V. On October 8th, 2003, the Court ordered the U.S. Attorney and Dr. Sell?s attorneys to each submit a memorandum stating each party?s position as to (1) the current state of defendant?s competency to permit the trial to proceed, (2) the probability that in the foreseeable future, the defendant will attain the competency to permit the trial to proceed, and (3) the nature of the treatment, if any, best suited to maximize the probability of restoring the defendant to competency.
VI. In response to this, Dr. Sell?s attorneys, against his wishes, petitioned the Court for fees and expenses for a C. Robert Cloninger, MD to examine him.
VII. In order to address the issue of Dr. Sell?s competency to stand trial, it is necessary for him to obtain a psychiatrist that will conduct an independent evaluation, and who is unbiased.
VIII. The defendant has chosen the psychiatrist that he wishes to conduct the competency evaluation: Dr. Mark Schiller.
IX. The defendant does not have a curriculum vita on Dr. Schiller and does not know what his hourly rates would be. He has limited access to telephone and, his attorneys appear to have an agenda of their own; but his address is (deleted).
X. For the above stated reasons, the defendant cannot, at this time, estimate the amount of time or funds he will need to hire Dr. Schiller, however, it is certain the amount will exceed the $1,000 maximum mentioned in 18 USC Section 3006A (e) (3).
Wherefore, the defendant, Dr. Charles Thomas Sell respectfully requests that the authorization be granted for the fees and expenses of Dr. Mark Schiller to perform an independent psychiatric evaluation to determine the defendant?s competency,
Dr. Charles T. Sell.
To be continued?
Mike S. Adams (www.DrAdams.org) is the author of the new book, ?Welcome to the Ivory Tower of Babel.?