Playback speed
×
Share post
Share post at current time
0:00
/
0:00
Transcript
2

EXCLUSIVE: Paul Boyne Speaks After CT Competency Charade Adjourned

Paul Boyne’s Competency Battle: Court Delays Trial, Lawyers Questioned
2

By Richard Luthmann

Virginia blogger Paul Boyne, who has been jailed for over 15 months on charges of cyberstalking Connecticut judges, continues to face a grueling legal battle. The latest development involves a controversial competency evaluation, which threatens to delay his trial indefinitely.

Let’s be clear: Paul Boyne is competent.

However, his refusal to participate in the evaluation has led the court to question his mental fitness. Legally, he has no obligation to do so, and the state must marshal clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption that he is competent.

At the same time, Boyne himself has raised concerns about the competency of his own legal representation.

In a recorded conversation with journalist Richard Luthmann, Boyne expressed his frustration with the court’s focus on his mental health, saying, “They keep trying to paint me as mentally incompetent. I didn’t participate in their evaluation, so now the judge gave the state more time to dig up dirt on me. It’s all about keeping me in jail.”

The hearing, which took place earlier this week, left Boyne disillusioned with the process. Judge Peter L. Brown, the trial judge assigned to Boyne’s case, has pushed the competency issue to the forefront despite the fact that the trial was originally set to begin in September.

Judge Peter L. Brown, New Haven, Connecticut

According to Boyne, the judge appears fixated on his refusal to undergo the evaluation while ignoring broader constitutional issues at play in his case.

The competency question stems from Boyne’s allegations that former Connecticut Supreme Court Justice Joette Katz has been secretly involved in his prosecution. Boyne’s refusal to drop these claims has raised concerns with the court about his mental state, but Boyne insists his accusations are grounded in fact.

“They’re trying to make me sound delusional just because I’ve been vocal about Katz’s influence,” Boyne said. “But it’s not a delusion if there’s evidence to back it up.”

CT Attorney Jennifer Buyske

Boyne’s relationship with  Jennifer M. Buyske and Alice M. Osedach Powers, his court-appointed Connecticut attorneys from the Manchester-based Kirschbaum Law Group, LLC, has also come under scrutiny. Boyne has openly criticized them for what he sees as a lack of effort in defending him.

“Jen and Alice, they really don’t like you,” Boyne told Luthmann. “They didn’t even bother hiding it in court.”

CT Attorney Alice Powers

Boyne claims his attorneys are more interested in criticizing him than mounting a serious defense, which has only deepened his distrust of the legal process.

During the hearing, Boyne’s attorneys even brought up journalist Michael Volpe, who has covered Boyne’s case extensively. According to Boyne, his attorneys suggested that his communication with Volpe was part of the problem, further fueling the court’s perception that he is mentally unstable.

“They brought up Mike Volpe like talking to a journalist makes me crazy,” Boyne said. “Since when is talking to the press evidence of incompetence?”

Judge Brown has scheduled another hearing for next week—on Halloween, no less—where the state is expected to push for Boyne to be officially declared incompetent. If the court rules in favor of the state, Boyne could be sent to a psychiatric facility for evaluation, delaying his trial even further.

Fairfield Hills State Psychiatric Hospital, Newtown, CT

For Boyne, this tactic is nothing more than a stalling effort to avoid addressing the real issues in his case.

“They’re using this competency nonsense to keep the focus off the constitutional violations. It’s a smokescreen,” Boyne said. “But I’m not backing down. I’ll keep fighting.”

As the competency battle drags on, Boyne’s case continues to raise questions about the intersection of free speech, mental health, and the role of the courts in determining a defendant’s ability to stand trial. With the next hearing looming, the question remains: Will the court continue to focus on Boyne’s mental fitness, or will it finally address the substantive issues at the heart of his prosecution?


Loading...

Share

Leave a comment


Streamlined Transcript

The following is a streamlined transcript of Richard Luthmann's and Paul Boyne's conversation on October 22, 2024, cleaned up for readability and a cursory understanding of the issues.

Richard Luthmann:
00:00:20
Hey Paul, what's going on? How are you holding up?

Paul Boyne:
00:00:22
Hey, Rich. Well, you know, I’m getting by, but it’s been a rough day. Let me tell you what happened.

Richard Luthmann:
00:00:24
Yeah, I’ve been waiting to hear about it. You had a hearing today, right? How’d it go?

Paul Boyne:
00:00:26
Yeah, I had the hearing. I’ll be honest, it didn’t go well. It was frustrating, man. They keep trying to paint me as mentally incompetent. I didn’t participate in the competency evaluation they ordered, so the judge was pissed. He actually gave the state a week to dig up more dirt on me, probably to declare me incompetent officially. We have another hearing scheduled for next Thursday—on Halloween of all days. They’ll probably declare me incompetent then and ship me off to the psychiatric hospital the very next day.

Richard Luthmann:
00:01:11
Wait, what? They’re actually doing that? What reason are they giving to keep pushing this incompetency angle?

Paul Boyne:
00:01:19
They don’t need much of a reason, apparently. But here’s where it gets funny—or maybe sad. Jen and Alice, my public defenders, they really don’t like you. They don’t hide it at all. They didn’t say much about you in court, but they dropped Mike Volpe’s name out of nowhere, like he’s somehow tied to my supposed incompetence. It’s the most bizarre thing. The judge and the prosecutor are basically insinuating that talking to Volpe, a journalist, is evidence that I’m mentally unfit. They’re grasping at straws. It’s absurd.

Richard Luthmann:
00:02:27
Mike Volpe? They dragged his name into this? You’ve gotta be kidding me. What does talking to a journalist have to do with your mental state? This is insane, man.

Paul Boyne:
00:02:36
I know! It’s ridiculous. But apparently, they think if I’m communicating with Mike Volpe, then something must be wrong with me. That’s their logic. What’s even more ridiculous is that the judge was stumbling over his words, like he didn’t even believe what he was saying. He just kept repeating that I was uncooperative because I didn’t do the evaluation, and that I was obsessed with this idea that Joette Katz is controlling everything behind the scenes. It’s like they’re trying to make me sound delusional just because I’ve been vocal about Katz’s influence in all this.

Evidence that Katz is connected to Boyne’s case is REAL. It was filed in Connecticut Federal Court.

Richard Luthmann:
00:03:33
That’s just their way of shutting down your argument, man. If they can label you as “crazy,” they don’t have to deal with the actual issues. But seriously, how did they even tie Mike Volpe into this?

Paul Boyne:
00:03:38
Oh, that’s where things got really weird. Alice and Jen, my attorneys, were the ones who brought him up. I think it was more of a scare tactic, to show that I’m "colluding" with the media or something. They didn’t say much directly about him, but I could tell they had discussed him behind the scenes. You know how it goes. They go into chambers, make their little plans, and come out with this nonsense about me talking to a journalist being part of the problem. Like, since when is speaking with a member of the press evidence of incompetence?

Richard Luthmann:
00:05:42
Unbelievable. Volpe gets dragged into everything, but this is a new low. They’re really reaching.

Paul Boyne:
00:05:50
Yeah, and the thing is, I called them out on it. I told Jen and Alice that they have a duty to inform the judge about the conflict of interest here, especially when it comes to Katz. Jen actually did bring it up, but she buried it in this whole tirade about how I’m impossible to work with and how I think everyone is out to get me. She was basically venting her frustrations, saying I don’t trust her or Alice, which is true to an extent, but that’s because they’re not exactly fighting for me. And now, next Thursday, they’re going to try to get me declared incompetent officially.

Richard Luthmann:
00:06:00
And the judge just went along with it?

Paul Boyne:
00:06:38
Yeah, the judge—his name is Brown—he’s supposed to be the trial judge, but now he’s focused entirely on this competency issue. It’s a distraction, really. This trial was supposed to start months ago, back in September with Judge Harmon, but now everything’s been derailed because of this competency evaluation. What’s strange is that Brown is the one who ordered the evaluation, not Harmon. And it seems like the prosecutor is suddenly on board with all of it, even though they were quiet back when it was first ordered. Something changed, Rich. Between September and now, something changed.

Richard Luthmann:
00:08:54
Two words: Joette Katz.

Paul Boyne:
00:08:59
Exactly. That’s what this is all about. Katz. It’s clear as day.

Richard Luthmann:
00:09:01
What did the judge say about Katz?

Paul Boyne:
00:09:10
This is where it gets even crazier. The judge actually said that part of the reason he thinks I’m incompetent is because I believe Joette Katz is controlling the lawyers, the prosecutors, even him. He straight-up said it, like that’s enough to prove I’m delusional. When I mentioned Katz’s editorial from January and Richard Robinson’s article from March, the judge had no clue what I was talking about. I told him, "You don’t even know who the Chief Justice of Connecticut is?" He just stared at me like I was speaking a foreign language. It was embarrassing. This guy is supposed to be a judge, and he doesn’t even know the key players in his own state’s judiciary?

Richard Luthmann:
00:10:56
That’s mind-blowing. They’re trying so hard to make you out to be crazy that they’re ignoring basic facts. It’s not a delusion if there’s evidence to back it up. What’s their endgame here? To keep you locked up indefinitely?

Paul Boyne:
00:11:19
That’s what it feels like. And what’s even more ridiculous is how they act like the Constitution doesn’t apply to me just because they want to declare me incompetent. I told the judge today, "Are you seriously going to deny me my First, Fourth, and Sixth Amendment rights just because I won’t go along with your evaluation?" He couldn’t even respond to that. He just kept harping on about how the competency issue needs to be resolved first, like nothing else matters.

Richard Luthmann:
00:11:53
Technically, competency does take precedence, but that doesn’t mean they get to ignore your constitutional rights in the meantime. This is a stall tactic. They’re using it to delay the trial, hoping you’ll break or give up.

Paul Boyne:
00:12:18
Exactly. And the kicker is, they keep saying they can’t proceed until the competency issue is settled. But the truth is, they could be addressing the motions to dismiss, the motions to suppress, all the Fourth and Sixth Amendment violations—right now. They just don’t want to. They’re pretending like everything is on hold because of this competency nonsense.

Richard Luthmann:
00:12:45
Right, and that’s where they’re wrong. The legal system doesn’t stop just because someone’s competency is in question. They can still make rulings on motions, especially if those motions involve constitutional issues. They’re just dragging their feet because they don’t want to deal with the fallout from those rulings.

Paul Boyne:
00:13:15
That’s exactly it. They’re trying to avoid dealing with the real issues by hiding behind this competency argument. But I’m not going to let them get away with it. I’m going to keep fighting.

Richard Luthmann:
00:13:55
Good. You need to keep pushing back. We’re going to cover all of this on the podcast tomorrow. In fact, we’re going to hold a mock trial for you before Halloween—if everything works out. And I was thinking of making Joette Katz the prosecutor in this mock trial. What do you think?

Paul Boyne:
00:14:45
Laughs. That would be perfect. I mean, they’re already saying I’m crazy for thinking Katz is involved, but if you look at the facts, she hasn’t denied it. I even told Jen and Alice, "Rich made inquiries to her, and she didn’t deny it." Isn’t that the same thing they’re accusing me of? Just not denying something? It’s ridiculous. But yeah, do the mock trial. Let’s see what happens next Thursday when they try to declare me incompetent. I’ll keep playing along with their game, but I’m not backing down.

Richard Luthmann:
00:15:00
That’s the spirit, Paul. Stay strong. We’re behind you, and we’ll keep this story front and center. Talk to you soon.

Paul Boyne:
00:15:10
Thanks, Rich. I appreciate it. Talk soon.

Discussion about this podcast

This is For Real?
Luthmann's War
Richard Luthmann exposes truth while fighting oathbreakers, institutional injustice, and corruption through free expression. He also searches for the good. What you read and see here draws substantial elements from classic investigative journalism and satire, but it is a genre all its own. At its core, it is a politically expressive approach aimed at commentary on hypocrisy in all its forms.
For tips, story ideas, or help, call (239) 631-5957 or richard.luthmann@protonmail.com