Usually coming into Great American about an hour or so, would schedule to Karen Johnson a Channel five that you're here to talk about more of what's happening in Claremont County. And there's probably few lawyers in the Try state that have the same experiences of James Bogan when it comes to representing individuals charged with death penalty
eligible offenses. There's not been an announcement yet they're going to go for the death penalty, But to knowing Mark Catolva, who is the prosecutor there, and the fact Claremont County is a very tough place to have a criminal defense made on an n GRII I would anticipate some decision might be made in the next few weeks to try this as a death penalty case. That puts all
kinds of things in play. And of course Chad Derman is facing I hope the death penalty soon for the murder of a seven, five and three year old sons. He lined them up and shot them one by one. I assumed the seven year old made it out of the house, chased him down in the field, brought him back and executed him again. And James Ogan has great expertise in this area, and James Bogan, welcome again to the
Bill Cunningham Show. And James tell the American people about how many aggravated murder cases have you handled and how many were not guilty by reason of insanity, the so called n GRI. I've handled quite a few not aggravated murder cases I've handled, but on three death penalty cases, two of them I did not go on to until completion, and the third one we tried it and
he was got life without parole. And if you were called last year, I had that roseland Bar shooter where he was schizophrenic and was unmedicated at the time, but he was found by two separate doctors not to qualify for not guilty by reason in Sandy. So when the public says, oh, he'll get off on insanity, that's really a misconception. It's an extremely hard standard to meet. Let's talk about the standard because in this case, as far as the defense is, one might be I didn't do it. That appears
to be off the board. Another one might be self defense or justification that's off the board. The only thing that remains is n GRII not guilty by reason of insanity. What are the standards in the state of Ohio if someone says I'm not guilty by reason of insanity, what are the standards to find somebody not guilty under that banner? Well, Bill, you would also be looking at competency and the serious mental illness defense, which applies only to death
penalty. But for not guilty better reason of insanity, you have to prove that, as a result of a severe mental disease or defect, that your client did not appreciate the wrongfulness of their actions. In the rose On Bar shooting case, the reason why the doctors felt that he knew right fromong was because right after he shot the guy in the head, he ran, which
tends to show that you're wrong. Trying to kill witnesses, trying to get away, or trying to kill yourself are three things that would indicate right from wrong. But in this case, what a lawyer would be looking at with this tragedy in Claremont County as the fact that the defendants did not try to kill any witnesses, He did not try to kill himself, he did not try to run after he shot these boys in front of a bunch of witnesses. He sat down on the steps and with his rifle by his side.
He wasn't holding it, was laying by his side, just waiting for the police. And so in a case where he would kill the witnesses, I assume his wife, and in a case where he would try to kill himself and I guess and miss or in a case he ran away, that would be cognizant of guilt that I know I did wrong. Therefore I'm getting away from the wrong. And so the fact that Chad Dermott sat on the front
steps with the rifle on his left side is indication of insanity. That those are things that his lawyers would need to look at and doctors would ultimately make the determination. But even if he's found not to qualify for nculity by reason insanity, there's a serious mental illness defense which does qualify certain defendants with a serious mental illness from the death penalty. This is under the Ohio Revised Code. If you want me to describe that, yeah, describe antil. So
instead of I didn't know right from wrong, I didn't know. I thought I was shooting a coke machine and it was my three year old. Assuming that doesn't fly, what is this serious mental defense that you lawyers sometimes look at to get someone free of these charges. What is that? This is actually something that now has to be looked at in every death penalty case. First, the defendant has been diagnosed with either schizophrenia, schizo effective disorder,
bipolar disorder, or delusional disorder. And the second prong is while not meeting the stand for being found knock guilty by reason in Sandy and being found competent to stand trial, is what significantly the mental illness significantly impaired the person's capacity to exercise rational judgment in relation to the person's conduct with respect to either conforming the person's conduct to the requirements of the law or appreciating the nature, consequences,
or wrongfulness of the person's conduct. Those are the prongs under the serious mental illness defense in Ohio. So he can claim, look, I'm seriously mentally ill. I think according to prosecutors Mark Takova, he planned this for many weeks. There was a news conference held last week and which the prosecutors said he planned this out. Does not work against a not guilty of a
reason of insanity or a serious mental illness. If someone is planning out if for a period of three, let's say three weeks, he's planning out to do it, it gives up in the morning. He takes his shar he brushes his taith, puts his shoes on, puts his clothes on. That's indication of the mind is working. I don't know if he had a job, but let's say he's working, gets in a car, has enough mental capacity to start the car. He conforms to the traffic laws as he drives
to work. Every day, he has conversations that work with individuals that are of such a character they don't turn him in for mental illness. He then leaves work. He's obeying stop signs, he's stopping at traffic lights, he's yielding to the right away. In other words, his mind is working every
step along the way. Doesn't that work against the mental illness. If a person's mind is working and that proves they're not mentally ill, yes that is a factor, and yes that would be a factor in the probably doesn't possibly doesn't qualify column. On the other hand, what you'd also have to look at is why did he plan it? Did he think these boys were possessed
by demons or something. Now I'm just speculating because I'm not a doctor and I'm not on this case, but those are all things that need to be looked at. Well. Hold on on that point, James Bogan, what if God was telling him that he had to kill these three boys, that they had to be sent to heaven or maybe to hell, whatever his sick mind would say. There's been some speculation that he was listening to God when he killed the three boys. That's definitely something to look at that would show
delusions. And one thing I was just getting at Bill is I saw an interview with his dad by WCPO, and the dad had indicated that his son had choked him back in twenty ten, or his son was charge with choking
in twenty ten. I'm wondering if that could have been a sign of something else going on with him twenty ten at his age, that would be around the time where if he does have a mental health issue, that would be he's thirty two now, that would be around the time where first breaks tend to happen because of the male brain that develops by the time they're twenty five
or thirty. So if you're a teenage boy or a teenage girl, there's a terrible events taking place where teenage girls are performing self harm on themselves. That those are the times when mental illness tends to emerge. Is between the ages like fourteen and twenty five years old for a male. So if this happened when he was like twenty years old, that would indicate he's going down
the avenue of mental illness. That's something that could be a sign. Now I could be way off on that, and I'm just speculating, but that's something if you're his lawyer, you want to make sure stuff like that is in front of the doctors who are evaluating your bait. You know, they like to have as much collateral information as possible, be as thorough as possible. Now, lastly, on the issue of mental illness, sometimes the quality
and character of the offense committed plays into it. If some man and woman gets into it and they're going crazy at each other and somebody pulls out a gun and shoots the spouse, you can say, well, you know it was a spouse fight. You get emotional, crazy stuff goes on, But when you kill a seven to five and a three year old, there can be no justification. I've seen the pictures and way of Karen Johnson coming up
in about an hour on this topic, they're beautiful little children. Does the quality of the crime committed play into the fact that no sane person would do that? No, that does not play into it at all. I mean the one time I actually did have a client file found knock Old Sparts in the sandy. It was a robbery case where he knocked a guy off his bicycle, took it, and then just stayed right there in the area instead
of trying to get away with it. So really, derman because he didn't leave the scene, because he was compliant, is an indication of n GRII because he didn't run, didn't kill the other witness, shot her in the hand, but he didn't kill the stepdaughter. That the fact that he stayed at the scene helps his defense. I think it does. And the wife was only shot in the hand. I believe when she was trying to defend the children, she was trying to grab the gun from him. So he
did not kill up with a target. Yeah, so she wasn't a target. He didn't try to kill her. He could have easily taken them the gunback pointed at her and blown her away and he could have easily blown away his stepdaughter or any other witnesses who were there. Now, how did this all fit in the mix? I don't know. Again, I'm just speculating,
but those are all things that would have to be looked at. So the fact that he didn't kill his wife and his stepdaughter and the fact that he stayed at the scene is more indicative of a mental illness than someone who would leave. That you could interpret it is that. Now. I can't say that to a certainty, again because I'm not a doctor, but that's
certainly something to look at. How hard would it be when I did active cases of NGR, I could always find one or two psychiatrists that would say this person is mentally ill, could not conform his behavior to the dictates of the law, did not know the difference between right and wrong. It wasn't that hard. Since you're in the business actively today, is it somewhat easy or difficult to find a psychiatrist to say that someone is not guilty by reason
of insanity? Is that still somewhat easy to do? You really don't have rent and experts the court clinic. They tend to be well in Hamilton County at the court clinic. I've never used the psychologist or psychiatrist out in Claremont County. But the doctors who are brought in by the court to do the initial evaluation, I've always on them to be very objective. And then when you go and get someone like doctor Carla Dryer or something like that for a
second opinion, they're not going to be. In my experience, the credible ones are not going to be renting experts. So right now, last question, when I was more actively involved, I wanted cases in Hamilton County, in Cincinnati. I didn't want them in Butler County. I didn't want them in Boone County. I didn't want him in Claremont County because the jury pool can be a bit more difficult in Claremont County than it might be in Hamilton
County. Is that still true? Yeah, you have to be in my experience, you have to be more careful with jury such and out in the outlying counties. Now, I'm not saying that as a knock on anybody, but that's just by the numbers. But you know, I was, you know, in my death colony case, I was in Butler County and we were able to get the jury to not even considered a death penalty, and you're not being assigned in the case. Let me ask you this, James,
You've got no communication in this case whatsoever. If the court would get a hold of you, because you're one of the few qualified, there's all kinds of certification you got to go through. Well, would you take this kind of case? Absolutely? I go by the old school rule, the unwritten rule that you know of, that when a judge asked you to take a case, you don't say no. And taking it not an endorsement of the client's conduct that they're accused of. It's an endorsement of the constitution and
due process. Because if these writs get diminished for even people charged with the worst crimes, they eventually get diminished for the rest of us. And you remember when I was on here last year talking about the story of John Adams, right right with the Boston massacre. Yeah, he said he took the case because he believed that every person charged with a crime is entitled to a
fair trial and a competent defense. He felt very wrongly about that, and he considered that one of the most important services he ever rendered to this country. Are you looking forward to a telephone call, because I would not look forward to do in this case. But you're saying you would do it. I would do it if I was asked. Now, do I actively solicit
to do these cases? No, that's ambulance chasing. But whenever a judge asked me to take a difficult case, which judges do, tend to trust me with difficult cases because in addition to my private practice, I do take these some appointments. Yes, you do it because it's to make sure there's due process. Yeah, without due process all of us and makes it it makes it certain the system make sure in the next case they cross all the teas and dot all the eyes by having a rigorous defense of Chad Derman.
I don't think I think it'd be damn near impossible to get a not guilty in Clarmack County on this case. But otter things have happened. And James Bogan, once again, thank you for your expertise and thank you for coming on the Bill Cunningham Show this Tuesday afternoon. Thank thank you very much to thank you Bill, always a privilege, Bill, Thank you, God bless
you. Let's continue with more line becomes available five one, three, seven, four, nine, seven thousand pounds, seven hundred and new at and T and more likely they're going to try this to a three judge panel. I think that's the better. The legal arguments may fall upon more fertile ground to judges than juries, because I don't think jurors are going to give this guy any break at all. Bill Cunningham, News Radio seven hundred of you. Did you know that if you miss any part of our shows, you
can catch the podcast of that show on the iHeart radio ad? Did you also know that a snail can sleep for three years? Just think of all our podcasts they could be listening to instead by snails are stupid? Financial planning? Are you now thinking about retirement? The stock market today is way down? Are you worried about that? Do you worry? Men don't have enough money saved? One call coorden to financial planning and set up a no cost
or obligation consultation. Now they will recommend a specific strategy to your personal circumstances. If you have assets of over two hundred thousand dollars two hundred thousand dollars called Steve Perrin Junior, that's Steve Perrin Junior. At five, one, three, seven, six, nine thirty one thirty one seven sixty nine thirty one thirty one or Coordendo Fancial Planning dot com