State v. Kent Malcolm
| Decision Date | 29 October 1987 |
| Docket Number | 50846,87-LW-3453 |
| Parties | STATE of Ohio, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kent MALCOLM, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | Ohio Court of Appeals |
Criminal Appeal from Common Pleas Court, Case No. CR-196, 367.
John T Corrigan, Prosecuting Attorney of Cuyahoga County, Cleveland for plaintiff-appellee.
Carla Tricarichi, Tricarichi & Carnes, L.P.A., Cleveland, for defendant-appellant.
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
Kent Alan Malcolm, appellant, is appealing his convictions and sentences, including his death sentence, for the aggravated murder of Kathleen J. Bowman and the attempted murders of Lilaya Vrndavan and Judith Scott.
On December 19, 1984, appellant opened fire inside the Cleveland Public Library killing Kathleen J. Bowman and wounding Lilaya Vrndavan and Judith Scott and was apprehended as he was leaving the library. There was no dispute at trial as to these basic facts, the only issue being appellant's sanity.
Appellant on appeal makes various claims that he was denied his right to present his insanity defense and to present evidence in mitigation of a death sentence. We find that although there was little dispute as to the events at the library, appellant was deprived in substantial respects of the opportunity to present his defense of insanity and his mitigating evidence and therefore we reverse and remand for a new trial as to his guilt and as to his penalty.
A summary of events leading up to the shootings comprised from appellant's and the state's evidence is as follows. According to the testimony adduced at trial from appellant, the medical experts, and appellant's statement to the police, appellant, who has been in and out of prison and mental hospitals for most of his adult life, came to Cleveland from Davenport, Iowa in October, 1984, because he heard it was easy to obtain welfare in Cleveland. For a long period of time appellant harbored a deep hatred for women, especially women who wore tight pants, and planned to go to Philadelphia to shoot women one at a time. In early to mid-December, appellant applied for and purchased a .32 caliber revolver and fifty rounds of ammunition.
Appellant's Philadelphia plans were thwarted at the Trailways bus station. After purchasing a ticket to Philadelphia, appellant became suspicious and believed he was being watched because of a letter he wrote to a woman in Philadelphia. He left and went to the Greyhound bus station where he purchased a ticket to Pittsburgh since he could no longer afford a ticket to Philadelphia. After boarding the bus, appellant heard a little voice say in a disgusted tone, "I hate you," at which time he panicked and ran off the bus. He fled to the railroad tracks and boarded a freight train hoping it would leave Cleveland, but it never moved.
When appellant became hungry on the evening of December 18, 1984, he left the freight car and followed the railroad tracks to St. Clair Avenue where he purchased food, beer and cigarettes. As he was returning to the train yard, appellant received a message to go back to St. Clair and shoot some "broads." He began to place the gun in a plastic bag because it started to rain when he got a sharp pain in the bottom of his right foot. This pain meant to him that he should not be doing whatever it was he was doing at the time, i.e., putting the gun in a plastic bag. Later, when he saw a girl to shoot, he could not remove the gun from the bag fast enough. The girl became aware of what appellant was attempting to do and escaped around a corner as appellant fired at her and missed.
Appellant said he is guided in his actions by the voice of the Christ within, but he also receives messages from a voice that imitates the Christ within. To differentiate between the two voices, appellant uses the I Ching method of throwing coins, which is an Oriental method of obtaining answers from your higher nature, i.e., your spiritual self or the Christ within. Appellant tosses three coins six times. The landing positions have meanings, which are set forth in the I Ching book of changes. Appellant memorized all sixty-four hexagrams so he no longer needs the book. Once the coins are tossed and have landed giving appellant an answer, appellant checks the expressions of the faces on the coins to see if they are consistent with the answer. Appellant gets very distinct expressions from Roosevelt's face on a dime, "even a lurking smirking grin." He has seen every conceivable expression on Jefferson's face, but does not get many explicit expressions from Lincoln's face. A frown on a face indicates a bad reading, i.e., a "don't do it reading." Appellant has been using the I Ching method of throwing coins since 1975.
On the morning of December 19, 1984, appellant began to search for women to shoot. He went to a McDonald's, a Mr. Hero's, a Burger King, which was closed, and a drug store. He considered going to a university campus because a voice told him to go there, but the coins did not confirm that the voice was the Christ within. He went to the Cleveland Public Library instead.
Upon entering the library appellant saw a couple of women sitting together who were dressed provocatively and whom he wanted to harm. He consulted the coins regarding whether to shoot them but received negative responses. Lacking divine approval, he continued walking around and said to his Christ within,
Appellant sat down in the Popular Reading Room of the library, watching and waiting for the right type of girl to come in. He began to think it was too spread out in the library when the voice very urgently said, "[L]et's get started." He rose from his chair and started walking around. When he sat down again, a modestly dressed young girl, Kathleen Bowman, a library employee, walked by and appellant heard the voice say, "[G]et her." She was not provocatively dressed, but appellant rationalized that the Christ within knew more about it than he and that perhaps the girl would wear tight pants the next day.
Appellant followed Ms. Bowman and observed her talking to Matthew Browarek, Ms. Bowman's supervisor, at the service desk in the Popular Reading Room. Appellant approached within two or three feet of her and tossed his coins at least five times according to his testimony seeking confirmation to shoot. He received positive answers each time and Roosevelt's face gave a clear expression of approval. Appellant, knowing he would not have the opportunity to choose the next woman after he fired his gun, said to the Christ within, "[L]ord, you take over, you do it, do it through me." Appellant then shot Ms. Bowman five times. Appellant then turned and ran.
On his way into the next room, appellant told William Brenner, an attorney browsing in the library at the time, In the next room, appellant shot library patron Lilaya Vrndavan in the head when she walked into the room. Ms. Vrndavan feigned dead and appellant ran back into the Popular Reading Room to reload his gun.
As appellant was leaving the Popular Reading Room, modestly dressed Judith Scott, a clerk-typist at the library, started down the hallway which separates the Literature and General Reference rooms. Appellant entered the hallway walking hurriedly, stopped about halfway and shot Ms. Scott in the upper shoulder. She continued on past him. Appellant's gun jammed, but after unjamming his gun, appellant shot Ms. Scott again, this time in the middle of her back. Appellant did not care about killing her, but did want to do more damage. His gun was empty so he just threw it at her and walked to the front of the library.
Police officer Norman MacLean was off-duty but uniformed and working at the Sohio Building directing traffic on the morning of December 19. An unidentified man ran across the street from the library and told him there was a man shooting a gun in the library. After entering the library, Officer MacLean saw appellant walking out the main entrance to the front doors and asked, "Are you the one?" Appellant said, "[Y]es."
Appellant was indicted for aggravated murder (R.C. 2903.01) with a gun specification (R.C. 2941.141) and two mass murder specifications (R.C. 2929.04(A)(5)) and two counts of attempted murder (R.C. 2903.02, 2945.74) with gun specifications. Appellant pled not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity. He was subsequently found competent to stand trial.
The critical issue at trial was appellant's sanity. All of the medical experts agreed that appellant was suffering from the mental disease chronic paranoid schizophrenia. Dr. Victor Victoroff, the defense psychiatrist, interviewed appellant for a total of fourteen and one-half hours. He testified that appellant's persecutory ideas about women, which he harbored as early as age seventeen, gradually worsened into a fixed delusion in the mid-1970's. The voices he heard became more and more controlling so that on December 19 appellant, due to his mental illness, did not know the wrongfulness of his conduct and could not conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. Appellant was entirely under the control of the Christ within and all decision-making had been relegated to the tossing of coins. Dr. Victoroff testified that appellant believed his life would be in danger if he ever disobeyed.
Dr Robert Goldberg, a forensic and clinical psychologist, who tested and interviewed appellant for a total of eight hours, also testified that appellant was legally insane at the time appellant fatally shot Ms. Bowman. Dr. Goldberg, however, was unable to reach an opinion to a reasonable degree of certainty as to the effects of appellant's...
To continue reading
Request your trial