The Defendant’s lawyers opted to have a battery of psychological tests run on Plaintiff Daniela King.

These tests were given in a hotel suite in Fort Collins, Colorado.  Karl wanted to be in the same room as the testing so that his wife would not be alone in the room with a stranger.  Dr. Zierk spoke with Defendant’s attorney, Ashley Hernandez-Schlagel and she refused to let Karl stay in the room.  Karl complied, but while he was out of the room, Dr. Zierk gave one the key tests, the MMPI2 ( Minnesota Mutiphasic Personality Inventory with over 500 questions ) in a professionally unacceptable manner.  What he did during the testing gave him the opportunity to alter answers to test questions that were given verbally by Daniela.  During the trial, Dr. Zierks’s testimony could have been altered in a way benefitting the defense, leading to an unfavorable result for the Kings. In his report, and his testimony, Dr. Zierk admitted that he filled in the answer sheet which should have been filled in by the person being tested, namely Daniela.

Note that the way the test was given, it is not possible to prove or disprove if the test results were altered.  Dr. Zierk had all recording devices turned off so that no independent record of Daniela’s responses exists.  That method of operation raises questions about why the recording devices were turned off. 

These matters were very serious breaches of the standard MMPI test protocol for the MMPI test, so the King’s filed a complaint with DORA ( Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies ) with the pertinent details ( see that document here ).  The review board at DORA found probable cause of violations, and issued a formal Letter of Admonition for Case No. 2017-4983 ( PSY ).  See DORA’s letter below.

The key section of the letter says, “By this letter, the Board takes the formal disciplinary action of admonishing you for the conduct specified above, and warns you that repetition of such practice may lead to imposition of more severe disciplinary action. This letter is an open public record….”

Note that DORA has the authority to revoke operating licenses for significant infractions, so their warning is to be taken seriously.

The complaint letter to DORA, and their Letter of Admonition came after the trial, therefore the Jury was not aware of the serious nature of the violations of the testing protocol.

DORA letter of Admonishment