 40-26-105 and Burford v, State, 845 S.W.2d 204 (Tenn. 1992), and petitions the Court

for a writ of error coram nobis granting an evidentiary hearing on his claim of subsequently or

newly discovered evidence thet, l presented at earlier state proceedings, would have resulted

in 8 cifferent judgment. in support hereof Mr. Thompson shows as follows:

On January 19, 2001, Dr. Casey C. Amey, a treating mental health professional at the

Special Needs Facilty of the Tennessee Department of Corrections submitted a swom

recommendation for the appointment of a conservator for Mr. Thompson. Or. Amey stated:

recommended by the treatment review committee to be treated with involuntary

medication [sic] and have @ conservator assigned to him.

it is my opinion that Mr. Thompson lacks the insight into his Biness to

make decisions regarding mental health and medical treatment at this time. |

believe that a conservator is necessary to make appropriate decisions regarding

his care and without such harm is likely to come to Mr.

Thompson or others as a result of his mental Iiness. Mr. Thompson's iliness is

chronic and fluctuating in nature, therefore extended periods of marked

improvement are not expected.

(Competency Evaluation of Greg Thompson by Casey Amey, M.D.; Attachment A\,

Acting on Dr. Arney’s professional recommendation, Tennessee Attorney General and

Reporter, Paul G. Summers, petitioned the State Chancery Court for the appointment of a

conservator. Attorney General Summers asserted that Mr. Thompson “is in need of protection

and assistance by reason of the Iliness rendering him presently disabled.” (Petition by

Attorney General and Reporter Paul G. Summers For Appointment of Conservator, p. 1;

Attachment B). Attorney General Summers requested the Chancery Court find Mr. Thompson

“incapable of managing his person ... based upon his present mental condition” (id, at p. 2) and

“in view of the seriousness of the Respondent's [Mr. Thompson's] condition the Court

immediately appoint e Guardian ad Litem and expedite these proceedings.” (id, st p. 3).

On April 26, 2001, the Chancery Court for the State of Tennessee, 20" Judicial District,

Davidson County, appointed Sherry Goodwin as conservator for Mr. Thompson. (Order of the

During Me. Thompson's capital trial the deposition of Dr. Watson wes introduced into

evidence despite defense counsel's objection. Dr. Watson testified that Mr. Thompson was not

psychotic and instead was malingering mental liness. (Trial Transcript Vol. 20, p. 153). Or.

Watson further testified that Mr. Thompson “had no mental Miness or defect which would render

{2}

o--

him harmful to himself or others.” (Trial Transcript Vol. 20, p. 169). During closing angument

the prosecutors argued that Or. Watson found

A malingering or faking of a mental lines. This man [Mr. Thompson} had no

mental illness. He has no organicity, he has no brain damage, but he has

antisocial behavior - mean and sorry. That is all that is wrong with Gregory

Thompson. There is nothing wrong with him...

(Trial Transcript Vol 21 at p. 8; see also id, at p. 68 & 73). In rendering Its decision on direct

appeal, the Tennessee Supreme Court relied upon Dr. Watson's testimony. State y,.

Thompson, 768 S.W.2d 239, 244, 248-249 (Tenn. 1989).

In opening remarks at the post-conviction evidentiary hearing, the post-conviction trial

court isted two issues R deemed “relevant and pertinent’: the ineflective assistance of trial

counsel and “the present mental condition and capacity of the petitioner (Mr. Thompson}."

(Post-Conviction Transcript Vol |, p. 3).

During the post-conviction hearing the prosecutor argued that Mr. Thompson did not

suffer from psychosis, schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. (Post-Conviction Transcript Vol. li, pp.

223 -248). Instead, the prosecutor argued that Mr. Thompson was malingering mental Iliness

and had “antisocial personaly disorder.” (id, at p. 256-257).' On appeal the Tennessee Court

of Criminal Appeals also reled upon the argument that Mr. Thompson malingered mental

Miness. Thompson y. State, 958 S.W.2d 156, 166-167 (Tenn.Crim.App. 1997).

Contrary to Its position during prior state court proceedings the State of Tennessee has

finaly acknowledged that Mr. Thompson suffers from a genuine and debilitating mental liness.

Mr. Thompson's mental Iliness Is directly related to the offense for which he stands convicted of

first-degree murder and under sentence of death. As Dr. Amey states in his affidavit, Mr.

‘in fact, Dr. Watson did not support a finding of ‘antisocial disorder” but

instead “adult antisocial behavior.” (Trial Transcript Vol. 20, p. 161-162) Dr. Blalr explained

that ‘adult antisocial behavior [) is not a disorder. It just means, in essence, that

someone has broken the law and its very different from having an antisocial personality

disorder..." (Post-Conviction Transcript Vol. li, p. 256).

3}

eee

“ Thompson's assault on staff “is related to his mental iliness” and “harm is Iikely to come to Mv.

Thompson or others as a result of his mental iliness.” (See Attachment A).

This Court should review Mr. Thompson's case in ight of the recent evidence of Me.

Thompson's long-standing mental incapacity. ‘The purpose of the writ of error coram nobis ls to

bring to the attention of the court some facts unknown to the court which, lf known, would hve

‘resulted In a different judgment. State ex rei, Cartson v, State, 219 Tenn. 80, 85-86, 407

S.W.2d 165, 167 (Tenn. 1966). A writ of error coram nobis wil issue upon @ showing by the

defendant that he was without fault in falling to present thet evidence at the proper time. State

v. Mion, 983 8.W.2d 661, 668 (Tenn. 1999). ‘The wilt should lssue for Mr. Thompson.

| Throughout Mr. Thompson's state court proceedings counsel knew that Mr. Thompson's

mental state was the crucial issue. (Triad Transcript Vol. |, p. 38, 120). Mr. Thompson believed

he and Ms. McNamara were on the run from the Ku Klux Kian. They fled from Georgie to

Tennessee. When Ma. McNamars's relative, with whom they had sought refuge, refused them

further lodging, they sttempted to return home to Georgia. Without money or transportation,

the kidnaping of the victim to obtain her car wes understandable. But trial counsel could not

understand why the victim had been killed when there were other shemetives end knew that the

Jury would have the same lingering question. (Post-conviction Transcript Vol. |, p. 134). indeed

Martin Trimble, the foreperson of the jury, later testified at the motion for new trist

| have stated, and | believe, that the one fact that wes not as developed as |

would have thought, out of a case that wes as detailed es i was, was his age

and those contributing factors that might have led him to turn from a wel-

rounded young man, I'l say, to the type of person he turned out to be. | am not

{4)

10

a clinical psychologist or anything, but! believe there might have been more

work done in that area; but again, | don't know that It would be an overriding

factor. tt would be one that might have eased my conscious or made me have a

better feeling about what we did. We took that very serious. You do not say to

take @ man's iife without being doggone serious, folks. We did that, and we

discussed that at length among ourselves; and the conclusion — and | have to

say that | agreed with & — was that he was old enough and had the background

to have done better than he did; but | do think that probably more could have

been done along that line.

(Motion for New Trial, Vol. | p. 77).

Counsel did request a mental health evaluation of Mr. Thompson. (Trial Technical

Record p. 19, Motion for Mental or Psychological Examination; Trial Transcript Vol. |, p. 41).

The trial court granted the motion by sending Mr. Thompson to Middle Tennessee Mental

Health institute (MTMHM"), 8 state facility, for evaluation. (Trial Technical Record p. 64-65,

Motion for Continuance; Trial Technical Record p. 84, Order). At MTMHI Mr. Thompson was

given “numerous tests” by what the state described as a “team” of experts. (Trial Transcript

Vol. XIX, p. 35, 52; Trial Transcript Vol. XX, p. 157, 176). The team made a joint evaluation to

which Dr. Watson, the forensic psychologist, testified.

Counsel also fied @ notice of insanity defense. (Trial Transcript, Vol. If p. 162).

Counsel questioned the independence of MTMHI's psychiatric evaluation (Trial Transcript, Vol.

1, p. 20) and requested their own psychiatrist pursuant to Ake v. Oklahoma. (Trial Transcript,

Vol |, p. 111). The request was granted. (Trial Technical Record, p. 234, Order). Despite (a)

the court's order approving a psychiatrist to examine Mr. Thompson and assist the defense, (b)

the knowledge that the State would have psychiatric and other medical opinions of Mr.

Thompson at Its disposal, and (c) the Ake prescription of a psychiatrist to assist in the defense,

counsel used the court-ordered mental health funds to hire Dr. Copple who was not a

psychiatrist but an “industrial psychologist’ (Trial Transcript Vol. |, p. 119). The effort to hire a

psychiatrist simply “was not successful’ (Post-conviction Transcript, Vol. fl, p. 193). Before

hiring the industrial psychologist, counsel had tried to find a particular psychiatrist, but “he hed

{5}

11

_ Moved to idaho” (Post-conviction Transcript, Vol. |, p. 43). Counsel “had a kind of a vague

recollection of trying to talk to a couple of psychiatrists in Nashville...” (Id, at 45).

Yet three psychiatrists who had treated Mr. Thompson from 1985, when the trial took

place, to 1990 told a very different story than that of the MTMHiI team. The treating

psychiatrists

auditory hallucinations, his delusions, his paranoia, his thoughts of

He had attempted suicide on a couple of occasions. He had set fire to his cell

both-his hands and his face. They had certainty — two of those

psychiatrists and maybe afl three of them had considered the possibility thai he

was malingering, that he was faking mental Iiness and throughout thelr

Riverbend records, it was clear that those had discounted the

possibility of malingering because they didn’t feel that R accounted for ail of the

psychotic symptoms they saw in him.

(Post-conviction Transcript Vol. Il, p. 209-10).

Mr, Thompson was evalusted at MTMHI by the State's team for thirty days. The

industrial psychologist, however, analyzed Mr. Thompson for # tota: of less than eight hours:

two sessions lesting three and one-half hours each and two further sessions lasting twenty

minutes each. (Trial Transcript, v. 18, p. 123-124, 127).

Trial counse! made an uninformed decision that the guilt-phase case could not be

defended. (Post-conviction Transcript, Vol. |, p. 58). Instead, counsel focused on securing

witness testimony about Petitioner’s good acts and exemplary behavior up through his high

school years for presentation st the sentencing phase. (Post-conviction Transcript, Vol. il, p.

192). Admittedly, counsel failed to pursue what they considered “negative” information about

Mr. Thompson. Without expert psychiatric essistance counsel falled to understand the

significance of such information. Since counsel, being uninformed and untrained on such

matters, could not explain Mr. Thompson's drastic change of behavior subsequent to high

12

school, they offered the jury what information they had. Mr. Thompson's changed behavior

remained unexplained.

The defense presented no theory whatever at guill/innocence and Mr. Thompson was

convicted of first-degree murder. At the penalty phase they put on a bizarre, incredible

defensive theory — that Mr. Thompson committed a brutal murder out of a need to “nurture.”

(Trial Transcript, Vol. XVII, p. 142-143 and Vol. XIX, p. 2-5).

Mr. Thompson's prior head injuries were brought out at the punishment phase: one from

an auto accident where he sustained a concussion and required hospitalization (Trial

Transcript, Vol. XPX, p. 152) and another from an assault by three men with a hammer or

crowbar, opening a wound which required stitches (Trial Transcript, Vol. XVII, p. 54). Ms.

Cajulao testified that directly after suffering the latter injury Mr. Thompson

sotetrat ars tteareerenh sscgee maaan

He would tell me when | came home to make sure nobody was standing behind

there that might hurt me.

0d. at p. 56). Without @ psychiatrist the defense was unable to explain the significance of these

events or even address — much less counter — the state mental health team's conclusion that

Mr. Thompson had neither brain darmage or “psycho-motor impairment” (Trial Transcript, Vol.

XX, p. 156). Predictably, the industrial psychologist, since he was not a medical doctor, had

found no evidence of brain damage (Post-conviction Transcript, Vol. fl, p. 188).

The industrial psychologist testified only at the sentencing phase. He asserted a belief

that Mr. Thompson committed the brutal murder due to s need to “nurture” people — in this

case, Ms. MacNamare (Trial Transcript, Vol. XIX, p. 26). Having examined Mr. Thompson, the

psychologist testified that “I find in this man @ very strong, an unusually strong need for what we

call nurturance, to meet the needs of people” (Trial Transcript, Vol. XVIll, p. 141). Of Mr.

Thompson's motive in committing the offense, the psychologist reasserted the shattered

{7}

13

« defense theory that the murder had been cormmitted due to fear of capture. This theory was

incomprehensible even with the industrial psychologist's backing; the need to “nurture” Ms.

MacNamare by helping her may have provided some explanation for the taking of the victim's

car, and possibly explained the kidnaping of the victim as @ means to getting her car, but

provides only a flimsy explanation for the ter murder of the victim. Because, in Mr. Trimbie’s

words, “those contributing factors that might have led him Mr. Thompson] to tum from a well

rounded young man....to the type of person he tumed out to be” were not developed, Mr.

Thompson was sentenced to death.

During post-conviction proceedings, Mr. Thompson raised an ineflective sssistance of

counsel claim. Post-conviction counsel repeatedly requested funds for e mental hesith expert

to demonstrate prejudice from trial counsel's deficient performance with respect to the mental

health aspects of the case. The prosecutor argued that counsel were not entitled to experts at

state expense (Post-conviction Transcript Vol. |, p. 16) and state law did not provide for expert

services on post-conviction. Counsel submitted the affidavl of Dr. Gillan Blair who opined that

based on existing information Mr. Thompson had shown s deteriorating mental status since

1985, was Skely suffering from schizophrenia at the time of the crime, and further expert

evaluation was required. (Post-conviction Transcript, Vol. Il, p. 199, 219). The post-conviction

court denied the requested funding. (Pretrial Hearing, Jan. 16, 1998, p. 6).

Prior to the post-conviction hearing the prosecutor talked to the medical staff at

Riverbend and reviewed Mr. Thompson's medical records. Mr. Thompson was taken off his

anti-psychotic medication shortly after the prosecutor's visit. At the post-conviction hearing the

prosecution argued that since Mr. Thompson was off his medication he wes not mentally &

(Post-convi tion Transcript, Vol. Il, p. 247), and was malingering mental iliness. Because Mr.

Thompson was denied funding for mental health expert assistance he could not counter the

state's position that Mr. Thompson was malingering mental liness nor demonstrate prejudice

{8}

from trial counsel's deficient performance. The post-conviction court dismissed the petition and

denied relief. Mr. Thompson's post-conviction appeals were denied.

Although Mr. Thompson attempted to litigate his mental health related claims in prior

state proceedings a combination of ineffective assistance of trial counsel and the court's denial

of expert assistance impaired his ability to adequately plead and prove his claima.

Compounding these errors the prosecution actively denied that Mr. Thompson was mentally &

and misrepresented the Riverbend medical records which documented his Mines. The State of

Tennessee now acknowledges Mr. Thompson's severe mental iliness and incompetence. Dr.

Amey's competency evaluation affidavit clearly states that Mr. Thompson's Diness has been

long-standing and presents @ danger to himself or others. This was the explanation for the

crime which trial counsel and the jury had been seeking. Mr. Thompson's case should now be

reviewed in light of this new evidence.

Although T.C.A. § 27-7-103 provides a statute of limitation requiring # petition for writ of

error coram nobis to be filed within one year of the date the judgment becomes final, to apply

the statute of imkations in this context would be unconstitutional in this case. Burford v, State,

845 S.W.2d 204 (Tenn. 1992). in Burford, the Tennessee Supreme Court held that e statute of

imitation may be unconstitutional as applied:

os ee peer pnt

afford # reasonable opportunity to have the claimed issue heard and decided.

Burford, 845 S.W.2d at 208; citing Michel v, Louisiang, 350 U.S. 95 (1955). The Court has”

directed that the application of Tennessee's statute of limitations must comport with due

process. Burford y, State, 845 S.W.2d 204 (Tenn. 1992). The Court requires that

{9}

_— —

an applicant a reasonable opportunity to have the claimed issue heard and

determined.

Burford, id, at 208; see also Workman vy. State, No. W2001-00774-SC-R11-PD (Tenn. March

30, 2001). This determination is made on a case-by-case basis by weighing a petitioner's

fiberty interest in collsterally attacking the constitutional violations occurring during the

conviction process against the state's interest in preventing the litigation of stale and fraudulent

claims." Sands y, State, 903 S.W.2d 297, 301 (Tenn. 1995). ;

in order to insure that Tennessee's post-conviction statute of imitations comports with

constitutional principtes, the Tennessee Supreme Court set forth the following due process rule

and analysis:

due process prohibits the strict application of the post-conviction statute of

fecal, aie ofa © the pont at which the lmbations periods would normaly

have begun to run. :

Sands y. Stete, 903 S.W.2d 297, 301 (Tenn. 1995). To determine whether due process

prohibits the strict application of the statute of limitations courts must (1) determine when the

limitations period would normally have begun to run; (2) determine whether the grounds for

rellef actually arose after the limitations period would normally have commenced, and (3) If the

grounds are “later-arising”, determine if, under the facts of the case, a strict application of the

limitations period would effectively deny the petitioner a reasonable opportunity to present the

claim. id

? in Burford, the court found the state's interest in the sdministrative efficiency and

economy created by a time bar insufficient to outweigh the petitioner's interest, 845 S.W.2d at

209, holding that “where an alleged infringement of s constitutional right often affects Me or

liberty, conventional notions of finality associated with civil Iitigation have less importance and

pnt et ange ty sett coment Ge cniaun® id. citing

of government, standing save

Sanders y, United Ststes, 373 U.S. 1, 8, 83 S.Ct. 1068, 10 L_Ed.2d 148 (1963); LN.S. v,

Chadha, 462 U.S. 919, 944, 103 S.Ct. 2764, 77 L_Ed.2d 317 (1983).

{10}

16

Following Burford, application of the one year statute of limitation to Mr. Thompson's

petition for writ of error coram nobis would be unconstitutional as applied. It was orily recently

that the State of Tennessee acknowledged Mr. Thompson's long-standing mental liness,

declared him incompetent and appointed him a conservator. The State of Tennessee has no

legitimate interest in creating procedural barriers to review of Mr. Thompson's mental health

related claims.’ See Reynolds v, Berry, 146 F.3d 345, 347(6th Cir. Ky. 1998); Rickman y,

Dutton, 864 F.Supp. 686, 706 (M.D.Tenn. 1994) aff'd 131 F.3d 1150 (6* Clr. 1997)(Giglio claim

not defaulted because state has no legitimate interest in creating procedural barriers to review

of issues involving the state's presentation of false testimony). Mr. Thompson has diligently

brought these facts to the attention of the state court. Mr. Thompson is entitled to an

evidentiary hearing on this new evidence. See Workman y, Stste, supra.

WHEREFORE, Mr. Thompson respectfully requests that this Court grant him an

evidentiary hearing on his mental health related claims in fight of the State's recent concession

that Mr. ee ,

grant such other relief as Is just and equitable.

* Additionally, the State waived the application of a procedural bar defense by

withholding the information necessary for Petitioner's claims and asserting that Mr.

{12}

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Dana C. Hansen, hereby certify that @ true and correct copy of the foregoing —

document was mailed to:

this the 23 day of May 2001, by postage prepaid delivery.

_)yna CHaeserr

Dane C. Hansen

{13}

+

—* Richland Creek Psychiatric Associates, LLP

4535 Barding Read

Briaa R Swenson, M.D. Suite 210

Panis &. Nunn, M.D.

Richard EK. Rochester, M.D.

Jeri K. Fitzpatrick, M.D.

Johanne C. Shadoin, L.CS.W.

Casey C. Arecy, MD.

Terry M. Buff, L.C_S.W.

Jack L. Kock, Jr.. MLB.

Rebecca J. Roberts, M.D.

Hal C. Schofield, MLB.

Telephone 615-383-0095

Pocsimic 6)5-383-0)89_

Michele H. Batte, Practice Manager

Dear Ms. Baker

This letter serves as a physicians recommendation for for Greg Thompson. Mr.

Thompsons is a 38 year old gentleman with a long history of Bipolar Disorder and psychotic symptoms.

He has severe symptoms of mania with racing tangential thoughts, pressured speech, in delusional

grandiosity. He becomes severely agitated and hostile at times. He has assaulted staff in the recent

past which appears to be related to his mental ness. It has been recommended by the treatment

review committee to be treated with involuntarily medication and have a conservator assigned to him.

ht is my opinion that Mr. Thompson lacks the insight into his iiness to make decisions regarding

mental bealth and medical treatment at this time. ] bebeve that a conservator js necessary to make

*ppropnate decisions regarding his care and without such harm is likely to come to

Mr. Thompson or others as a result of his mental iliness. Mr. Thompson’s illness is chronic and .

fructuating in nature, therefore extended periods of marked improvement are not expected.

| xe esgaitea) OF-17-O/

ee

a oe tanaetrentosdije Muhe

_ .

: mee . ‘

cen._}ste DEPARTMENT OF CORRECxiOm

MENTAL HEALTH TREATMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE

wore wwe Thenpren, Crug wom 102804 ome @ ww 2/3 flt "png

REPORT OF INITIAL PHYSICIAN MEETING VITH_IWATED

videad at dens wr. peer rte Wits, Planse snct

lenate’s Signsture Deve

ber ° ie 1; F for

Physicion’s Signstwre | ‘NS

te REPORT OF SECO PHYSICIAN'S ine WITH

Secoed Physician's Recoumsedst lonis)s

Titte

32-3329 (5/89)

‘ege 1 of 2 pages

ms 1458

OTA HEALTH TREATIONT REVIGY COM ITTEE

Phongson \oB4OL | a ye

IV. REPORT OF TREATMENT REVIEW COMITTEES |

OF PUTA Wis tual w wn re

eget betta oan Mae yas r Th whe y

a vAtntn of uw

rethsit och oo. | * e 4,

Pu ‘ales

wap I-B- 04

ATTACHMENT

fa : Aeon Wile? pt Gitar tee |

Oth bile a bt 1 LG O/-0b-O/

“BR”

bite Copy: Mesith Record .

ellew Copy: Tresteest Tees Coo dlaster

&-3329 (5/89) |

age 2 of 2 pages ; es-1450

; vet

IN THE CHANCERY COURT FOR THE STATE OF TENNESSEE

20TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, DAVIDSON COUNTY

me =F RECEIVED”

Petitioner, } ON aon lS AND Claman One

aS NO. —

IN THE MATTER OF | Of fH a)

GREG THOMPSON, #108408, ) & S

) es)!

2°

3

Comes now the’ Petitioner, the Tennessee Department of Correction, ae

ttvough the Office of the Attorney General and Reporter for the State of Tennessee, and

respecthiy states as follows:

1. The Respondent, Greg Thompson is a thirty-nine (39) year old male presently

incarcerated at Lois DeBerry Special Needs Facility, 7575 Cocksill Bend industrial Road,

Nashville, Tennessee 37208-1057. He is sentenced to desth for first degree murder.

2 The Respondent is in need of protection and assistance by reason of the Eness

rendering him presently dleabled as defined in T.C.A. Section 34-11-1010,

The Respondent has been diagnosed by Dr. Casey Amey, his resting

peychianiet, as suffering from 2 long history of Bipolar Disorder and peychotie

symptoma.

. The Respondent is unable to understand the need for treatment with psychotropis

medication or the correiation between the medication and the cessation of his

symptome. He hes Ittle understanding of how his medication works, and minimal insight

into the presence of his Eness. sia:

ht is the opinion of Or. Casey Amey, his treating psychiatrist, that the Respondent

is incapable of making rational decisions regarding his restnent needs and is in need of

8 conservator to monitor his medical and psychiatric trestnent.

Page tat 3

- owe

_ APPENDIX

ms, Boy

MANCHESTER, TENNESSEE

GREGORY THOMPSON, )

)

Petitioner, )

) Case Mo: 31,213

* )

)

RICKY BELL. Warden, )

° )

Reepondert. )

REPLY TO RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF ERROR CORAM NOGIB

Comes now Petitioner, Gregory Thompson, trough undersigned counsel, and flies this

Reply to Respondent's meeponee to pation for 2 weit of error corsm not im support hereaf

ta. Thompsen shows as follows

L Respondent has Overtookied the Evidence Concerning Mr. Thomoson's

Mental State ai the Time of the Offense,

Reepondent iniiedy argues het ka Thompson neither sfeges nor presents evidence

hat his metal probiems “existed at the fine of the crime (January 1, 1985) nor during the tied

(Aasqust 28 - 72, 1985)" (Resporees, p 2-3) Reepondert hes, however, overiooked both te

siegeton end evidence of exactly tat These am noted on page 8 of the Pedlion tor Welt of

&srer Cora.) Nobia. There Mr. Thompson recounts the afiidevé of Or. Gillan Bist, which was

sutrniied as pert of the post-conviction proceedings. ' Ae ihe Pelion states, in tut affice@ Br.

7~

poe re

the thme of the crime, ard turther expert evetuation wes required. Post

conwiction Tranecript, Vol. fp. 198,219} The post-conviction court denied tre

requested turding. (Previa! Hearing, Jen 14, 1908, p &

(Peiiion, p. 6) (emphasis added) pee sien Affidevé of Dr. Blair, Atiechment A. Since Or. Stal

is an expert, her opinion is evidence. See Tenn. RP. Evid. 702. One suspects sino that Sis

| woudd be Dr. Amey’s opinion in his affidevl Or. Amey, @ state peychiatrial, describes Mr.

Thompson as heving “s long history of Bipoter Disorder and psychotic symptoms.”

{Competency Eveiuston of Greg Thompson by Casey Arney, M.D_ Attachment B) (emphasis

edded). Addilionelly, Faye E. Suman, PhD. hes reported that “Mr. Thompson wae dlaptaying

“Dr. Biatr’s sfideva was subriitied in support of # motion for funding of expsst

essistance. The motion wes denied.

significant signs of mental ness trom the time he was e small chiki’ (Report of Or. Faye E

Suan, PhD. Atachment C). Significantly, Dr. Sultan reports thet

2 erasecepeeeemmnerines ss,

would have substantial impaired Mr. Thompson's sbllty to conform he conduct

io fhe requirements of the ins.

I: ane.aine Deposttion of Dr. Suiten, Attachment D. Or. Barry Crown, PhD. reports

hat “Wx. Thompeon suffers from 8 major mental dmordecthough disorder, to wit, tat ine

suflers torn schizosfiectve disorder-bipcier subtype wah organic components.” (Report of Br.

Serr Crown, Ph.D, Aliachment &}. Onset of tie deorder typically occurs in early ecutthood. -

ik Exper opinion Geary indicates fret Mr Thompson suflered trom mental Bness at te time

of the tere. A combination of reflective mesitance of counsel, Gate of rescurces, snd st

mincorchc provarted the bry trom tering cet tc Aces comnenny cow .

prope -eeckdon of he ema ,

in short, contrary to Respondent's sssedion, Mr. Thompson presented both am

stegeton and evidence - in the form of expert opinion — thet hie mental condiion exdated ta

1908 and tt 8 dose go 10 he insu of gull of frat degree murder end sentencing for any

a Counsel as one of Denial of Prrchistis Asstetenes,

Respandent gues on to exp Seat ie, Thompocr’s inafleciive exsistanse of esuneel eu

claim tacks mort because he has not shown why» quallled and competent peychiatist <r”

martat heath expert wes not hired by Wiel counsel. (Response, p. 3. Respondent apparecdiy

peleves hat Mr. Thompson must expiain the actions of an aflomey whose periormence was,

scoording to ir. Thompson's cisim, constiationaly deficient. Tote bs nat the cose, Tee very

pc ot ci et Wl cour ht nt enn nd cout nt etiactety extn —

fe cit nck we Me Thormpecn's scarce court-ordered resources to Nise 8 vest pyc wih

medical waining, end ateed engaged an industri peychotogist whose practice hed consisted

largely of something so tangential as evaluating the work potential ef social securty dlesbilty

seen Rigsted at every stage of his criminal ira! and post-comicion proceedings.” (Responses,

p. 4) (emphasis sdded) The seve wes act Migsted at ret “Wigation’ k by Rs very nemee

sdverserial. See 0.0. Davie vy. Liberty Mutual insurance Comoamy, 38 8.W.3d 560, 585 (Tenn.

2001). Mr. Thormpscn’s tril wee hardy advernaril on the crucial sue of paychiatre evidence

(© suppori a first degree murder cherga, sccording to the competent evidence now presented

by Ora. Amey, Steir, Suftan and Crown, this matter should heve been properly raised - and

counsel shouts have been property sssisted ~ by 8 peychietriat rather then an nousrie

peychotogist. Respondent hed at ie daposal the entire peychiatric stall of Middle Tennesses

Mente! Health retiute, while counsel's failure to employ 8 peychistrist efi Mr. Thompson with

Nor did the post-conviction proceedings constinés “Rigation” ih Gis tue sense cite

tested wah precision regarding his mantel state at the time of the offeree. Lacking tis

eeststence, Thompcon wes unable 1 prove his cain o fhe required stancerd =

eorant OF Aenay’s affidavit calle into question Mr. Trampears competency aur post

conmcton proceedings. Or Amey Terein afirms thet lr Thompeon Tacks the insight ic he

Brees to make decisions regarding mental heath and medical restmert at th tne” and that

he has “2 long history’ of severe ments! Eness. (Pettion, Atachment A, first page). socording

© the Ternesses Supreme Court fils allegation impugns Mr. Thompson's ability to raise any

such Gini in post-cormiction proceedings - "a peliioner who was Incompetent froughoul fe .

fenttafiors period woutd be denied fhe opportunity to challenge his cornmicfion ine meeninghd

marner_* Wathing vy, Stats, 903 8.W 20 302, 305-6 (Tenn. 1995), The Tennessee S preme

Caxst more recen®y expisined that under Rs hoiding in Wating. “due process requires tut

some ressonebie opportunity to sssert those rights be sflorded.” Seats y. State, 23 8.W.3s

272, Z78 (Tenn. 2000). Respondents stegation thet the aim hes been Rigated st “wery step

of his colina! tial and post-conviction proceedings” (Response, p. 2) ls, therefore, ineqaeste,

Davis vy. Liberty Mutual 38 5.W30 at SOB. Ries

Moreover, st every step of his criminal Wiel and post-comaiction proceedings the State

sfirnatively misrepresented Mr. Thompson's mental state. Throughout Mr. Thompson's cout

proceedings the proseca.tor engaged in false endior misteading questioning and use of reports

to expus Sut ter. Thomgesn was compstent ond nat mentally & ‘The prosecutor miated hdr.

Thompson's judge and jury despite heving evidence to fe contrary and withoul revesiing such

evidence, thereby committing gross misconduct For example, during Mr. Thompson's pos

comiction proceedings he stlempted 1b prove his ciaim of Ineflective sssistance of counsel

based on « (afure t0 adequately Invesiigate his mertal healt. The state argued thet Mr.

Thompson wes not mentally I, was competent at the time of visi, was presently competent,

and was competent to be executed, despite ten years of records to the contrary. insthutional

records cleerty Mustrate Mr. Thompson's “significant history of peychosls requiring mfliple

medications.” (Anaciment F) Mr Thompson's ments! haan reatmert pian contemporary te

the post-conviction hearing revests 8 diagnose of schizophrenia with presenting protiems ef

called for pharmacotherapy and peychotherapy. Me Tromoscr Ned # web documented Nasary

of hatkucinetions and deklonal thinking, such es: beleving the guards we devis: sesing and

hearing devi, god and woman in hie colt hearing voices; baleving hie calle contaminated by

feeinge thet he ides for the space shulile was sicien trom him: believing the guards were

people from his chichood end feeling confused that they could not remember white he cox

befeving thet he wrote songs for Eis and Miches! Jecksor: requesting ofl to weat his @ry —

stomach and ssophegus, reporting that he had fought wer between good end evi and head —

won, making everybody happy; refusing 10 bathe anc epteiering feces nd Utne over hie colt

eating feces: feeling dlstreesed about his health beceuse he hed esten feces, engaging In sett

maffatior, and shemping suckle. (Miechement 1) Prior to the post-conviction evitendary —

heering, the prosecutor went to Riverbend to tal to stall about Petlioners behevicr andi

row fan" Conary, bu Sate er Pat Me Thane we meray Reto |

prosecutor argued to the contrary. —

miamteatanendiethigmatnts Nang hes simcont sey Deen on

medication. However, fo eriipeychotie medication was prescribed curing the morte af =

Februsry and Merch, 1998. (Atechment f) The stste post-conviction hearing tock piace Marcha

77 ard 28, 1906. The prosec.anr argued at the hearing frat since Mir Thompson was ofl his

medication, he wee not mentally See 0.6. Post-conviction Transcript, ¥.X, p. 267. Or. Btatr

vested that 8 person on the correct dosage of medication can be stable and function very wall,

*Curlousty, Mr. Thompson was taken off his medication shorty sfter the prosec.tor’s

viel, and wes not on medication af the time of his stste post-conviction hearing. Nat

surprisingly, sfier thet hearing, when the residvel effect of orice treatment hed ended. tr.

Thompson sgain descended into mania end the State of Tennessee resumed his medication.

however, thet person stil has the disease. (Post-conviction Transcript, . , p. 236). Dr. Blair

lurther testified thet she expected the effects of the medication to remain for # period of time

har consumption cessed. (<i. at 242) The State presented no evidence to support its

core ery sheyatora

in Apri 1996, upon arriving back in Riverbend, Mr. Thompson once again began te:

Gapley peychotc symptoms. (Attachment J) By the end of Apri, Mr. Thompson preserted

wah parercis and Rt wes recommended that he restart the Meliert which hed controied his

maria wih psychosis. (Atactwnent Mz. Thompson hed been found pecing his cel and was

eotated, stafing thet he hed been Bstening to the radio for the inst sb years for twenty-four

hours 8 day and now he was redicecive. While at the infirmary observation cell, Mr. Thompson

became more aghated and paranoid stafing he could feel that the tights were radiating him...

wee noted thet Mr. Thompson hed become progressively more hypomenic since April He wae

bert to the special needs medical unli on an emergency basis. (Attachment L) At special

needs medication wes preecbed without his consent because he iected the capacity to mate

Gecistons and he wes presenting » danger to himeell and others. (Attachment M) Because Mr.

Thormpeon hed been taken off his medication for the ime period surrounding the post-

cormiction hearing, he had once again entered » menic episode.

Ma. Thompson's descent into mania wes predictable besed on his medical records.

‘Those records were reviewed by the prosecutor and were known at the time of the post-

cormiction hearing. However, defense counsel wes denied the exper! sssistence necessary te

retad the proseadon's medically unsound es. “wa Hed the jugs or defense counse! been

tformed of Mr. Thornpeon's tue mental status, the outcome of the proceeding would have

been dilerent Becavss the State kept tis evidence from the jogs and defense counsel, in

eusence commilfing fraud on fhe court, Frere was a0 adversarial determination of hr.

Thompson's mental heii. The Stste has now admitied Mr. Thompson's long-standing mental

Brest anc competence This shouts be cons: “ered by the Coun

= = Ths State's Admission thai Mr. Thompson Suffers from s Lone-Standing Mentad

Mness and is incompetent la “Newty Discovered Evidence "Which Shovid Be

Considered by the Covrt, ;

Respondent finaly ssserts thet the coram nobis peillion is berred by the sistas af

benistiors because, * Respondent’ option Or Arey’) sffidevt is nat “newt decoverad

evidence.” Case tow, however, ety contradicts fe argument thet the sficevt ts not new

i oe

evidenae. An admission by an sdversartel party or winess that the lestimony given at trial

could Neve been untrus can be “newly discovered eviience.” See State vy. Parchman, 973

S.W.20 607, 611 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1987). Here, as in Workman vy. State, 41 6.0.30 108

(Tenn. 2001}, ka. Thompson is not st teu tor not bringing the evidence eerfer, since State

wiresess did not previously admi, end in tect denied, the seriousness of his mental state and

the “long history” — in Or. Arney's words — of his peychiairic problems. Yorkmen, 41 $.W.30 at

103. The State hes changed Bs opinion of Mr. Thompson's mental state, as & is now and

possibly os i wes af

the time of the offense. Mr. Thompson ls without teu in not presenting this evidence carter.

State ¥. Mixon, 983 8.W.20 681, 668-(Tenn. 1998) Additionally, no state court hes ever hetd e

é and tal hearing to eveluste the strength of Mr. Thompson's claim — which is now supported

by State's edrrission — wih fhe necessary tunding and competent counsel to sreure expert

peychiaetc opinion and essistance. Ky A hearing & necessary.

im Bastord y. State, 845 8.W.2c 204 (Tern 1982), the Tennessee Supreme Court nted

before » state may terminate « cimtm for ieee io comply Gh) procedural

“requirements such) ss statees of imitsfore, due process reqéres that poteiat

Migerts be provided an opportunity for the presertafon of calms sf s meaninghd

tne and ins meaninghés menner__ 8s possibte hel under fe cCrosnetences of

8 pertic.ter case, appiicadon of the state may not sflord s reasonatis

opportundy w heve the cistmed Beye heard and decited

Bastond, 646 8. W 20 at 208. Septceden of tre stents of inisGore here «fl mean that he

weve of Ma Thompson's capectty to comml first degrees murder and capability wl never be

heard to the extent required by dus process. Sands y Stats 903 6.W 20 297, 301 (Tem

_w

Moreover, » Workman te Court hetd tut

mn ow view, the due process considerstions Gscvesed in Burfonl and moss

_ Pecendy in Seats y, Sate, 23 8.W.3d 272 (Tenn. 2000) and Y/liemne v. State

[44] 8.W.20 [464] (Tenn. 2001), reteased just today, apply «ih even greater

force when the staate of imitafons & being applied ins capisl case w bere

Ctein that newly discovered eviience may prove het the defendant = sctunly

innocent of the capital ote of which he wes cormicesd

Yrorknan, 41 8.W.3d af 102 Athough Respondent stemets © distinguish Workman sy

pointing of that the newly discovered evidence retsied to Tectual Inmocence” (Reaporee p.

@ showing of “tactual nnocence’ ls not required © grant s hearing indeed Mr. Thompson need

onty show that dus process requires his claim be heard. Burton Sands muam Once greresd

a hearing, Mr Thompson then must show that ‘newly discovered evidence mey heve resuited

in 0 diflerert judgment and thet he “wee without feu” in taling to present the newly

Gecovered evidence” serfer. YYorkman, 41 8.W30 at 104 citing T.CA §40-28-105; State a

Mion, 963 S.W.20 661, 673 a 17 (Tern. 1998) I he makes such 8 showing, Mr. Thompsce

wil be eniiied © e new biel

bn chart, the ctahae of Uiations would visiate due process # applied here. -

Thompson’) corem nobis petilion shoutd be heard in tl |

WHEREFORE, Mar Thompson reepecty requests that tis Cour grant him a

evidendary hearing on hs mentatesih reteted Game night of the State's recent concessian

that Mr. Thompson is Incompetent and hes long suffered from # debilitafing mente Eness or

grant such offer reel as is jst arti equtabte.

“Unde Workman st 8 hearing ar. Thompson need nol mest the vasty burdensome

requirements applied io ectusl nmocence claims, Le. Hose of Schive y Dein 613 US. 298,

175 6.CL O81, 130 Ed. 20 608 (1085) Wie Mt. Workman feces those requirements, which

perwat refel onty mn “exireordinan/ end ‘vere’ cases. Scam $13 U8. af 321, ka. Thompson

wast meet the lesser burden of showing neflecthe sssistance of coureai The great

fe@ood Het Me Thompson can mest hs burden anc obtsin whe! memes hearing on he

wets he wore pe se

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

|, Dane C. Hansen, hereby certlly that s fue and correct copy of the foregaing

document was meted .

ATTACHMENT

=

AFFIDAVIT

STATE OF TENNESSER)

COUNTY OF DAVIDSON

Comet Aan De. Cn Bik sn fie ede th lowing wh awa

the best off my knowledge information and be Bat

1. 1 am 8 eensed Prychologist with a peivase practice in Nashville, Tennessee. My

business address ig 1500 21 Avenue South, Suise 320, Nashville, Tennesses 37212.

2. I meeived « Bachelor of Sclence Degpes from the London School of Economics and

Political Sclence, University of London, England in 1983, 0 Massexs Degree in Prychology from

Vandertile University im 1985, and « Ph.D. from Vanderbils University ia 1988. I have been «

Scensed Prychologist in the Suse of Tennessee since 1988.

3. tn may profeesiondd work, 3 have been tavelved whth ference prycisiogy to the

capacity of s Prychological Examiner at Middle Tennessee Meatal Health Instiress from 1987-

1988, and as 8 peivese practitioner since that time. I have givea testimony and ave beee qualified

us an expert wo testify in the cours of Tennessee regarding sock lssues us sanity at the time of the

offense; ability wo form specific intent, compezeacy to stand tial, and the presence and cffect of

learning Gsabilises, in cases in Devidson, Pumam, Williamson, Lewrcaca, und Shelby Councies.

4.. I have bees approsched by Robert Warmer and asked w give an opinion regarding

whether or not there is a need for prychological evaluation of his client Gre gory Thompson.

5. I have reviewed Mr. Thompson's institstional and medical records at Riverbend

Maximam Security Insdtutios where he is currently incarcerued, The records revealed a posidve

family history for prychiarric dismurbance. Extent and diagnoses are unknowa. Apparently bok

parents are deceased, one from a self-inflicted gunshot wound. The medical progress nous

revealed Mz. Thormpsoa’s cacalaring psychiarric problems since incarceration. Three prychisses

(Dra. Brad Diner, Roy Deal, and Steve Humble) employed st RMSI have weased Me. Thompsoa

Labo 129

for psychosis. Adjustment difficulties were novd in Mr. Thompson during November 1988. ia

June 1986 a suicide gesturc/anempt occurred. By June 1988 Mr. Thompson was diagnosed as

exhibiting « Bipolar Disorder. The possibility of « thought disorder was raised Ia July 1988. By

Seprember Dr. Diner reponed that Mr. Thompsoe was prychotie “looks more schizophrenic thas

manic.” Symproens described included thought blocking, suspiclousness, Insppropriate affect,

hallucinations and agitation, Mr. Thompson's behavior apparently deteriorated even further, Ideas

" of self harm were noted Is January 1989, along with increased sudhory hallucinations and

perecurry ideas, By May 1989, hygiene was noted to be poor. In Sepmember 1989 Mr.

Thompson set fire wo his cell and received bums to his face and hands, A month lazer he was noted

to be bostile, and agitated with rapid speech and loosening of associations, Fils mental status

rapidly descriorated wo inctuds Might of ideas, marked tangentiality, grandiose delusions, thought

6. Since late 1989 the medical record indicated « rapid cycling panera of prychodla

At dimes Me. Thompsoa has been noted wo be withdrawa, morbid and expressing suicidal ideation,

if not direct plane. More typically, he has vacillated from a basal mental stats that included low

level soditory hallucinations, impaired insight and judgment and compromised coberence 10 8

frankly psychotic stase. Ai these times Mr. Thompson sppcared agitated, hostile, and

uncooperitve. Speech was noted wo be intrusive, pressured and loud. Thoughes were grandices

and tangential with marked loosening of associations and flight of ideas. Paranoia was cvidemt.

The preseace of hallucinations (both andhory and visual) were oftes denied, but low level ongoing

suditory baDucinations were suspecied by the cxamining psychisvim, Mr. Thompsoa hes

presenied something of a diagnostic dilemma He has bees variously diagnosed as Bipolar

Affective Disorder, Schizo affective Disorder, and Schizophrenia Paranoid type. The possibility

of malingcring has beea raised, however Dr. Humble stated 8/9/70 chat soc 8 diagnosis “fails wo

explain the psychotic symptoms.” Current medications are Lithium, Ha)dol, and Cogentia. Me.

Thourpsce sporadically refused to take medicadon os prescribed. h should be soted that Lidium

has beea prescribed interminently since 1986 On occassion Mz. Thompsoe has bees secluded and

[*)

cee

* — —_— eee eee

subdved for the protection of both self and others. The writings of Mr. Thompson are coasisseat

with the above description of « prychotlc individual

6. Ihave read the affidavit of Brock Mchier of Capital Case Resource Censer, wih

whom I have worked oa previous cases, and whose lavestigations and assessments I heve found

to be accuram, The brief history of traumatic childhood events and bead injuries, and the self-

reported sympeoms of neurological impairment, slecp disturbance, hallucinations and disordered

thinking are consistens with the psychotic behavior noted la the instinational and medical records,

and raise an Inference that Ms. Thompson's problems may have a seurological os well ss

prychological basta. A full social and medical hisory would be aa essential pert of any sssessmest

of Mx. Thompeco's mental conditoa, 7 |

7, The evidence presemed suggests that Me. Thompeca is grossly impaired, aad ints

wy professional optnica that he ls in need of a full prychobogical evuluasicn.

§. If Me, Thompson fe found to be suffering from seurclogical or paychological

impairment as Gescribed above, i ts Ukely that some degyes off such bmpaimest would have existnd

at the time of the offense and would have bees a significant factor ta determining whether or ast

Me. Thompsos was able wo appreciass the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform Ms condust

to the requirements cf lsw whea be commined the bomicids of which be stands comvicisd. Such

mpairmest would have had » direct bearing spon whether he was capable of knowingly and

intelligently waiving his constitutional righ 1 counsel and to remain cileat ot the tins of his

arrest. ik would also have been significant mitigating evidence which should have been considered

in the deiermination of whether a penalty less than death wes appropriate in his cama, |

9. te onder to artive ot an adequate understanding of Me, Thompson's neurological

and psychological condition, ft would be necessary wo administer a full benery of tests and conduct

2 mental suas imerview. The psychological ists and interview could be adminisered at 2 cost pf

$850.00. My fee for consultation, and for count estieoay, if required, is $100.00 per hour. As

noted, s complezs social and medical history most be compiled im order w sdequamly doremest

Mz. Thompson's psychological development, incidents of rauma, and cvidence of pre-caisting

0)

0000131

conditions. The investigation necessary to compile such # history need not secessarily be done by

8 psychologist, but should be performed by a person skilled in social/psychological investi gation,

lian Sa:

DR GILLIAN BLA APPIANT

FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAITH NOT.

pet ___“Y2/5O

Sworn to and subscribed before me on

this the 2) “tay of November, 1990

| QRaartol, Arado —

| My Commission Bxpiree_ 5/23/43. : | ATTACHMENT

“BR”

ra

0000132

- Richland Creek Psychiatric Associates, LLP

4535 Harding Read

Brias R Swensea, MLB. Suite 230

Pauls S. Nene, MD.

Richard K. Recbesicr, MD.

Jeri E. Fitrpatrick, MB.

Jobanaa C. Shadola, L.CS.W.

Casey C. Arecy, MA

Terry M. Huff, LCSW.

Jack L. Keck, Jr., MLE

Rebecca 1. Roberta, MLB.

Hal C. Schofield, MB.

- January 19, 2001

Kelley Blevins Baker, Staff Counsel

State of Tennesses

Dept. of Corrections

4° Floor

Rachel Jackson Building

26" Averwe North

Nashville, Tennessee 37243

Re Greg Thompsoa

TDOC: 108406

Dear Ma. Baker

This letter serves as a physicians recommendation for for Greg Thompson. Me.

Thompson is a 38 year old gentleman with a long history of Bipolar Disorder and psychotic symptoms.

He has severe symptoms of mania with racing tangential] thoughts, pressured speech, in delusional

grundiosity. He becomes severely agitated and hostile at times. He has assaulted staff in the recent

past which appears to be related to his mental iliness. It has been recommended by the treatment

review committee to be treated with invohuntarily medication and have a conservator *ssigned to him

h is my opinion that Mr. Thompson lacks the insight into his iliness to make decisions regarding

mental bealth and medical treatment at this time. ] beBeve that a conservator js necessary to make

tppropriate decisions regarding his care and without such harm is ikely to come to

Mr. Thompson or others as 8 resuk of his mental iliness. Mr. Thompson's illness is chronic and .

fuctuating in nature, therefore extended periods of marked improvement are not expected.

41

. e -_— ° »

:

reu._Jsee verantnenr oF CORRECx 10"

MENTAL HEALTH TREATMENT REVIEN COMMITTEE A

ATE MAE Thee, Cras, ween |0340G woe sum 12/3 Jed mage

t. REPORT OF INITIAL, PHYSICIAN MEETING WITH NATE: °

inltiot Physictaa’s Mecomscedsticnishs

* tamete’s Sigactere

ss 1] 5/ot

Prysician’s Signeture

We REPORT GF SECOND PHTSICIANYS MEETING WITH OATES

Second Physician's Aecomeandetlon(s)1

“ae: ole 4 a Ai 5 cote~

athe si

th. REPORT GF TREATHENT TEM MEETINGS

Tresteest Tees Recommeadstion(s):

Biguetwre(s) of Treetecet Teen Meatier (eds

Titte

Titte

ae

xe. igfitsa/ OF-17O/ : pS

2) Y Lifes °F : :

<2-3329 (5/89) ' «'Da-2458

Page 1 of 2 pages

; on -* *

mpson WSO i Pi, Se | :

MENTAL HEALTH TREATHONT REVIEW COMMITTEE : !

| | -f ‘

IY. SPORT OF TREATMENT REVIEY COMUITTEES

v.?

ca Te ATTACHMENT

a Coops a 53 peg hcaecutee ae | mt i Orde

Ohi Lich ler LA 0b HE LOI 21-0827

White Copy: esl th Record '

Tellew Copy: Iresteeat Teese Coo di neter

Pim Copy: iamate Rights Advocete

CR-3329 (5/89) | nD

Page 2 of 2 peges —

UNIVERSITY PSY CHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, P.A.

Charlotte, North Carolina 28262

(704)S47-1483/Fax (704)547-0052

Teye L Semen PLD. Dewner

ae a E Kapphe, 3A,

ed One PB

=o Sr

Jedtth Theres, PB.

PSYCHOLOGICAL REPORT

' CLIENT: GREGORY THOMPSON

DATE OF BIRTH: 12-13-46)

DATE OF REPORT: 7-22-99

Location of Examination Riverbend Maximum Security Institution (RMS)

Nashville, Tennesses

Education of Ciiegt: 13

Occupation of Client: Death Row Inmate

Qt

Mr. Gregory Thompson was referred for psychological evaluation in July,1998

suomnty Me. Saphen M. Kiosingar of the Pedared oiinde fords theme”

Tennessee Incorporated. Mr. Thompson was convicted of murder in 1985. This

evalustion was requested to address the following question:

1. Mr. Thompson's current psychological status

2. Mr. Thompson's likely status and mental state before and surrounding

the time of the 1985

* $3. Social, n psychological, and economic factors in the life of Mer.

Se are» uch might have be coaridered to be mitigating in nature at the time of

PROCEDURE:

Prychological evaluation of Mr. Thompson was initisted on August 20, 1998, This first

evaluation session extended over a period of 2 four bours and consisted of

per eh pa + Ae i _ ee wr mer tS

_ been administered to Mr. Thompson. Levels of current intellectual and

neuropsychological functioning had been recently essessed )

Gon tl cnaagusmhem—iaethbustaaeen

Following the 8-20-98 initial evaluation session, a very extensive review of legal,

military, medical, prison and psychiatric/psychological records was initiated. A list of

the documents ecamined is attached to this report. ,

h was intended that additional clinical observations of Mr. Thompsoa would continue to

be made as part of this evaluation process, A return visit to RMSI was scheduled to

occur in 1999. By January 1999 Mr. Thompson's psychological condition hed

deteriorated to such a severe extent that observations relevant to the original referral

questions became impossible. Mr. Thompson's lnwyers now had questions concerning

Mr. Thompson's competence to participste in Habeas Corpus Two farther

interviews were conducted with Mr. for this purpose, on 2-2-99 and

4-7-99, totaling spproximstely six hours of additional observation. Vohuminous

Tennessee Department of Corrections mental health, medical, and administrative records

were reviewed at this time as well. :,

As 8 consequence of this interruptior in the evaluation procedure, the

evaluation which was initiated for the purposes described in the REFERRAL

QUESTIONS section of this report is, as yet, incomplete. Purther interviews with Mr.

Thompson will be conducted at a late time. Nevertheless, the extensive record review

conducted, the ten hours of clinical observations made of Mr. Thompson during the

to make it to render opinions about Mr. Thompson’s state at

and around the time of the 1985 offense. ° ’ .

CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS:

“questions posed to kim tnd append to be alert, watched and tntvested ta the inturiow pooeess

His speech was sometimes tangential and rambling. Although motor behavior sppeared

controlled there was a manic quality to his verbalizations. Mr. Thompson was oriented as te

person, place and time, but he repeatedly expressed his firm belief that he had written each and

every song which played on the radio. . : as

details of these sessions will not be reviewed |.era,

FORMAL PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING:

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMP1-2) was administered to Mr.

Se eS Sen Cae See ene

‘Thompson's level of reading competence exceeded the necessary level of 8” grade ability

required for proper administration of this test.

The MMPI-2 profile produced by Mr. Thompson is considered valid and appropriate for

individuals are considered to be highly suspicious of others, often displaying paranoid

features. There is indication in this profile of the presence of a thought disorder and the

inability to manage emotions. The world is perceived as a threatening and dangerous

place and fears are viewed as externally generated and reality-based rather than as a

SS Se | NSS SL NNN, OREN

trey meee | 1% _ 21, 1999. Ms. Lamar assumed total responsibility for the care and rearing of Mr. The and

Se

which suggest memery and concentration problems, and an inability to make decisions, ees Ma. Lamar recalls te period following ber daughter's fatal sntomobile accident as one of

tremendous strain and disroption for her. She was unable to describe the reaction of the thres

; —_ _° young children to their mother’s death becsuse she “took to my bed” for spproximately five or

- RELEVANT PSYCHOLOGICAL/PSYCHIATRIC DATA CONTAINED IN oni six weeks following the accident. Ma. Lamar wes unable to atiend to these children in any way

RECORDS: >." at that time. She did not recall how they obtained food or clothing, or whether they were in any

: distress. Ms. Lamar reported that she was drinking alcobol quite hesvily during this period and

that she left her bed fo resume household activities only because the children contracted a serious

Thompson has suffered from significant mental iTiness since at least the time of hi Ma. Lamar described Mr. Thompeon as displaying significantly “different” béhsvior when be

ae ete He has been treated almost continvously with some combinstion of : returned to visit her following his discharge from the U.S. Navy. “Greg didn’t act the sams”.

} — SN me nes ee ee He has received « ; Unlike the ‘eager to please’, passive, sometimes funny, gentle boy who she had reared, Mx

variety of diagnostic inchoding Psychosis, Prychosis Not Otherwise Specified, Paranoid Thompson was “angry”, “sometimes sad™. “I don’t think he wanted me to know what was going -:

Schizophrenia, Mania, Mixed Substance Abuse, Schizophrenia, BiPolar Affect! ve Disorder, | on with him He mostly just stayed sway from me.” Ms. Lamar reported that she noticed Me. te Ae

Schizoaffective Disorder, Malingering, and Adult Antisocial Behavior. This is clearly indicative ; Thompson sometimes “staring off into space” or “talking to himself”. She would ask him shout —

of the Tennessee DOC mental health staff's view that Mr. Thompson has experienced major : these behavior. “He'd demy it. He acted like he didn't know what I was talking bowl” Ma

mental ilness throughout at least most of his period of incarceration. Further, there is extensive Lamar recalls being quite concerned sbout her grandson's mental state during this time. She did

documentation contained in these records of many episodes of bizarre aggressive and/or self not recall ever being asked these questions at any time before or during Mr. Thompson's trial.

- | Ms. Nora Jean Bal Wharten re | |

: | Norma Jean Wharton is Mr. Thompson's older sister. A lengthy telephone interview was

INTERVIEWS WITH COLLATERAL WITNESSES: conducted with ber on huly 21, 1999. She grew up in the same home as Mr. Thompson and had

, ' continuous contact with him throughout his childhood Mr. Thompson lived briefly in the home

Five individuals were interviewed (cither by telephone or face-to-face) who provided significant of his sister following his discharge from the military.

functioning of Mr. Gregory Thompsoa. Ms. Wharton described Mr.Greg Thompson as a highly sensitive, passive, timid, emotionally -

ee . vulnerable child She described a childhood of great hardship. According to ber report, thelr

- gundmother, Ms. Maybelle Lamar was verbally abusive, neglectful of the children's basic daily

, needs, highly critical, and unable to care property for the children. Ms. Wharton described many

instances of such abuse and neglect. She described the period following their mother's death as

particularty chaotic and neg)ectful, recalling that often there was no food in the home and that the

?

47’

continvously drunk and unable to care for her grandchildren. According to Ms. Wharton, a

Thompson frequently witnessed his sister Nora being beaten by their grandmother. sa MICHAEL CHAVIS

: ; ,

Ms. Wharton further recalled that she and her younger brother had witnessed the brutal beating Federal Defender Services of Eastern Tennessee investigator, Mr. Michael Chavis, was

and rape of their mother by their biological father. She recalls Greg standing in the scene interviewed about his July 29 through August 2 , 1998 interview with Ms. Arlene Cajulao in

screaming and sobbing uncontrollably. , Honoluha, Hawai ws ony ee had an intimate relationship and lived

: together for approximately four years, from 1980 to 1984.

Ma. Wharton reported that Greg would frequently cry at school during the carly schoo! year, |

and, as 8 result, was ofen the victim of intense mockery from his classmates. Because Ma Mr. Chavis reported that Ms. Cajulao described Mr. Thompson as displaying increasingly bizarre

Wharton was in the same classroom as her brother she observed these behaviors and oftes behavior during the Istier part of their relationship. Similar to descriptions proved by Ms. Nors

intervened on ber brother's behalf, She described Mr. Thompson's response to this abuse as Wharton, Ms. Cajulao reported several episodes of “parancid” and aggressive behavior which

quite passive. had no spparent external antecedent. She reported that Mr. Thompson sometimes thought that

:, ~ | | people were “afler” him. He would close all the curtains in the house because he did not want

Of particular significance is Ma. Wharton's recollections sbout Mr. Thompson repestedly the person who was “looking” for him to see him through the curtains. She remembers being

banging his bead against the wall of their home on many occasions during their carly childhood. quite concerned about Mr. Thompson's mental state. ,

This behavior frequently followed their grandmother yelling at Greg “You have the Devil is 9 :

you." Mr, Thompson would tell his sister that he was attemnpting to “knock the Devil out” of ie ; . —_

bead in this way. Ms. Wharton recalls believing that this behavior was quite odd. ° SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS : ..:

Mr. Gregory Thompson has experienced symptoms of major mental illness throughout his adult

Following his discharge from military service, Ma. Wharton described Mr. Thompson's behsvier Hife. Indeed, there is information svailable which suggests that Mr. Thompson was displaying

as significantly different than his prior conduct and sttitude. She reported several cpisodesef significant signe of mental iTiness from the time he was a small child Self-injurious behavior is

bizarre behavior which inchoded a sudden intense emotions! reaction without obvious external reported as carty as six years old. There is extensive documentation contained within the records

provocation. Mr. would become extremely angry, would cry and scream for a Jenthy reviewed for this evaluation that Mr. Thompson has experienced a thought disorder and/or am

period of time, would sppear as ifbe might or ectually become quite physically violent or affective disorder of some type for many years. |

concerns to her grandmother. Lamar soggested that Ms. Wharton take ber brother ht is my opinion that Mr. Gregory Thompson is most sppropristely diagnosed, according to the

the psychiatric unit of the local hospital for treatment. Ms. Wharton did not stiempt to get any Dioguosde and Susdededl Mama of Mecnad Diserdane Potcts Bandon eo tnving Sdidee ative

veatment for Mr. Thompeon and reports fecling quite guilty sbout this. Disorder, Bipolar Type. As is typical of this (iness, became te a

adulthood. Mr. Thompson was suffering serious mental iTiness at the time of the 1985 offense

yee, Soe han voncleed en cetias <i mete ane Govnghers te post Oomn | - for which he has been convicted and sentenced. This mental iliness would have _

received counseling to coping with the cffects of her abusive impaired Mr. Thompson's ability to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.

childhood and she has been treated with s combination of s major tranquilizer (Stellazine) and : ts

anti-depressant medications. She reported that her younger half-sister Kim has also suffered Further, Mr. Thompson was the victim of severe childhood emotional sbuse and physical

from significant mental ines. : negiect. His family background if best described as highhy neglectful and economically .

| deprived. Mr. Thompson repeatedly witnessed episodes of violence during his childhood ia

CUSTODY OFFICERS AT RMSI i which one family member ssstulted or brutalized another. There are significant aspects of Mr.

| ; Thompson's social history that have been recognized as mitigating in other capital cases.

Following the second interview conducted with Mr. Thompson on 2-2-99, 1 informally '

interviewed two custody officers who escorted Mr. Thompson back to his cell. These officers It is important to note that all of the informanon related to Mr. Thompson's carly mental Ines

have not as yet been identified by name. Both reported that they were aware that Mr. Thompson : ~ £37 Ciipeecees :

bebeved it would be in his best imterest to be housed in « prison facility better equipped to deal |

with individuals experiencing severe mental iTincss. Fayd E. Sultan, PhD. ,

4g

ATTACHMENT

“Th” :

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSER

AT CHATTANOOGA

GREGORY THOMPSON, ‘ec ; Case No. 4:98-CV-6

Petitioner :

..

RICKY BELL, WARDEN :

a Respondent. ‘

__ 2a

tap/roremaycem : onal

mame, Gh / Games, A/ eee, IE / @aneee, HC / Renee, B/

‘WeeueSam, MC/ Cuma, SC / Gem, S/T, </Creem,

p=”

eerwrsna we ww we

~ = - + ~ Ye BY BY

eo et oo we ww wv Oo

ARREEABANCSCES

Pox the Petitioner:

STEPHEN M. KISSINGER, Eng

Assistant Federal ty Defender

Pederal Defender Services

of Bastern Tennessee, Inc.

530 8. Gay Street, Suite 900

Knoxville, Tennessee 37902

(423) 637-7979

Fox the Respondent:

GLENM BR, PRUDEN. Esq.

Assistant Attorney General

some vg yo

ce of the Attorney General and Reporter

Criminal Justice Division

425 Fifth Avenue North ~

2né Floor, Cordell Hull Building

Nashville, TH 37243-0493

(615) 741-3487

Alee Present:

Michael Chavis

Investigator

Pederal Defender Services of Eastern Tennessee, Inc.

Witness Addresas

B. Sultan, Ph.D.

versity Psychological Associates, P.A. .

8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 69¢

Charlotte, North Carolina 286262 .

Deposition of FAYE R, SULTAN. FE.Ra, taken by

the Respondent, at the Mecklenburg County District

Attorney's Office, 700 Past Trade Street, Charlotte,

North Carolina, on the 22nd day of July, 1999, at

1:01 p.m., before Dayna H. Lowe, Court Reporter and

Notary Public.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

~

o

eo ew 2 4wewewn wv

The Witness: Fave R. Sultan, Ph.D. .

. Examination

By Me. Prudem. es ccc eevee eecere seve 8, .

Fox the

i

: .

3

Q.

record.

A.

Q.

A.

Q.

A.

ZHURES QE THR BZEELRITZE

Dr. Sultan's Curriculum Vitae. ..... - §

Listing of documents reviewed as of —

WUABI9D woe ec cee ee ese coe ee woe.e. BF:

een

ZBEQCERBRIACA

Whereupon. ,

YAXE BR. SULTAN, Pi.La,

haying been duly sworm.

was examined and testified as follows:

EXAMINATION EX COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT

BY MR. PRUDEM: ;

Would you please state your name for the

Paye Ellen Sultan.

And what is your profession?

I am @ clinical psychologist.

Dr. Sultan, where is your practice located?

My practice is located right here in Charlotte,

" . _

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9689

eet ao 8 &® &@w we #

ches

North Carolina.

Q. And are you a sole practitioner in your

practice, or are you in partnership of some sort with

othere?

A. In the last several years, we actually have. .

operated in partnership. I retain the directorship of

the practice. It's called University Psychological

Associates. I was, for many years, the sole proprietor

of that practice. I'm now a shareholder. And there are

a total of nine psychologists and social workers

practicing together.

Q. Are there any peychiatrists ae part of your

practice?

A. No, not at thie time. There are not.

Q. You're appearing today pursuant to a subpoena

that we served on you?

A. Yes, I an.

MR. PRUDEN: I'd like to make the subpoens

Exhibit 1, please.

(Exhibit No. 1 was marked for identification.)

BY MR. PRUDEN: |

Q. Deo you happen to have a CV?

A. ' @. It's part of the package that you've

just been given.

Q. Oh, okay. Great. This will simplify things.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

Dr. Sultan, just to make sure that I've got it straight,

ie this a copy of your curriculum vitae? fi, |

A. It is. |

MR. PRUDEN: I would like to make that

Exhibit 2 to thie deposition, and, with your peraiesion,

after you mark it, I'd like to just keep it over here by

me for reference. a

MR. KISSINGER: Mo objection. :

(Exhibit No. 2 was marked for identification.)

MR. PRUDEN: Off the record for a moment.

(Off-the-record discussion.)

BY MR. PRUDEN: |

Q. Now I assume it will tell me somewhere on your

CV where you are licensed? ie

A. I'm licensed in North Carolina.

Q. and only North Carolina, correct?

A. That's correct.

Q. x notice the date on your CV is 19 October

1996.

. & Yes, it ie.

Q. Ie it correct in all aspects, or are there any

additions or deletions that need to be made to it?

A. There are no deletions I don't believe. There

are some additions.

Q. Okay.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

eerw#n#eiupr;je#owe#f ww

10

A. Let me just be sure there are no deletions.

No, I think ‘everything stands as is.

In addition, in the last several years there

are some presentations. That would be the nature of the

additions. I gave a workshop track at the National

Conference for Women and Addictions that was held in.

North Carolina, a national symposium addressing women's

and addictions issues and the legal factors that ought to |

be considered. I did that track. I gave a lecture to

the North Carolina Counselors’ Association meeting about

a year ago.

Q. And the nature of that?

A. That had to do with the appropriate assessment. .

of trauma survivors, I believe, from a counseling

perspective, or how a counselor might best interview

people in a way that was ethical and effective. And I |

think those are the two additions.

Q. Okay. Thank you.

A. Sure.

Q. Now in preparation for -- let me strike that. .

When were you first contacted to possibly work on

Mr. Thompson's federal habeas case?

A. I think it was near the end of July of. 1998.

Perhaps August.

Q. So either July or August of last year?

INTERIM COURT

(704) 333-9809

A. Either the end of July or the beginning of

August of 1998.

Q. And who first contacted you?

A. Mr. Chavis did on behalf of Mr. wecemand for

the Pederal Defender Services office..

‘Q.. And what. was'the nature of that firet contact?

Was it simply to determine your availability to need

assist in the case?

A. Mr. Chavis asked me about ay availability and

asked if I would be willing to perform a psychological

evaluation to assess what Mr. Thompson's psychological

condition might have beeh like at the time of the offense

in 1988, to assess whether it was possible to make such

an sppraisal, to see whether there were factors in his

personal background that might have been investigated at

the time of trial that would have had bearing on his.

psychological, status at the time of the offense, and

Mr. Chavis also suggested that they wanted to know

something about Mr. Thompson's current psychological

state, his level of functioning at the present time.

Q. Were you also asked if you would be able to

determine hie competency at the time of his criminal

trial in 1968S?

A. That was not an initial question, no.

Q. Was it a subsequent qesticna?

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

weer oweww

10

A. It became a question because Mr. Thompson's

psychological state deteriorated very, very quickly at a

point a few months after my initial meeting with him. At

that point, there was a question about whether he would

be able to proceed with the psychological evalvation, and

I was asked to come and cbhserve him and make some kind of

determination about whether he was competent to proceed.

Q. In these habeas proceedings, correct? |

A. That's correct.

Q. Did Mr. Chavis express te you any opinion as to

what he thought Mr. Thompson's psychological condition

‘was, hie mental status was, at the time of the offenset:

A. The only opinion that he expressed to me was

that he thought that he was not in good shape, that he .

had deteriorated. He didn't label it in any particular

way. Said he didn't think that he was doing as well.

Q. When you say he didn’t label it, does that mean

he didn’t use any diagnostic categories, say out of the

DSM-IV? ° :

A. Exactly. -

Q. Now after your initial contact with Mr. Chavie,

did you accept being retained by them on thie case, of

did you have subsequent discussions in that regard?

A. I think the next conversation was simply a

logistical conversation planning my first trip.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

eewenwewew wv

~

o

Q. And after the initial series of factors or

items that Mr. Chavis detailed for you that they wanted

you to assess, wee that enended any? |

A. I need to ask you to tell me what you mean.

Q. Sure. You said that you were asked to |

determine Mr. Thompson's mental status at or about the

time of the offense, if it was possible to make that

appraisal, and then his current competency. Have you

been asked subsequent to that to render any other expert

opinions in thie matter?

A. Only what I said to you just s minute ago in

terms of his competence to proceed with the appellate

process. I don’t think I've yet been asked to assess his

competence at the time of the offense. I don't think

that's ever been a questicn. . ie

Q. Do you know how you came to be recommended to

the federal public defender in Knoxville to participate

in thie case?

A. I don't.

Q. Have you ever worked for Mr. Kiesinger before?

A. 1 dom't think so. I don't know all of the

attorney pairings in the state of Florida for the capital

collateral representative. I know that Mr. Kissinger,

although I didn't know him then, worked there at sous

point, and it's possible that he was attached to one of

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

rr er er | ee

10

10

the cases that I worked on.

Q. How about Me. Dane Hansen? Have you ever heen

employed by her? .

A. I don't think so.

Q. You said that you have a clinical practice,

correct?

A. That's correct.

Q- | An@ you aleo do forensic work, cbvicusly, since

you're here today?

A. Yes.

Q. How mch of your practice percentage-wise is.

forensic work? Can you give me an estimate?

A. At thie point in my: practice, maybe 20 or 25

percent.

Q- And the balance, 75 to 80 percent, being

clinical, is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Of your forensic work, can you give me «

breakdown, percentage-wise, civil cases versus criminal

cases? And when I say *civil,* I mean, you know, family

law matters, personal injury matters, things of that

nature.

A. I think that, along that dichotomy, probably

half and half criminal versus civil cases as you've

described them. I think that's probably about right.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9689

BPBBBBEBEBERREEECE RE Swe ewan weewe»

Q. ow out of the criminal cases, what percentage

of the time have you testified for the defense versus the

State? |

A. A lot of the time when I do an evaluation,

either for the State or for the defense, I don't wind up

testifying, so it's a little hard to describe it quite

that way. |

@. explain to me basically how that works out for

you.

A. Okay. I may be called upon either to supervise

an evaluation that goes on in my office by ancther

psychologist on our forensic team. 1 may be called upon

to do an evaluation in « criminal situation. Sometines

what I diecover in the evaluation is helpful to the

attorney who's asked me to do the evaluation. Often I

only know that by whether I'm called to testify later in

the case, assuming that there is a trial and there is

testimony. Some percentage of cases will coms to «

settlement arrangement or a plea arrangement. Scus

percentage of cases, because I'm in a supervisory

capacity, I won't wind up testifying at all.

Q. Approximately how many capital cases have you

been consulted on in the course of your practice?

A. Im the course of my practice. Maybe 75, maybe

60.

(704) 333-9889

—"

eo ewt oo Fe & hh elhmUhNUCUCMY

~

o

11

Q. And capital cases out of which states?

A. North Carolina, Utah, South Carolina, Florida,

Virginia. And I guess this counts as a capital case,

even though it's a post-conviction case, right?

Q. That's correct.

A. Go Tennesses.

Q. I meant to include collateral cases, either

post-Conviction or federal habeas among those capital, 60

Goes that bring in any other states besides the five that

you listed?

A. I don't think so. I think that's all.

Q. Out of the 75 to 80 capital cases where you

have been consulted, how many of those, roughly, have you

given testimony in court? Air Ye

A. Im total I'm going to say maybe 25 or 38.

Q. And would the testimony that you gave is

capital cases be in those five states that you've listed

for we, North Carolina, Florida, Utah, South Carolina,

and Virginia?

A. tf Gom't think that I've testified in Utah. And

I was called to testify in Virginia and then declined to

testify, so that I may or may not have a record of

appearing as a witness in that state. I's not sure.

Q. Im all the capital cases where you've been

consulted, has it been for the State or for the defense?

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

~

“ o

ee ee ee ee ee ee ee

A. They've all been for the defense.

Q. All for the defense. And so none of them would

be like a court-appointed expert? You were perhaps paid

through court funds but working for the defense in all

those cases? I mean, you weren't like an amicus to the

court in any of these?

A. No. In fact, North Carolina doesn't often

operate on that kind of system, but most of the psynént

has come through court funds as you described just a

minute ago.

Q. Because most of the defendants were indigent?

A. Yes. That*s correct.

Q. Obviously, in the states where you've testified

you have been declared an expert, correct?

A. Yes.

Q. What federal jurisdictions have you been

declared an expert in?

A. I don't know if I know.

Q. As best you can recall.

A. I think the only federal case that I testified

in that fits into the category ve're talking about is «

North Carolina case, a Charlotte case.

Q. Would that be in the Western District of North

Carolina?

A. Sounds right to me.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9689

eoe-+tea «© &® &@ Ww w&

14

Q. All right. Now a Dr. Barry Crown hae aleo been

retained to work on behalf of Mr. Thompson in this case.

Are you familiar with Dr. Crown?

A. I on.

Q. How is it you know of Dr. Crown?

A. I've never met Dr. Crown. I hear that he and I

have appeared in the same hallway, although we're

excluded from speaking to one another or even knowing one

ancther. I'm not sure what he locks like. But I think

there have been several cases, some that I know about and

some that I don't, on which he's aleo been called in to

prepare an opinion of some kind.

Q. So you've never directly consulted with

Dr. Crown om a capital case?

A. That's not true. We have had probably a total

of four, maybe five, telephone conversations where we've

talked briefly about some of those cases. I just don't

know what other cases there are.

Q. Have you had conversations with Dr. Crown about

thie case?

A. Yes, I have.

Q. And the nature of those conversations?

A. Becavee I was doing only a part of the

psychological testing, having been told by Mr. Chavie

that the neuropsychological and intellectual assessment

INTERIM GOURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9669

would te done by Dr. Crown, I needed to check with

Dr. Crown about his test results so that I could include

them ae part of ay opinion, part of my work. In that

kind of situation, I have the permission of the attorney

to make that kind of consultative phone call, and so we

aid talk about Mr. Thompson. i

Q. Did you provide information to Dr. Crown about

your testing and evaluation of Mr. Thompson as well?

A. 1 did not. ies |

@. Anything about any diagnoses you may have

A. Wo. I don't think I provided him with any

disgnostic information at all.

Q.. Deo you know Dr. Theodore Blau?

A. Wo, I don't.

Q@. De you know of hia?

A.. Yes.

Q. Obviously, you are a psychologist, you're not «

medical doctor, correct?

A. That's correct.

Q. Deo you have a law degree, a juries doctor or

something elee like that? ~~

A. No, I don't...

Q. You're not authorized to prescribe medications,

correct?

INTERIN COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

eewrteavKkee#wew ¥

10

16

A. No. In North Carolina, psychologists don't

prescribe medications. In some states they do.

Q. <Aw@ part of your training, have you had any

training regarding psychotropic medications and their

effects? |

A. Yes.

Q. What sort of training is that?

A. I have had both graduate school. training about

the effects of medications and the various types of

medications and postgraduate seminar education about that

matter. | } |

Q. Various workshops that you've attended, for

example? |

A. Yes.

Q. You're not a neurologist, correct?

A. Mo, I'm not. | |

Q. What sort of neurological training have you

had?

A. Almost nono. That's why always in an

assessment where @ neuropsychological questica comes in 7

will request the assistance of a neuropsychologist.

Q. Im performing the evaluations that have been

requested of you on Mr. Thompson's behalf, you've

reviewed various documents?

A. Yes.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

17

Q. You have provided me with a three-page,

approximately three-page document, two and a half pages,

of -- says documents reviewed as of 7/22/99? -

A. That's correct.

Q. As you sit here today, to the best of your

knowledge, this is a complete listing of all mn

documents that you have reviewed?

A. To the best of my knowledge, enn ean.

document that I have reviewed ia listed on these three

pages. |

MR. PRUDEN: If I could, I'd like to make that

the next exhibit to the depositica.

MR. KISSINGER: No objection.

(2xhibit No. 3 was marked for identification.)

BY MR. PRUDEN:

Q. Are there any other materials, cuteide of |

Qnemmentts that you've reviewed as part of your process

of evaluating Mr. Thompson, for example, audio tapes,

videotapes? , ,

A. “fe. These ase ne tapes of any kind relating to

this case that I have reviewed. The other material would

be my own assessment notes from my clinical interviews

with Mr. Thompeon, notes that I made during ay interviews

with collateral witnesses, the psychological — data

that I collected.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

ees#s;senn ff &O WwW

~ - +» +» »

vw © ww FY OC

18

Q. Any other esventels --

A. I think that's it.

Q. <-- that have not been listed as documents?

Okay. The clinical notes and notes from your interviews

with collateral witnesses and the psychological test —

ta, thowe are items on the subpoena. Have you already

forwarded those materials to Dr. Blau?

MR. KISSINGER: I don't think they have been

a as of this very moment, but they will be sent -

off immediately following the deposition.

MR. PRUDEN: And you'll provide use with an

inventory of what's being sent?

MR. KISSINGER: Absolutely.

MR. PRUDEN: Do you have Dr. Blau's address?

MR. KISSINGER: I have it.

(Off-the-record discussion.)

BY MR. PRUDEN: .

Q. How many times have you actually seen

Mr. Thompson?

A. I've seen him three times.

Q. Can you please tell me een those three times

were?

A. I can. The first time I met with him was on

August 20th of 1998, and I spent about four hours with

him at that time. I then saw him on the 2nd of February,

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

we ewnanweiww

10

19

1999, and spent about two and a half or three hours with

chim, perhaps almost four hours with him. And again on

the 7th of April of 1999 for about am hour, hour and a

half. |

Q. Let's take. these in order. What exactly was

the purpose of your visit with Mr. Thompson on the 20th

of mgun, 1998? |

A. The purpose of my initial visit was.to address

the four questions that I mentioned at first, to aseese

Mr. Thompson's current psychological statis, to assesa

Mr. Thompson's likely psychological status and mental

state before and surrounding the time of the 1985

' offense, and to assess social, environmental,

psychological, and economic factors in his life that

might have been considered to be mitigating in nature at

the time of his trial in 1985.

| Q. And how a4 you go about thie on the 20th of

August, 1998? 2

A. Prior to that date, I had received some records

from the Federal Defender's office, and I reviewed those

records to establish that Mr. Thompson had a reading

level that was adequate to allow the administration of

certain psychological tests. My procedure is, prior to

the initial interview, to do very limited record review

so that I go into the first interview with an objective

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

~

~ o

eo ee ws eo TF & &S BH

mind. So basically what I knew about him at that point .

was the crime which he had been convicted of, the date of

the offense, and what his educational background and

reading level were. I also knew that psychological

testing had been administered to him in a variety of

settings prior to my going in... At that point, I went in

with just the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory

for that first date.

Q. Is that the MMPI-2?

A. Exactly. And I spent two and a half of the

four hours with him conducting the clinical interview,

and chout 90 minutes of that time was spent for -

Mr. Thompson to self-admiinister the MMPI following my

instructions and direction.

Q. That's in addition to the two-and-a~half-hour:

interview?

A. That's correct. .

Q. And that time again wae?

A. About four hours.

Q. I'm sorry. No. For the MMPI.

A. About 90 minutes, about an hour and a half.

Q. What did you assess Mr. Thompson's reading

level at prior to going in?

A. I didn't assess his reading level. It had been

assessed as above eighth grade, which is the required

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9689

~oee 1 Oo FR @& WS Ww

ny wenn nw Ww ~~ +» +» Ye Ye Ye

ee>euesS RB S&&SLA hh & & wR OO

reading level for the proper administration of the

MMPI-2. |

Q. And the notes of the clinical interview on that

Gate are among the materiale you'll be forwarding to

Dr. Blau, correct?

A. Yes. That's correct. |

Q. As well as the raw data of the PIP: -

Kk. Yes. | mee

Q. Will that raw data indicate what scoring:

programs you've used on the MMPI?

A. Yes. es

@. Were you able to validly administer an MMPI to

Mr. Thompsom -- '

A. Yes, I was.

Q. -- at that time?

. wenden. Ae

Q. And there were no other standard tests used by

people in your profeesion that you administered. on that

date? ae

A. Mo. Most of the testing had already been

completed by Dr. Crown by the time I saw Mr. Thompson for.

the first time, although I was not aware of any of the

results of that testing.

Q. Did you discuss with Mr. Thompson the facts and

circumstances of the.crime for which he stands convicted

INTERIM COURT REPORTING :

(704) 333-9889

eo enwanweww re

Che s

and sentenced to death during your interview of hia?

A. Yes.

Q. How did you discuss them with him? Did you ask

him questions or detailed questions, Dr. Sultan, or did

you just ask his an open-ended question?

A. I would have had to ask him some open-ended

questions, because I didn't know the details, eo -+ I

hadn't read any factual basis of the crime. That meeting

was my first look at Mr. Thompson and my wanting to see

how he presented himself without a lot of particular

provocation from me, so that, because I was to have a

lengthy time to interview his -- although it turned out

not to be the case, at the time I thought I was going

to -- that interview, I think, would be described as

quite open-ended, basically me asking him to tell me

about himself, about what aspects of his growing-up years

he wanted to talk about. oo

I asked follow-up questions when he would bring

atopic up. He answered a general question about the

offense, and then I would ask some follow-up questions

about that as well.

Q. Do you have your notes of that interview here

with you to refer to?

A. I don't. They're packaged up for Dr. Blau.

'@. #=D4id you write down every fact that Mr. Thompson

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9689

~

o

eo ewtt en vf f¢& & Bw

told you about his recollection of the murder of Ms. Lane

om your notes?

A. 1 don't recall specifically, but wy best guese

would be that, while there's some factual material about

the offense itself, my notes are much more likely to

ceflect his psychological state at the time and what he

recalled about how he felt and what he was experiencing

and what the other people around him seemed to be

experiencing through his observation. So I'm sure

there's factual information, but 1 hesitate to tell you

that every single detail that he suggested to me wound up

in those notes.

Q@. What did Mr. Thompson tell you about the

offense, as best you can recall?

A. As best I recall, Mr. Thompson talked about his

relationship with the young girl that he was with for the

days and weeks prior to thie.

Q. Joanne McNamara?

A. Yes. And how he felt a tremendous need to

protect her. He fancied himself rather as a rescuer of

young women, and thie part of the story came about in his

description of other circumstances in which he had

provided assistance to damsels in distress. Joanne

McNamare wae the last in a line of young girle that

Mr. Thompson viewed himself as taking under hie wing. He

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9869

7+

soe ew#wt#n8eheesemUmerrmlUmMEtlmUlUCCULWhDUlUlCUM

Che Ss

24

was quite disturbed about her circumstances.

What he told me was that they were thrown out

of the place that they had been staying when it was

discovered that they were not in fact married. I don't

know who it was who portrayed them as a.married couple to

the people that they were staying with; but that the.

truth of it was discovered, that someone contacted Joanne

McNamara's mother -- or parents, I don't know which; 1

think mother -- to let her know that thie child was is

her home, the person they were staying with, that

Mr. Thompson forced the victia in this case into her car

at knifepoint.

Mr. Thompson was not sure whether he precisely

recalled that he killed Ms. Lane -- is that correct?

Q. That's correct.

A. Okay. But that he knew that he had in: fact

killed her.

Q. I'm sorry. Would you say that sgain for me?

A. I'11 do my very best. He was not sure -- and I

asked him this specifically -- whether he was recalling

the events from his own memory or from having heard the

recitation of the facts and a reminder of his ow

statement to the police over the years. At this point in

time, we're about 14 1/2 years after the event.

He waen't claiming in any way not to remember,

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9689

~

o

eew7w awe ww ew

simply was unable to make distinctions for me about which

memories were specifically his and which he had read and

heard about in the course of his case and had heard

discussed about him. And, of course, there had been

_ post-conviction hearings and, by then, Supreme Court

Gecisions, and so the facts had been recited many, many

times. I was not clear precisely how clear his

recollection was at the end of that first interview.

That was one of my issues to revisit at a later tine.

Q. Does he have any recollection of actually

stabbing Me. Lane? a

A. He said he wasn't sure, That wae really the

iesve that we talked about. He said that he knew he had

talked about it at some point, and he had been told he

talked about it at some point, but that his emotional

state at the time was pretty disrupted and aroused. At

some point during that conversation Mr. Thompson began to

show a lot of agitation and anxiety, kept expressing «

willingness to talk, but it was clear that in remembering

there was a lot of pain for him, and he expressed « great

deal of remorse to me about the occurrence of the

offense. Said that he had no real understanding even

after all thie time about how he could have been capable

of such a thing. It wae not characteristic of hia,

according to him, for him to be sssaultive in that way.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

re er er ee ee ee ee

se &

Said that he had never killed anyone before and that he

didn't have any reason to hurt Ms. Lane. Said that it

haunted hia. |

Q. # Now were there any visible signs you chserved

of thie anxiety and disturbance?

A. Easier to demonstrate than to talk about

verbally, so I'll do that and see if I can describe what

I'm deing.

Q. Okay, and if you'll do it and maybe --

A. WNarrate it at the same time.

Q. Okay.

A. Oksy. When Mr. Thompson becomes agitated, he

rocks back and forth in his chair, does what I've heard

referred to as pill-rolling, finger rolling with both

hands, rubbed his face a lot with his hands, used the

same phrases over and over sgain, and then became what a

psychologist or psychiatrist might refer to as

tangential, would begin to talk about different subjects

ané then bring himeelf back to the subjecte at hand, or I

might direct him back to the subject at hand.

At some point he began to talk to mus -- and I

Gon't know that it was connected specifically to talk

about the offense, so I want to be careful to say that to

you -~ but at some point during the interview he began to

tell me that he had writterm all of the songs om the radio

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

~

o

oeoe#,+#e 8 # & Ww

that I ever listened to, and he began to tell not just mu

that, but any guard that wandered by in the hallway, tell

himself that, told me that sgain and again. I disagreed

with him at first to see what would happen, and he was

quite secure in that belief and wasn't agitated by the

fact that I challenged him. He just thought I. was silly.

And I think that probably would be my interpretation of

agitation. Because it was the first time I saw him, 1

don't know if the belief system that I was hearing about

that seemed so odd wae connected to agitation or simply «

part of what he was like, and so I made some note sbout

that but didn't attach any particular significance to it

at that tine. |

Q: What was hie reaction when you expressed

disbelief about hie writing the songs?

A. He told we I was silly and patted my hand.

Q. If I understood your comments correctly, he

would start out basically on point as he was talking to

you about various aspects of the crime or the issues that -

you were talking about, and then he would become

tangential, correct? Or did he start out tangential at

some pointe and then focue back in on what he wae talking

about ?

A. Pocusing I think is an overstatement in uy

event. I don't think that he ever was really focused.

INTERIM GOURT REPORTING

_ (704) 333-9889

eewrtee*w7esweew re

~

co

Q. Why?

A. Having only seen him that one time in a

relatively coherent state, I don't know what he's like

when his medication is properly regulated and he's at h .

best, but Mr. Thompson in general rambled. His general

style of verbiage was what we would call little loose

in association. Something would remind him of something

else, and he would begin talking about that before he

finished talking about what he started out talking chon.

Was tangential in the sense that whatever associations he

made in his mind that most of us would keep to our

selves -- we all do them, we just don't all say them --

he would then say whatever it was that cocurred to hia.

I didn't do any particular kind of redirecting to see how |

focused he could become. I simply redirected as I needed

to to get a general sense of the way his thought process

was working.

Q. Would you describe Mr. Thompson as being

self-reflective during your initial interview with hia?

A. Wo. |

Q. The reason I asked that _ you did state that

be was talking about how he felt about the crime,

A. The word *reflective* means to me a more

intellectual process.

Q. Ali right.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9669

eo ewneweeiwew

~~

“ o

A. He emoted a great deal. He reflected very

little. Insight, which is an intellectual kind of

exercise really, almost an academic, removed exerciee, is

not something Mr. Thompson has very much of I don't

think. He reacts very strongly emotionally, and

sometimes out of control emotionally, but I don't think

I'd categorize that as reflective. He was deeply hurt

and deeply upset by his own behavior, became tearful,

rocked a great deal back and forth in hie chair, did the

hand gestures that I talked about, but did he reflect

upon it and describe it to me objectively? 1 don't think

so. ce

@. Was it mr. Thompson's becoming tearful that led

you to conclude that there was remorse and that alone?

A. Wo. I think the content of his verbalisations

was pretty clear as well. 1 don't know what's wrong with

me; how could I have done that; how could I be a beast)

why was I a beast; what wae I thinking; how could thie

happen; should never have happened, I think about her all

the time; she deserved to have a life. With or without

the emotion attached, the content I think ie pretty

clear.

Q. Was this in response to any specific question

by you as to why he did thie crime, or wae thie just part

of his general rambling to you or diecussicn?

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

eo e-.7w oo w4weww w

10

A. I don't think I would have asked Mr. Thompson

why he committed the offense during my first meeting with

him. I think he pretty much just chose the way he wanted

to talk about it.

Q. You said that he described Joanne McNamara as

the last in a long line of young women or damsels in ©

distress that. he was rescuing? |

AR. Actually, I think I described it that way.

Q. All right.

A. TI don't think that's a label he would have

used. Again, that indicates a whole lot of —

self-reflection. He simply told me about other girls

that he had helped.

Q. Were you able to verify that there were other

young women he was able to help besides Ms. McNamara?

A. I don't know if I'm able to do that. I haven't

done that. ‘7

‘Q. . Have you asked Mr. Kissinger or Mr. Chavis to

try and verify that for you? .

A. Wo, but it's a very interesting idea.

Q. Did you ask him how he felt he was helping .

these young women?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. What wae his response?

A. He protected thea.

INTERIN COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

81

31

Q. roa?

A. Enemies.

Q. Was he more specific?

A. Different situations, different enemies.

Joanne McNamara's case, her mother was the enemy." Bvil

men in her mother's home were the enemy. Her mother

wanting her to prostitute. In a situation that he was

deacribing to me in Hawaii -- no, maybe it was a |

situation that took place before he was transferred to

Hawaii; In the service, he rescued two teenage runaway

girle, put them up in his barracks. They came from,

according to him, abusive, violent homes, the arid being

their family -- their families.

Q. . Did he ever tell you that enenend 48 enesuten

young women that he assisted young men?

A. Never. I don't think so, no.

Q. Did you talk with him at all about his —

girlfriend Arlene during this first visit? |

A. Alittle bit, yes. :

Q@. Did you bring up the topic © or aia he?

A. I don't remember.

Q. What do you recall was said about her and his

relationship with her? | ,

A. That he loved her very much, that he knew her

for a long period of time, that they lived together when

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9689

eo e#;,e ne *#® & Ww

10

he was in Hawaii, that he wasn't good enovgh for her.

Q. Did he say why he was not good enough for her?

A. I don't recall that he did specifically, no.

Q. And you didn't ask hia?

A. I don’t think so.

Q. You administered the MMPI-2 to Mr. Thompson.

He willingly took the test?

A. He did.

Q. As you observed him, did he have any difficulty

reading the test and taking it on his own?

A. He didn't have any difficulty reading it. He

required a fair amount of supervision to take it.

Q. Can you elaborate on that for me, please, the

supervision that was required? ~

A. I'11 describe the level of supervision as

unusual statistically, in terms of the number of MMPIe

that I've helped to administer over the years.

Mr. Thompson read some of the items aloud to me and then

made rhyming sounds to some of the words. Some of the

items struck him as particularly amusing, and he would:

laugh out loud, and I would lavgh with him and suggest to

him that he get back to what he was doing. It didn't

wind up taking him -- part of how I suspected he might be

of normal intellicence is that it didn't take him much

longer than the average person who does it without the

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9689

ee, are ww w we

~

o

distractions. He asked a few questions about the

. interpretations but took my direction when I suggested to

him that he was the one who needed to make the

interpretation. —

Q. So by and large Mr. Thoupeon had no apparent

difficulty comprehending the questions or sanenguetring

thea? |

ALT don't believe so, and the scoring of the test

doesn't reflect any difficulty with comprehension. :

Qo. So you never reached a point where you had to

read questions to him because he was unable to read thea

and understand thea?

Ae Bo.

Q. ta there anything clea that occurred during

this first visit, thie four-hour visit with ur. + Sem

that we haven't discussed? ii

A. I think we have hit the high pointe.

Q. Did you talk with anyone else at the-prisoa

concerning Mr. Thompson during that firet vieit when you

were out there at River Bend, or was your time at River.

Bend solely limited to dealing with Mr. Thompeon?

A. During that first time, zy time was linited

solely to hia.

Q. Om the 2nd of February this year, you said that

you spent between two and a half and three hours cut at

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9869

~

- o

34

eee aowsees® w& Ww

the prison?

A. I did.

Q. And what happened during your visit? what did

you do during your visit to the prison on 2 February,

‘997

A. I think the anewer to the question of what I

did is that I observed Mr. Thompsom. I observed

Mr. Thompson in interaction with me, and I observed

Mr. Thompson in interaction with prison officials, and I

observed Mr. Thompson in interaction primarily with

Mr. Chavie. .

-Q. Where did you make these observations?

A. We were in one room the entire time.

Mr. Chavis entered that room with me. It's a smail roca,

kind of a cell-sized room. In fact, I think it is a

cell.

Q. <A visitor's room?

A. It's used as a visitor's room, but I don't -- I

don't think that it hae the amenities of a typical

visitor's room. There is a table in there, but I think

it really is a cell that's set aside in the high-security

area of that prison in which he could be cbhserved frou

three sides, so part of what I got to observe was

Mr. Thompson's reaction to the people who were observing

him. It was a lot like being in a fish bowl.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

tb ES

eo ews awwFeeee wF Ww FY

Q. And the reason you went out there on the 2nd of

February was why?

A. It wae about time for me to go back and

continue my evaluation, but prior to me planning that

trip specifically, using Mr. Chavis ae my contact person

for the logistics, Mr. Chavis asked me if I might com

and observe him. He called me at some point a week or so

beforé the time of my visit and said what I said to you

earlier, which ie that he was concerned about him and

thought that he waen't doing very well and asked if I

would come and look at him.

Q. What did you observe about Mr. Thompson on thie

visit? . as

A. Mr. Thompson was in terrible peychological

condition. 1'1] describe his physical appearance first.

Mr. Thompson was physically filthy. Hie body stank,

stank to the point where I could smell him before I could

see him enter the room. He locked disheveled. He came

inte the room wearing a dirty reg wrapped around his

head. He wae highly agitated, quite angry during much of

the visit, sometimes threateningly so.

Q. Toward you?

A. Not toward anyone in particular. He alternated

between being absolutely silent and speaking in great

gushes of words, streams of words. Mr. Thompson appeared

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

eerwrnawewwew rr

vy WwW NW WY WH YP YP YP Ye YP YP PY PY Pe OP

v @®@ wwe Fre oO’ emrmlUlU Cc OUhRUOhUhrMhUhFMhUrPKCUCUO

to be in a great deal of psychological discomfort. He

was not having the sort of psychotic episode where

someone is comfortable being crazy. He was apparently

quite tortured.

Mr. Thompson spoke in what could be described

clinically ae word salad at times, where words were

strung together that had nothing to do with one ‘another.

Hie anewers to questions didn't appear, on the surface at

least, to have anything to do with the questions.

Mr. Thompson didn't know who I was. Did not know that he

wae living in a prieon unit, thought that he was living

on a slave ship. .

And there are psychologists and psychiatrists

who believe in the symbolic level of speech of that

nature, so I hesitate to say to you that he was not able

to communicate anything. Perhaps it is that I was not

able to understand much of what he was trying to tell me.

But he told stories that had to do with his

enslavement and with his suffocation and with the fact

that he was being destroyed by an unknown tormenter,

although he knew it, he juet couldn't tell me who it was

or what it was.

That alternated with talk about how he was the

god of the world and the king of the world and that he

had seen heaven and that he had the power to set himself

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9869

eoewtnawee ww -e

37

~

o

free and to get us all out of the slave ship that we were

living in or that we were on.

At some points he wae able to say who I was in

terms of knowing that I was a psychologist. At other

pointe he told me that I was one of his vessels, one of

hie servants. At some point he became quite angry.

Sometimes he would get very, very angry, and I was unable

to detect anything external that’ had caused whatever the

verbal eruption was.

He was kept in hané shackles as well as leg

shackles during that visit and sometimes appeared very

uncomfortable in them and other times seemed to be

unaware that he was in them. He tried to leave the

interview room -- stated some intention to leave the

interview room maybe a dozen times and was distracted by

myself or Mr. Chavis into continuing conversation.

After about an hour and a half, he allowed

Mr. Chavie to leave the room. At first he was afraid of

me. He told me that I was evil and that I was there to

kild (im. At some point it was all right for Mr. Chavis

to leave, and, in fact, it became very important for

Mr. Chavie to leave. So he dismissed Mr. Chavis, and

Mr. Chavie left.

Q. You say it became important. Important to his,

or did he say it was. important or did you judge it to be

eoew-wtn weww

» » &

important?

A. He said. He directed it in some way. I'm not

sure exactly what he said. Mr. Chavis asked permission

to leave at some point and was told no. At that point it

was okay for him to leave. Mr. Thompson seemed to be

reacting very, very, very strongly te «) casual

observation on the part of the guards. Because of his

high level of agitation, and later as I became aware,

because the guards were very concerned about him and the

state he was in, there were more than the usual number of

people around I think, and Mr. Thompson wae aware that he

was being cbserved more closely and yelled things at the

guards and pounded hie hands sometimes on the table and

got up from his chair and moved his body around. —

At some point he was willing to remove the rag

he wae wearing on his head, but I think that took almost

two hours. And our interview terminated when

Mr. Thompson decided that I could save him if I would

allow him to kies my hand, and when I refused, he became

very angry, stood up, turned hie beck on ms, and told us

to leave. Didn't use the word “leave® but said you're

not here anymore.

When the guarde, four guards, came in to assist

Mr. Thompeon in returning to his cell, whether

intentionally or not, they wound up placing me between

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9869

oe ew. 8 «# &® 4&4 Ww

~

o

them and Mr. Thompson. Mr. Thompson wae extremely angry

with the guards: I don't know why. They didn't know

why. They were trying to talk with him about it. Didn't

want to go back into his cell block the way they wanted

him to, said that that was the incorrect door. Kept

insisting that he come cut the door that the guards were

standing in front of, the door that I was supposed to

leave by.

I actually requested that the guards move me

from between them, because I was concerned that there was

going to be some sort of physical altercation at that

point. They were ae well. I was -- Mr. Thompson's a lot

taller than I am. With the thrashing around that he was

doing -- they weren't physically struggling at this

point, he was thrashing around himself -- I was afraid

that he was going to actually hit me with his head. Se

wae rocking his head back and forth.

Q. #Gesticulating too?

A. ‘To the extent that he could --

Q. That he could with the shackles?

A. -- with hie hands shackled. In fact, I think

they were on a waist band too, because I remember

noticing his head moving much more than hie hands. if

he'd been waiving hie hands in my. face, I would have

noticed. |

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9869

eet oweww

BS

The guard then spent about ten minutes, maybe a

little bit less, with me, then, in the hallway and

Mr. Thompeom in that same room I was telling you about

with all four guards around his with them talking very

quietly and patiently to him. There was one man in

particular that he seemed to be comforted by, and this

man spoke very quietly to him in hie ear about that it

would be ckay and he could go back to his cell now and he

wouldn't let anything bad happen to him and although

Mr. Thompson continued to curse, the volume of his

emotionality came down, and that guard led the processica

of people out the back door of that room back towards the

cell block. |

At that point, after they had him beck in his

cell, they actually brovght his back to me.

Mr. Thompeom -- I thought thie was really quite dignified

behavior on the part of the custody officers. _

Mr. Thompson wae spparently in « room in which he was not

allowed to have paper or pencile or any object at all,

but he had been telling me for those two and a half or .

three hours by that point that he had some documents that

he needed me to take to his lawyer for hia. Sometimes

they were a secret code or « map to «a gold mine.

Sometimes those documents came up as his salvation. But

the guards actually led his back to his cell to let his

INTERIM GOURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9689

BeEoseesees

41

look for those documents, and then they led him back into

the room eo that he could tell me from the doorway that

they had been stolen.

QO. So he never delivered any of these documents to

you?

A. There weren't any such documents.

Q. Okay. |

A. And the guards assured me that there had not

been any documents stolen, that in fact he was not able

to have anything with him and hadn't for some time so

that there wasn't anything missing from his cell.

Q. Were you able to carry om any sort of «

conversation with Mr. Thompson during this visit?

A. 1 think that depends a ict on what you think «

conversation is. We were not conversing se you and 7

are. Words were being exchanged back and forth, and st

some point he thought that we were making contact,

because he appeared to be pleased when he was talking to

ma or when he was talking to Mr. Chavie. We didn't say

anything that made any sense to me particularly.

©. And after they took Mr. Thompson away, you

didn't see him again on that date?

A. Wo, I didn't.

Q. Did you, subsequent to Mr. Thompson being taken

away, talk with any of the guards?

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9689

eo ews. e8 F& & we Ww }

ChE S

42

A. I did. Two in particular.

Q. Okay.

A. I don't know their names.

Q. What was the nature of those conversations?

Before you answer that, Doctor, did you make any notes

about those conversations with the guards?

A. I did, as soon as I left the prison as a matter

of fact. And I in fact had to make notes about that

interview after I left Mr. Thompson's presence, because

part of what he did -- and I neglected to tell you this

earlier -- ie that he studied very carefully every single

pen mark that I made on my paper, took the pad out of ay

hand, made his own notations on the pad, read words out

loud, made up different words, told me to write down

various words and spelled them for sue.

Q. Are those notations that he made on your pad

part of the documents that are being forwarded to

Dr. Blau?

A. They are.

Q. What did you discuss with the correctional

officers? |

A. <I wae very alarmed by the condition that I saw

Mr. Thompson in. When I had seen Mr. Thompson about five

ané a half months before that -- no, I guese maybe not

quite that long, about five months before that -- he was

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9669

eo eew#Wenfe 84 Ww

~

°o

in a much, much better psychological state.

The level of anguish and disorientation and

confusion and anxiety that he was living in was very

alarsing to me, and I asked the correctional officers who

came back to talk to me how long he had looked like that.

I asked them what they thought about what was happening

to him. They indicated to me that they didn't understand

why he had been allowed to get into that kind of |

psychological position. They thought of him as a mental

health inmate. They thought he had longstanding

psychological problems, according to their report. They

talked to me about the fact that there was a unit efther

at that prison or somewhere nearby for severely mentally

411 inmates, and they both expressed the belief that ‘

Mr. Thompson needed to be housed there.

One, at least, of them had known him for many

‘years and said he had never been as bad -- in his words,

as bad as he had been in the last several weeks, and they

indicated to me that some custody officers had been

relaying information about his psychiatric conditica te

the contract people who were mental health service

providers for the prison unit and that it didn't sees

that much wae being done.

Q. Are the names of those correctional officers

with whom you spoke in your notes?

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9689

eo eww ew#esewe wh 4

~

o

11

44

A. They're not. I was upset enough and physically

a bit intimidated by the interaction I just had with

Mr. Thompson that I didn't look at their name tage. When

I left, I immediately called Mr. Chavis and described

what I could remember about their physical appearance and

asked him to identify then.

Q. Was Mr. Chavis able to identify then?

a. I don't know.

Q. He's never gotten back to you on that point?

A. No, he has not.

Q. Did you make any attempt to talk to the prison

mental health personnel after thie episode with

Mr. Thompson on the 2nd of Pebruary, om that particular

date, before leaving the prison?

A. What I did was talk to Mr. Kiesinger seeking

permission of some kind from him about how to pursue

communication of the kind you're describing. He

suggested to me that he didn't think it was appropriate

at that point for me to directly contact the prison

personnel unless I thovght Mr. Thompson's life was in

danger -- in which case I wouldn't have asked his

permission, I just would have told him that's what 2

needed to do -- and he said that he would communicate it

in whatever way he saw appropriate.

Q. Had you planned to do any testing of

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(764) 333-9669

HERE ERE ER ES ee vn we wee

wv w Ww WW WH FF

re er ee ee

Mr. Thompson when you went out there on the 2nd of

Pebruary?

A. Bo.

Q. I guess that brings use to April 7th.

A. Yes. |

Q. What happened, then, on that date?

A. I was scheduled to appear at a hearing that I

don't ¥eally understand the nature of exactly, so I can't

tell you what it really is legally, but there was some

kind of hearing in which the issue of his competence to

proceed in his appeals was going to be discussed.

Q. That's ckay. Mr. Kissinger and I know what the

hearing was supposed to be, so you just tell me what it

was that happened out there, and I think we'll be fine.

A. Okay. I showed up at whatever city it was ia

the night before the hearing, and I had asked to speak

with Mr. Thompson, because present competence is such «

fluid condition. *r. Kissinger and I both met with

Mr. Thompson together -- he and I sat side-by-side with

Mr. Thompson. across the table -- and I talked to

Mr. Thompson, and I thought that probably within the

legal definition of competence to proceed as

Mr. Kissinger explained it to me, at the time that J met

with him, he probably met that definition. He probably

met that standard for competence.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING =

(704) 333-9889 j

eee#j, a we ww

ChE sS

Q. What sort of things did you talk about with

Mr. Thompson?

A. To describe it as talking about with is

probably not an accurate characterization. Mr. Thompson

was very angry with me. He did not want to talk with me.

Q. Was that how he expressed hie anger, simply 12

don't want to talk with you, or were there other signs of

anger directed toward you?

a Very, very, very rapid clipped speech about how

he didn't know why we had to meet, didn't want to meet,

the sort of tone of voice I'm using right now. Very

clipped, véry rapid. He had met a good doctor; he had

already talred to a good doctor; why was I there; could I

leave him alone; he didn't want to talk about it again;

he didn't want to tell me whether he knew where he was;

he knew lawyers were representing him; he knew lawyers

were trying to kill him; he knew he was in a jail;

couldn't I see the bars; was I blind; you know, cbviously

there were bars.

~

Some of what he said wasn't coherent, but when

I asked him pointed questions about his legal

circumstances and about the function of the court, he

answered those questions, not directly exactly, but let

me know that he understood. He didn't seem to understand

that the doctor that he liked so much had been sent there

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

97

oeoe-#y,#e«*sre & Ww F

& S&S

25

47

by the State.

Q. Dr. Blau you mean?

A. Yes.

A. According to Mr. Thompson, the man who came to

see him was going to save him and quite a wonderful

fellow and locking out for his best interests and

couldm't I just go away. Said they made contact. They

had very good harmony. They had a good -- I think

connection is the word that he used. That it had been a

significant meeting and that I ought to consult with the

doctor if I wanted to learn something. He was quite «

learned man and a good man, unlike the person I was.

- ss: Jie- some point he knew who Mr. Chavis was, said

some angry things about hia. At some point he wasn't

sure who Mr. Chavis was. But he knew that Mr. Kissinger

was his lawyer each time I asked him. And so be |

tolerated my presence for about 45 minutes, maybe an

Q. Was he angry toward Mr. Kissinger? —

A. I -- my interpretation ie that he was angry

with Mr. Kissinger for bringing me into the roos. He

thought ‘Mr. Kissinger was doing kind of a crappy job and

told him that he wished he would just get some money so

he could get a decent lawyer, but he said that |

Mr. Kiesinger hadn't been horrible exactly so far, right

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

woe env#e*#ess#se#e#e*# 4& Ww

10

46

at that point, and although he would become free when

Mr. Kissinger raised funds for his release, he knew “at

he was stuck with Mr. Kissinger for at least the next few

days, which said to me he knew who Mr. Kissinger was.

When I asked hie if Mr. Kissinger was actually a

fund raiser or whether he was a lawyer, he said he was a

lawyer, eo -- but he wasn’t really happy with anybody in

the room.

He told me actually that he -- I asked him when

the last time was he had a bath because he looked like he

had showered, and, in fact, whoever was the chief custody

officer -- I think it might have been a captain --

Mr. Kissinger and I were in his office waiting for

Mr. Thompson to be brought to whatever room we were going

to be allowed to sit in, and he mentioned to us in

passing that Mr. Thompson had eaten his dinner or had.

eaten something and had bathed.

When I asked Mr. Thompson when he bathed, he

told me it had been months. When I asked hie if he .

didn't remember taking a shower, he became very angry

with me, so I didn't know whether he was angry because he

didn't want to talk about taking a shower or because he

didn't remember taking a shower.

Q. Om 2 February did you ever ask him about his

hygiene or lack thereof?

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

49

~

A. Did I ask him? I must have, because he told me

that he didn't like water. I told him he stank, so that

doesn't qualify as asking, but I think we had those two

exchanges at least.

Q. Were you able to elicit from him why he allowed

hie personal hygiene to deteriorate at that point ia

time? .

2. Can't, can't, can't: Afraid, afraid, afraid.

Q. Of water, water, water?

ke Yas. |

Q. Okay. pid you administer any tests to

Mr. Thompson on 7 April ‘99?

A. Mo. |

Q@. Do you intend to administer any other tests to

Mr. Thompson between now and the evidentiary hearing in

September of this year?

A. tI don't think so.

Q. You had to think for a moment about that.

A. Well, it would be very interesting and maybe

clinically interesting. That's what I have to decide

about, maybe if it would be clinically significant to do

some projective psychological testing with his. The

judgment that I'll make is whether it's likely to be so

stressful for Mr. Thompson that the stress would outweigh

whatever possible gains there might be.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

100

ewe enwrnweweew re

wv ~ ww +» » » » »Y YY YP BY BY

ese Y§ oweewstfa «ese &@ w FY OC

I'm aleo not at all sure that I'm going to be

able to complete my evaluation by September, because if

Mr. Thompson's condition is not improved beyond what I

saw the last time I visited with him, I'm not sure how

one might do that. ~

Q. And that last time would be 7 April, correct?

A. Yes. —

Q. What tests, as we sit here today, do you think

you would perhaps like to administer to further assist

you in completing your evaluation of Mr. Thompson?

A. If I administered any further tests, I think

that I would like to administer the thematic and

perception test that Dr. Copple administered to hia in

the early 19908. I thought the results that he chtained

at that time were quite interesting, and it would be

interesting to see how that had changed over tine.

Q. Any others?

A. None that I can think of. He's been given

quite a large number of tests by all the psychologists

who've had their hands on him over the last year.

Q. What remains to be done so that you can

complete your evaluation of Mr. Thompson? 2

A. Are you asking me about the ideal world or the

world of what minimum could I survive with in order to be

secure about my opinions?

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9869

101

Si

oeoewrwee#f#k#e#ejrTr##* 4«# w

~

o

Q. Why don't you give me both?

A. Okay. Im the ideal world, I would have two or

more further opportunities to spend time talking with

Mr. Thompson about his life and to be able to review with

him information about hie family life and his economic

circumstances that has been revealed to me through other

sources. |

Typically I'm in a position where it's the

individual him or herself who might be revealing those |

circumstances to me first, and then I might be seeking

collateral information to substantiate. In this case, ft

don't have any of that information from Mr. Thompson and

all of it from other people, so it would be very helpful

to know, when confronted with the facts as they have been

told to me, whether Mr. Thompson could let se know

something about how that affected hia emotionally.

That would let me be able to have opinions

beyond simply what psychologists and psychiatrists know

to be true statistically in certain circumstances. Then

I would be able to know that that was true for

Mr. Thompson as well.

Q. And minimally? I'm sorry. Are you through

telling me what you need for the ideal world?

A. One more thing I think in the ideal world. 1

think I would like to speak with another relative or two.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9689

102

eoeoes»nw’#e#eske wen

~

o

Q. Have you spoken to some relatives?

A. tI have. This family has been able to help me

understand a great deal of the early dynamics of -

Mr. Thompeon's life, and, because he's such a poor

historian -- even was during the first visit --. .

collateral witnesses in this case are quite important

because, unlike how Mr. Thompson's been portrayed by

Dr. Blau, Mr. Thompson's very reluctant to talk about

whatever level of disability or illness or suffering he

might have experienced, and although we did talk about

some of the same events in his family life that later r

talked about with his grandmother and his sister, he

certainly minimized the damage to him of those

circumstances.

Q. Have you had a social history prepared on

Mr. Thompsca?

A. Wot a formal social history, no.

Q. De you intend to have one?

A. Wo, not at thie time. I don't.

Q. I take it there hae been no prior social

history done on him that you've been provided. Am I

correct in assuming that?

A. I think I have been provided it as part of the

prison records. I-mean, I think that there are social

histories that are part of various evaluations that have

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9669

eo e#, e* wt 4 Ww

10

been done on him in the past. I don't know how

formalized they are, but certainly there was some

information about his family.

Q. You state that you've talked with his

grandmother?

A. Yes.

Q. When was that?

A. Yesterday.

Q. First time?

A. First time.

Q. And his sister?

A. His sister, Nora Wharton.

Q. W-a-r-t-o-n?

A. W-h-a-r-t-o-n.

Q. And when did you talk with her?

A. Yesterday as well.

Q.. First time?

A. Yes.

Q. Have you talked with any other family members

about Mr. Thompson's background?

A. Wo.

Q. Have you attempted to talk with his brother?

A. His older brother, Curtis, is the person I was

referring to earlier, and I did attempt to call his house

at one point last night, and he was not st home.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

~

o

ae ane

eet 8 «8 &® & WwW

Q. Have you attempted to talk with any of

Mr. Thompson's schoolteachers or schoo] administrators?

A. Mo. I have, however, reviewed a large number

of depositions and pieces of testimony that are those

people that you're describing right now. .

Q. Neighbors from when he was growing up, have you

talked with any of thea?

A. Mo, I have not. |

Q. Just reviewed any testimony perhaps from then?

A. Yes. That's correct.

Q. Have you seen the -- says here extract of

Mr. Thompson's Navy records taken from trial counsel's

file, post-conviction hearing Exhibit 3. That does not

include the actual transcript of his court-martial, does

it? Have you reviewed the transcript of his

court-martial, called the record of trial?

A. I'm trying to think if the actual transcript is

in there. I think that in that exhibit is a summary of

the transcript, a factual finding. I don't know if I

have -- yeah, I think I have seen the testimony of at

least some of the witnesses, so it may be that the answer

to your question is yes and I don't know.

Q. Or perhaps it's just the summary of the

testimony of the witnesses?

A. Perhaps it is, but I don't think so.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

eoerteawneees ww

b ©

Q. The record of trial, I believe, would be thie

size document (indicating), and it's about 3/4 to an inch

thick I believe.

A. I think that is part of the packet that £

received.

Q. Have you attempted to contact any of his

supervisors. in the military?

A. No.

Q. Have you talked with his former girlfriend,

Arlene? me

A. Cajuleo. No, I did not. I actually.

interviewed Mr. Chavis, who spent -- let me see if it was

three or four days -- with her. It looks like from

July 29th through August 2nd of last year, 1998, |

interviewing her in Honolulu, Hawaii. Mr. Chavis and &

have talked about the content of his interviews with

Me. Cajulao om several occasions over the last several

months.

Q. Did you find her cbservations of Mr. Thompsca

beneficial to yout |

A. tf did.

Q. Basically what about her cbservations was

beneficial? What pointe did she bring out that you find

important in reaching your diagnosis?

A. Ms. Cajulao described to Mr. Chavis that during

INTERIM COURT

(704) 333-9869

106

ceoewranwskewesw

»

oO

' the course of the four-year relationship she had with

Mr. Thompson, Mr. Thompson became increasingly bizarre in

behavior that he exhibited. There were a number of

cecasions in which there were incidents that took place

in the military that he described to her as his having

been attacked. The facte of the situation may in fact

not be that, but that was his description to her, that he

was being picked on, eS

was being attacked. 7

‘Be became depressed, according to her, over

time and increasingly paranoid. At some point she would

come home from work, and he would be in their home with

the curtains drawn, standing by himself in the dark

telling her that people were after him and that he didn't

want, poeple to be chile to lock ot bin theeugh the

windows. ie cumatare eing qpte eames ue Ute

behavior.

There are a couple of situations that she

described to Mr. Chavis in which, with no external

provocation that she could identify, Mr. Thompson becam

quite violent with her, and she saw those behaviors as

very unusual for him and reported to Mr. Chavie that

Mr. Thompson seemed unaware of what ‘had provoked it and

didn't even seem after the fact to remember what had

taken place, would simply, after a period of time, cals

(704) 333-9889

107

eseervwrweweweewe ee ew

10

himself down and return to normal behavior. I found all

of that quite significant.

Q. How did he become violent with her?

A. There's one episode described in which they're

in the kitchen cooking dinner or cleaning up the dishes,

and he actually threatened her witha knife. He told her

that he was going to kill her. )

Q. Any other specific violent episodes related to

you?

A. There's an incident in which I believe he

struck her.

Q. With his fist or with an cbhject?

A. With some part of his body. I think he may

have grabbed her around the neck. .

Q. Do you know whether or not she ever reported

any of these assaults on her?

A. 2 don't know.

Q. How was this information conveyed to you? Was

this a written statement that Mr. Chavis had taken from

Me. Cajulac? Is that how you pronounce it?

A. Cajuleo is what he tells me.

Q. Cajulaoc.

"A. Yes.

Q. Was this a written statement, or are -hese

Mr. Chavis's notes that you have relied on?

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

108

oe est awe ww

10

A. They're his notes I've relied on. It's an oral

report that he made to me, and I've made some notes of

that report.

Q. So he did not actually give you his notes?

A. That's correct.

Q. The notes that you made, are they among the

materials that are going to Dr. Blau?

Ay Yes.

Q. Have you talked with Mr. Thompson's trial

attorneys in this matter? | e

A. I have not.

Q. Do you intend to?

A. Again, it's a wonderful idea. That might be a

really significant source of information. In reality, in

the duration of an evaluation, anyone who can provide me

with information about Mr. Thompson increases the depth

of my understanding of him, and eo that would be a very

nice thing. .

Q. What about his post-conviction attorneys?

A. ° My opinion about that is exactly the same.

Q.. Have you talked to thes?

A. Wo, I have not talked to thea.

Q. Have you talked to any other custodial officers

out at River Bend other than the two that you mentioned

you spoke to on 2 February of. this year?

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

wo enwrnawe ww re

~

o

11

~A. Not about Mr. Thompson, no.

Q. You've talked to other custodial officers

simply about getting in and out of the prison?

Administrative type things?

A. Sometimes I've talked to them about whether

they like their jobs, or they wanted to know what work

was like in North Carolina, so it might be that kind of

conversation.

Q. Since I just received this report at the outset

of the deposition, I haven't really had a chance to go

through it. Ie this a preliminary report, then, since

you haven't completed your evaluation?

A. It's somewhere between a preliminary report and

an amended report and amendments that will be attached to

it. Let me say it better than that. I think that I have

enough information about Mr. Thompson so that I am

comfortable with the opinions that I suggest, that I make

im thie document. I think that as additional information

ie forthcoming it will add to the depth and the

complexity of my understanding.

MR. PRUDEN: I think at this time what I'd like

to do is, since I've had you talking for over an hour

now, why don't we go ahead and take a break for maybe

about 15 minutes or so, and that'll give me an

opportunity to take a look at the report, and that might

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

- 110

weoees#.=n=#eanquase#e ww ww

10

expedite things.

(Recess from 2:35 p.m. to 2:48 p.m.)

BY MR. PRUDEM:

Q. What indicates to you or what indicia are there

for you that suggest Mr. Thompson was displaying

significant signs of mental illness from the time he was

a emall child? How do you arrive at that conclusion?

K: During my interview with Mx. Thompson's

sister -- and let me say all. of her names -- Ms. Nora

Jean Hall Wharton, Ms. Wharton spontaneously began to

talk to me about Mr. Thompson's behavior in the time

period immediately following their mother's death.

By the time of the first grade, Mr. Thompson,

when he was being yelled at by his grandmother, she was

reportedly verbally abusive in the following fashion:

She would yell at him you have the devil in you, boy.

She would then observe Mr. Thompson standing or sitting

beside a wall repeatedly banging his head into the wall.

She, in her role as protector of him, would ask him what

was going on, and he would tell her he was trying to

knock the devil out of his head. She recalls at the

time, although she was quite young herself, being worried

about his behavior and thinking of it as very odd.

One of the things that we know about people who

develop thought disorders is that frequently in childhood

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9669

111

~

o

11

61

wo ewe*wee ww

you'll see one or more peculiarities in behavior. This

would certainly fit in that category. She recalls other

inetances.

Q. Sort of a self-punishment or a self-exorcisn

type thing?

A. A self-injurious behavior is what we would call

it I think. Mr. Thompson, when he was Greg, in the first

and second and third grade had rather frequent hysterical

crying episodes in classrooms that Ms. Wharton recalis

also as very unusual in the context of his schoolroce

situation. She describes him as being the subject of

torment on the part of the students because he behaved in

an odd fashion. Sometimes he would simply begin to cry

and wail and scream and apparently made a sound like a

fire engine when he was sobbing and developed the

nickname Fire Engine. That's reported in the trial

transcript. She told me much more detail about actually

the extent of those kind of emotional outbursts. ‘

At home it was rather common for Mr. Thompson

to begin to cry and ecream during times when Ms. Wharton

herself was being beaten by their grandmother.

Me. Wharton was the victim of physical abuse on the part

of the grandmother. Mr. Thompson cbheerved mich of this

since they were together virtually all of the time, and

Nora Wharton was not really permitted much interaction

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

112

eo ewvw#n#s##se & NehUmrF

eeRE REE ES

outeide of their home.

Q. Did Me. Wharton tell you how she was beaten?

A. Yes. She was beaten with what she referred to

as a tennis shoe on one occasion.

Q. Like a sneaker? | j

A. Yes. In the street in front of the neighbors,

beaten to the point whee she had to be assisted in

walking home afterwards.. She was beaten with aa —

electrical cord at some point. Mr. Thompson observed

both of those beatings and became hysterical. ©

She recalled ancther episode during which her

biological father was brutally beating and raping their

mother on the floor in front of them when the children

were quite small, perhaps Mr. Thompson was himself three

or four. She was maybe four or five. Mr. Thompson's

reaction to that vas to stand and scream and scream and

ecream and ecream during the entire episode. i

Any of the -- taking the self-injury aside,

setting that aside, any one of those behaviors is

isolation might not be particularly significant. | Putting

them together, we begin to see a pattern of intense

emotional reactivity. 4

Q. So basically, if I understand it, it's the

self-injurious behavior and the crying and the way you

see him reacting to these physical abuses of others?

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

=

113

eo envweaew#eeiwew ee

10

A. Yes.

Q. And that is indicative of a sign of menta]

illness to you? I just want to make sure that I's

understanding what you're telling me. If I'm not, please

explain it to me.

A. I think I understand your question. it is an

early indicator of a problem that's likely to develop.

With the benefit of hindsight, it takes on the

significance of a precursor, because then we see the

escalating pattern of dyefunction and abnormality.

Q. Sort of a causal relationship is what you're

seeing developing? . |

A. I'm not sure what causes what. There are often

early indices of later mental illnesses that you don't

know exactly what it's going to look like later, but you

realize in looking at the child that there's a high

likelihood that something is not going to be right when

that person achieves maturity.

Q. Because of the environment, for example, in

which he's growing up?

A. Perhaps. Perhaps becouse of the genetics .

involved. Perhaps becauee of the situations he's exposed

to, as you said, the environment. Perhaps because of

whatever factors there are. Perhaps nutrition plays a

role in this. These children were without food for

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9869

114

eo ew ono Ff & YS BY

10

significant periods of time as well. I don't know all of

the reasons, but what I know is that if you look back in

the childhood of thie man, the beginnings of mental

illness are apparent. ,

Q. Besides Me. Wharton's report of lack of food,

have you seen any evidence that the children were takes

away because of malnutrition?

&. No. Ms. Wharton did tell me, however, that

there was a neighbor who had planned to make a report to

Social Services, so perhaps I'1] have the opportunity to

interview that neighbor as well.

Q. And ie there authority in terms of -- strike

that. You don't know to what degree the children were

malnourished then? | |

A. Mo. I don't know. I do know that -- and this

is confirmed by the grandmother -- in the six weeks

approximately following their mother's death, the

children were left alone virtually all of the tine

because Me. Lamar was drunk and in bed, and so we have «

five, a six, and a seven-year-old child in « house with

no food. They would occasionally steal money frou

underneath her mattress while che was sleeping, and one

of them would go to the store to try to find some food.

Occasionally a neighbor would provide them with a meal or

a can of food. I don't know whether they were

GOURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9689

11

eo ew# eff & &e BS

10

malnourished over an extended period of time. I do know

that there is, from Ms. Wharton's perspective, rather

serious psychological damage from that time.

Q. You have no medical documentation showing any

malnourished condition or that it's caused sous problea

with his brain, do you? |

A. I dom't. These children were never taken to

the doctor, so there wouldn't be any medical Ké

documéntation. There's probably documentation in the

school system. According to Ms. Wharton, Me. Lamar was

so drunk at the beginning of the school year following

their mother's death that she forgot to sign the children

up for lunches at school. They didn't have anything to

eat during the day, so they forged her signature on «

permission slip so that they could eat. They were

discovered and punished by the school superintendent

people, and a form was sent home to Ms. Lamar. She then

signed it, and the children were able to eat lunch after

that point. A couple weeks passed for all of that to get

straightere«d out.

Me. Wharton has undergone a lot of therapy in

recent years and says that she's now able to describe

situations that she wasn't very comfortable acknowledging

to herself, these being one of thea.

Q. Your diagnosis for Mr. Thompson is

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9888

116

eoewrt aownkewese

~

o

echizoaffective disorder, comma, bipolar type. What

leads you to that diagnosis from what you've reviewed and

your testing resulte?

A. What leads me to the diagnosis is that there is ~

a long history, perhaps at this point almost a 20-year

history, of simu)taneous thought disorder on the part of

Mr. Thompson documented throughout all the records, and

affective disorder, emotional disorder, being unable to

regulate his emctions, sometimes falling into the pits of

despair and becoming suicidal, sometimes becoming highly

agitated and manic and having too much energy, too much

exuberance, and grandiose thinking. The thought disorder

is manifested in persecutory ideas, delusions of

grandeur -- lots of different kinds of delusions

actually -- auditory hallucinations that he sometimes

admits to, sometimes suspected by the doctors who are

doing the examination.

The psychological testing early on in

Mr. Thompson's incarceration confirm the presence of «a

psychotic process. There was an MMPI administered to his

by a prison psychologist in 1990 that is described as

valid and indicative of psychotic process, and throughout

the prison record he receives a variety of diagnoses that

take into account both thought disorder and affective

illness.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

11

eo ew h UC O.mUC UC OUmUCUMMLEhLUCUNUCUM

~

o

The very best diagnosis to describe all of the

complex of symptoms that I just talked to you about is

echizoaffective disorder, bipolar type.

Q. You note in your report Mr. Thompson was

observed having a significant change in behavior ofter he

was Gischarged from the Navy. What significance ao you

attach to that fact?

A. Well, it's interesting, because the state Court

of Appeals actually notes this, that prior to his entry

into the military Mr. Thompson ie described almost

uniformly -- well, in fact, uniformly according to their

opinion -- as passive, as compliant, as eager to please,

as gentle, as timid, as eager to rum from attacks.

At some point -- and we don't know, because I

haven't seen any peychiatric records from the military at

this point; I don't know if there are any -- we don't

know whether or not the change in Mr. Thompson is

perceived as other than behavioral disruption, but, in

fact, hie description of that time ie that he began to

notice that people were trying to burt hie all the time,

that officers and other people of his rank and slightly

above his rank attempted to provoke him, that they

sometimes physically assaulted him, that he thought he

was being followed a lot, and that he sometimes struck

out in what he thought was defense and then later found

INTERIM COURT

(704) 333-9889

118

eo ewrnweww re

10

out from other people who he knew and trusted that there

wasn't anything to defend against or that there might not

have been anything to defend against.

Q. This is what he related to you during your

interview last August? |

A. Right. The people who saw him after the

military each were struck by how very different he

seemea. That was the word that kept being used,

"different.* Sometimes the people I was speaking to were

not able to describe what different meant, but, for

example, the grandmother said that he was different as in

not right, that he wasn't himself. Ms. Wharton tells us

that the grandmother was very well aware that he was in

deep psychological distress, and, in fact, the

grandmother suggested that he be taken to the psychiatric

unit at Grady Hospital in Atlanta, I believe, for

treatment. The grandmother cbeerved him staring off into

space for long periods of time. She cbeerved his

mumbling to himself. When she asked him what he was

doing, he told her he had no idea what she wae talking ©

about. She said that wae very different from the boy who

left her to go into service.

The sister has even a better glimpee of hia

than that, becauee he actually went to live with her for

a while, and she said he was bizarre. She described his

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9869

-

119

eenwnaw#ew we

10

ae paranoid. She said that he would explode for no

reason at all, that she was afraid of him for the very

firet time in her life, that they had always been

terribly close, the sort of close where if there wae only

one piece of bread to eat they would share it, that they

always looked out for one another, and that suddenly he

was behaving in ways that she simply could not identify.

She described three very serious episodes of aggressica

and ensticnai upeet that she said are what led her to

approach her grandmother about what to do for treatment

for hia.

Q. Did they ever attempt to get treatment for hia? ~

A. Wo, they did not.

Q. And did they say why?

A. No. Me. Wharton did not say why. She said

that she felt greatly guilty about that. |

Q. You state that the echizoaffective disorder,

bipolar type, would substantially impair Mr. Thompson's

ability to conform his conduct to the requirements. of the

law. How so?

A. There are pointe in time when Mr. Thompson is

out of contact with reality. He is reeponding te

situations that simply don't exist or that he perceives

in extremely exaggerated or different form. A person is

not able to conform one's conduct to the law if you are

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9869

eo ews & *& ® 4&6 Ww

& FOSS ES

70

frankly delusional or hallucinating in some way.

Mr. Thompson over the years hae had both of those

symptoms.

Q. So it's this delusional aspect of this disorder

that is the main factor that would keep him from having

the ability to conform his conduct ‘to the requirements of

law, if I understand you correctly?

A, ‘Ie it the main factcc? Let me say that I think

it's at least as potent a factor if not more as the other

aspect of hie mental illness, which is that he has

enct ional disregulation.

Q. Meaning?

A. Meaning Mr. Thompson often ie not in control of

his emotions. He has episodes of rage, of aggression,

that he doesn't understand or relate to very well. He's

told about them later. Sometimes he remembers thea,

sometimes he doesn't. He is often embarrassed about his

behavior afterwards, but there are pointe at which I

believe he's not in control of what he's doing.

Q. When you say “he's not in control of what he's

doing,* are you saying that it's impulsive behavior?

A. If I am emotionally disregulated; if I's

over-aroused and overreactive and I operate out of a

faulty belief system, so that not only do I have the

impulee to do things that I ordinarily wouldn't, but 7

INTERIM COURT

(704) 333-9689

so en8ntnmefemlmCUtlmUCOHUmUCUMEUC DUC

~

¥ o

aleo think things are going on that aren't, I have a

combination in which yes, I suppose you could call it

impulse, but you aleo have to take the notion into

account that it might be an impulee to do something that

doesn't make any sense.

Q. Does this disorder prevent Mr. Thompson from

planning hie activities?

a. Sometimes, yes, it does.

Q. And so the inability to plan, would that be a

factor that would prevent him from conforming his conduct

to the requirements of the law?

A. Tf that were in operation at some time. In the

history of the Department of Corrections' mental health

records, when he's properly medicated I don't think

that's true about hia.

Q. Ie it your professional opinion, then, thet

when he is medicated he has the ability to plan, but when

he is not medicated he does not always have the ability

to plan?

A. Those two things are true. It's aleo true that

if he's inadequately medicated or a medicated he

doesn't have the ability to plan anything. I don't know

whether he has impulees. I think he's all impulee, so to

have impulses implies that there's a part of you that's

not impulsive. For example, when Mr. Chavie and I saw

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9869

122

eewnweewew er

~

°o

him during my second interview with him, he could not

have planned anything at all, not beyond the nanosecond

in which he was experiencing the world. But he was

receiving psychotropic medications at the time, so that's

why I have to put that qualifier in there.

Q. What evidence prior to his incarceration do you

have that Mr. Thompson was hallucinating or suffered

hallucinations -- excuse me, experienced hallucinations? |

A. Well, the evidence of hallucinations is an

interesting thing since the only way that we know if

somebody is hallucinating ie if they tell us. If you're

asking me if there's documentation, the answer is no,

because Mr. Thompson never was taken for treatment es

best I know. He doesn't remember, at least according te

his report to me, whether he received any treatment ta

the military. He remembers being told that he needed

treatment in the military, and he remembers that he

thought he wanted to see a psychiatrist in the military.

He cannot remember if he actually ever saw such @ doctor.

It's possible that there are records that exist that will

have exactly the evidence that you're talking about, but

I haven't seen thea. .

Q. Have you attempted to obtain hie military

medical records?

A. Do you mean have I asked Mr. Chavis to get

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

eoenywnaweeeiweew re

10

those for me? Yeah, I have. I don't know what they'll

show. I rather suspect that Mr. Thompson never received

any medical treatment of a psychiatric nature in the

military. He didn't like to tell anyone about what was

happening to him. The evidence that I have has to do

with the reports of people who observed him, who cbheerved

him moving his lips and talking when there wasn't anyone

present, that being his grandmother.

Q. And thie is after his return, correct?

A. Yes. And I have Mr. Thompson's report. He

wasn't happy to talk about it is my opinion, but he

acknowledged to me that it's possible that when he

thought he was being followed while he wae in the

military that maybe there wasn't anyone there. And when

he saw people locking in hie window, which would qualify

as hallucination, it's poesible that there wasn't anyone

there looking at him either.

Q. Do you know if Mr. Thompson has filed any kind

of claim with the Veterans Administration for his

condition while in the military?

A. I don't have any idea.

Q. Any other evidence in the record pricr to his

incarceration that would be indicative to you that he was

experiencing hallucinations --

A. Wo.

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9689

124

eo ew awe ww w

~

o

™

Q. -- other than his self-report?

A. And the report of the sister and his

grandmother. Are we talking about just documents?

A. Mo. Mo documents. a

Q. Or any other reports from other individuals?

A. - Not at this time, no. | | .

@ Bear with me for just a minute, please.

A. Sure.

Q. You're familiar are the ters malingering?

A. I aa.

Q. What stepe during your evaluation process have

you undertaken to deternine whether or not Mr. Thospece

might be malingering? »

a The MMPI-2 has several scales that are set.

aside to elicit the possibility of trying to portray

one's self in an inaccurate manner. Mr. Thompeca

performed withis normal levels cn ali the validity

scales. Dr. Blau gave Mr. Thompson several measures of

malingering, and he scored within normal limits on all of

those. There are normal test results found within the

prison records, and I have my almost 20 years asa

clinical psychologist with which to make clinical

judgments.

MR. PRUDEN: I believe that's all the questicns

INTERIN COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9889

eo ewtnweiww vw

BS &EEE S

~

~ a

I have. Steve?

MR. KISSINGER: None.

(Signature reserved.) |

(Whereupon, at 3:16 p.m., the taking of the

instant deposition ceased.)

Signature of the Witness

SUBSCRIBED and SWORN TO before me this day of

r 29__.

My commiesion expires:

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9689

eo eww oweww w

~

o

76

ERRATA SHEET

RE: GREGORY THOMPSON v. RICKY BELL, WARDEN

DEPOSITION OF: FAYE &. SULTAN, PH.D.

Please read this original deposition with care,

and if you find any corrections or changes you wish made,

list them by page and line number below. DO NOT WRITE IN

THE DEPOSITION ITSELF. Return the deposition to this

office after it is signed. We would appreciate your

prompt attention to this matter. ot!

To assist you in making any such corrections,

please use the form below. If supplemental or additional

pages are necessary, please furnish same and attach thea

to thie errata sheet.

read:

Page ___—sitine _ should

read:

Page ss sLine ss shows).

read:

Page ___s—siLine __séwsdos 1

read:

Page __—iLine ___ssshow ld.

read:

Page sd iLine sé wow dd

read:

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9869

iat

eoeoes#ses$==*a wef we Ww

eo & & &

INTERIM COURT REPORTING

(704) 333-9669

128

78

CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER

STATB OF NORTH CAROLINA )

COUNTY OF CABARRUS )

I, Dayna H. Lowe, the officer before whos the

foregoing deposition wae taken, do hereby certify that

the witness whose testimony appears in the foregoing

deposition was duly sworn by me; that the testimony of

eaid witness wae taken by me to the best of my ability

and thereafter reduced to typewriting under my direction;

that I am neither counsel for, related to, nor employed

by any of the parties to the action in which this

deposition was taken, and further that I am n

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.