Man accused in triple homicide ruled competent
Judge sets bail, hearing date
The prosecution of a southwest side Milwaukee man charged with killing three of his neighbors in March is back on track after a judge Tuesday found the man competent to proceed in the case, then set $750,000 bail and a preliminary hearing date next week.
Dan Popp, 40, has been undergoing evaluations and treatments since he was charged in March with first-degree intentional homicide of Phia and Mai Vue, a Hmong couple, and their neighbor, Jesus Manso-Perez. Popp also faces one count of first-degree attempted homicide on accusations he fired at Manso-Perez’s son.
In April, he was found incompetent, meaning he did not have the capacity to understand the charges against him or aid in his own defense, and he was sent for treatment meant to restore him to competency.
A psychiatrist from Mendota Mental Health Institute, Mark Phelps, testified Tuesday that he believed Popp had been restored to competency during weeks of treatment and that during a specific interview about his competency in September, Popp was “malingering,” or trying to suggest he again wasn’t competent.
Phelps said Popp, who had coherent, organized responses during many previous interactions, persisted in discussing aliens and a belief that he had computer chips implanted in his brain.
Phelps had submitted a report of his conclusion in October, but Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Jeffrey Conen ordered one more evaluation.
Anthony Jurek, a forensic psychologist, testified that he spent about four hours interviewing and evaluating Popp at the Milwaukee County Jail over two days last month.
In his opinion, Popp remains incompetent to proceed, citing his answers to questions about the plea bargain process and other aspects of the legal process.
Jurek said he also administered a test designed specifically to detect defendants who might be trying to fake incompetence.
Normally, he said, such subjects score well below 30 on a 61 question test, but Popp scored a 42, suggesting he legitimately has some confusion about his situation but does understand some aspects of the justice system.
Conen said while he respected Jurek, who has testified in his court many times, he thought the fact that Phelps’ opinion was based on more extended observation and interaction with Dodd made it reliable.