The Case of John Odgren

On January 19, 2007, then 16-year-old John Odgren stabbed and killed a 15-year-old classmate, James Alenson, at Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School in Massachusetts. Odgren's diagnosis of Asperger's Syndrome was noted and the extent to which he understood the "effects of his behavior on others" debated. As reported in the May 3rd Boston Herald, defense lawyers for Odgren say that he was "insane" when he killed Alenson.

But prosecutors say that taped telephone conversations between Odgren, who is now 18, and his family in the months following his arrest "show a lucid boy who was not in the throes of mental illness." A judge has blocked the use of the tapes from being used at Odgren's trial; it's argued that proper procedure was violated when prosecutors obtained the tapes without the permission of the court. From the Boston Herald:

Prosecutors argue Odgren had no "expectation of privacy" because he was well aware of the policy on recording conversations, which is stated in a prerecorded message at the beginning of each call. Odgren also signed a document that informed him that all phone calls and conversations were recorded and monitored.

The recordings sought by prosecutors include both conversations he had on the phone and conversations he had with people who came to see him at the jail, where visitors are separated from inmates by a glass partition and both must speak into a phone to communicate.

Consider the case of another young man now in prison, Chris Bello. Bello has been accused of as many as 100 instances of molestation of a 5-year-old child, as reported in the April 13th Disaboom---but, as his mother, Judith Bello, points out, how much did he understand about his rights when he made statements to the police and throughout the judicial process?

How much did Odgren understand about the documents he was signing regarding his phone calls and conversations being "recorded and monitored"?