COLUMBIA, S.C. _ The trial judge has denied a request from attorneys for convicted Charleston church mass killer Dylann Roof to delay a competency hearing after the lawyers said Roof "may lack the mental capacity" to be his own attorney.
Roof has told U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel that he wants to be his own lawyer in the punishment phase of his death penalty trial, which is scheduled to begin Tuesday in Charleston.
The jury will hear evidence and then decide if Roof is to be executed or gets life in prison without parole.
But on Monday, Gergel is to hold a closed hearing to listen to new mental health evidence. The State newspaper and other media outlets have asked Gergel to hear arguments about why that hearing should be open to the public.
The tangle of hearings became more knotted late Thursday when Roof attorney David Bruck and his legal team made the new assertion about Roof's mental competence. They asked in a court filing for delays in next week's already scheduled crucial court proceedings.
First, Bruck is asking for a one-week delay in Monday's mental competency hearing at the Charleston federal courthouse. In that hearing,
All that federal standards require for mental competence is that a defendant be able to understand the proceedings against him and be able to assist his attorneys. Gergel has ruled that Roof has the right to be his own lawyer and choose whatever defense strategy his selects.
If Gergel were to grant Bruck's motion of a one-week delay, that would push the penalty phase of the trial back into January. Roof has been convicted of 33 counts, including hate crimes.
In his latest motion, Bruck noted that Roof announced this week at a pretrial conference that he will present no case to offset the government's evidence in the penalty phase.
In the penalty phase of a death penalty trial, defendants usually put up witnesses to show the jury why a defendant should get life in prison without parole. The government puts on witnesses to show why a defendant should be executed.
"This defendant's announcement that he will not defend himself against the death penalty _ following a government presentation that is expected to involve more than 38 additional witnesses and hundreds more exhibits _ raises in especially stark fashion the question of whether the defendant is actually unable to defend himself," wrote Bruck.
"The court should permit counsel the time to adequately prepare for a hearing to explore these concerns," Bruck wrote.
"As everyone does, we regret this situation. But when the government asks for the death penalty, there arises a special need accuracy that can slow and delay the legal process in ways that noncapital sentencings do not," Bruck wrote.
