</s>and meaningful reflection upon the gravity of the contemplated assassination. The clinical evidence which the defense presented relative to appellant's mental capacity in effect consists of the testimony of two psychologists, Schorr and Richardson, and two psychiatrists, Dr. Marcus and Dr. Diamond. The other four psychologists called by the defense (Seward, De Vos, Howard, and Crain) merely attempted to interpret and verify the findings of Schorr and Richardson and never observed or tested appellant. Their testimony is thus entitled to negligible weight. People v. Bassett, supra, 69 Cal. 2d 122, 140-43, Martin Schorr, a clinical psychologist, examined appellant at the county jail for several hours on November 25, 1968, and for most of the following day, administering several psychological tests including the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MPPI), the Thematic Appreciation Test (TAT), the Bender Visual Motor Gestalt, and the Rorschach. (Rep. Tr. pp. 55/40, 5547.) Mr. Schorr testified at length regarding his opinion, derived from the test results, of appellant's general mental and emotional makeup. But it was only 180. 2025 RELEASE UNDER E.O. 14176

Summary  
The document details legal proceedings and expert testimonies regarding Sirhan Sirhan’s mental capacity during his trial for the 1968 assassination of Robert F. Kennedy. Defense experts, including psychologists Martin Schorr and Orville Richardson and psychiatrists Dr. Marcus and Dr. Diamond, testified that Sirhan lacked the capacity for premeditation and deliberation due to alleged diminished mental state. Their testimonies were criticized for methodological flaws, inconsistencies, and reliance on incomplete or biased information. Schorr’s testimony was deemed unreliable due to improper testing techniques, plagiarism of a book, and inconsistent conclusions. Richardson admitted incomplete testing and preconceived biases. Dr. Marcus faced scrutiny over contradictions in evaluating Sirhan’s amnesia claims and erratic behavior. Dr. Diamond’s opinion relied on unverified factors like self-hypnosis while dismissing critical evidence, such as Sirhan’s prior statements to a garbage collector about his intent to kill Kennedy. Prosecution rebuttal by Dr. Pollack argued that Sirhan possessed the mental capacity for premeditation, citing his planning, motive, and rational behavior during the assassination. The court rejected the defense’s claims of substantial evidence for diminished capacity, emphasizing the lack of credible expert testimony supporting such a conclusion.  

The document also addresses the admissibility of evidence obtained during a warrantless search of Sirhan’s residence in Pasadena, California, following RFK’s assassination on June 5, 1968. The search recovered notebooks and an envelope from the trash area behind the residence. Prosecution sought to admit portions of the notebooks and the envelope as evidence of Sirhan’s mental state, while the defense argued the search violated Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches. Legal arguments referenced precedents such as *People v. Gilbert* and *Warden v. Hayden*, which upheld warrantless searches under exigent circumstances to protect life or prevent further harm. The case also referenced broader context of potential conspiracy, given recent assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and President John F. Kennedy, emphasizing law enforcement’s urgency to investigate threats to high-profile officials.  

A separate legal proceeding examined the validity of Adel Sirhan’s consent for the search of his brother’s bedroom in the same residence. Adel, who was not the property owner, provided consent after being advised of his constitutional rights and informed he was not under arrest. The court cited precedents such as *People v. Thayer* and *People v. Hill*, which upheld searches conducted with reasonable belief in a co-occupant’s authority. The trial court ruled Adel’s consent valid under California law, emphasizing officers’ reasonable belief in his authority to grant access.  

Key People  
- **Martin Schorr** (clinical psychologist)  
- **Orville Richardson** (psychologist)  
- **Dr. Marcus** (psychiatrist)  
- **Dr. Diamond** (psychiatrist)  
- **Dr. Pollack** (prosecution’s rebuttal psychiatrist)  
- **Sirhan Sirhan** (defendant, accused of assassinating RFK)  
- **Adel Sirhan** (oldest male member of the Sirhan household; provided consent for search)  
- **Munir Sirhan** (residing in the Sirhan household)  
- **Mrs. Sirhan** (property owner of the residence; testified she did not authorize the search)  
- **Robert F. Kennedy (RFK)** (assassinated on June 5, 1968)  

Key Locations  
- **Ambassador Hotel** (site of RFK’s assassination)  
- **County jail** (where Schorr examined Sirhan)  
- **696 East Howard, Pasadena, California** (Sirhan household; site of search and legal proceedings)  
- **Pasadena Police Station** (location where Adel Sirhan initially met with officers)  

Key Events  
- Testimony by defense experts on Sirhan’s mental capacity for premeditation and deliberation  
- Cross-examination revealing contradictions and methodological flaws in expert opinions  
- Dr. Pollack’s rebuttal testimony asserting Sirhan’s ability to premeditate  
- Court’s rejection of the defense’s claim of substantial evidence for diminished capacity  
- Warrantless search of Sirhan residence following RFK’s assassination, recovering notebooks and an envelope from trash area  
- Legal debate over admissibility of evidence under Fourth Amendment protections  
- Investigation into potential conspiracy related to RFK’s assassination, referencing recent assassinations of MLK Jr. and JFK  
- Legal proceeding examining validity of Adel Sirhan’s consent for search of his brother’s bedroom, citing California law and precedents on co-occupant authority  

Key Organizations  
- **California Supreme Court** (referenced in legal precedents)  
- **Los Angeles Police Department** (involved in search and subsequent legal proceedings)  
- **Prosecution team** (including Chief Deputy District Attorney Compton)  
- **Defense legal team** (arguing for diminished capacity)  
- **United States Supreme Court** (referenced in constitutional arguments)

RFK Declassified Files

56-la-156-y_sec_001_ser_1--part_5_of_7.pdf

Document Summary

Try AI Search