Page 9

Advocacy Unlimited Newsletter - March/April 2007     

By Robert E. Byron

In 1975, I knew a woman who, in the course of a psychotic episode, took her 5-month old child to New York and tried to throw him out of the window on the 18th floor of the YMCA. She was arrested, then sent to Bellevue. The city took custody of the child.
After a few weeks, Bellevue released her. They recognized the woman was troubled, not criminal, and so did the city. They treated her accordingly and then, when she was stabilized, let her go, making sure to keep custody of the child. Things are different now. Now the notion is: we all need protection. That is why we have the Psychiatric Security Review Board. Created in 1985, it exists in substantial part because of the John Hinckley verdict.

Only three states have PSRB's: Oregon, Arizona and Connecticut. The board exists for one purpose – protection. C.G.S. §17a-593(g) states: "[The board's] primary concern is the protection of society."  Not justice, not fairness, and certainly not recovery and reintegration.

At a recent hearing in Middletown, I saw an example of what the board is protecting us from: a young man named Patrick. Patrick is tall, trim and 28. He is under the board's watch because in 2002 he walked into a class at Fairfield University, said he had a bomb – he didn't – and held the class hostage.

His intent was to get himself killed by provoking a confrontation with the police, to commit "suicide by cop." Patrick had congenital glaucoma. He had lost sight in his right eye and had but partial sight in the left. The vision problems moreover were causing him social problems - girl problems - which in turn created emotional conflicts. On top of that he could not find work. He had graduated Fairfield in 2001, but a job eluded him.

The bomb gambit was a desperate act by a desperate young man, which might have merited some consideration, but his timing was very bad, coming only months after 9/11. He was charged with 27 counts of kidnapping and locked up for 21 months before trial. At the MacDougall-Walker Correctional Institution, he felt his blood pressure rising. He told the prison he needed to see a doctor. Two weeks later he received laser surgery on his eyes. It seemed to work. He was then transferred to the Bridgeport jail for trial, but the medication for his eyes didn't follow. In two weeks he was blind. He still is.

At trial, Patrick was found not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect. After having been incarcerated for 21 months, he was given an additional eight years under the board and sent to Connecticut Valley Hospital, where he remains today.

In Middletown, Patrick asked the court to release him from the PSRB's custody. He presented his own case. His argument was that from July of 2003 until September 2006, no psychiatrist participated in a PSRB deliberation or vote about whether he was dangerous. It's a good argument; but the problem is, in the board's view, it doesn't need a psychiatrist (although, inconveniently, the law says it does). That argument is tangential to what the PSRB is there for. It's there to protect us.

While in the custody of the state, Patrick has been rendered blind and, at CVH, he has been beaten twice, once with his own cane. He wears a hearing aid in each ear. But that's not important; what's important is, we're protected. That's fine, I guess. But I wonder, who protects Patrick?

Robert E. Byron is an attorney in Hartford. His practice focuses on criminal appeals and psychiatric cases arising in the criminal and probate courts.