Brain Scan on Kraft Shows Abnormality, Professor Testifies

A brain scan of serial killer Randy Steven Kraft shows that he suffers from an abnormality that could affect “emotional, impulsive, and sexual behavior,” a UC Irvine psychiatry professor testified Wednesday.

Testimony by Dr. Monte S. Buchsbaum, director of UCI’s Brain Imaging Center, marked the first time jurors have heard the defense waver at all from its position that Kraft is innocent of all 16 murders of which he was convicted on May 12.

“Randy still maintains he is innocent,” said Kraft attorney C. Thomas McDonald outside the courtroom in Santa Ana. “But if the jurors believe he is guilty, we’re only saying maybe there is a reason. Maybe it was something beyond his control.”

Buchsbaum, testifying about the PET, or positron emission tomography, scan at Kraft’s death penalty hearing, acknowledged on cross-examination that some leading authorities claim such brain tests are too experimental for use in criminal cases.

Buchsbaum also acknowledged that a more standard brain-scan test on Kraft four years ago, an EEG or electroencephalogram, showed no abnormalities. But he testified that the PET scan can measure deeper into the brain than an EEG and can better reach areas that control sexual behavior.

Buchsbaum said the problem could stem from a head injury Kraft suffered when he was 1 year old.

Kraft, now 44, is accused by prosecutors in court papers of 45 murders of young men in Southern California, Oregon, and Michigan.

Bodies of the victims, most of them between 18 and 25 years old, were usually dumped along freeway ramps or in remote areas. Most had been sexually mutilated, or showed some signs of sexual abuse.

Kraft acknowledges that he is gay. But in questioning witnesses himself, Kraft has tried to elicit a portrait of himself as a conservative gay man, not given to extreme sexual aberrations.

Buchsbaum told jurors that in most areas, Kraft’s brain was quite normal, which would explain his high intelligence and his ability to communicate well with co-workers. The brain area affected controls “a narrow spectrum,” he said.

Buchsbaum’s testimony did not include any details about what extremes might result from Kraft’s alleged brain abnormality. But he did say that test results showed a significant difference from the norm, based on PET scans of 24 volunteers.

While other brain-scan tests measure electrical impulses, or the structure of the brain, a PET scan measures how the brain is functioning.

Although there are about two dozen PET scan centers across the country, including three in California, Buchsbaum admitted under questioning by Deputy Dist. Atty. Bryan F. Brown that it is a new procedure for criminal trials. In fact, Buchsbaum said he believes he is the only PET scan expert involved in criminal cases today. And he has only testified in three other cases.

Depression Could Have Been Factor in Test

Brown questioned whether “depression” might have caused Kraft’s test results. After all, Brown said, the test occurred on May 31, just two weeks after Kraft’s conviction. He also reminded the professor that Kraft has been in the Orange County Jail for more than six years. Depression could not be ruled out, Buchsbaum answered. In fact, he had written several years ago that depression could interfere with test results. But Buchsbaum quickly added that he doubted depression was a factor, based on recent experimental tests on that issue.

Buchsbaum also testified that “it would be consistent” with the test results for Kraft to display some signs of the organic damage. For example, bursts of anger would not be surprising, Buchsbaum acknowledged.

Yet Kraft’s long list of character witnesses have all insisted that Kraft rarely displayed any temper, was always quiet and reserved. After Buchsbaum’s testimony, prosecutor Brown asked a Kraft character witness whether he had ever seen Kraft angry, a question that until Wednesday had been more typical of the defense.

Even Kraft smiled at this switch in the lawyers’ positions.

Kraft lawyer McDonald was pleased with Buchsbaum’s testimony. And McDonald said he doesn’t consider it inconsistent with his earlier arguments that Kraft is innocent.

“If the jury’s position is (that) Randy is guilty, we can at least show them it wasn’t because he is an evil person; it’s something organic he can’t do anything about.”

Another witness Wednesday was Rabbi Leonard Beerman of West Los Angeles, now retired, who said he believed after talking to Kraft that he is a considerate, caring individual who should be spared the death penalty.

“Did you ask Mr. Kraft whether he had killed any of these young boys?” Brown asked the rabbi.

“No, but Randy did tell me he was innocent,” Beerman answered.

“Did you believe him?”

“Yes, yes I did,” Beerman answered the prosecutor.

Beerman also said he opposes the death penalty, not only for Kraft but for people such as Adolf Hitler and Adolf Eichmann, who “murdered my own people.”