Anselmo double murder trial pins experts against each other with insanity plea

Ian Anselmo's insanity defense for his double murder trial in August will be a battle of dueling psychological experts and some tough challenges for his lawyer.

His attorney, Richard E. Hornsby, argues that his client was "unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of his actions at the time of the alleged offense and did not know what he was doing or, if he knew what he was doing, did not know what he was doing was wrong," in a May 26 motion.

That's the standard, the very thing he must prove.

"All persons are presumed to be sane," according to jury instructions read by trial judges. Because of that, "the defendant has the burden of proving the defense of insanity by clear and convincing evidence," the Florida statute reads.

More: Eustis man who killed pregnant stepmother claims insanity as trial date nears

More: Bond in Eustis killing not unique

Normally, the prosecution has the burden of proof, which must be beyond a reasonable doubt.

"The question you must answer is not whether the defendant is insane today, or has ever been insane, but whether instead the defendant was insane at the time the crime allegedly was committed," the jury is instructed.

Hornsby has implied that he has little choice.

"The prosecutor is not being very flexible," he told the Daily Commercial, referring to a possible plea deal.

However, he described the evidence as "compelling," and said the jury could still come back with a finding of guilt for a lesser offense, like manslaughter.

A person convicted of second-degree murder can be sentenced to life in prison. Anselmo is also charged first-degree murder for killing an unborn child by injury to the mother, a penalty of 30 years.

It is easier to convince jurors of insanity when there is a known history of psychological problems, such as schizophrenia, as opposed to someone snapping, said John Spivey, the executive public defender whose office is not associated with this case. It is unclear if such a history exists for Anselmo.

Another hurdle is the instruction that states: "Unrestrained passion or ungovernable temper is not insanity, even though the normal judgment of the person is overcome by passion or temper."

That definition would seem to fit the definition of Florida's second-degree murder law: "… the unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual."

Woe to the defendant who tries to hide evidence, mislead investigators, or take other actions that would show premeditation or rational consciousness of guilt, Spivey said.

Psychology Today reported in 2020 that despite a public perception that insanity is a common defense, "it is used in only 1% of all criminal proceedings, and its success rate is only 25% of that 1%. Therefore, less than one in 400 defendants are found not guilty by reason of insanity in this country."

There are some famous cases where defendants were found not guilty by reason of insanity, including John Hinckley Jr., who shot President Ronald Reagan in a 1981 assassination attempt.

Members of Congress were outraged by the finding, so they passed the Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1983, which put the burden of proof of insanity on the defense. Reagan signed the bill into law.

Jurors also tend to be skeptical. Attorneys for Virgil Hyde III tried but failed to convince jurors that he was insane when he shot his wife and the mother of his two children 24 times at their home near Groveland in 2014.

Hyde could be heard in videos watching security footage and whispering to his wife, Bobbi, that he could see neighbors sneaking around their home at night. One psychological expert testified that his paranoia was heightened by delusions that enemies had taken the form of his loved ones.

But after viewing 100 pieces of evidence, it took jurors just two hours to convict him of second-degree murder. The two had been arguing over money and her insistence that he get treatment for drug addiction.

In a horrific 1980 case, however, jurors found that Diane Evers of Leesburg was not guilty by means of insanity when she drowned her three young children in a bathtub and claimed to be the Virgin Mary.

People found not guilty by reason of insanity are sent to a mental institution until they are deemed sane. Evers spent the majority of her life in a mental institution.

A judge later ruled that she could be moved to a kind of halfway house, but even that move was tempered by reality: There were no beds available.

This article originally appeared on Daily Commercial: Ian Anselmo's insanity plea for killing pregnant stepmom poses challenge