Therapist Says Trauma Could Impair Tuffree Witness’ Testimony

Discrepancies in the testimony of a key prosecution witness in the murder trial of Daniel Allan Tuffree could be attributed to the trauma of seeing his partner shot and killed, a police psychologist told jurors Wednesday.

But during a lengthy cross-examination, psychologist Roger M. Solomon acknowledged that the testimony of former Simi Valley Police Officer Michael Pierce as to the number of gunshots he heard during last year’s shootout with Tuffree could be unreliable.

Tuffree is charged with first-degree murder in the slaying of Simi Valley Police Officer Michael Clark. He also faces charges of armed assault and attempted murder for allegedly shooting at Pierce after police came to Tuffree’s home to check on his health.

Tuffree had reportedly been taking Valium and drinking alcohol, stopped answering his phone and was possibly suicidal, according to court testimony.

Pierce, now a police officer in Tempe, Ariz., was one of three officers who came to Tuffree’s home Aug. 4, 1995. His testimony two weeks ago riveted the jury as he described standing only a few feet from Clark when he was killed.

Pierce testified that he heard four distinct gunshots fired at his partner from inside Tuffree’s home--one initial report followed by three quick blasts.

But he said he never heard Clark fire his pistol. The fallen officer had emptied his 9-millimeter Beretta during the gunfight, firing more than a dozen rounds, according to court testimony.

Other witnesses have testified that they heard between eight and 15 gunshots coming from Tuffree’s yard.

Prosecutors called Solomon to the stand Wednesday to testify about how traumatic incidents, such as police shootings, can affect the memory of those involved.

The psychologist told the jury that amid the confusion of the fatal shootout, Pierce may have focused on one aspect and tuned out Clark’s rapid firing.

Solomon said he has counseled thousands of police officers involved in shootings and that limited recall is typical.

“Attention tends to narrow in moments of peak stress,” he testified. “It is very, very common and quite usual that a police officer may not recall how many shots were fired.”

But on cross-examination, Solomon acknowledged that Pierce’s memory of the shooting could be unreliable. He admitted that Pierce could have been so focused on specific details--such as protecting himself from gunfire--that he failed to observe other events occurring around him.

“There is no way to rule out that we could have all kinds of misinterpretations,” he said.

Tuffree’s attorneys have admitted that the former schoolteacher shot and killed Clark. But they have argued that Tuffree shot in self-defense because Clark fired first.

During Wednesday’s proceedings, Deputy Public Defender Howard Asher asked Solomon if it were possible that the four shots Pierce said he heard were fired at the end of the gunfight instead of the beginning.

“It is conceivable,” Solomon answered. “They could have been the first, the middle or the last.”

After Solomon’s testimony, Deputy Dist. Atty. Patricia Murphy began questioning firearms expert Paul Dougherty, who is expected to narrate a reconstruction of the shooting.

Dougherty is expected to take the stand again today.