by Antoinnette Borbon
It was a day filled with deep emotion for a few of us while listening to both closing arguments in the case of Zacharius Kleinsasser. Mr. Kleinsasser was brought to trial for a recommitment in Napa State Hospital.
On Wednesday, Deputy DA Rob Gorman delivered a brief closing which was very similar to his opening statement earlier this week. Mr. Gorman reminded the jury once again of the three elements to be met by the state.
He talked about the letter written by Mr. Kleinsasser, arguing that its contents could mean the public would be at risk if Mr. Kleinsasser decides to follow through on a mission message for the military. This was disputed by evidence that came forward in the trial showing that Mr. Kleinsasser had told Dr. Skillie it would never happen.
Mr. Gorman also argued that Mr. Kleinsasser was a substantial danger to the public. He briefly reiterated the same testimony of Dr. Skillie’s findings and suggestions to keep him in Napa, and with that he rested.
Deputy Public Defender Dan Hutchinson began his closing with a statement about liberty. Mr. Hutchinson told a story of a man who had, by no fault of his own, suffered mental illness.
Mr. Hutchinson argued, “This is a man who has lost hope,” and been in a system that kept moving the goal posts. He reminded jurors of testimony from the many doctors who had treated Mr. Kleinsasser over the course of sixteen years. The one thing they all agreed on was that Zacharius Kleinsasser posed no risk to the public, and during his sixteen years of commitment at Napa he had demonstrated absolutely no aggressive behavior.
As Mr. Hutchinson neared the end of his lengthy and in-depth closing argument, his speech slowed and his head lowered. He told jurors he could not have been as strong a man as Mr. Kleinsasser. Fighting back emotion, the defense attorney asked the jurors to do the right thing and let his client go home to his family.
On Thursday, the jurors ruled in favor of Mr. Kleinsasser, setting him free.
Commentary: I was not able to be there Thursday morning for the ruling, but I trusted there would be a good outcome. But, as I reflect on what this man had to endure just because of mental illness that stemmed from an injury that occurred while on his job – ironically in the same field – my heart is wrenched.
I was reminded of a statement Dan Hutchinson made in his closing for Thaddeus Sonne, a young kid who was accused of rape.
In the closing argument in that case, Mr. Hutchinson began with a question, “Why are we here?” It seemed to fit this case even more.
As this story unfolded in a mere three days, it revealed a tale of great injustice and unrighteousness on the part of our legal system.
I felt shame, as there was little reason to lock this man up and proverbially throw away the key. Having dealt with several different types of patients in my twenty plus years in the medical field, I have seen patients retreat into a vegetative state from the side effects of prescribed drugs – both mentally and physically.
Thus, I find agreement with Mr. Kleinsasser’s refusal to up the dosage of his medication. It was a short time ago we heard the testimony of Dr. Super during the Mings trial, about the dilapidated body of 42-year-old victim Kevin Seery – due to prescribed drugs for his mental health issues.
It also raises the question of who has the authority to force these medications on an individual? Where are the patients’ rights? Where is the liberty now?
I can understand the fear of a threat. But this was not even perceived as dangerous to a city councilman, but rather a human concern for another individual – as stated by defense.
As to Mr. Kleinsasser’s delusions and listening to only partial content of his timeline – they seem to be nothing short of a great fiction novel.
If he has kept his temper and actions under control for well over sixteen years, I am guessing he will do fine in the care of family. I won’t worry about the “what ifs.”
It may serve us better to use our energy and taxpayers money for that “substantial danger” from a real criminal mind…not the one of a disabled brain-injured veteran who lost 10 plus years locked away.
Why? The question still remains to me – a grandiose delusion of a blue diamond and a bomb inside a man – and how that just doesn’t cut the mustard.
It is always a joyous day to hear vindication by a jury of one’s peers! It restores an element of faith in our society. To those who fight for true and righteous justice, be it on the side of the defense or prosecution, my hat is off to you.
oh sorry, read the last article before this one.
glad to hear he’s out, hope he has access to the support he needs.