Jodi Picoult - House Rules

“Is that the only kind of mental defect that constitutes legal insanity?”

“No.”

“Does Asperger’s syndrome cause someone to have psychotic breaks?”

“No, but there are other symptoms of Asperger’s that might prevent someone from distinguishing right from wrong at a particular moment in time.”

“Such as?”

“The intense fixation on a subject that someone with Asperger’s has can be overwhelming and obsessive-to the point where it impedes function in daily activities or even crosses the boundary of the law. I once had a patient who was so focused on horses that he continually was arrested for breaking into a local stable. Jacob’s current special interest is forensic analysis and crime scene investigation. It was evident in my interview with him, as well as in his obsession with the television show CrimeBusters and the detailed journals he kept about each episode’s plot.”

“How might a fixation like that contribute to some of the evidence we’ve heard in this courtroom?” I ask.

“We have heard that Jacob was increasingly popping up at crime scenes, thanks to his police scanner,” the psychiatrist says. “And Jess Ogilvy’s death was part of an elaborate crime scene. The evidence was arranged to look at first glance like a kidnapping, then eventually revealed the victim. It is possible that the opportunity to create a crime scene, instead of just observing fictional ones, led Jacob to act in a way that went against rules, laws, and morality. At the time, he would only have been thinking about the fact that he was creating a real crime scene that would be solved by law enforcement officials. In this way, an Aspergian fixation on forensic analysis led Jacob to the delusional belief that, at that moment, Jess’s death was a necessary part of his study of forensic science. As chilling as it seems to us, the victim becomes collateral damage during the pursuit of a greater goal.”

“But didn’t Jacob know that murder is illegal?”

“Absolutely. He is the poster child for following rules, for seeing things as either right or wrong with no mitigating circumstances. However, Jacob’s actions wouldn’t have been voluntary at that moment. He had no understanding of the nature and consequences of his actions, and he couldn’t have stopped if he wanted to.”

I frown slightly. “But we’ve also heard that Jess Ogilvy and Jacob were extremely close. Surely that would have affected him?”

“Actually, that’s another reason we can conclude that Asperger’s played a role in what happened to Jess. People with Asperger’s have a greatly impaired theory of mind-they can’t put themselves into someone else’s position to imagine what the other person might be thinking or feeling. To the layperson, it’s a lack of empathy. So for example, if Jess were crying, Jacob wouldn’t try to comfort her. He might know that people with tears in their eyes are usually sad, but he’d be making a cognitive judgment, not an emotional one. For someone with Asperger’s, this lack of empathy is a neurobiological deficit, and it affects behavior. In Jacob’s case, it would have lessened his ability to perceive the impact of his own actions on Jess.”

“But still, Doctor,” I say, playing devil’s advocate, “there’s a big difference between not handing someone a hankie when she’s crying and killing her so that she can be a pawn in a crime scene setup.”

“Of course there is.” The psychiatrist turns to the jury. “And this is probably the hardest thing for the layperson to understand. We’re always looking for motive in a crime that’s as horrific as this one is. I’ve considered this from my discussions with Jacob and with Dr. Murano, and I think that the answer lies in the argument Jess and Jacob had the Sunday before her death.

“The calling card for Asperger’s is impaired social interaction. To that end, someone with Asperger’s has a very naϊve and limited understanding of relationships, which might lead him to seek contact in an inappropriate way. This leads to disappointment, and even anger, if a relationship doesn’t work out the way he’s anticipated.” She looks at Jacob. “I don’t know what was said between Jacob and Jess the afternoon of her death, but I believe Jacob had a crush on his tutor. Ironically, his rigid sense of right and wrong-which you’d think would deter criminal behavior-might actually have backfired here. If Jess rebuffed Jacob’s advances, he would have felt that she’d done something wrong to him, that he was the victim.”

“And then what?” I ask.

“He snapped. He lashed out without realizing what he was physically doing at the time he did it.”

“Nothing further,” I say, and I sit down. I glance at Jacob, who is glaring at me. Emma stares straight ahead. She seems determined to not acknowledge my existence today.

Helen Sharp stands up. “There are a lot of kids who’ve been diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome. So are you telling us that the world’s full of ticking time bombs? That at any moment, if we look at one of those kids the wrong way, he might come after us with a carving knife?”

“No, in fact, it’s the opposite. People with Asperger’s aren’t prone to violence. Since they don’t have an active theory of mind, they aren’t motivated to hurt someone; in fact, they’re not thinking about that person’s feelings at all. If someone with Asperger’s does become violent, it’s during the single-minded pursuit of a special interest, during a state of panic, or during a moment of complete ignorance about appropriate social interaction.”

“Isn’t it true, Doctor, that most defendants who claim insanity do so because of a psychotic break from reality?”

“Yes.”

“But Asperger’s isn’t a psychotic disorder?” Helen says.

“No. It would fall more in line with personality disorders, which are characterized by perceptual and interpersonal distortions.”

“In legal terms, doesn’t the absence of psychotic episodes suggest that the person is personally-and criminally-responsible for his or her actions?”

The psychiatrist shifts. “Yes, but there might be a loophole for Asperger’s. We can’t scientifically prove that someone with Asperger’s has a very different experience of subjective reality than someone who doesn’t have Asperger’s, and yet the extreme sensitivity to light and sound and taste and touch and texture indicate that this is the case. If that could be measured, there would be strong parallels between Asperger’s and psychosis.”

There is a sharp jab in my side as Jacob elbows me. He passes me a blank piece of paper.

“If that were true,” Helen says, “wouldn’t this suggest that someone with Asperger’s has a hard time being aware of reality and his role in it?”

“Exactly. Which is why it might very well contribute to legal insanity, Ms. Sharp.”

“But didn’t you also say that Jacob’s fixation on forensics led him to use Jess Ogilvy’s death to create his own crime scene?”

“Yes.”

“And wouldn’t such premeditation and careful calculation suggest he knew very well what he was doing at the moment?”

Dr. Newcomb shrugs. “It’s a theory,” she says.

“You also mentioned a lack of empathy.” Helen approaches the witness stand. “You said it’s one of the features of Asperger’s syndrome?”

“That’s right.”

“Would you consider that an emotional measure or a cognitive one?”

“Emotional.”

“Is lack of empathy part of the test for legal insanity, Doctor?”

“No.”

“Isn’t it true that the determination for legal insanity is whether the defendant knew right from wrong at the time the act was committed?”