| Amid the mounds of evidence presented at the trial of Jeffrey Dahmer, the verdict rested on a critical question: was the defendant insane, as he had pleaded? To make their case, prosecutors needed to prove a somewhat counterintuitive argument, that a man capable of acts far outside the norms of human behavior—crazy, in layman’s terms—was legally sane during his crimes. In 1994, two years after the serial killer’s conviction, The New Yorker published a profile of Park Elliot Dietz, a forensic psychiatrist who had played a pivotal role during the trial. For three days in a locked courthouse library, Dietz had spoken with the defendant, uncovering a crucial detail about what had allowed Dahmer to murder and dismember his seventeen victims. Dietz, at the time, was among the most prominent members of his field, enlisted in the case of John Hinckley, Jr.—Ronald Reagan’s would-be assassin—and during the standoff between the government and the Branch Davidian cult at Waco. A regular on Court TV, Dietz could charge thousands of dollars per day during a trial, and his up-close encounters with killers made his résumé one of a kind. “I’ve done interviews where inmates have threatened me all day long, spat at me, taken punches at me, tried to bash me over the head with a chair,” he recalled. “But Dahmer”—at least during their interviews—“was a perfect gentleman.” | 
No comments:
Post a Comment