[LaggyLou]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see how the TX supreme court lets this stand. It appears that there was just an offhand comment about a Law and Order episode on the witness stand, and that the jury was made aware of the error before they deliberated. There is no way you can call this "material".

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, could you be any more misinformed?

(1) It was hardly an "offhand" comment. Dietz -- the only one of ten testifying psychiatrists to opine that Yates was legally sane -- testified that there had been a "Law&Order" episode on shortly before the crime in which a woman had drowned her children in the bathtub and had been found not guilty by reason of insanity. (NOTE: that Deitz is a consultant for L&E, which was before the jury) The prosecutors used this testimony plus evidence that Yates watched Law&Order to suggest in the closing that she had gotten the idea for the crime from the show, and, thus, knew it was wrong (i.e., she wasn't legally insane).

(2) The jury WAS NOT made aware of "the error" before it deliberated. Rather, the false testimony came to light only after the jury returned a guilty verdict but before the jury returned its death penalty verdict (10-2 against, IIRC).

[ QUOTE ]

Park Dietz is by far the most respected forensic psychologist in the land

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, the humanity. Dietz is by far the forensic psychologist with the best PR in the land. Aside from that, he's a professional witness (i.e., a hired gun). This time, he was hired by the prosecution (as he is in most of his cases). When he is hired by the defense, he sings a different tune. See, e.g., Deanna Laney.

So tell me, did you even read the court opinion you criticized?

I didn't think so.