Mr. Specter. The distinction on that, though, would be whether or not they are, in fact, in touch with reality, understanding the nature of the questions and answers, or whether they only appear to be in touch with reality? Would that not be the key distinction that Dr. Beavers is making in his testimony?
Mr. Herndon. I am not sure I follow you there, Mr. Specter. Will you repeat that again?
Mr. Specter. Yes. You say that Dr. Beavers said that many psychotics appear to understand the questions or appear to be in touch with reality.
Mr. Herndon. He said it is possible, I believe, that a psychotic could appear to be rational and have a good memory, but still be a psychotic individual or psychotic personality.
Mr. Specter. Yes; but wasn’t the key distinction that Dr. Beavers was making was whether or not, in fact, the individual did understand the questions as opposed to whether he appeared to understand the questions?
Mr. Herndon. Yes; I gather from Dr. Beavers’ testimony that in this particular instance during this particular phase of the examination with regard to two exceptions which he mentions, Ruby appeared to be fully aware of the intent and the meaning of the question and was rational in his reply.
Mr. Specter. But didn’t he go beyond that, Mr. Herndon, that is he did not use the qualifying term of Mr. Ruby’s appearing to be in touch with reality, but said, and I will make the portion of the transcript available to you: “I felt that he was aware of the questions and that he understood them, and that he was giving answers based on an appreciation of reality.”
Now, you have read that along with me. The distinction I am making here is that Dr. Beavers doesn’t say here that Mr. Ruby appears to be in touch with reality, but that he, in fact, is, according to Dr. Beavers’ conclusion, during the course of this examination, except for two areas which I am going to come to, that Ruby was, in fact, in touch with reality and did understand the nature of the questions and answers.
Mr. Herndon. I recall he did specifically make that comment.
Mr. Specter. So that whatever ultimate conclusions flow from whether Ruby was psychotic or whether he was in touch with reality are beyond your ken as a polygraph examiner? You merely rely on what the psychiatrist says in formulating your conclusions; is that not so?