Speaker 1: Listen, all you New Yorkers.
Speaker 2: You can't taxi.
Speaker 3: Okay, they were looking around. This is the 77 WABC minicast.
Speaker 3: It's in the hands of the jury now, the Lindsay
Speaker 3: Clancy case. Everybody across America is talking about this. The
Speaker 3: woman who killed her three young kids. And it comes
Speaker 3: down to sort of a battle of the experts, mental illness,
Speaker 3: a whole bunch more. And joining us now to talk
Speaker 3: about all of this, who better, John, than Dr.
Speaker 4: Mark Siegel?
Speaker 2: Dr.
Speaker 3: Siegel, what do you think? I'm sure you were watching
Speaker 3: this case and everybody's wondering how could somebody, it looks like,
Speaker 3: plan before, during, after, and then now they're also saying
Speaker 3: she was psychotic. That's part of her defense. Explain this
Speaker 3: from a mental perspective.
Speaker 2: I've been covering this case for weeks now, so I'll
Speaker 2: boil it down for you. First of all, The defense
Speaker 2: was saying a cocktail of medications and poor health care. Well,
Speaker 2: the medications don't really play a major role here, actually, unless.
Speaker 2: There's two that she was on at the very end,
Speaker 2: Remeron and Trazodone, that could cause psychosis. But she was
Speaker 2: being monitored for that and hadn't shown signs of it.
Speaker 2: So theory one from the defense is psychosis, some overbearing,
Speaker 2: commanding voice telling her to kill her children, coming out
Speaker 2: of the blue because it wasn't something she had for months,
Speaker 2: like Andrea Yates. That's the defense position on this. And frankly,
Speaker 2: all of their evidence on this is false. is forensic.
Speaker 2: It's after the fact. It's not something that was put
Speaker 2: forth by her providers that were taking care of her,
Speaker 2: but they say the providers did a poor job. The
Speaker 2: prosecution today actually finally made a really strong case in
Speaker 2: closing arguments, saying that she was hiding her plan, that
Speaker 2: she didn't feel like she was suicidally depressed, but she
Speaker 2: couldn't end her own life until she got her kids
Speaker 2: out of the way. They called them like broken toys.
Speaker 2: And so she was not valuing them properly, had to
Speaker 2: get them out of the way, didn't want them to
Speaker 2: see each other as she ended them. Really horrific. And
Speaker 2: then felt free to commit suicide herself. So they feel
Speaker 2: the prosecution carefully planned crime with the husband told, don't
Speaker 2: come home, go to the CVS pharmacy. I think that
Speaker 2: as the case has gone on, it's gone more for
Speaker 2: the latter, the prosecution's view. The other was like women's
Speaker 2: health is being overlooked, women's mental health is being overlooked.
Speaker 2: For sure, that's true, Rita. And, you know, postpartum depression overlooked,
Speaker 2: postpartum psychosis almost never discussed. And she didn't get great
Speaker 2: medical care. But I think the case is moving more
Speaker 2: and more in the direction that this was a crime. Now,
Speaker 2: it's Massachusetts, so all bets are off.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I think all bets are off. And I said
Speaker 4: it before to Rita that I think that they should just,
Speaker 4: you know, not convict her as a criminal, but put
Speaker 4: her in a mental health institution and see how things,
Speaker 4: how do they say it, things sort themselves out.
Speaker 2: Let me tell you, John, one quick thing about that.
Speaker 2: Andrea Yates was put in a mental hospital and it
Speaker 2: ended up being totally the right move because she suffers
Speaker 2: and grieves every day for her children and has tried
Speaker 2: to do charity work. And when they've tried to release her,
Speaker 2: she's refused to be released. The biggest concern is, of course,
Speaker 2: that somebody goes home in two years, but should not
Speaker 2: Andrew Yates. So I think that you're right, that a
Speaker 2: mental hospital is the right setting for this, provided that
Speaker 2: the person stays there.
Speaker 4: Governor Patterson has two cents to put in.
Speaker 1: So, Mark, was there any fitness to proceed hearing before
Speaker 1: this trial started? Because, you know, back like 40 years
Speaker 1: ago when I worked in one of these DA's offices,
Speaker 1: Almost immediately, the defense would have the alleged perpetrator tested
Speaker 1: to make sure. And if the psychiatrist determined that this
Speaker 1: person doesn't understand the charges made against them and can't
Speaker 1: assist with their own defense, they do send them to
Speaker 1: a mental hospital.
Speaker 2: That's a really important point, Governor, that nobody has brought up.
Speaker 2: And I think that that would have been proper in
Speaker 2: this case because we can't even tell. The theory on
Speaker 2: this is, by the way, that she had a temporary
Speaker 2: psychosis with the voice telling her what to do and
Speaker 2: that now she's not having that. But all jurors' eyes
Speaker 2: are on her in the trial looking how she's responding
Speaker 2: to all of this. But so in other words, she
Speaker 2: would have probably been deemed fit to stand trial because
Speaker 2: as opposed to Andrea Yates, who drowned her children, the
Speaker 2: voice stayed for months. With her, it was reportedly or
Speaker 2: allegedly a transient voice. But fitness to stand trial is
Speaker 2: definitely something that should have been brought into play here,
Speaker 2: but wasn't.
Speaker 3: You know, I have just a question. Getting into the
Speaker 3: whole psychosis issue, Dr. Siegel, because it is fascinating. Today,
Speaker 3: the prosecution, I was watching some of the closing arguments.
Speaker 3: They talked about how she sent her husband out to
Speaker 3: a pharmacy, and they were kind of alluding that she
Speaker 3: wanted him to go longer so he would be gone
Speaker 3: longer to do this. So there was a lot of planning.
Speaker 3: It looked like just very organized thought at the time.
Speaker 3: and obviously the crime is horrific. It's so just shockingly horrific.
Speaker 3: But to your point, and then in the case, the doctors,
Speaker 3: the voices, she only heard it during this time, right?
Speaker 3: She never heard it before. She never heard it after.
Speaker 3: I mean, just from your professional, can somebody have that
Speaker 3: just for those 20 minutes or 15, 20 minutes and
Speaker 3: then go back to seeming to be more normal?
Speaker 2: It can happen. It's much less likely than with Andrea
Speaker 2: Yates where it goes on for months, but it can happen.
Speaker 2: But your point about organization and literally putting the children
Speaker 2: in separate rooms so they wouldn't see it happening to
Speaker 2: the other child or sending the husband out, that speaks
Speaker 2: more for premeditation. That's what the prosecution is saying. I
Speaker 2: think what John is saying is no matter which is true,
Speaker 2: suicidal depression versus postpartum psychosis, whichever is true, she's a
Speaker 2: severely mentally ill woman that should be in a hospital.
Speaker 2: That's what John is saying, I believe.
Speaker 4: I truly believe that because there's got to be a
Speaker 4: loose screw if she did it and it's horrible. As
Speaker 4: long as she could stay there. Listen, I see how
Speaker 4: mothers love their children.
Speaker 2: Absolutely.
Speaker 4: I mean— And for her to— if it was her that
Speaker 4: did it, there's got to be a loose screw.
Speaker 3: And also, you know what's interesting? And this is interesting
Speaker 3: to John's point. By all accounts, from what I've heard,
Speaker 3: she seemed to have been a loving mother. Like, that's
Speaker 3: what is interesting through all of this. I just hope
Speaker 3: if she ends up in a mental institution, she never
Speaker 3: gets out.
Speaker 2: By the way, the idea of being a loving mother
Speaker 2: goes to the psychotic idea of something called altruistic infanticide,
Speaker 2: where she was taking the children to heaven with her.
Speaker 2: That would be the psychotic delusion that she could have
Speaker 2: been suffering from, horrible as that is. That's very common
Speaker 2: in these situations.
Speaker 3: It's just shocking. Three kids under the age of five.
Speaker 2: Wow. Well, Dr.
Speaker 3: Siegel, let's see what the jury does. We love having
Speaker 3: you on, doctor. Thank you very much. You get your perspective.
Speaker 2: Very disturbing case. We've discussed it well, but wow, is
Speaker 2: that horrible. Horrible. As John says, we're here to protect
Speaker 2: our children.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 4: Thank you for your common sense, Dr. Siegel. Thank you.