State’s experts disagree that Kozak’s mental state prevented him from having criminal intent

NEVADA, Iowa - His anger building through the day like a volcano, Alexander Kozak told a psychologist, he was in a 'cold fury' by the time he shot Andrea Farrington as she worked inside the Coral Ridge Mall.

Called by the prosecution to refute testimony of a defense expert in the murder trial, psychologist Tim Kockler testified Friday that Kozak, during a mental evaluation, told him his gun was a 'tool” and 'I am the weapon.”

Kozak admitted his objective that day - June 12, 2015 - was to kill Farrington, Kockler testified. When he fired three times, he was aiming for her torso because that was the most likely way to harm her.

The courtroom grew still when Kockler recounted Kozak's 'point blank matter of fact” retelling of the killing - until Cheryl Farrington, Andrea's mother, broke down and started crying.

Kozak didn't show any reaction, except to write notes for his defense attorney.

Kockler said he didn't agree with the diagnoses of two mental disorders made by the defense's expert witness, who testified Thursday.

According to testimony over the last week and half, Kozak, 23, a security guard at the Coralville mall, shot Farrington, 20, in the back as she worked at the mall's welcome center for the Iowa Children's Museum.

Kozak, on trial for first-degree murder, argues he should be convicted of a lesser charge because of his mental conditions.

Kozak admitted to investigators he 'didn't feel anything” when he shot Farrington because she had dumped him, according to Wednesday's testimony.

Kockler, who practices in Utah but conducts mental evaluations for the Iowa Medical and Classification Center, said Kozak in his interview was open and honest. He talked freely about what happened that day.

Kockler said Kozak recalled details of what he was thinking. He knew he had a gun and remembered things like parking in a handicapped spot outside the mall just before the shooting because it was close - 'it was logical.”

Kozak told Kockler there were no other means of resolving the situation, but to shoot her.

Kockler said there was no evidence that Kozak had 'intermittent explosive disorder,” which would make him prone to outbursts far out of proportion to what initially had upset him - as defense expert witness Dr. William Logan, a forensic psychiatrist, had concluded.

Kozak didn't fit the criteria for that disorder, Kockler said. He had no history of acting out violence.

Kockler said he also didn't agree with Logan's diagnosis of borderline personality disorder because someone with that disorder usually is in and out of the hospital for threatening suicide. Such a person may also cut himself or herself. There's no evidence Kozak did either.

Kockler, however, did find that Kozak has an 'unspecified personality disorder.” But he said personality disorders are fairly common. Many people have them and carry on normal lives.

Johnson County Attorney Janet Lyness asked if that would prevent Kozak from being able to plan.

Kockler said no - it wouldn't interfere with 'making good, sound decisions, if they choose.”

Defense attorney Alfredo Parrish asked why Kockler didn't take into account that Kozak had little sleep the night before the shooting and had a migraine that day.

Kockler said he was aware of both, but didn't think they impacted what he was asked to determine in this case: criminal responsibility.

Parrish asked if he had talked to Kozak's family and friends. Kockler said he asked Kozak if he could, but was told no.

'Did you contact me?” Parrish asked. Kockler said he didn't think it was necessary.

Another rebuttal witness for the state, Dr. Arnold E. Andersen, a doctor and psychiatrist from Iowa City, agreed with Kockler and disagreed with Logan's diagnoses. Anderson said Kozak lacked remorse, was deceitful on occasions and lacked empathy for others.

He cited Kozak's reaction to shooting Farrington - not feeling remorse at the time - and his not sensing how his behavior affected others, as in the time Farrington was 'creeped out” when she realized he knew where she parked because he left a note on her car.

Parrish questioned Anderson's ability to make an evaluation, noting that he was an expert on eating disorders and most of his writings had focused on those.

Andersen said he treated patients for every known mental disorder, but that to further his career he had developed a niche.

Closing arguments are set for 9:30 a.m. Monday in Story County District Court, where the trial has been moved on a change of venue.