South Carolina inmate says ‘psychopath’ defense doomed him to death row

(CN) — A South Carolina death row inmate argued Tuesday he deserved a new trial in a high-profile double murder case because his defense attorney told jurors he was a "psychopath."

Stephen Stanko was convicted in 2006 for strangling his girlfriend Laura Ling at their home outside Myrtle Beach. Stanko then sexually assaulted Ling’s teenage daughter and slit her throat.

The girl survived and called 911 for help. Stanko next drove to the Georgetown home of a 74-year-old friend, Henry Turner. He shot Turner while the man was shaving, using a pillow to muffle the blasts.

The brutal crimes led to a manhunt that drew national attention. Stanko was eventually arrested in Augusta, Georgia, where he was pretending to be a wealthy restaurateur during The Masters golf tournament. He still had Turner’s truck and the revolver he used to shoot him.

Stanko was convicted in separate trials of committing both murders. His defense attorney William Diggs didn’t dispute his client committed the crimes, but argued he was insane at the time.

Stanko suffered from a congenital brain defect that was aggravated by a head injury in high school, Diggs told the jury. The injury caused his client to develop an antisocial personality disorder, Diggs argued, transforming him into a “psychopath.”

It was a controversial and, ultimately, unsuccessful defense strategy. Stanko, now 57, was sentenced to death in both cases.

Stanko claims on appeal he received ineffective counsel from Diggs, among other issues. On Tuesday, a three-judge Fourth Circuit panel heard those arguments. U.S. Circuit Judge Pamela Harris and Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Albert Diaz, both appointees of Barack Obama, served on the panel with U.S. Circuit Judge Toby Heytens, appointed by Joe Biden.

Joseph Perkovich, a New York attorney for Phillips Black, represented Stanko at the hearing. He told the judges that Diggs’ strategy at trial was “extremely damaging” to Stanko’s case. Telling the jury that Stanko was a psychopath didn’t help explain his actions, but instead turned him into a monster.

It was well-known among capital defense attorneys that psychopathy is not an effective insanity defense, Perkovich explained, and actually hurts the client during the penalty phase.

“The jury views this evidence and they want to euthanize the defendant,” Perkovich said.

He said if Stanko underwent a meaningful psychological evaluation, it would provide a better picture of his mental state at the time of the killings.

Anthony Mabry, a senior assistant attorney general for South Carolina, argued Diggs offered the best defense he could at trial but was “trapped” by the brutal facts of the case.

Harris expressed concern that the ineffective counsel issue was not properly raised on appeal before the South Carolina Supreme Court.

Diaz asked Perkovich if Diggs failed to present any evidence of Stanko's mental health problems, or if the evidence simply was not presented to his liking.

"It wasn't competently developed," Perkovich responded. "There were pictures, there was 'dazzling evidence' put forward by a very plainly incompetent presentation."

Perkovich also argued Diggs should not have represented Stanko at both trials.

After Stanko was found guilty for Ling’s murder, he filed an appeal claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. But Diggs continued to represent him in Turner’s murder.

Stanko told the trial judge he wanted Diggs to represent him in Turner’s murder case, despite the issues in the first trial.

Perkovich argued Tuesday the defendant should have been provided conflict counsel to advise him of the issues.

Stanko is being held at Broad River Correctional Institution.

Follow @SteveGarrisonPC

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Email *

Submit