A forensic psychologist testified before DC Superior Court Judge Jason Park that a suspect accused of assaulting an infant wasn’t mentally fit to stand trial in a hearing on July 21, that despite of an earlier finding he was competent.
Devonte Wright, 26, is charged with assault with intent to kill while armed against a minor, cruelty to children, assault with a dangerous weapon against a minor, and carrying a dangerous weapon. The charges stem from Wright’s alleged involvement in the stabbing of a two-year-old on May 27, 2020, on the 1700 block of Benning Road, NE.
Wright is diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder with a depressive factor and underlying verbal rigidity or mutism. In that state, an individual would have disorganized thinking distinct from reality as well as feelings of low esteem and difficulty communicating.
According to testimony, the defense expert has been involved in Wright’s competency case from July 14, 2020, shortly after the incident. Thus, he concludes Wright’s competency cannot be restored.
Twelve evaluations later, the expert said Wright has shown improvement in his factual understanding of his case; however, he still shows deficits in rational knowledge and his ability to engage with counsel–the legal standard for standing trial.
As such, his opinion is that Wright, after five years, remains incompetent and is not restorable.
In response to defense attorney Patrick Nowak’s questioning, the expert explained that Wright has hallucinatory symptoms, which have diminished with treatment but remain present.
He also noted that Wright shows strong indications of cognitive confusion and difficulty thinking clearly.
The expert focused on Wright’s symptoms of limited emotion or flat affect and behavior suggesting social withdrawal stating the patterns are “more notable and prominent” than is typical. He said Wright is “relatively isolated… he’s less engaged,” when referring to his behavior in the ward.
The expert stated that Wright seemed to genuinely struggle answering questions but conceded to the prosecution’s possibility that he was simply unwilling.
The prosecution maintained that Wright has factual and rational understanding of his case, referencing an argument from another psychologist who used Wright’s ability to teach chess as an indication of his competency.
The prosecution also highlighted that the expert has never physically met with any of the doctors who have worked with Wright, nor has he ever spoken to Wright’s mother or grandmother to get a better understanding of their observations.
The expert has only worked from notes and records from Wright’s doctors, the prosecutor said.
Parties are set to reconvene on July 25 for a continuation of the arguments.
