An Open Letter to
the Fort Worth Star Telegram
Link to Web Page by Larry Robison's Sister
| Which Story
is Supported by the Facts? J. R. Labbe in her column, “The Other Side of the Larry Robison Story”, writes that every parent knows enough to ask to hear the other side of the story before deciding who’s guilty. But it’s not enough to just hear both sides of the story-—we must also determine which story is supported by the facts. Labbe repeats Melissa Estes’ side of the story, "Robison was never diagnosed as mentally ill until after he committed these murders, and then only by defense expert witnesses as a defense tactic.” This claim is not supported by the facts, however. The facts, as reported in the discharge summary from Hugeley Memorial Hospital, are that Larry Robison was admitted to the hospital on November 13, 1978, four years before the murders. Upon admission “he was actively hallucinating and suffering paranoid delusions.” In fact, he was so psychotic that Dr. Albert M. Randolph, his physician, and Dr. Arturo Arauzo, a consultant, felt that transfer to a closed facility at John Peter Smith for further treatment was necessary. The final primary diagnosis was “schizophrenia, probably paranoid type with acute decompensation.” Mr. Robison, by the way, was admitted voluntarily to Hugeley and agreed to be transferred to John Peter Smith. Having worked on a closed unit in a county hospital, I know that no one who was not indeed mentally ill would voluntarily agree to be a patient on such a unit. On the other hand, who in their right mind, wouldn't want to deny to a friend that they had indeed "heard voices?" It’s a fact that two juries rejected Robison’s claim of insanity. But it’s also a fact that the insanity defense almost never succeeds in Texas. To be judged not guilty by reason of insanity in Texas, the defense must prove that the defendant didn’t know the difference between right and wrong. In this context any attempt to hide evidence or flee can be portrayed as proof that the defendant did know that what they did was wrong. The fact is, someone can be undeniably psychotic and quite likely to hide evidence and/or flee after an act of violence. But because of our exceedingly narrow interpretation of legal insanity in Texas, it’s not surprising that two juries rejected it for Mr. Robison. That doesn’t mean, though, that he wasn’ t severely mentally ill. Today, Friday the 13th, the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles declined to recommend to Governor Bush that Mr. Robison’s death sentence be commuted to life in prison. As a result, Mr. Robison will probably be executed at 6:00 p.m. next Tuesday. But though Mr. Robison, unfortunately, might not be with us much longer, the two main issues raised by his case will remain: Is it right for us to hold someone who was obviously mentally ill at the time of their crime to the same standard of justice as someone who was not suffering from paranoid delusions and other psychotic symptoms? Is it wise for us to continue to deny medical treatment to the severely mentally ill among us as we did to Larry Robison because they lack medical insurance and they haven’t been violent? The Reverend Craig C. Roshaven, Pastor First Jefferson Unitarian Universalist Church P.S. I have a copy of the Discharge Summary mentioned above and I am able to provide you with a copy by fax if needed. Craig
Roshaven |