Defense: Tree of Life suspect has schizophrenia, epilepsy

The man accused of killing 11 people at the Tree of Life synagogue in 2018 has schizophrenia and epilepsy, his defense attorneys said in a court filing late Monday.

The revelation, contained in a response opposing the government’s request to do a psychiatric and neuropsychological evaluation on Robert Bowers, came on the same day, the defense said, that its request for the Department of Justice to withdraw notice to seek the death penalty against their client was denied.

Bowers, 50, of Baldwin, is accused of killing 11 people worshipping at the Squirrel Hill synagogue on Oct. 27, 2018.

Jury selection in the case is scheduled to begin April 24 in U.S. District Court. The trial, which will have separate phases for guilt and sentencing, is expected to go until July.

Eight months ago, the defense wrote, Bowers’ attorneys filed a request with the Justice Department to withdraw its intention to seek capital punishment, providing “a detailed recitation of the work of Mr. Bowers’ mental health experts, as well as substantial information regarding Mr. Bowers’ life history.”

After that, at the request of the U.S. attorney, the defense provided reports from all of the experts they had retained, and last month, again at the government’s request, they provided the raw data from Bowers’ neuropsychological testing — including results of EEG, MRI, PET and CT scans — as well as the records they reviewed.

The only thing the defense declined to provide, they said, was “unfettered and unprotected” access to Bowers.

On Monday, the court filing noted in a footnote, Bowers’ attorneys were notified that their request that the government withdraw its notice of intention to seek death was denied.

“It is unclear whether this decision was made by members of the Department of Justice’s Capital Review Committee or the Attorney General,” the defense wrote.

On Feb. 23, Bowers’ attorneys filed notice that, if the case moves into a sentencing phase, they intend to “introduce expert evidence relating to a mental disease or defect or any other mental condition of the defendant bearing on the issue of punishment.”

The notice did not indicate what mental health condition the defense was alleging.

However, in the document filed Monday, defense attorneys revealed their client’s diagnoses.

“The defense has given explicit notice that it intends to present expert evidence that Mr. Bowers suffers from schizophrenia, epilepsy, and structural and functional impairments of his brain, findings that are supported by neuropsychological testing and various brain imaging techniques,” they wrote.

In their filing, Bowers’ attorneys said only two of the defense experts — a psychiatrist and neurologist — relied on clinical interviewing of Bowers to form their opinions.

A neuropsychologist, radiologist and neuroradiologist reviewed records and interpreted raw data obtained through imaging procedures to reach their conclusions, the defense wrote.

“These defense experts will offer interpretations of this data and opinions that support the diagnoses of schizophrenia, epilepsy and structural and functional brain impairments,” the defense said in their filing. “However, they have not, and will not interview, evaluate or otherwise administer tests to Mr. Bowers.”

In early March, in response to Bowers’ notice that he would seek to introduce mental health evidence at sentencing, the U.S. attorney’s office asked the court to give them permission to have a psychiatrist interview Bowers and complete a forensic examination; have a neuropsychologist observe the interview and conduct additional tests; and have a neurologist complete a full evaluation.

As part of the evaluation, the government suggested that the experts be permitted to ask questions about the attack, as well as Bowers’ conduct before and after.

In their filing Monday, Bowers’ defense team objected to the government’s request, saying they sought a “broad-ranging, invasive and constitutionally problematic investigation into Mr. Bowers’ life, mind and body” that is “wholly inappropriate.”

While the prosecution is allowed to test the defendant’s mental health evidence, the attorneys wrote, it cannot “pursue its own agenda or conduct an untethered, invasive, free-for-all examination of a defendant.”

U.S. District Judge Robert J. Colville, who is presiding over the case, has not yet ruled on the issue.