WOBURN — Rage, not psychosis, drove Nathaniel Fujita to beat, strangle, and slash to death his former high school sweetheart after she broke up with him, a psychiatrist testified for the prosecution on Monday.
“My assessment of Mr. Fujita’s mental status at the time of the crime was that he was angry, enraged, acting out in a very brutal way, and acting in a purposeful, well-thought-out, goal-directed and thorough way,” said Dr. Alison Fife, who met with Fujita four times before his trial began in Middlesex Superior Court.
Comments
Dueling psychiatrists and psychologists are one of the worst aspects of the American judicial system. It's a very inexact field and the "expert" opinion is always in support of the side that's paying for their testimony. Meanwhile, the jury is composed of people with no expertise to judge which "expert" knows what he or she is talking about, if any of them know what they're talking about.
There's no easy solution, but in England at least the experts are appointed by the judge and considered to be neutral.
It's the job of the lawyers on the case to have their experts explain the facts and their opinions in such a way that the jury can determine who is more believable. "Neutral" is difficult to achieve and most times is a misnomer.
I agree that neutral is difficult to achieve, but the adversary system is a perversion when it comes to seeking the truth. Especially with expert and technical testimony, two polarities often end up distorting things to the point that the truth cannot be found on either side. Lawyers don't care about the truth; they care only about winning by whatever means it takes.
We have a judicial system on the verge of collapse because the search for justice has been lost along the way. The number of people shown to be wrongly convicted by DNA evidence are just the tip of the iceberg. Plea bargains aren't justice. Making examples is not justice. The system is so polarized that prosecutors often insist on someone's guilt even when irrefutable evidence says otherwise.
I can't see it happening, but we need a major overhaul. No matter how innocent I was of some arbitrary criminal charge, I would have no confidence that I would be treated fairly and receive justice.
The occuption of "Expert Witness" has become a lucrative field. There are basically lists of these "experts" in all fields and the defense uses them to find people who will give testimony in support of their cases. These people are mostly experts in their fields but some seem to be more than willing tp tailor their findings in return for a fat paycheck.
I suspect that the defendant will not receive a 1st degree murder conviction, in spite of evidence that the murder was planned beforehand, but he will be convicted of 2nd degree murder and receive a lesser sentence. Regarding justice in this case, several questions come to mind, many of them comparing our justice system to less punitive societies where defendants, including those who kill, are given fewer years in prison and have an opportunity for redemption. I hope this young man has the same opportunity because everyone deserves a chance to redeem themselves. I hope that eventually Nathaniel will have the ability to communicate with the victim's parents and ask their forgiveness. Lauren's father showed remarkable humanity after his daughter's death. He was a living example of God's grace.
I do not agree. If someone kills, there is no forgiving them. The only thing he can do is spend the rest of his life in jail regreting his decision. It's not the fathers job to feel guilty when the boy goes to jail.