Appellant Brief, 1988
Added 2022-08-22 07:23:49 +0000 UTC"The court ignored the record and instead adopted [the State's] speculative interpretations of what the indicia of Petitioner's incompetency 'really' showed. Typically the court found Bundy's plainly irrational conduct to be evidence either of a 'diabolical' cleverness or to be a reasonable, if unsuccessful, effort by him to influence the course of his trial. Thus, Petitioner's bizarre and irrational behavior at the plea proceeding becomes in retrospect an astute lawyerly subterfuge; his suicidal marriage ceremony in the penalty phase becomes a reasonable, if unsuccessful, play on the jury's sympathy. The 'evidence' on which these interpretations are based are inferences, guesses and surmises-- not facts. That the court's interpretations were first advanced by the State is irrelevant; the record provides no basis for characterizing Bundy's self-defeating behavior as anything other than a product of mental illness..."
I've been on a competency hearing research kick lately. This brief, filed in early 1988 by Jim Coleman, was a desperate attempt to appeal Judge Sharp's ruling from the month before. It may seem like dry legal reading at first but I found it full of interesting facts about Ted's mental state. Coleman does an excellent job at arguing the case for incompetence, in my opinion.
