Friday, December 09, 2005

Government defends McBride confession

In documents filed Wednesday in U. S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, government investigators defended the confession they received from Webb City businessman Keith Erwin McBride, who is being held on an arson charge after allegedly burning his business, Coin-Op.
McBride's lawyer, Shane Cantin of Springfield, said in documents filed earlier in U. S. District Court that his client's rights were violated when he was interviewed April 19, while McBride was in the middle of a four-day hold for psychiatric and medical treatment.
McBride, 51, was arrested April 15 after allegedly burning his business Coin-Op in Webb City to the ground, as well as his home in Duquesne. He was arrested following an hours-long standoff, in which he "barricaded himself into one of his business properties threatening suicide," according to the court filing.
"Armed with a handgun, Mr. McBride attempted to shoot himself in the head, but the firearm failed to function. After teargas was introduced into the warehouse, Mr. McBride was eventually taken into custody, and without further incident."
He was placed on a 96-hour hold at the Hawthorn Center in Joplin. During that time, according to the court document, "Mr. McBride was diagnosed with 'major depressive disorder-single episode, severe" and 'severe psychological stressors.' Hospital records indicate that Mr. McBride was exhausted, despondent, quiet, and detached from those around him. He suffered from insomnia, and refused to participate in group counseling sessions. Mr. McBride had to be coaxed out of his room to walk around. (He) was given sedatives to assist in his sleeping, and was medicated throughout his stay at the Hawthorn Center."
When officers arrived at the center to question him, they were able to convince him to sign a waiver of his Miranda rights "although Mr. McBride had been sleeping and was otherwise medicated with sedative type drugs," the court document said.
McBride made incriminating statements during that interview, according to the document.
Cantin says his client could not have been able to give thoroughly informed consent due to his condition. "Mr. McBride was suffering from at least three days without any, or very little, sleep, prior to his arrest of April 15, 2005, and continued to suffer from insomnia, depression, and anxiety since arriving at the Hawthorn Center. His symptoms were treated throughout this time with medications which caused him to have unclear through processes, difficulty comprehending and remembering, and which otherwise impaired his ability to understand the complete nature of the rights he was being asked to give up, and the consequences of the decision to abandon them."
The government investigators disputed that version of events, noting that McBride initially admitted to the crime during his standoff with the police at the warehouse. "In an attempt to coax defendant from the warehouse, Corporal James Altic talked with him and asked if he would come out. (McBride) replied that he would not, and would kill himself. When asked why he wanted to kill himself, defendant told Corporal Altic, among other things, that he had nothing left to live for, and said he 'blew up' his business and house. When queried whether he had used explosives in the fire, defendant replied that he had not, but that he had been 'very inventive.' During a phone conversation with another police officer, Darren Gallup, defendant advised that he was afraid of going to jail because he had blown up his business and house."
The police investigation determined McBride had made numerous phone calls to friends and talked "openly and extensively about his conduct."
During the interview at the Hawthorn Center, "he appeared to investigators to be coherent and lucid. He appeared to understand his constitutional rights as read to him and as appeared on the standard printed form." He signed the waiver, then wondered whether he needed a lawyer, according to the document filed Wednesday, then decided he did not

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I still don't understand why this is arson. I had been under the impression that it isn't a crime to burn down your own home, business or art studio. As long as he doesn't try to claim the insurance money it doesn't look like a crime to me. Pretty dumb, but not a crime, I wouldn't think. The only "crime" is that his actions do endanger the lives of the firefighters who battle the blaze, and I guess the attempted suicide is a crime.

Anonymous said...

unless the business and/or home were mortgaged...then the buildings belong to the bank, not to him, and it would probably be arson in that case. An artist using an old chicken coop as a studio probably would not have a mortgage on that structure, so no arson if he burns that down.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, but if your home or business has a mortgage against it... the building does not belong to the banking instutition. However once the property is destroyed then the loan value is due to satisfy the outstanding loan.