Opening statements set for newspaper shooting insanity phase
Opening statements are scheduled for Tuesday in the second phase of a trial to determine whether the man who killed five people at a Maryland newspaper was legally sane at the time of the mass shooting
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Opening statements are scheduled for Tuesday in the second phase of a trial to determine whether the man who killed five people at a Maryland newspaper was legally sane at the time of the mass shooting.
Jarrod Ramos pleaded guilty to all 23 counts against him in October 2019, but he is contending he is not criminally responsible due to mental illness.
Judge Michael Wachs said during jury selection last week that a “vast majority” of the case will consist of testimony from mental health experts called by defense attorneys and prosecutors.
Opening statements are starting one day after the third anniversary of the attacks that killed Wendi Winters, John McNamara Gerald Fischman, Rob Hiaasen and Rebecca Smith.
The second part of the trial was initially set for November 2019, but the case was postponed. The trial was delayed again in February 2020 after one of Ramos’ three public defenders left the case for medical reasons, pushing it back to June 2020. The pandemic delayed it further.
Under Maryland’s insanity defense law, a defendant has the burden to show by a preponderance of the evidence that he is not criminally responsible for his actions. State law says a defendant is not criminally responsible for criminal conduct if — because of a mental disorder or developmental disabilities — he lacked substantial capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct.
If Ramos were found not criminally responsible, he would be committed to a maximum-security psychiatric hospital instead of prison. Prosecutors are seeking life without possibility of parole.
Ramos, 41, had a well-documented history of harassing the newspaper’s journalists. He filed a lawsuit against the paper in 2012, alleging he was defamed in an article about his conviction in a criminal harassment case in 2011. The defamation suit was dismissed as groundless.
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.