*1 any- the instant circumstances of thing say undertake to
we
question would be dictum.
Affirmed. POLLARD,Appellant,
Marmion America,
UNITED STATES of Appellee.
No. 13901. Appeals Court of
United States Sixth Circuit.
June 1960. 4, 1960. Amended Oct.
As 6, 1960.
Rehearing Denied Oct. *2 Department.
Detroit Police He was an apparently well-adjusted, highly intelli- gent Negro force, officeron the of an ac- nature, pleasing personality, tive happy disposition. rating His aas mem- Department ber of the Police was excel- lent, intelligence quotient, his appeared from the examination of the Department, very high. He was married and had four children. He was good husband and father and had never been in trouble. left a He Detroit high school, good where he awas stu- dent, grade, he was the twelfth Navy, earning, to enlist in the after there, full service dis- honorable charge. April, 1956, police while on he was duty, daughter his wife and small' brutally murdered in their home neighbor. drunken murder, After children, sons, Pollard’s three other continued to live with him and his mother-in-law, who cared for the chil- Gradually, dren and the home. Pollard depression became the victim of chronic melancholia, appearing generally, to bursting fatigue, be overcome with into crying sobbing tears and for con- repeatedly periods, siderable ening threat- to commit suicide gun. He continued his -duties with the Department, but, Police ficers, to his fellow of- always he seemed overcome fatigue. appeared gay, Where he had smiling, good humored, before the murder, silent, morose, he afterward was expressionless, appearing long periods questions not to hear addressed to him. Bailer, Detroit, His Mich., brother-in-law on one oc- Kermit G. prevented deliberately him from casion appellant. running thru-way, onto a where he George Woods, Chief Asst. U. S. E. probably would have been killed swift- Mich., Atty., Detroit, Kaess, Fred W. moving occasion, cars. On another George Woods, Atty., E. and Detroit, Mich., U. S. Asst. lying brother-in-law found him on the brief, Atty., on S.U. home, sobbing; body in his floor appellee. limp hardly was so he could be lifted to McALLISTER, Judge, Chief Before many incidents, bed. After these SIMONS, Judge, Circuit Senior Pollard seemed to recover and would be- Judge. BROOKS, District suddenly memory cheerful with come no happened. Judge. McALLISTER, Chief Pollard, April, years Marmion A little more than two daughter, years been for a member several of the murder of his Pollard day May 22, attempted remarried, On rob- 1958. fessed eleven other on attempted marriage, beries, or robberies. before this Bank the Detroit up a hold branch first, arraignment, Pollard, On his at o’clock Company eleven Trust & pleaded guilty. Later, court, mo- *3 gun, morning. threat- a With he counsel, tion guilty the Pollard’s aside set ordering up a teller, her to fill ened the plea guilty plea; a was money. bag paper The teller with entered; proceeded the and trial before bag Pollard, who to and so handed having Judge, jury a waiv- District him accompany to official ordered a bank appellant, ed. at defense was that The they approached the exit. As to the charged, the time of acts suffered suddenly door, his arms threw the official mind, from a defect of denominated dropped the Pollard, then around who psychiatrists, as a reac- disassociative bag money build- of the ran out and tion, attempt- he and that committed the ing. compulsion an ed robberies under hearing impulse. irresistible testimony After day, the same On afternoon psychiatrists, of three attempted to M., 4:00 Pollard P. appellant ordered District Court up the Bank of a hold branch committed to the United States railing to a walked Commonwealth. He Prisoners, Spring- Center for Federal at employee sit- which a was behind bank field, Missouri, period for a of not ex- gun him, ting pointing at told and examination, ceeding days, thirty employee, quietly. how- to sit The study, report as to condi- his mental ever, ran Pollard raised an alarm psy- tion. The conclusions of the three up having After day held out of the bank. appellant chiatrists who had examined and failed in one two banks in robberies, were made available to Medical Cen- planned then Pollard ter, neuro-psychiatric exami- and after a bank, but third rob a afternoon to same finally nation, appellant was returned when, he so decided not to do accompanying report. an Detroit with said, had too much window he found it area, being of his and felt chance Prior to examina- committed for great. However, being caught study too was tion and Medi- United States 3, 1958, days later, stated, en- Center, appellant, on June a few cal as above hold-up. attempt psychiatrists: another tered bank was- examined three which Palmer, enclosure behind He went an Dr. La- Milton R. Alfred C. Dr. sitting employees Bine, and with two Herbert Alfred Raskin. Dr. gun, of them come ordered one Palmer, psychiatrist, Dr. R. Milton railing. employee As the behind appellant, supported called on behalf of thought arose, that she Pollard the defense that Pollard at time of pushed then alarm button. He charged against him, the conduct was accompany him out of ordered her to suffering from reaction a disassociative telling bank, him. walk ahead her to compulsion and that acted under the they got outside, ran Pollard When arriving impulse. of an irresistible empty es- his car lot to across conclusion, had been at Palmer Dr. attempted later, caped. A week including by psychiatric team, assisted market, grocery up when to hold Papano, psychologist Dr. the Vet- screamed, proprietor out Pollard ran Administration, Duncan, a erans and Mr. leaving building, his car in psychiatric Mental social worker of the placed car the market. The rear of Hygiene Adminis- Clinic of the Veterans surveillance, later, police when under tration. changed Pollard, to who had government, voluntarily, then, The get uniform, car, he was came and in a most commendable effort to sub- Po- detectives Detroit arrested mit District Court all evidence Department. arrest, After his bearing Pol- upon appel- lice that it had obtained relieved, greatly impulse lard seemed lant’s claimed irresistible —even- mentioned, theory District com- and conten- above contrary its own testimony study two mitted examina- tions —introduced La- Federal Alfred C. tion to the psychiatry, Medical Center Dr. They Raskin. Prisoners. Alfred and Dr. Bine witness, Dr. agreed appellant’s report 6,1958, On November opin- their Palmer, testified Neuropsychiatric Staff Conference an ir- ion, appellant completed. the Medical Center was attempted resistible neuropsychiatric made examination robbery of the banks. Anderson, D., staff Theodore M. LaBine, Palmer, Ras- and Dr. Dr. of Dr. psychiatrist. comprehensive, ex- kin detailed *4 diagnosed many report,1 the record. tending pages of In his Anderson Dr. over manifesting testimony, Pollard anti- of this “an acute conclusion At the point goes patient report that Pol under to state bor. on At this 1. The to the Medical as a de had committed went what could be described lard psychiatric pressive eval a reaction. From information “in order that Center competency to stand trial his obtained within seems this reaction uation of responsibility appropriate time of the at the limits and without and his symptoms malignant He been ex be made. has more offense amined psychia feelings, court-appointed thoughts guilt by suicide, two severe competent agree depressed patient he is remained and etc. The trists who despite in their inter withdrawn efforts friends trial and of his to stand pretation despite of the law he could not be to include activities and responsible keep occupied criminally for the own efforts to considered * * charged. police job. after he is force Three months offenses with which patient, 1) The met wife of Information: his wife’s death he his second Sources reliable, 2) obtaining and The who a considered was at that time divorce. who is They supported during contains exten each other their record which official report along periods pre-sentence during with the emotional and stress sive court-appointed reports psy course next de of the two several months get During and information about married. time extensive cided to this chiatrists reports supervisors themselves. These noted the crimes are all considered reliable. * * * efficient, interested, became less less more The withdrawn, noticeably patient born and a and raised Detroit less effec policeman. area and tive He his rela and in a comfortable residential continued during they problems tionship planned present no with his he had unusual child get springtime and main married in hood. He attended school participated they place average, find a ‘B’ as soon as could a suitable tained ex activities, and the school Toward the end March he tracurricular so live. robbery During grade, first armed and life. the 12th committed his cial he became during repeated patient April enlisted in this was twice. Navy long During May store, a because he for a time he robbed beer then felt days marriage to be and he wanted a ‘sailor’ was hon two before his robbed years companies, day orably discharged later, two on about two finance and having any marriage, grocery had difficulties. He before his a re store progressed day marriage through Detroit turned to two banks. On the of his employment grocery store, term another a series during moderate he robbed years. year shortly During next three One thereafter another one. Detroit, he returned another June he robbed bank and two married years joined grocery finally apprehend first wife and was and two later stores During being charged only the Detroit He is force. ed with the 6-11-58. years, daugh four three bank next ter four sons robberies. apparently patient hap were born “The describes to this es- robberies py reasonably family. sentially policemen successful follows: Detroit carry required guns [This was a their misstatement. are at all always daughter.] pa three sons and one times so he him. his with driving tient states he endured some He would be down a financial street early life, stress had overcome his married reason and would incidental see company. verge grocery finance this were on store or He buying unpre- park point, house. At his car in an fashion, April, 1956, daughter ‘casing’ his wife and meditated unprovoked place, neigh in an attack enter the establishment- killed he would psychiatric patient pattern social with- reaction witnesses who testified underlying per- out court. evidence serious sonality prior behavior defects and whose foregoing report Anderson of Dr. social, consistently inte- well had been approved Dr. was concurred in and grated, fur- There is and constructive. Joseph Sturgell, Neuro- C. Chief of the suggestive time that at the ther Moreau, psychiatric Service, Louis Dr. eruption acute antisocial of his Deputy Neuropsychiatric Chief of the symptoms, a disassociative there was Service, Settle, Ward- Russell O. Dr. although type reaction, psychoneurotic en Chief Medical Officer permit an the evidence insufficient Medical Prisoners. Center Federal adequate psychodynamic formulation.” Their conclusions were embodied foregoing, In the admitted Report Neuropsychiatric Staff sugges- diagnosis of Conference of the United States type tive evidence of a disassociative Spring- Center for psychoneurotic Federal Prisoners at tend- reaction is evidence ing field, of the three Missouri.2 *5 manager attempt general with and to scare the His fund of information is com gun. high how to He states that he knows mensurate with this and with his * * * gun and was not afraid of its use well school education. There cur is going accidentally rently psyscliosis or intention- of£ either no evidence of or severe ally, personality disintegration.” harm- he had no of since intention anyone. reports ing He that he knew stop. wrong Report Neuropsychiatrie at the time but could 2. of striking no emotion at He would feel Staff Conference stated that Pollard was regret. time, joy, fright, anxiety, psychiatrists nor no examined the three here- * * * only reports mentioned, He that he tofore and into con- also took him when a report, one incident which scared Dr. sideration ports Anderson’s the re- manager grabbled previous psychiatric examiners, with and he bank of might get findings psychological physi- tests, afraid that someone became of respects laboratory examinations, In hurt the tussle. other cal and the de- continuing scriptions on in a normal fashion life was of his behavior submitted Attorney and his associates were unaware the United States during and others extraordinary taking place anything period March, April, of patient. May 1958, After at- with this his last of and the of ob- results tempted robbery, scene, adjustment he left the walked servation of his behavior and home, during twenty-five days one or two miles pick up returned of confinement Report his ear near the scene while it the Medical Center. The fur- attempt surveillance. It was in this was under “An ther stated: to evaluate his apprehended. during period After manner that he was mental condition March through May 1958, during felt he was arrested he states that he has of which he alleged first than ever has since his better to have committed a series of very robberies, died. He feels relieved but he armed leads us to the conclu- weight objective know what from. doesn’t sion that of his- “Neurological & Mental Exam- Status torical evidence available to us tends to neurological previous A examination ination: the conclusion of ex- special essentially findings, normal and no studies aminers. Certain of the current performed. psychological particularly psychological were Detailed test re- not, date, per- sults, affect, has examination the blandness of and the subsequent flight religiosity, formed. into mild patient examining presence enters the “The room hint of the of a latent schizo- friendly, willing, courteous, phrenic process subject. in a spontaneous in this The re- depressive symptoms manner and in relates the active described as surrounding experiences following in a cidents spontaneous, correlated, murder of his wife and their goal ap directed, recovery child in infant his slow gives therefrom, subsequent parently very reliable fashion. no He bizarre sensory perceptual ineffectively planned or losses executed robberies, or or distortions hallucinations series the emotional * * :i: general following arrest, His level of and relief of tension ease delusions. light
intelligence high sugges- is estimated at the nor viewed the above superior findings, during level which indicate that mal is com tive reported period Q. with a of 119. a dissociative state mensurate I. have ex- guilty therefore, appears beyond lant was reasonable In this psy- psychiatrists, psychologist, doubt. six worker, the Chief chiatric social leading A brief certain mention of Center the Medical Medical Officer of question insanity ir- cases on the including Prisoners, all for Federal impulse pertinent. resistible gov- expert witnesses, both leading English come, first, We appellant, either ernment and M’Naghten’s subject. case on the opinion (1843), Case 10 Clark and F. attempted impulse when he Eng.Reprint 718, and Kirw. 1 Car. banks, to rob or that three questions put in answer to House tended evidence available to them Lords, proposition to a abstract non-expert expert, or show fact. No respect insanity, Majesty’s law in Her opposition. was submitted in through Judges, speaking Chief Justice filing of after the Pleas, District Tindall of Common Court Report States of the United agreement and in Mr. Justice with re- Center for Federal gard Prisoners Maulé, Brougham, Campbell, Lord Lord condition, filed Pollard’s Cottenham, Wynford, Lord Lord contrary found, its in which Chancellor, Lord the rule stated opinions expert psychia- to the trists, “notwithstanding party accused appellant did act under complained view, under act of with accordingly, and, an irresistible delusion, of the redressing an insane influence of charged. guilty found him crimes revenging supposed or some The court testimony based its conclusions grievance producing injury, lay witnesses, on certain public benefit, some nevertheless *6 testimony of statements taken from the punishable according the nature reports the the or official committed, the crime he at the if knew Center, on its United States committing he time of such crime that * * * personal judgment own matter. ,” acting contrary lawto rea- The court that it had no concluded the that and ground “to establish a defence on appellant’s guilt. sonable doubt of clearly insanity, it must be government proved that, at commit- is that the time It submitted the ting act, party appellant the the accused whether as a result reason, laboring a defect of question under such an irresistible was a mind, not to know the from disease the of fact which was determinable case, by quality of the act was nature trier facts—in this it, doing; or, did sitting jury, know that District without a wrong.” doing appellant he was properly not know and that guilty. found rule, English statement of the brought immediately a dif- forth Appellant’s almost that counsel contends guil- view, important quali- prove an ference did not doubt; and, ty beyond fur- In fication in the United States. a reasonable year ther, sus- after the announcement of no evidence to there was M’Naghten’s Case, finding appel- question rule in tain the trial court’s feelings guilt may in con- have been related to his actions not bave and that isted conscionsly death of his wife and activated. nection been subsequent compelled opinion child, acts which our that dur- “It is therefore apprehension certainly period question, Pollard, ing lead to while readily acknowledge right punishment. intellectually capable knowing We inability governed wrong, to marshall suf- our either have from objective im- facts formulate a made ficient drives which unconscious theory satisfactory right. completely possible on which adhere for subject’s opinion as to this unconscious solid our belief base period ques- only responsibility during positive- motivation, could which by prolonged analysis, ly tion.” identified consequences; Supreme Court its if he has knowl- Judicial came before the criminal, edge wrong and v. that it is in Commonwealth of Massachusetts Rogers, ap- power Justice and a mental ply sufficient Chief Mete. knowledge court, expressed his own Shaw, speaking act, adding insanity, to it and to know if he does rule as to wrong M’Naghten punish- he will do ment; recognized and receive element insanity partial' Case, as follows: exempt re- sufficient to him from crime, a “In order to constitute sponsibility for acts. criminal intelligence and person must have proved, “If then it is to the satis- enough capacity a criminal jury, the mind faction rea- purpose; and if intent and of the accused a diseased was in so powers either are son and mental state, question and unsound will will, no has no deficient that he be, whether existed to so the disease power, controlling mental science or high degree, that for the time be- overwhelming through if, ing reason, con- it overwhelmed the disease, his intel- violence of mental science, judgment, and whether power obliter- the time lectual ated, committing prisoner, responsible moral not a he is homicide, acted agent, punishable and is not so, impulse: If and uncontrollable criminal acts. aof then act was not the act easily “But these are extremes involuntary voluntary agent, distinguished, mis- and not to be concur- body, act difficulty lies taken. The between directing (Em- rence it.” of mind par- extremes, of may these in the cases phasis supplied.) insanity, mind tial where the years Two after the of Chief weakened, in- but not clouded Rog- Justice Commonwealth Shaw reasoning, remembering, capable of ers, general supra, question same perverted in- judging, soor Supreme of Penn- came before the sylvania, Court delusion, false as to act sane the case Com- impressions and influences. *7 Mosler, 264, 4 Barr monwealth v. law, cases, as the rule of we these Gibson, speaking for which Chief Justice it, not this: A man is understand is court, as held that an act committed responsibility, to excused be impulse, did a result of an irresistible capacity reason suffi- and he has subject liability for the doer to distinguish him to cient enable to crime: right wrong, to the and as between particular is, doing; in- “The law whether the act he is then general sanity partial, knowledge or de- be consciousness that and gree great doing wrong to of must so be is he is act subject controlled its sub- criminal, have the will of him to and will ject, have taken from him and to be re- punishment. In order to freedom of action. moral sponsible, sufficient he must have memory re- power to recollect the of is “But there a moral or homicidal others, he stands to in which lation insanity, consisting an irresisti- him; stand to in which others kill, inclination to or to commit ble doing contrary is is the act particular other offence. some justice plain dictates of ligament may be an unseen There right, injurious others, to and a vio- mind, drawing pressing on the it to duty. of the dictates lation sees, consequences can- which avoid, although placing contrary, it under a “On which, coercion, laboring partial while its results are in- be incapable clearly perceived, is re- sanity, understands the if he still act, doctrine ac- which character of sistance. The nature
457
(cid:127)
distinguishing
dangerous
only
capable, not
knowledges
this mania
recog-
right
wrong, but that
between
be
relations,
can
in its
by
impelled
act
he was not
to do
only
clearest
in the
casep.
nized
impulse,
means
which
ought
have been
irresistible
to
shown
to
justify
ac-
before will
a verdict
evinced
habitual,
at least to
or
reasoning powers
quittal
single
that his
instance.
than a
itself in more
by
par-
against
dis-
were so far dethroned
directed
It is seldom
* *
deprive
to
eased mental condition as
*. The
ticular individual
frequency
power
will
to resist the
constitutional
this
perpetrate
small,
fortunately
and it
insane
malady is
though
deed,
knowing it
confine it within
better
wrong.”
juries
If
strictest
limits.
general motive, operat-
allow it
ing
aas
v. United
court
Smith
character,
its
this
in cases of
States, supra,
United
cited Davis v.
recognition
destroy
or-
social
States,
375,
360, 41
165 U.S.
17 S.Ct.
safety.
personal
To
der as
well
750,
L.Ed.
tion,
determina
of its
justification in
as a
establish it
say:
“The doctrine
and went on
necessary
particular case, it
either
impulse,
adopted
show, by
proofs,
clear
its
Supreme Court,
followed
has been
temporaneous existence evinced
likewise
followed
the courts of
present circumstances,
the exist-
District.”
As the District
tendency de-
ence
habitual
of an
case,
instant
held: The Federal Courts
becoming
veloped
previous cases,
recognize
impulse”
de
as a
“irresistible
in itself a second nature.”
fense
criminal conduct.
App.D.C.
States,
United
Smith v.
In the instant
the defense
144,
548, 549,
36 F.2d
annotated in 70
insanity having
interposed,
court, referring
A.L.R.
upon
burden was
the accused to over
expressed
M’Naghten’s Case,
view
presumption
sanity by
come
evi
stated:
dence sufficient to
create
reasonable
longer
“This harsh rule is no
fol-
capacity
doubt as to his mental
to com
lowed
the federal
courts
mit
States,
the offense. Davis v. United
most of
state
courts.
mod-
160 U.S.
16 S.Ct.
499.
L.Ed.
degree
ern doctrine is that
preponderance
If
the mere
insanity which will
the ac-
relieve
created
reasonable doubt as
consequences
cused of the
of a crim-
to whether
acted under
ir
inal act must be such as to create
*8
impulse,
government
resistible
his mind
im-
uncontrollable
guilt.
prove
not
When there has
pulse
charged.
to commit the offense
created, by
evidence,
a reason
This
must be such
to
as
able doubt
to
per
as whether an accused
judgment
override
reason
son acted under
impulse,
an irresistible
right
and obliterate the sense
upon
prosecution
the burden is
wrong
to es
to the
that
extent
ac-
tablish, beyond
doubt,
a reasonable
that
deprived
power
cused is
of the
he did not act under an
im
irresistible
right
wrong.
choose between
pulse.
States, supra,
Davis
United
ability
distinguish right
The mere
3;
States,
note Matheson v. United
wrong
longer
227
is no
the correct
540,
355,
U.S.
33 S.Ct.
459 unsoundness be- mental prolonged and defendant’s fre- has had a ness of, after, fore, at the time quent opportunity to observe * ** alleged offense subject. commission of the way. class comes all It from one general proper- proposition, “As a ample oppor- witnesses who testify ly qualified lay witnesses to observe defendant’s acts tunities accused, and sanity as to the Many and conduct. of them knew testimony may sufficient long years, him for a term of places satisfy the law the burden thus from time to time noted though the" upon prosecution even change in his mental testimony condition. expert to the con- there is * * * Among the witnesses however, were whole, trary. Upon the men who came in contact with crime in to the view we are constrained daily, criminals almost and as this in the evidence which part of their duties, official psychia- thus disinterested trained and easily could not be deceived. It was duty trists, it was to deter- whose also shown that but few of all those mine condition of any special witnesses had overwhelming interest defendant, as to is so the defendant. is not a case insanity, the burden that where the was limited proving beyond sanity a reasonable family friends or relatives any significance all, at doubt has sought the defendant who meager evidence met family shield disgrace, prosecution. motion for large it is a case where number of judgment acquittal should witnesses, any apparent in- granted”. (Emphasis sup- bias, agree terest that the de- plied.) before, of, fendant at the time Brown, P. 36 Utah State after, alleged the commission of the 641, 644, L.R.A.,N.S., in a case was, be, offense and continued to involving insanity the defense insane, mentally that ir- charge testimony of where the criminal responsible. Under such circum- undisputed and mental unsoundness was said, any stances can it be show sanity, evidence of was no there reason, that there is evidence prosecution the claim that the relied on sanity? of defendant’s jury de- could into consideration take “Counsel for the state contend apparently rational acts fendant’s jury were authorized to conduct, com- before and at time he take into consideration defendant’s disposed offense. The court mitted acts and conduct before and at the contention, government’s as fol- offense; time committed lows: doing what he did his acts seemed doubt, may “There, no be in- words, In other rational. evidence where the offered stances guilty defendant others upon question defendant ordinarily like acts do when he com- sanity weak and is so incon- of his forgeries. mitted the Hence the may well in- the state clusive jury justified finding sanity, upon presumption of sist guilty. us, however, It seems to any evidence need not offer and thus when his analyzed, acts are of defendant’s rebuttal * * hardly support this contention. said, question. Could upon But if we assume that defendant however, all in- so forge checks, intended to which may be stances because so *10 did, he no doubt this is not alone us that this case It seems to some ? person sufficient to make insane striking illustration that offers guilty of a As crime. was well case, said In be this cannot so. this Knights by Mr. Justice pointed out, of Sullivan the evidence we 460 State, 58 Neb. 78 scious or unconscious the N.W. desires were Am.St.Rep. stronger, 80: is not it is to be that acts that ‘Such said * * * Ordinarily appear insane rational are not be taken law. persons comprehend sanity, nature of the factfinder as of evidence they where all of the other evidence in the
their life acts. When take proof they usually destroy case is of a defendant’s mental un- property, know doing, soundness. often are singularly fitted to ac- choose means may mentioned, however, here be ” complish end in view.’ Neuropsychi- Report that of the State, Tex.App. atric Staff Conference of the In Holmes v. Prisoners, Center it was for Federal defense for both the the medical pointed attempted agreed that robberies prosecution defendant out ineffectively by Pollard were bizarre and crime was at the time the was insane planned nevertheless, executed; he jury, committed and the conviction, bank, reversing tried ordered to leave one he convicted. bank instead officialto follow him behind the court said: him, of ahead of resulted which give our assent to never “We can barely being caught from behind alone based for murder conviction a upon during escaping struggle, which after a this shown evidence bag money dropped paper of record. collected; occa- that on had the various insanity. If ex- “The defense was attempted robberies, he sions of his physicians to be pert of suddenly had that he enter a bank credited; opinions persons who of before, prior never edge knowl- seen longest the defendant known arrangement premises, be- are and known best personnel. Taken in considera- ; faith whatsoever and if lieved factors, other tion with all of the conduct, judgment per- put in be strangers, highly part intelli- judgment which fect knowledge gent police with a officer man, from the actions formed committed, crimes are has how unhesitatingly say, our we then nothing sanity. opinion, was established defense government suggests, true, It is as the conclusively possible to as it is Report Neuropsychiatric that the ninety-nine insanity in establish Center Staff Conference of the Medical hundred.” cases out during opinion Pollard, was an gov- period question, have been psy may In the instant which made unanimously erned unconscious drives chiatric witnesses impossible adhere to him to agreed severe Pollard suffered from “acknowledges right, and that the staff guilt; feelings depression inability to marshall suffi- either opinion, [its] had an irresistible their objective com- formulate a acts; facts or cient pletely un to commit criminal theory satisfactory on which apprehended and desire conscious re- as to geared [Pollard’s] solid base a his be punished; and that he during ques- period sponsibility accomplishment of this end. havior However, did conclude court, however, the staff tion.” his entire stated that weight objective during historical period “the conduct pattern of against to us tends available activities militated criminal previous conclusion, conclusion examiners” and that his conscious findings pun current indicated apprehended and that the not to be desire during period attempted demonstrably greater than his ished may contrary. “a disassociative state robberies With desire to unconscious drawing any that his existed and actions conclusions the have out foregoing consciously appellant’s activated.” con- not have been as to whether *11 work when he came to asked. Sometimes court alluded trial opinion, the In its they officer, witnesses, talk a lay and with fellow testimony of through- normally. he times Other each other conduct Pollard’s stated that and a time hours at following sit two murder would say nothing. period out change neighbor from a This was by drunken and child his wife general demeanor, among prior when he col- his any his concern not cause lively always very talka- opinion, had and he been their leagues, and car, drove married tive. Once when he the scout present sane; wife that his was steering constantly on the wheel mur- he beat after the time considerable him a approximately half an with his fist permissible infer- is a “It and that ders When, occasion, he was his hour. on relative conduct ence that [his] wrong, anything by her, if was he did asked condition, as related doing though as he know he was didn’t defendant suggest to her it, and would continue. His wife would insane.” call Pollard’s officers and ask fellow record, conduct, the to Pollard’s As possibly couldn’t come over because regard, compass in this in brief stated acting Pollard afraid; unusual and she was following: discloses the strange very and that he was and of his wife murders Before “messing gun, around” with and stated, Pollard, child, previously she was afraid he would shoot her. When intelligent, active adjusted, of an well responded police he to roll at head- call happy nature, pleasing personality, and quarters, always late, he was almost con- rating as a disposition, an excellent with trary prior promptitude; to his would he good officer, and police husband and appear sleepy come in and all of to be been in father, who never had the time. He would act lifeless and the police murders, be- After trouble. officers, stated, as one of them chronically depressed and came tinually Shortly worrying all started about him. by fa- overcome seemed to be remarried, occasion, before he on he tigue. into repeatedly off stare would He party appear jovial, would attend a and crying space would and commence eating, dancing, talking, then twenty long crying continue for as change. quickly would He would sud- unusual After such at a time. minutes denly down, stop dancing, sit refrain including that would threats he eating conduct— commit others, from with the and become suicide, up the would he wake very quiet. While, times, at all re- he nothing morning remember next garded present affection, his wife with His fellow officers such conduct. nevertheless, the occasions one Department noticed various the Police mentioned, when he was at home with changes him death of about her, holding gun kept he his with the changes. They abrupt weren’t his wife. pointed himself; barrel toward pass and he a week would Sometimes him, kept wife became afraid of but right; but then he seem would talking him, trying to distract something out of the ordi- would do asking go party; him to to a nary. of his duties as In the course crying he started until tears streamed day policeman, would on one he insist Suddenly, fear, down his cheeks. enforcing upon and issue loiter- law wife ran out of the house called ordinances, ing for violation tickets station, asking police that his friends express day, the next he there come over. His fellow officers anything opinion that he did not see gun away took arrived and soon wrong conduct. When go him, had him to from question his fellow would be asked He afterward called them. station with driving policemen, while with them station, but did ear, be silent a scout would sometimes incident and talked as mention minutes, and then answer ten happened. nothing though At though just question *12 462 mind, suffering jovial frame from diseased time, that kind of was in he force, exculpated him partner mind which excused and and, his conversed from all criminal acts. where his returned home things in pleasantly for some time However, distinctions certain several general. His underwent wife applying drawn courts appeared experiences. he Often similar impulse. While rule of irresistible talking people him. not hear greed, said, anger, passion are wrong; something was all knew officers ordinary parlance, be result acts they couldn’t stated that of them but one cause ir of desires that have become every person out of report that acts resistible, law, “ir not, this is ordinary. impulse” results from resistible lay all From mental Fur defect or mental disease. witnesses, here sum- which we have ther, insanity,” it is held that “emotional affirmatively con- marized, cannot lasting passion which is an unbridled Obviously, sane. that Pollard cluded just long enough com enable act of his the murder a result of as plained done, subsiding, of to be and then from while absent and child he was does not relieve the accused of accounta grave suffering home, some from he was bility, jurisdictions even in where those was, in the disorder, and that disorder impulse, the doctrine of irresistible aris psychiatric medical ing recognized. defect, out of a mental result- experts, reaction a disassociative People Finley, 482; v. 38 Mich. Com ing the acts in Pollard’s commission 138, Wireback, monwealth 190 Pa. v. charged im- because of an irresistible Moreover, effect, A. 542. like in Bell
pulse. State, 120 Ark. 180 S.W. court, although sustaining conclusion the case At the opinion, impulse but doctrine of rendition of court’s irresistible as a de crime, slight distinguished prior fense to certain amendments between therein, insanity, impulse make announced would such and “emotional” court evi- counsel “But defense submitted that follows: be remembered must psychiatrists tes- who the three that one who is dence of otherwise sane will not offered in court be excused from has tified a crime com minds, temporarily available scientific the best that, further, mitted while reason report by anger, disease, dethroned not official jealousy, Medi- psychiatrists passion.” United States or other Prisoners, while Center Federal cal general in 14 rule is stated Am. testimony of the as conclusive as Jur., page impulse 793: “Irresistible witnesses, would, in it- psychiatric three recognized by impulse the courts is an ap- self, as to doubt raise reasonable by, growing of, induced out some responsibility pellant’s acts. for his affecting volitive, disease mental judge reply, he had trial stated that distinguished perceptive, from appellant’s re- no reasonable doubt as powers, person afflicted, so while acts, sponsibility even able to understand the nature and con- psychiatrists tes- additional there were charged sequences against of the act appellant, tifying for such evidence perceive wrong, and to that it is is un- mind; change not cause him to would able, disease, because of doing; appellant knew he was resist the distinguished to do it. to be right wrong; knew from that many passion mere wrongdoers, responsible for their overwhelming growing emotion not out commonly conduct, pleaded of, with, and connected disease simply impulse; because a man Frenzy arising solely mind. from doing something resist anger regard- jealousy, passion wrong, was no excuse for his knew misdeeds; insanity.” furious, is not was not less of how commit such emphasized twice motivation *13 to attempt to crimes motivated as had. Pollard was need of because robberies the bank scholarly opinion In the of District gov- security. This, the for financial quotations reference is made to by con- claims, shown ernment sub- different authorities on the signed, stated: in which fession ject important psychiatry. of This reflecting development, May science, rapid 21,1958,1 in was a state of “On my public first di- suffers in life that mind from the the hard about versity attempting contrariety express- to led in of views and I had by security. subject Inas- in ed various financial students achieve my magazine marry countless articles. to books and I much as was guided obviously I would trial court was not wife, decided second I financially by for type in its of decision statements such not lead same my first with would of in actual I led little be value insecure life $5,000 court, or- in controversies before the wife. I needed about only pur- My buy the persons benefit cross-examination house. der to deciding pose a bank who in to rob make such statements. Where, instance, $5,000 and, if I obtained for writ- it is said to obtain psychiatry money, to er that not intend takes a deterministic I did regard position robbing.” behavior, with to tinue helpful. statement if rele- is not Even seems motivation The claimed might vant, point disputed- bewell —(cid:127) during Pollard, mar pointless. his first as well as the of another declaration regular receiving riage, had been writer, psychiatry that the “best is still promotions, policeman salary of a with more of art than of science.” On His approximately a month. $450 trial, examination one receiving time, wife, at that first government’s psychiatric witnesses who a clerk a month about $300 that, opinion, appellant testified in his Compensation Michigan Unemployment impulse, acted under an irresistible joint Their income Commission. probing expression trial court—-in for an regular policeman’s almost twice what of views—read a to wit- statement wife, at salary His would second be. psychiatrist, ness from a book marriage him, had the time her which it that a au- was stated certain enough pay money her her own— thority denying “has been most blunt in daughter bills, her take care own can serious crimes committed be paid sup money with the which was impulse”; and the port husband. She her former court then stated “That witness: years position previously for six held a very light is a bold statement Michigan Telephone Bell Com with the pany. you just reply, have stated.” rela considered herself be She the witness be nevertheless declined to financially. tively Between comfortable expressed by bound view such arrest on June Pollard’s time of experi- writer and declared in his herself, paid trial, had, she thought ence, he there were ex- definite he had owed. bills that off about $700 ceptions statement, to the author’s could be condition financial Pollard’s that individuals understand could situa- motivation reasonable considered and, still, “carry impulsive tions out an attempted far robberies. As bank definitely act which resistible, ir- be went, he was much off better income definitely and I would consider policemen and such most other than irresistible.” condition could be considered a financial Many medical and motivation Pollard’s non-medical a reasonable robberies, express freely every police attempted other themselves writers subject psy- and articles on department had books man in the chiatry. certify written cannot be is so such Secretary Health, shall What court the same to authority of law. accepted in a court Wel- Education and fare, Only testimony, subject person to cross-exami- who order such nation, Hospital considered—with confined can be so in St. Elizabeth’s Columbia; exception noted, in this District report person sanity, restored shall be where a conformity give superintendent hospital psychiatry introduced shall *14 statute, requires judge considera- notice to crimi- thereof with the court, court nal and deliver him to the tion the court. precept. proper in Title obedience to the important great Psychiatry is 24 U.S.C.A. 211b. §§ legislative upon which the science rely. judicial Federal statutes branches rec our conclusion from the psychiatric provide for examinations light ord in in this case that crime, as those persons well accused govern unanimous suffering ill- mental from deemed be to experts psychiatry and ment’s medical appellant’s expert witness, insanity. evi- consider Courts ness as well arriv- psychiatric dence from lay wit uncontradicted evidence ac- an ing at whether a determination sanity nesses, presumption of was guilty by reason of crime cused is not overcome, to and the failed Dis- insanity. the instant In appel proving that sustain its burden of committing trict illness lant did suffer mental thought the examination, it give independ- stated that consequent upon unprovoked murder facility available best absent his wife and while was child men- on Pollard’s ent advice court duty; it failed on and that alleged responsibility criminal tal prove act under acts, States the United impulse of such irresistible a result Prisoners, Federal Center for mental illness. guided by informa- be it wanted to foregoing, with the accordance In the Center. from the tion obtained judgment is set of the District Court unnecessary light foregoing, it is case for further aside and the remanded cer- disparaging views to consider proceedings opinion. consonant with futile psychiatric writers tain psychiatrists, rely upon Judge (dissenting). SIMONS, under can committed Senior that no crimes be impulse. irresistible regret greatly my inability con- I able, thoroughly During case— research- cur the consideration Judge reversing a mat- ed Chief its conclusion—it before anxiety part fol- great above I on the the conviction case. ter findings court the fact of the District conscientious trial low Judge humane agree 474) (D.C., F.Supp. were found to have -if Pollard impulse, they substantially sustain his responsible Appellant clusion that sane him not court found conduct, charged. to a when he committed the crimes not be committed he could cure, pub- Particularly am I unable to and the entertain institution for possible concept Appellant imperiled by that the wished still be lic time, part apprehended, while at the same of Pollard be yielding conduct similar according However, to an irresistible the future. charged crimes, escape any person crime and to detec- statute, commit the apprehension. found, which tion and I would sustain the federal court in charged, person, conviction. insane sois