A specialist in brain function testified that a murder defendant was mentally incompetent to stand trial before DC Superior Court Judge Todd Edelman in a motions hearing on June 29.
Daniel Simon, 41, is charged with second-degree murder while armed and carrying a dangerous weapon outside of a home or place of business for his alleged involvement in the fatal beating of Michael Jones, 52, on the 200 block of 15th Street, NW, on Jan. 4, 2023.
“He’s unrestorably incompetent,” declared a neuropsychologist expert during questioning by Simon’s attorney, Molly Bunke. According to the expert, if Simon failed to take his medication, “his [schizophrenic] symptoms are quite severe.”
The expert also said Simon’s demonstrated symptoms of schizophrenia (delusional thinking) and third-grade reading level indicate a “cognitive deficit.”
During cross-examination, the prosecution asked about Simon’s psychiatric history. The expert explained that Simon’s incompetency diagnosis in 2012 does not definitively confirm or repudiate Simon’s current mental competence.
When questioned by the prosecution, the expert confirmed that his single two-and-a-half-hour session with Simon assessed his overall intelligence, cognitive abilities and neurological processing.
The expert explained the results of two tests he administered to determine if Simon was faking mental illness. They do not determine if Simon received was legally competent to stand trial, meaning he understood the charges and could help his lawyer.
The Inventory of Legal Knowledge (ILK) is used to test whether a defendant may be faking sufficient legal knowledge. A high ILK score may indicate an individual is responding with honesty, while a low score may indicate an individual is responding with deliberate incompetence or malingering.
Prosecutors argued Simon’s score was high, but the expert said, “I wouldn’t say it’s high.”
The expert also conducted a Word Choice Test (WCT), to determine whether Simon was struggling to answer each question correctly. The expert said Simon’s 43 WCT score could be explained by feigned incompetence, but also said schizophrenics and second language English speakers may score in the same range without feigning incompetence.
The expert admitted that while “establishing cause” of a neurological disorder is hard, there is evidence that one exists.
The same expert interviewed Simon as a part of a Competency to Stand Trial (CST) assessment. This assessment is intended to confirm that the defendant could understand the charges against him and help his lawyer fighting those charges.
During the CST, the expert said Simon knew the seriousness of his charges, but did not initially understand the difference between first-and second-degree murder in terms of premeditation. Once the expert explained the difference, he asked Simon to repeat his newfound understanding. The expert said Simon’s explanation was “very, very similar” to his own.
While Simon’s case was pending, a jail error resulted in a mix-up of ID numbers and wrist-bands. The expert said Simon “seemed to believe” a conspiracy was unfolding against him.
Simon’s attorney asked the expert if it is common for a delusion to have some basis of fact. “Just about every delusion starts with a kernel of truth,” the expert said.
Bunke disputed previous testimony from an expert in forensic psychology, who said under oath that Bunke did not return her calls. Bunke said she had an investigator analyze her phone records and found otherwise.
Edelman said a proffer could potentially make something big out of something “quite subsidiary,” and asked Bunke to have the investigator submit a statement to the court.
Parties are scheduled to reconvene on July 1.
