Dear Sarah: Murderers May Walk Free In Arkansas
Criminal responsibility before a jury trial
Dear Sarah,
I feel obligated to bring this grim murder case in my neck of the woods to your attention.
I have read — and re-read — what you said in a press release when you were running for governor about changing Arkansas law towards protecting victims’ rights. I will refresh your memory.
Once you became governor, you took steps to reform Arkansas prisons and sentencing guidelines.
But what about violent actors who are never convicted?
You may not have known about how some violent offenders raise an affirmative defense due to lack of criminal culpability or criminal responsibility. This happened less than a month ago in a Grant County case in front of Circuit Court Judge Stephen Shirron.
In a transcript from the May 7, 2024, hearing, Shirron said:
“Now, by law, the defendant has the burden of proving his affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence. With the state having no evidence that would refute Dr. Wright's opinions, they are left with no choice other than to essentially concede that they're unable to establish the culpable mental state required to try Philip Reynolds.
Applying the facts that have been adduced at this hearing to the law under Arkansas Code 5-2-313, I have no choice but to find that at the time of the conduct charged, the defendant lacked criminal responsibility. While Philip Reynolds committed some of the most heinous, savage, and brutal physical acts that this Court has ever encountered, he did so while being impaired by his mental disease. At the time, he lacked the — the capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct. He lacked the capacity to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law and he lacked the capacity to form the culpable mental state required to establish an element of the offenses charged. Therefore, a judgment of acquittal will be entered on the grounds of lack of criminal responsibility.”
Reynolds was born and raised in Arkansas. He became a criminal defense attorney in Texas and then returned to his home state at some point.
Around 2016, he moved to Grant County on family land. He left behind in Texas unpaid child support and sanctions from the Texas Bar Association. He was also arrested, and charged, with carrying a gun on a school campus.
His past also includes drug abuse with a diagnosis of “amphetamine abuse and psychotic disorder NOS due to periodic meth use.”
According to his last psychological evaluation presented to the court, Reynolds “also reported to his treatment team that he used methamphetamine approximately ‘15 times’ during his life, with his last use being ‘a couple of days before’ his arrest in 2019.”
His victims — in fact a lot of people in Grant County and surrounding areas — now worry if, or when, this man could be released from the Arkansas State Hospital as a result of Act 911 of 1989. Lawmakers passed Act 911 “relating to the commitment of insanity acquittees; and for other purposes.”
You campaigned on the need to reform Arkansas prisons and to create a victim's bill of rights. That’s a great start. I think the circumstances of this case are unique and should be examined thoroughly.
Let's look at what has happened just 50 miles south of Little Rock.
The victims in the case are many. A man now dead at the hands of his neighbor, left a widow and their two children. Another neighbor shot in the leg with medical needs he never dreamed of having. An elderly neighbor who witnessed the brutal slaying of the victim in broad daylight and continues to be haunted at 87 years old. The responding officers who were fired upon in the chaos and examined the gruesome crime scene. He also threatened others prior to committing these crimes.
Please look at this case and how mental health professionals, and the work they perform, impacts the judicial system. During this complex five-year case, ultimately one psychologist's opinion decided the outcome before the facts were presented to a jury.
In this case, the defense made the motion to seek an evaluation of criminal responsibility in February just days after a hearing where Reynolds was deemed fit to proceed to trial.
It's confusing to the average person, like me, when I read the court transcript from the May 7th hearing. That's because the prosecuting attorney called the psychologist with the Arkansas State Hospital to the stand and then asked all the questions when originally the defense asked for the evaluation. (The licensed psychologist's 22-page evaluation can be found in “The Dumpster” section of this site.)
Having witnessed many trials, this stood out. When the prosecution finished with the psychologist, the defense had no questions.
But there are a lot of questions in this case.
It is not clear if the psychologist listened to the phone calls from the defendant in 2019 during his incarceration in a South Arkansas jail before he was committed to the state hospital. I have. They are critical to understanding this case.
Less than 1% of capitol murder trials end in acquittal due to criminal responsibility, according to research.
Could this man be released?
Shouldn't Arkansas law clearly seal off any loophole that could release a violent criminal who is acquitted due to lacking criminal responsibility because of a mental illness when the criminal's actions caused the violent death of an Arkansas citizen?
In this particular case one victim was shot nine times, mutilated with a brush axe, and set on fire. Another neighbor was shot. Law enforcement was fired upon. The details of this case are horrific and were left undisputed during the final hearing.
Help Arkansans — those affected by vicious violent crime and those who may be victims in the future — by asking the legislature to correct this obvious failure in Arkansas law.
Sincerely,
Suzi
Good job. Keep the heater on.