Is Tarloff Not Guilty By Reaon Of Insanity?

The brutal killing shocked the New York City psychotherapy community. On February, 12, 2008, David Tarloff entered the Upper East Side office suite shared by five mental health professionals. Psychologist Kathryn Faughey and psychiatrist Kent Shinbach were working that evening.

It was reported that 42-year-old Tarloff brought a small black bag and a rolling suitcase with him. The bags contained a strange collection of items: knives, a meat cleaver, a hammer, ropes, duck tape, women's clothing and adult diapers. He sat down outside Dr. Shinbach's office while the psychiatrist was in session with a patient. Tarloff did not wait long.

Tarloff entered Dr. Faughey's office, took out the knives, and stabbed her fifteen times in the face, head and chest. When Dr. Shinbach heard the screams he ran into her office to try to save her. They wrestled. Tarloff stabbed him, robbed him of $90, and escaped through the basement. Video surveillance cameras captured his image as he left the building.

Dr. Faughey was pronounced dead at the scene. Dr. Shinbach was seriously injured and rushed to New York Hospital. He survived and will almost certainly testify against his attacker.

A composite drawing was circulated and Tarloff was apprehended. He confessed to the police and made a videotaped statement. He told a strange story. He said he planned to rob Dr. Shinbach, take his ATM card, remove $50,000 from his bank account and use the money to take his ill mother to Hawaii. His videotaped statement was played in court during a pre-trial hearing. Tarloff said: "I'm sorry for that woman. I didn't know she was going to be there..."I just wanted to go in and look and she attacked me...Everything happened so fast." The tape continues and Tarloff asks the police officers if he could pray. Then he adds, "I don't have any underwear on."
ttp://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2010/04/08/2010-04-08_im_sorry_says_c…

David Tarloff's picture has been widely circulated in the press. Even without knowing the details of this bizarre crime, his wide-eyed, piercing gaze and long, unkempt hair indicate that he is mentally ill. Diagnosed with schizophrenia, he was admitted to psychiatric hospitals twenty times. Dr. Shinbach treated Tarloff twenty years earlier and, in 1991, committed him to a psychiatric hospital.

Tarloff was charged with second degree-murder for the killing of Dr. Faughey. He was also charged with second-degree attempted murder, first-degree assault and first-degree attempted robbery of Dr. Shinbach.

After his arrest, Tarloff was evaluated by court-appointed psychiatrists. They concluded that he was found competent to stand trial. To be competent, a defendant must have "sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding and have a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him." (Dusky vs. United States, 362 U.S. 402, 1960)

Can a defendant be competent to stand trial for one case while not competent for another? In a puzzling side story, Tarloff's competency was questioned in a separate matter. He was charged with a misdemeanor assault against a security guard in a Queens County hospital. The judge in that case ordered a competency evaluation. The court-appointed psychiatrists came to a different conclusion that the Manhattan psychiatrists did.

The Queens psychiatrists concluded that Tarloff was not competent to stand trial. One doctor wrote, "The defendant's eye contact is intense and ominous. His mood is irate and very easily angered. Mr. Tarloff does not talk about his Manhattan case but does reference it on several occasions: 'I know the the incident in Manhattan, but I never hit anyone since grade school.'"

Tarloff's attorney, Bryan Konoski, commented on the two cases, "The irony here is that it's absolutely ridiculous that you can be found unfit in one county, Queens, but yet come over the border essentially to Manhattan and be found fit there...You can't be fit in one place and unfit in another place. It makes absolutely no sense."
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/investigators&id=6357187

David Tarloff was charged with murder in the second degree in the killing of Dr. Faughey. His trial began last week. It is not surprising that he was using the insanity defense. In New York State, the defense is termed "Not Responsible Due to Mental Disease or Defect. The statute reads, "at the time of such conduct, as a result of mental disease or defect, [the defendant] lacked substantial capacity to know or appreciate either: 1) the nature and consequences of such conduct; or 2) that such conduct was wrong." (New York Penal Law Section 40.15)

Law and Crime Essential Reads

When Parents of School Shooters Face Legal Liabilities

Why Gen X Parents Are Afraid of the Wrong Types of Crime

Defense attorney Konoski told the press, "The proof in the case shows he was legally insane at the time of the commission of the offenses...Everything about his thought process was bizarre - so crazy...the proof in the case shows he was legally insane at the time of the commission of the offenses."
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2010/10/11/2010-10-11_shrinkwr…

Dr. Eric Goldstein, a psychiatrist hired by the defense, included this in his report: "David Tarloff was acutely psychotic, believing he was the Messiah...He believed that God had blessed his plan to rob Dr. Shinbach and get money in order to save his mother's life."
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2010/10/11/2010-10-11_shrinkwr…

Many people believe that the insanity defense is frequently used and often successful. In fact, this is far from true. The insanity defense is only raised in approximately 1% of cases and most of the defendants who raise this defense are convicted. The research shows that the insanity defense is more likely to succeed if the defendant has a documented history of severe mental illness and is charged with an apparently motiveless crime.

Tarloff's trial will be important to follow for those interested in mental illness and psychiatric defenses. Will the jurors conclude that David Tarloff was psychotic when he killed Dr. Faughey? Will they decide he was insane at the time? More posts will follow.