Idaho child killer's competency appeal nears

BOISE, Idaho (AP) - As an appeal over the competency of a convicted child killer nears in Idaho's U.S. District Court, a judge is sorting out just what expert witnesses should be allowed to testify about in the case.
Joseph Edward Duncan III was sentenced to death in 2008 after admitting he kidnapped and tortured two northern Idaho children before killing one of them. He gave up his appeals later that year, but his former attorneys argued that he wasn't mentally competent and fought the sentence on his behalf.
A hearing on the matter will be held in Boise's U.S. District Court in January.
Duncan's defense attorneys say the crux of the case is whether Duncan suffered from religious delusions or merely held unusual religious beliefs, according to court documents.
In preparation for the hearing, U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge issued a ruling Wednesday designed to give attorneys on both sides guidance about the appropriate scope of testimony.
Judges are given plenty of leeway in deciding what evidence in relevant to a case, Lodge noted, and existing case law calls on district courts to act as gatekeepers. That means the judge will have to exclude junk science, and try to keep the expert witnesses focused on relevant and reliable testimony that is based on scientific techniques.
It's difficult to predict just what witnesses will say on the stand, Lodge said, so he may change his mind on some things when the hearing is under way. But he conditionally approved the defense's request to use Dr. Michael First, an expert in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the text that medical professionals use to diagnose mental illnesses.
The U.S. Attorney's office had opposed First's testimony, saying he would only be able to establish the definitions of the mental illnesses in the manual, and that any expert could do the same or the court could simply take official notice of the manual.
But Duncan's attorneys say First is an expert in the diagnosis of those disorders, and that he'll discuss the difference between religious beliefs and religious delusions, "which is at the heart of the conflict in opinions in this case," according to Lodge's order.
The defense also hopes to call Dr. Xavier Amador, a psychologist who wrote a book about a condition called anosognosia, a lack of insight experienced by some people who do not recognize that they have a mental illness.
Among the experts that prosecutors hope to have testify is Dr. Ronald Roesch, a psychologist and the director of the Mental Health, Law and Policy Institute at Simon Fraser University, who examined Duncan in 2012. Roesch also studied records, reports and witness statements dating back to 2006 in an effort to determine whether the defendant was competent in 2008.
Defense attorneys have contested Roesch as a witness, arguing that his testimony will be irrelevant and unreliable in part because his findings weren't made in 2008. Lodge said the defense can raise some of its concerns during cross-examination, however, and that any objection to Roesch's testimony is premature right now.
When Duncan first decided to represent himself in 2008, Lodge had him examined by a local psychologist who found that while Duncan's thoughts were "somewhat unusual," Duncan wasn't delusional.
If Lodge finds that Duncan wasn't competent when he gave up his appeals, the judge will have to assess whether he was competent during his sentencing hearing. That could lead to a new sentencing hearing, or a new sentence of life in prison.
Duncan has been convicted of five different murders spanning three states, but the competency hearing focuses only on the crimes he committed against young Dylan Groene and his 8-year-old sister in 2005. During his sentencing hearing in that case, prosecutors said Duncan kidnapped the two children from their northern Idaho home on a spring day in 2005 after killing their older brother, mother and mother's fiance. Duncan kept the children at a remote Montana campsite for weeks before killing Dylan and returning with Dylan's sister to Coeur d'Alene, where he was arrested.
Duncan has also been convicted in the murders of Slade and Brenda Groene and Mark McKenzie in Idaho state court and in the 1997 murder of 11-year-old Anthony Martinez in Riverside County, Calif.
Joseph Edward Duncan III was sentenced to death in 2008 after admitting he kidnapped and tortured two northern Idaho children before killing one of them. He gave up his appeals later that year, but his former attorneys argued that he wasn't mentally competent and fought the sentence on his behalf.
A hearing on the matter will be held in Boise's U.S. District Court in January.
Duncan's defense attorneys say the crux of the case is whether Duncan suffered from religious delusions or merely held unusual religious beliefs, according to court documents.
In preparation for the hearing, U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge issued a ruling Wednesday designed to give attorneys on both sides guidance about the appropriate scope of testimony.
Judges are given plenty of leeway in deciding what evidence in relevant to a case, Lodge noted, and existing case law calls on district courts to act as gatekeepers. That means the judge will have to exclude junk science, and try to keep the expert witnesses focused on relevant and reliable testimony that is based on scientific techniques.
It's difficult to predict just what witnesses will say on the stand, Lodge said, so he may change his mind on some things when the hearing is under way. But he conditionally approved the defense's request to use Dr. Michael First, an expert in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the text that medical professionals use to diagnose mental illnesses.
The U.S. Attorney's office had opposed First's testimony, saying he would only be able to establish the definitions of the mental illnesses in the manual, and that any expert could do the same or the court could simply take official notice of the manual.
But Duncan's attorneys say First is an expert in the diagnosis of those disorders, and that he'll discuss the difference between religious beliefs and religious delusions, "which is at the heart of the conflict in opinions in this case," according to Lodge's order.
The defense also hopes to call Dr. Xavier Amador, a psychologist who wrote a book about a condition called anosognosia, a lack of insight experienced by some people who do not recognize that they have a mental illness.
Among the experts that prosecutors hope to have testify is Dr. Ronald Roesch, a psychologist and the director of the Mental Health, Law and Policy Institute at Simon Fraser University, who examined Duncan in 2012. Roesch also studied records, reports and witness statements dating back to 2006 in an effort to determine whether the defendant was competent in 2008.
Defense attorneys have contested Roesch as a witness, arguing that his testimony will be irrelevant and unreliable in part because his findings weren't made in 2008. Lodge said the defense can raise some of its concerns during cross-examination, however, and that any objection to Roesch's testimony is premature right now.
When Duncan first decided to represent himself in 2008, Lodge had him examined by a local psychologist who found that while Duncan's thoughts were "somewhat unusual," Duncan wasn't delusional.
If Lodge finds that Duncan wasn't competent when he gave up his appeals, the judge will have to assess whether he was competent during his sentencing hearing. That could lead to a new sentencing hearing, or a new sentence of life in prison.
Duncan has been convicted of five different murders spanning three states, but the competency hearing focuses only on the crimes he committed against young Dylan Groene and his 8-year-old sister in 2005. During his sentencing hearing in that case, prosecutors said Duncan kidnapped the two children from their northern Idaho home on a spring day in 2005 after killing their older brother, mother and mother's fiance. Duncan kept the children at a remote Montana campsite for weeks before killing Dylan and returning with Dylan's sister to Coeur d'Alene, where he was arrested.
Duncan has also been convicted in the murders of Slade and Brenda Groene and Mark McKenzie in Idaho state court and in the 1997 murder of 11-year-old Anthony Martinez in Riverside County, Calif.
My guess former attorneys aren't keeping this going for free. Disgusting.
HE has made himself irrelevant. "Why" doesn't matter. Make the punishment fit the crime. What he did screams for action, for justice.Â
Hang him, shoot him, whatever, but he needs to be put out of our misery. He is nothing but a cold-blooded murderer, and needs to be treated as such. I couldn't care less if he has mental problems, he did the crimes, he deserves the worse possible punishment. And I want it to be cruel and unusual. Just my opinion.Â
If his lawyers have a problem with the state [or State] executing him, have a Powerball lottery for it. I sure that Idaho and Washington lottery sales will skyrocket. Then put that money into a permanent Child Predator Containment Facility on McNeil Island. Perverts go in, and they NEVER get out.
Heyjoe you are exactly right. There is no reason, what so ever, that this dirt bag should still be wasting air. That is his ex-attorney arguing for him. I would guess he is not working Pro Bono. Greedy POS just canât let go of a money pit.    Â
The legal system in the US is a business - pure and simple. Â The legal system exists for no other reason than to serve itself. Â
The absolute truth!
In my opinion, this guy should not be breathing.
Could be setting a dangerous precedent here? Start bringing religious convictions into a defense to prove someone innocent by reason of insanity seems insane in itself. The attorneys need to be challenged for their sanity? Once you start getting people off because of their insane convictions, religious beliefs or not, where does that stop?  So he heard voices, thought he was the messiah, though he served the devil, his mother told him to do it, it was his evil twin.....so what! Who commits these kinds of violent crimes but the insane?  Look at his eyes. See that glare....what is that? A statement of how evil he is or a glare that we're all next should he get out? Guilty is guilty! Death penalty is the only right thing to do here.
Who cares whether he is found competent or not? I don't want him released back into society or put somehere where he can escape. I am fed up with the mockery every murder trial makes of our justice system. This murderer needs permanent, irreversible removal from society.
Just put a good sized slug between the bastard's eyes and get it over with! I'm sick of this piece of ****!
 @Zoso Let Shasta Groene, or maybe her dad, have a go at him. I often wonder what her life is like these days. You can't tell me she didn't end up permanently effed up after watching her family executed.
@anon4444 @Zoso My guess is she's having nothing to do with articles like this. Moved on as best she can. Bless her.
I am so sick of the perverted creep....just execute him now and stop wasting tax payers money.
Of course they are fghting the sentence on his behalf, even though he gave up his appeals. Money hungry, bottom dwelling land sharks!
Who gives a rip whether he's competent or not. He did this crime, now put him away where he can't do it again. Sheesh.
You can see it in his eyes. Â If you look at a picture of Ted Bundy you see it too. Â
 @keri555 Yes, the look of evil.Â
This guy is pure evil. This article does not do any of his vics justice nor does it serve to show how the judge who released him should be punished. Duncan is also a suspect of the murders of two young sisters in Western WA. The horror he put on this family in ID is purely unspeakable. There are those "bleeding heart liberals" who want to see him turned loose - I propose they be forced to house him with their family!!
 @raven Do they actually want to turn him loose, or merely get his sentence changed to life in prison?
Â
I'm usually squeamish about the death penalty, but this guy and Charles Campbell, I'd pull the switch. This guy wiped out a whole family. He killed the brother in front of the sister, for God's sake, and probably the rest of the family as well. Why, exactly, should he be spared???