Verbatim Transcript Quotations

These are taken from the trial transcript attesting to the fact that Ron Schilling was for the most part unaware of his surroundings that day. His violence was caused by his epilepsy. As the Doctor in the last quote states, Ron Schilling was"along for the ride on that day."

Now for the Transcript Quotations:

1)Assistant District Attorney John Burr, guilt phase of bifurcated NGRI trial, Closing Arguments, 09 February 1976:
Page 51: There was no evidence that there was any design to take Mr. Posthuma's life when they left Stanton's house.
Page 52: I think it's a very fair statement, ladies and gentlemen, that there was no intent to kill...
Page 53: Again, I don't believe this was a plan when they went out to--there to kill him.
Page 54: I think Mr. Schilling was telling the truth when he said that Michael Posthuma was dead when he stabbed him, partially the truth. He was. I think the evidence fairly demonstrats that a lot of those wounds were inflicted after he was dead.

2)Assistant District Attorney John Burr, NGRI phase of bifurcated NGRI trial, Closing Arguments, 10 February 1976
Page 20: You have to decide, number one, did Mr. Schilling have a mental disease or defect at the time in question? I think he probably did. I think the evidence shows that. ... I think the evidence shows that Mr. Schilling had a mental disease or defect on (June) 9th. I think he does today and has throughout the whole trial.

Doctor Brown, NGRI trial, 10-13 February 1976:
Page 22: The diagnosis of the seizure disorder means that Mr. Schilling, and this diagnosis by the way is made on the basis of objective evidence of not only the history as gathered by the neurologist of the attacks, but also electroencephalogram, brain wave test evidence of abnormality in the brain which is consistent with the development of seizures.
The diagnosis was grand mal seizures which is the type of seizure in which the person becomes unconscious, and post-ictal confusional states. This is a way--this means specifically that after seizures these people have periods of time ranging from minutes to several days, perhaps, which they are confused and do not know what they're doing.

Page 24: (Dr. Brown reading Dr. Tegtmeyer's report), "We thus have an electroencephalographic evidence of a convulsive disorder confirming the suspicion clinically' that this patient has a seizure disorder.
In reviewing the materials that you have gathered," and this is his letter to me, "there were several episodes enjoyed by various individuals suggesting definite grand mal seizure with post-ictal behavior of a very violent nature.
It is therefore my conclusion, neurologically, Mr. Schilling has a seizure disorder, probably grand mal with post-ictal confusional state. This may have been a result of his injury, or might have resulted from the meningitis that he had at the age of two.
The role of the seizure disorder in the legal aspect of the patient's problem I think is difficult to state. Repetitive behavior in a post-ictal state is not unheard of, of course, or as part of a seizure pattern. However, one would have to get a more clear cut prescription of the alleged time of the behavior before one could say the patient was in any kind of seizure at the time."

Page 26: The conclusion that I arrived at was that at the time, on June 9th, 1975, the alleged crime, that Mr. Schilling was suffering from a mental defect. The defect, specifically, that of the seizure disorder which is a defect which he has had for a long time and the defect that he'll continue to have unless it's controlled by medication.

Page 27: The only conclusion that I arrived at in terms of the activity, in other words, was he having seizure activity during the time, this blank time period. I could arrive at no conclusion covering that time period. I did have a report suggesting that prior to this time period he had had a seizure.

Page 32: Burr questioning whether it would "be normal for an individual to carry out planned activity during a post-ictal confusional state?" Brown responds, A: I think the answer there, Mr. Burr, has to be qualified. And, if I may speak to that for just a moment. I would say, in the normal sense of planned activity, no, that one would not carry out planned activity during that time. I think, in the sense of a much deeper level of consciousness and awareness that that activity might well be planned activity in the sense that a person who is behaving extremely aggressively during the post-confusional state may well have life situations in his past in which aggressive behavior may well be the behavior that he would like to carry out. During this time it would not in any sense be planned that he would carry out the aggressive behavior that he might have wanted to exhibit when he was five, but couldn't. But, on the other hand, those thought patterns are already laid down and this kind of involuntary activity could occur during a post-ictal confusional state based on essentially early plans made years ago.

Page 37: Q: I'm sorry. Now, you indicated that Mr. Schilling was, further your opinion to a reasonable degree of medical or psychiatric certainty, that he suffered from a mental defect. Is that correct?
A: That's correct, yes, sir. . .
Q: And it was further your belief that he suffered from it on June 9th. Is that correct?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: And that mental disease — I'm sorry. That mental defect was what again, please?
A: Epilepsy, grand mal type of seizure disorder with post-ictal confusional state.
END OF QUOTATIONS

Of utmost importance is the fact that I did not have an opportunity to meet my burden of proof with the NGRI defense. On page seven of Dr. Brown's report, he still could not make a conclusion about the exact time in question because he did not know the details of what occurred. He pointedly needed information "from the horse's mouth," as he put it during trial. It was subsequently acknowledged that he was referring to my co-defendant, Thomas Stanton. My co-defendant was the only person on the planet who could have supplied him with that crucial information but, apparently, he was "constitutionally precluded" from testifying.
Mr. Stanton subsequently offered information to the court of appeals in a 36-page document entitled "An Open Letter To The Court," which provides graphic details of the circumstances of the entire tragic offense. I first obtained a copy of same in 1998 and supplied copies to the commission exposing Mr. Stanton's testimony that I was merely "along for the ride on that day."

Back to Free Ron Schilling main page