Once again, I question TruTV’s choice of gavel-to-gavel coverage of a murder trial—this time because of the tone of the coverage, not the choice of trial. The FL trial of Thomas Fast for the murder/dismemberment of his father’s third wife is undeniably terribly sad, but it doesn’t raise “whodunit” questions, as several TruTV commentators have claimed. And I find it grotesque that on-camera talent have pointed the finger of suspicion at the defendant’s father—a man who is obviously mourning his wife and at a loss as to how to deal with his emotions toward his son.

I say this not because I feel the cops can never arrest the wrong person. In fact, I’ve written several times that I think the cops often mistakenly suspect the spouse in murder investigations. I say this because television producers seem to feel that the only way to position a trial is as a mystery. In fact, this trial is no mystery. But it presents some interesting legal issues—just not the issues the TruTV commentators are highlighting.

The Real Issue

The Thomas Fast trial illustrates the serious problem we have in this country with schizophrenia, a disease that the NIH estimates afflicts 1.1 % of the population. This small percentage is statistically insignificant. But when you consider that the current population of the U.S. is over 300 million, then you must acknowledge that there are over 3.3 million schizophrenics in this country. Add to that number, the percentage of the population with dementia (a disease of the aged that mimics many schizophrenic symptoms and behaviors), you discover that we’re talking about a very significant number of people, indeed.

Until 1975, a family with a schizophrenic member (a son, for example) could have him committed to a mental hospital—involuntarily. (Incidentally, the Fasts were married around that time when Thomas Fast was in his early 20s, the age by which most schizophrenia manifests itself). In 1975 the ACLU led a coalition of mental-health civil rights advocates to challenge the constitutionality of this law. Subsequently, in O’Connor v. Donaldson the U.S. Supreme Court decided that involuntary commitment for mental illness that could be treated and controlled with drugs was a habeas corpus violation. Since then, schizophrenics who are medicated and, so, do not exhibit symptoms must be released from custody on their own recognizance.

While this was undoubtedly a well-intentioned decision, in practice it has produced a wide range of problems, most of which have fallen to private families to deal with. And when no family is available or willing to deal with the problem, the schizophrenics join the homeless living under viaducts.

Office of the U. N. High Commission for Human Rights

Please read the U. N.’s “Principles for the protection of persons with mental illness and the improvement of mental health care (1991).” I assume this was written by people with a full grasp of the problem, but it shows how incredibly complicated the issue is. Unfortunately, American law deals with schizophrenia as if it were simple.

In the case of Thomas Fast, it appears (from various testimony) that he has at some time been treated for paranoid schizophrenia and has taken medication voluntarily. His father has assisted him throughout his adult life, despite the defendant’s frequent failure to take “his meds” and his constant babbling about paranoid fantasies involving the CIA and drug cartels.

In the end, though, the defendant’s delusions and hallucinations got the better of him. He murdered his father’s wife.

Now, the defendant has tried to accuse his father of the crime, or at the very least to claim his father has falsely accused him.

Defense Attorneys Lie in Court

I first realized that defense attorneys lie in front of juries when I served as a juror in a criminal case. The judge had warned us that we were not to take anything the lawyers said to be the truth, but I did not realize that meant he would actually tell us bald-faced lies. In the opening statement, the defense attorney told us a wide range of things that were never admitted in evidence, including that the defendant was drunk when he committed the crime (yes, the defense attorney). Later, this statement served to confuse me greatly when the issue of a written confession was raised—but that’s another story altogether.

In the Fast trial, the defense attorney seems to have lied about the defendant’s father having his wife’s wedding ring before her body was found. The TruTV commentators acted as if this was a proven fact, which tended to incriminate him in the crime. Later, to the judge, the defense attorney said, “He [the father] answered that [question'] in a way that was not true.” But he offered no evidence of this.

Family Members’ Testimony

In trial after trial we’ve seen family members of the victim and the defendant testifying “damningly” about the defendant’s behavior before and after the crime. In almost all cases, I’ve wondered about the relevance of their testimony. Most families have conflicts. Many in-laws have generally negative opinions of each other.

In this case, though, the father’s testimony is extremely relevant. He discovered that his wife was missing from their home late at night and that her car was missing. He searched the neighborhood for the car. Instead of his wife’s car, he found his son’s car in a nearby Publix store parking lot (near where her body was discovered a month later). The father had thought his son was in another part of the state on a contracting job—so he found this suspicious. He called the police, who came to the parking lot. While they were there, the son arrived in a taxi, shoe-less with a duffle bag. Whether or not there was a familial connection, this man would have had to testify at the trial.

Insane Murderers

Think about the recent trials of schizophrenics: Naveed Haq, Charles McCoy, Kathleen Hilton. In each of these trials, family members have testified or spoken to the media about their struggle to cope with the defendants’ mental problems.

I’m not asserting that schizophrenic murderers should be acquitted. I’m suggesting that schizophrenics should be hospitalized and treated before they commit murder. I’m also suggesting that we need to find a way to provide a type of out-patient or halfway-house environment for schizophrenics after they leave custodial, institutional care.