Psychiatrist: Man accused of killing 6 controlled by voices |

Psychiatrist: Man accused of killing 6 controlled by voices

Associated Press
Ronald Lee Haskell collapses July 11, 2014 as he appears in court in Houston. A forensic psychiatrist told jurors Monday that Haskell was not responsible for his actions because of severe mental illness that made him believe voices in his head were telling him to kill.

HOUSTON — A forensic psychiatrist tells jurors a man accused of fatally shooting six members of his ex-wife’s family in 2014 wasn’t responsible for his actions because severe mental illness made him believe voices in his head were telling him to carry out the killings.

Prosecutors allege Ronald Lee Haskell created a meticulous plot in which he traveled from California to suburban Houston and stalked his ex-wife’s family before killing six of them, including four children.

But Stephen Raffle, a forensic psychiatrist who examined Haskell, testified at his capital murder trial Monday that Haskell didn’t know what he did was wrong because the voices in his head “had basically taken control” of him.

Raffle was expected to be the final witness for the defense. Haskell’s trial began Aug. 26.

Categories: News | World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.