David McClain was not the kind of guy to smash a beer bottle across a police officer's face. A former teacher at his parent's college in Japan, Mr. McClain had no criminal record. He also had no history of sleep disturbance. Yet, before his ordeal could end, his sleep pattern would create a new defense for criminal defendants in Indiana. Unfortunately for Mr. McClain, his assault on the police officer would leave him with a criminal conviction.
After ten months in Japan, Mr. McClain was ready to come home. There is a 14-hour time change between Japan and the Central Time zone. The flight began in Japan at 11 a.m. on Sunday, December 19th. He landed in Indianapolis 20 hours later.
Friends and family members gathered to celebrate his homecoming at various times over the next several hours. Mr. McClain kept up the pace and the evening neared its climatic end when he relaxed with a small gathering of college friends, a beer and a marijuana joint. He was there less than one hour before embarking upon a car ride to a pool hall. He never made it.
Along the way, Mr. McClain walked out of the car and into the middle of traffic, holding what remained of his second bottle of beer. A police officer drove by and told him to move out of the street. Instead, Mr. McClain opened the door of the patrol car and sat down. "Don't I know you?" he asked the driver. The officer pulled into a parking lot and got out of the car. He walked over to the passenger side and found Mr. McClain, also out of the car and facing away from the officer. Without warning or provocation, Mr. McClain cracked the beer bottle over the officer's face, breaking his jaw. Two police officers arrived and subdued Mr. McClain. He and the injured police were taken to the hospital in the same ambulance.
Mr. McClain fell asleep during the ride. Drug tests conducted within the next three hours revealed only the presence of marijuana in his urine.
Mr. McClain was charged with aggravated battery against police officers and resisting law enforcement. His first lawyer offered an insanity defense, claiming his client's violent behavior was a form of automatism caused by sleep deprivation. (The Indiana court accepted the definition of automatism as the existence in any person of behavior of which he is unaware and over which he has no conscious control.) Mr. McClain's second lawyer, Gregory Bowes of Indianapolis, researched the issue further and withdrew the insanity defense because automatism was externally caused, unlikely to reoccur and therefore did not qualify under the legal definition of insanity. He intended to put forward the defense that Mr. McClain's sleep deprivation prevented him from acting with the level of intent necessary for a criminal conviction.
The state argued to preclude the evidence because medical testimony related to his ability to form a criminal intent and must be presented under the insanity provisions. The trial court ruled to exclude the admission of expert testimony regarding sleep disorders and dissociative states because the insanity defense had been withdrawn. The court was unsure of the legal correctness of its ruling and requested appellate review. For the first time, the highest court in Indiana faced the question of whether and how evidence of automatism can be presented to show a lack of criminal intent. Holding: Indiana Supreme Court: The trial court was incorrect in excluding expert testimony on automatism and sleep deprivation. The condition is not included within the insanity defense because automatism may manifest in a person with an otherwise healthy mind. In addition, the court was concerned that a merger of automatism with the insanity defense could result in psychiatric confinement and treatment of a sane defendant.
At the ensuing trial, expert testimony regarding the effects of sleep deprivation was presented to the jury. Dr. Mahalmud testified that "because of profound sleep deprivation combined with the abrupt disruption of his circadian cycle, he was in a mixed state of wakefulness and non-REM sleep, was unable to know what was going on around him and was unable to form an intent to commit the violent acts he exhibited. The state's expert countered with the theory that, if Mr. McClain's behavior was directed violence, then it did not result from sleep deprivation. He speculated that a drug such as LSD may have caused the behavior. (Mr. McClain was not tested for the presence of LSD.)
Jury Verdict: Mr. McClain was convicted and is awaiting sentencing. Attorney Bowes is hopeful that the judge will exercise her authority to weigh the mitigating value of sleep deprivation when she sentences his client. He reflected upon the larger effect of the Supreme Court's ruling. "It is entirely appropriate for any defendant to present evidence that bears on the issue of voluntariness. If it's relevant, the court ought to use it." He pointed out that the permitted use of the defense requires so many factors to happen at once that it is unlikely to be successfully employed with regularity. The prosecuting attorney expressed his concern about the potential overuse of the defense. Andrew Hedges of Indianapolis told The Forensic Echo he was somewhat reassured by the alleged comments of the jurors who convicted Mr. McClain that "if he was that tired, he should have gone to bed."
 | Michael Welner, M.D. Chairman The Forensic Panel |
Dr. Welner comments: Sleep disorders, automatisms and intent questions are arising with increasing frequency. A genuine sleep disorder case will be featured in a forthcoming issue of The Forensic Echo. The McClain scenario, however, raises sleep deprivation and the behaviors associated with the condition.
To date, we can only rely on scant research evidencing the increased propensity to aggression in persons with mental retardation who have been sleep-deprived. [Kennedy C., Meyer K.,J. Applied Behavioral Analysis 29:133-35 (1996)] These results have followed more extensive bio-chemical research in sleep-deprived rats. But reliance on rat research is not likely to pass a Daubert test for admissibility.
Nonetheless, we can state that some populations are more likely to attack when less rested. Case studies of mentally retarded individuals revealed aggression associated with escape from demand situations, such as an assignment of tasks. [O'Reilly M., J. Applied Behavioral Analysis 28:225-26 (1995)] (Mr. McClain, we recall, was ordered to "Get out of my patrol car.") However, the persons studied were violent to begin with, and their sleep deprivation was not so pronounced as Mr. McClain's.
Animal research studies have demonstrated an increase in aggression upon exposure to agents that increase dopamine transmission in the brain [Hipolide D., Tufik S., Physiology and Behavior 57: 1139-43 (1995)]. Dopamine has been associated with, among other things, bizarre behavior, particularly in the regions implicated in the rat studies of sleep deprivation. Additional studies demonstrated paradoxical behaviors in response to other drugs as well. We also know that cocaine and amphetamines, as well as MDMA, are potent dopamine stimulators. Additional studies demonstrated paradoxical behavior to drugs that affect other neurotransmitters as well. [Santos R., Carlini E., Pharmacology 55: 1-7 (1987)]
Emergency room drug screening profiles need to parallel trends of recreational drug use.
The uncertainty of the McClain case emphasizes the need for emergency room drug screening profiles to be updated to parallel cultural trends of recreational drug use. Illicit drugs such as rohypnol, LSD, mushrooms, ketamine and ecstasy are not adequately screened for. Many of these substances can influence behavior, but are not part of urine or blood toxicology profiles. For example, the only hallucinogens screened for in Mr. McClain were PCP and cocaine. Urine toxicology studies performed on Mr. McClain just hours after his arrest showed no trace of cocaine. Traces of marijuana were present, and we know the attack on the police officer was carried out with a half-empty bottle of beer, even if Mr. McClain's alcohol level was not especially high.
A forensic psychiatric analysis of a sleep deprivation defense should include a thorough examination of 1) any prior incidents of violence, 2) actions in previous instances of sleep deprivation, and 3) previous behavior following earlier incidents of circadian disruption. Mr. McClain may have fared better had he revealed a history of puzzling and uncharacteristic behavior following sleep deprivation. The jury may have perceived him with the compassion reserved for a person who is ill as opposed to someone who should have just gone to bed. Otherwise, peculiar and random violence with no evidence available even after expert analysis is more representative of too much (intoxication) than too little (deprivation).
The U.S. Supreme Court clarified the standards for the admissibility of scientific expert testimony when it decided Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals in 1993. The trial judge should consider whether the theory or technique presented has been 1) tested, with a known or potential error rate 2) subjected to peer review and publication, 3) subjected to standards of control, and 4) widely accepted within the relevant scientific community.
