Insanity Defense Possible in Baby’s Death
[Guest post by DRJ]
Another Houston mother has killed her baby:
“Attorney George Parnham described the Houston mother charged with capital murder in the death of her 2-month-old as “severely depressed,” and he confirmed Saturday that he is considering insanity as a possible legal defense for the woman with a history of mental illness.
Parnham, who represented Andrea Yates in the 2001 drownings of her five children, described his new client — 28-year-old Narjes Modarresi — as “very soft, very quiet” during their first visit. She is being held without bail at the Harris County jail’s psychiatric unit.
On Wednesday, Modarresi reported that a man took her infant son from his stroller during an afternoon walk. The next day Modarresi, an Iranian immigrant, led police to the baby’s body, which was found facedown in a shallow grave near Buffalo Bayou.
A preliminary autopsy showed that 2-month-old Masih Golabbakhsh was alive when buried — his lungs were full of mud and water.”
Parnham’s presentation suggests the mother has a history of mental illness, although maybe his experience at representing mothers who kill their children has taught him to emphasize that background. Family members, including the baby’s father, appeared with Parnham but did not speak. Rusty Yates also offered encouragement through a reporter.
Where are the fathers when these tragedies happen?
— DRJ
Where are the fathers? We as a society have decided fathers aren’t necessary past conception. Beyond that, our courts have decided moms can kill babies if they are inconvenient. So why was she arrested? Is she mainly being charged because of bad timing? Our legal system would stand by uninterested if she committed this crime a few months earlier.
Not to be uncaring, but who cares that she was depressed. My guess is probably 90% of murderers are unhappy about something.
Largebill (1d1579) — 4/24/2010 @ 9:09 pmI would call Rusty Yates a tool, but my screwdrivers, hammers, and wrenches might walk out of my shed in protest.
L.N. Smithee (46a32f) — 4/24/2010 @ 10:15 pmIt’s only at all comprehensible if she did have a history of mental illness, no?
happyfeet (c8caab) — 4/24/2010 @ 11:28 pmABC:
Emphasis added.
Sounds like the father was in the picture; he even had his whole family helping out. What’s your basis for suggesting the absence of the father?
Anon Y. Mous (dccbdf) — 4/24/2010 @ 11:37 pmmaybe she read a different article that didn’t say that part
happyfeet (c8caab) — 4/24/2010 @ 11:43 pmI didn’t mean the father was absent. In fact, I assumed he wasn’t absent since he participated in the press conference.
I’m not trying to be cruel and I know these are easier to spot in hindsight, but often in these cases friends and family will recount how impaired or unusual the person acted for weeks or months. If she was that mentally impaired as the attorney suggests, why didn’t anyone do something?
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/24/2010 @ 11:46 pmSounds like they knew there was a problem. There was a concern that she wasn’t bonding with the baby, so her taking the baby out in a stroller was probably viewed as a positive thing. She would be spending time with the baby and perhaps with time, things would improve. It probably never occurred to anyone that what she was going to do was to go bury her baby alive. How do you even spot that in someone? I mean, sure, if they were previously violent, ok. But, postpartum depression is not unusual, and the vast majority of women get through it without harming their baby.
Anon Y. Mous (dccbdf) — 4/25/2010 @ 12:58 amI’m no expert but what I recall from the Yates case and what some online resources show is that postpartum depression comes in different forms. The mild form is often called baby blues although it’s no picnic. However, the severe form reportedly includes deep depression, suicidal thoughts, and/or psychosis. It also tends to recur with subsequent pregnancies.
Maybe there was no hint that anything was wrong or the problems seemed mild, but the attorney’s statements suggest there was reason for concern and she had a prior pregnancy. I’m willing to keep an open mind — it’s certainly possible more information will be revealed in the future. But I’m curious when I see reports of past mental problems but nothing seems to have been done.
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/25/2010 @ 1:09 amPaging Dr. nk, STAT!
Icy Texan (e77df9) — 4/25/2010 @ 4:47 amFWIW, this sort of thing happened long before abortion was made legal, so my learned colleague Largebill’s assertions above are invalid.
Technomad (e2c0f2) — 4/25/2010 @ 4:54 amThe only thing I see Largebill asserting is that things are getting worse instead of better.
It’s tough to invalidate the truth.
Icy Texan (e77df9) — 4/25/2010 @ 5:07 amIcy Texan,
Your virtue looms large like the hindquarters of an elephant. The Lord will annoint thy head oil (extra virgin) and you will be wafted on wings of self-righteousness, extra crispy or original recipe with your choice of two sides.
nk (db4a41) — 4/25/2010 @ 6:11 amWhere are the fathers when these tragedies happen?
Ah! Margarita’s question.
nk (db4a41) — 4/25/2010 @ 6:42 amWhere are the fathers when these tragedies happen?
Yea we need a man to pin it on.
I know thats nasty, but its just as nasty as that question.
SGT Ted (c47cc2) — 4/25/2010 @ 7:43 amI’m sure it was devastating for those Medical professionals who treated Andrea for years and it ended up like it did with the calm deliberate systematic (and in two cases violent) murder of her children –
With these practioners income, reputation thrust into the spolight nationally in front of their colleagues, clients, community leaders and business associates – and with all that they had worked for on the line including their very careers – I’m positive while testifying for the defense they were totally truthful and honest about her true state of mind and her diagnosis’.
I was always facsinated how a near catatonic state individual had the mental faculties to plan and commit a crime – I understand that her two older children resisted heavily and had to be beaten into submission to be drown by their mother.
Catatonic, near suicidal people do that all the time. Especially call family members and law enforcement to report their handiwork
I know – I need to be understanding that she wasnt herself – that her idiot husband forced her into this life and caused her to do this.
Or there is 5 dead kids, now 6
.
EricPWJohnson (277a19) — 4/25/2010 @ 7:53 amSGT TED
DRJ is stating her opinion – Russell Yates should have been concerned for thehealth of his children and his wife – if in fact she was as ill as the medical practioners testified to (which is all that anyone, including DRJ has to go on) then he had a clear duty and failed at it
This isnt a male female thing – its an abusive cycle – I mean the very idea that someone has to look after the children just doesent compute in this day and age
EricPWJohnson (277a19) — 4/25/2010 @ 7:56 amAlso, in such a repressive/oppressive culture, the anger and autonomy boils over one way or the other.
Patricia (5f1523) — 4/25/2010 @ 8:29 amDRJ and Patricia
After rereading my last sentence – I meant no offence, judgement nor snarkiness – I just was referring to the jury comments after the trial
EricPWJohnson (277a19) — 4/25/2010 @ 8:40 amFrom the Duke Journal of Gender Law
EricPWJohnson (277a19) — 4/25/2010 @ 8:46 amThis is especially chilling just chilling… those poor poor children…
EricPWJohnson (277a19) — 4/25/2010 @ 8:55 amhttp://www.law.duke.edu/shell/cite.pl?10+Duke+J.+Gender+L.+&+Pol'y+1
at least the jury saw through all that BS
B
EricPWJohnson (277a19) — 4/25/2010 @ 8:59 amPerhaps the infant had offended the mother and this was an instance of sharia law? Oh, wait… it was a little boy.
My bad.
GeneralMalaise (24d3e0) — 4/25/2010 @ 9:07 amGeneralMalaise
What are you implying please…
EricPWJohnson (277a19) — 4/25/2010 @ 9:13 amnk… you seem to have a swollen sense of your ability to communicate what others find of no interest.
Are you empty inside?
GeneralMalaise (24d3e0) — 4/25/2010 @ 9:13 amGM
Could you please respond – what are you implying – please be clear..
EricPWJohnson (277a19) — 4/25/2010 @ 9:17 am24.nk… you seem to have a swollen sense of your ability to communicate what others find of no interest.
Are you empty inside?
Comment by GeneralMalaise — 4/25/2010 @ 9:13 am
Nobody is forced to read my comments or address me directly when I have not addressed them.
nk (db4a41) — 4/25/2010 @ 10:18 amI’m just conflating infanticide with shariah law, PW… that’s all.
GeneralMalaise (24d3e0) — 4/25/2010 @ 10:49 amGM
Then why? Surely there is an undercurrent of intetionalism here – what were you really saying or wanting to say?
EricPWJohnson (277a19) — 4/25/2010 @ 10:54 amI answered your question, PW… now if you will be so kind as to answer the question I’d asked you in the “Comedy Central” thread… do you conflate cartoons and images of Muhammed with “an all out assault on Islam”???
GeneralMalaise (24d3e0) — 4/25/2010 @ 10:59 amGM
please provide a quote –
however – please answer my question
EricPWJohnson (277a19) — 4/25/2010 @ 11:01 amEPWJ,
GM’s point is pretty clear. One would have to be intentionally obtuse not to see he was mocking how some people (guess which ones?) will kill their female relatives for supposedly dishonoring the family.
Largebill (1d1579) — 4/25/2010 @ 2:16 pmLB
Dont think so
EricPWJohnson (277a19) — 4/25/2010 @ 2:25 pmSGT Ted:
I wasn’t trying to pin it on anyone. I’m trying to think about postpartum insanity defenses.
If this defense is based on postpartum psychosis, how does that condition develop and what are its symptoms? If the symptoms can occur suddenly or can be unnoticed by close family members, then no one is to blame except the mother, and the law considers her legally blameless if she was not sane.
However, if the symptoms developed over time, then either the defense is being raised after-the-fact and there was no evidence that something was wrong, or this is a legitimate defense and there was prior evidence of a serious problem. Many married mothers have husbands in the home, so it seems logical to me that they would be the ones who would most notice a problem. If there is no husband in the home, then I would direct my question to the people in the mother’s life.
But my point is that “If something was clearly wrong, where were the people in the mother’s life who saw it?” And the corollary is: “If no one saw it, then is this really postpartum psychosis?”
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/25/2010 @ 2:37 pmI take it as a rebuttable presumption that a mother who kills her child is not responsible for her actions.
nk (db4a41) — 4/25/2010 @ 2:43 pmDRJ,
You are absolutely correct that “post-partum depression” may refer to anything from the “baby blues” that simply needs a little extra understanding and encouragement to a severe diepression accompanied with psychosis (“psychosis” = unable to properly discern between what is real and what is a delusion, hence also unable to make rational choices).
In answer to the question, “Why didn’t somebody do something”?
What did you want them to do?
I’m not trying to be a wise-a– or a jerk, but it is unfortunately a lot harder than one might realize. Society and the legal system approach this from different approaches with different goals in mind, so it is not surprising that bad outcomes occur.
As far as getting help goes, our society has decided to err on the side of protecting personal autonomy. A person cannot be forced into any treatment against their will unless he/she is an immediate threat to self or others. In some cases, after repeated short term commitments for what seem well justified concerns, the threshold for action becomes higher and higher. Many psychiatrists and psychologists have at least a few patients that they would not be surprised to find that they killed themselves on any given day, but we don’t keep such folk in insitutions againmst their will (anymore).
Do you have someone awake monitoring the person 24/7? In most circumstances there would not be the resources needed for that. Even then, what would monitoring mean, knowing where the person is and what they were doing 3 minutes ago?
And the typical person and family, even if they know “something is wrong”, will have a hard time grasping the reality of a potential life and death situation and the degree of vigilance that requires. Who wants to think a spouse or child would be capable of such a thing? It would be hard to focus on your job even if you knew a competent adult was with them.
And all of that is in the best of circumstances. if one has to depend upon the public mental health establishment things will be worse- there are great people who do wonderful things in crisis management, but the management of a crisi on Sat. night does not necessarily turn into an urgent follow up on Monday morning.
MD in Philly (59a3ad) — 4/25/2010 @ 2:55 pmMD in Philly,
I defer to your medical knowledge but does this type of psychosis come on overnight or over time? If I’m around someone who is depressed to the point of expressing suicidal thoughts or delusions, I’m going to think long and hard about leaving her alone with two babies.
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/25/2010 @ 3:01 pmAnd it seems to me that whether she could be committed is a different standard than whether the family should be concerned. We may encourage personal autonomy when it comes to the state, but that doesn’t mean the family was powerless.
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/25/2010 @ 3:03 pmDRJ
If she had 2 documented suicide attempts – where does CPS have a duty to respond?
EricPWJohnson (277a19) — 4/25/2010 @ 3:05 pmI don’t know, Eric, and I’m not trying to pick on this family. After all, the reports imply they brought in family members to help her watch the children so they may have done all they could reasonably do. But it seems to me these are the issues you have to consider when deciding whether an insanity defense is justified. Otherwise anyone can claim insanity for almost anything.
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/25/2010 @ 3:09 pmnk:
The words of a good son who had a loving mother.
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/25/2010 @ 3:18 pmDRJ
I dont think you are picking on the family – I do think that Russell was framed by the defense as the real culprit in the 2nd trial but failed in the 1st
I think the jury defined the standard reasonably well, they said she planned a sophisticatd plot, informed the police and called her husband and showed no remorse
EricPWJohnson (277a19) — 4/25/2010 @ 3:33 pmBy definition to be psychotic means to have firmly held beliefs that are in contradiction to reality. Thinking you are Jesus, a CIA agent who needs to report through an old cell phone you found on the street, that your family is not your family but imposters, that your child is not your child, that the FBI listens to your thoughts through a device implanted in your head.
Obviously for legal/justice purposes, the question is whether a person’s perception of reality is so confused as to make it impossible to hold them account for their actions. If mom x syas it is wrong to kill a baby, but she didn’t kill her baby because her baby was switched with an alien at the hospital and it was an alien she killed, then if you believe she is telling the truth as she sees it, you cannot find her guilty of murder. If she thinks her husband married her only so she could give birth to someone who was going to save the planet, and now that the baby has been born he is going to leave her so she killed the baby to prevent that, you might say that her jealousy was a delusion, but might also say that she knew murder, even because of jealousy, is wrong and hold her accountable. Don’t hold me to have details 100% correct on that, it’s just a first approximation.
MD in Philly (59a3ad) — 4/25/2010 @ 4:09 pmIn Bulgakov’s “The Master and Margarita”, the Devil makes Margarita queen of the damned for one night. Neither she nor the Devil have the power to redeem the young mother who suffocated her newborn, but they do have the power to refuse to torment her. And they do.
nk (db4a41) — 4/25/2010 @ 4:55 pmDRJ-
To go from rational thinking to overt psychosis usually does not happen overnight. On the other hand, a person who is psychotic may not be sharing the thoughts that are part of their delusions.
Having a well thought out plan does not negate the possibility of psychosis. Some people with schizophrenia can have a very elaborate belief system and will act quite “rationally” in the context of what they believe. For example, the person who thinks the FBI is listening to his thoughts will write letters to their Congressman, Senator, people in the FBI, go to a newspaper, hire an attorney, etc. to make them stop.
A person with psychosis does not typically appear drunk or sedated but alert and not confused, they are likely to seem odd and “feel distant” .
Two documented suicide attempts can be looked at in different ways. From one point of view it could be argued that she simply had made suicide “gestures” as a cry for help and really didn’t mean it; that if her attempts in the past were “not serious” then future attempts would be also. In addition, a past history of a suicide attempt does not mean you can predict another attempt within the next 24 hours. Now all of that may seem totally opposite to what prudent common sense would say, but that’s psych care in the big city.
I had a patient (male about 20) come in with his aunt one day, reportedly at the advice of a local mental health clinic where he had been seen by an intake psychologist, but where he would not get an appt with the psychiatrist (MD) for a week or two. The presenting complaint was poor sleep. Well, after a little discussion it came out that this fellow was hearing voices telling him to kill his aunt and had been hearing them for at least weeks. He had episodes like that for a long time and had assaulted others in the past. In fact, it was because he had a good relationship with this one aunt that he, the “problem child”, had been sent to live with her. She became more than a little apprehensive about this as she heard him tell the story as she had no clue what he was dealing with.
From the high bar criteria of an overworked big city system there was insufficient reason to hospitalize him, even if he had been willing, as the fact he had not acted out was suggestive that he would not (though obviously on the other hand sending him home with her was taking a big risk). He had no place else to go. Thankfully she was able to lock her nightime quarters to prohibit access to him from the basement bedroom where he was staying. Thankfully the sample meds I gave and the cooperative nature led to him quickly coming down from the voice-induced agitation.
Youth protective services have only so many emergency foster homes available, and a significant number of them are more or less unofficial group homes where the owners make their living taking kids in (which is not supposed to be the situation, but you “go to war with the army that you have”).
So, members of the family and others may have been neglegent or foolish or both, or they could have been taking all of the steps that they thought they could do, and misinterpreted something in mom’s behavior that they thought was positive that was actually a big warning signal and are simply left to deal with a very painful tragedy.
As a public service message, when a person has been very depressed and nigh unto suicidal, beware if they suddenly “appear” better. If a person seems to have more energy, focus, and organizing their room, belongings and the like, they may have decided to commit suicide and are putting things in order before they “leave”, they seem “happier” because the internal distress over the future has been resolved.
MD in Philly (59a3ad) — 4/25/2010 @ 5:14 pmComment by nk
Thanks for sharing that illustration, it does seem very appropriate.
MD in Philly (59a3ad) — 4/25/2010 @ 5:16 pmMD,
The legal standard varies from state to state but I think it’s fair to describe it this way: Whether, at the time of her act, a mental condition made her unable to know and understand that what she was doing was wrong. She could believe she was Jesus when she killed her baby but if it could be shown that she knew and understood it was wrong to kill, she can still be legally sane.
That’s why efforts to lie, cover up or hide the offense become relevant, because they are evidence that a person understands they’ve done something wrong and they can be punished. Of course, the reality is that some crimes are so horrific that many people believe a person must be crazy to have done something so bad. It’s hard to argue with that.
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/25/2010 @ 5:21 pmMD:
My first criminal case as a young attorney was assisting a lawyer who had been appointed to represent a man charged with defrauding several local businesses. The case was pro bono because he had no money (I guess he spent it all) but he was well-dressed, articulate, attractive, calm, and pleasant but, as you suggest, a little distant.
After several conversations over a period of days, I was confused why he was being held in jail and why he had been charged criminally for what looked like a serious business disagreement. That changed one Friday afternoon as we prepared to leave the jail, telling our client that we would be back the following week for more consultations. He told us not to bother because he wouldn’t need the help then. When we asked why, he told us the world was ending that Saturday. He knew that because he was Jesus.
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/25/2010 @ 5:30 pmDRJ,
Yes, I understand that point, at least in principle, and tried to address it above in #42. One could see that a person knew it was wrong to kill a baby, but “she didn’t kill a baby”, she killed an alien. She buried it because she didn’t want those who slipped her the alien to begin with to know what happened.
I’m not saying that as details in this case, I’m just addressing the issue that just because someone had planned something sophisticated doesn’t mean they “knew what they were doing”. A person with psychosis can be alert and perfectly functional in many ways, in fact, their behavior could seem logical and rational, even, taken in context of what they believe to be true. The example I gave about the FBI reading someone’s mind also refers to a true incident, and the fellow can show you all of his correspondence to the FBI,. etc. where they “deny it for reasons only they know”.
MD in Philly (59a3ad) — 4/25/2010 @ 5:36 pmI met Mary Magdelene once, when she was post partum.
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 4/25/2010 @ 5:36 pmnk,
Margarita’s decision may be justice for the young mother but is it justice for her baby? And if this case is due to postpartum psychosis, what if a public trial alerts other mothers and their families to the perils of this disease?
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/25/2010 @ 5:39 pmHe told us not to bother because he wouldn’t need the help then. When we asked why, he told us the world was ending that Saturday
That’s wonderful. I bet you spent that evening wondering which class in law school it was you slept through where they covered that scenario.
MD in Philly (59a3ad) — 4/25/2010 @ 5:42 pmMD,
We’ve branched off into several topics and while this case was the springboard for the discussion, I agree neither of us is talking specifically about this case.
And, actually, I spent the evening wondering if the world was going to end …
He was very convincing.
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/25/2010 @ 5:50 pm#52 DRJ:
I learned a lot about Jesus from Mary.
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 4/25/2010 @ 6:05 pmIt was not justice. It was mercy and kindness and nobility of the strong. And that’s a different but good example of how people should behave towards infants and others weaker than themselves.
nk (db4a41) — 4/25/2010 @ 6:11 pmI have a feeling there’s more to that story, EW1(SG).
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/25/2010 @ 6:11 pmMercy, charity and forgiveness are important, nk.
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/25/2010 @ 6:14 pm#55 DRJ:
Not much, it was my first exposure to post partum psychosis; I was to escort the patient to an involuntary commitment hearing being held at the hospital on a weekend (the Judge came to the psych unit to hold the hearing). The patient was, or seemed to be, quite normal and “together” in most respects.
It was when you would discuss her identity (in order to determine her orientation to person, place and time) that things suddenly took on a surreal quality.
And she was committed initially for a 72 hour involuntary for observation: the primary concern being not only her welfare, but that of her newborn.
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 4/25/2010 @ 6:18 pmAnd I thought I had to give examples of people with psychosis to explain it to the rest of you, silly me. I never thought about lawyers getting first hand experience in involuntary commitment proceedings or elsewhere.
Sorry you had to endure that “existential crisis”, DRJ.
And thanks for your vignette, EW1(SG).
MD in Philly (59a3ad) — 4/25/2010 @ 7:39 pmMD,
I stopped asking questions because I thought it might be tedious for you, but my experience is limited to a couple of cases and nothing about postpartum depression. However, this happens enough that it’s noticeable, but it’s not so common that I understand it.
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/25/2010 @ 8:14 pmWell,
The first trial jury comments are worthy of note – the depth of common sense of that panel is note worthy
What they found compelling was not the testimony from the experts but her maner and demeanor in court.
She was – in their words – relieved – murderous – cold – calculating – unremorseful –
It matched the video taped confessions, interviews, and 9-1-1 calls
The second trial – she was coached to act
EricPWJohnson (277a19) — 4/25/2010 @ 8:25 pm#58 MD in Philly:
An almost forgotten event, its remembrance prompted by the interesting discussion~thank you!
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 4/25/2010 @ 8:51 pmEPWJ
I didn’t watch and don’t plan too, but there are questions when people put what they think is their common sense judgement over an expert. Yes, common sense at times clears the smoke from the experts.
But as you can see from above, quite psychotic people can be “calculating”, and the “flattened affect” that can acompany mental disorders can be judged as unremorseful.
I’m in total agreement with the idea that dueling experts can be nothing but confusing. On the other hand, there’s a reason one goes to a psychiatrist and not a surgeon when the person is psychotic, just as there is a reason to call the plumber and not the electrician when the basement is flooded.
Wisdom is when one knows to trust their own judgement and when one knows they don’t even know what they don’t know. The mental state of a person 6 months ago and their mental state now, likely on treament, are two entirely different things.
I’m not giving an opinion one way or another on the Yates case, I’m just looking in general. Some crimes are “easy” to see how they were perpetrated, others come from a very dark place that one should be cautious in saying they understand, especially if they do not have a base of knowledge from experience professionally or personally.
MD in Philly (59a3ad) — 4/25/2010 @ 8:56 pmIt occurs to me, MD, that we’re looking at this from opposite perspectives. One is medical vs legal, but the other is truth-tellers vs liars. I’m sure patients lie to doctors but, as a rule, they want help so they try to cooperate. But lawyers in criminal matters rely far more on what people do than what they say to find the truth.
Everyone involved may say the mother was psychotic but that doesn’t make it so. That’s why I want to know what her family thought in the days, weeks, and months before she killed her baby as well as what happened that day.
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/25/2010 @ 9:00 pmIn my first death penalty case my client claimed that he did not remember anything because he had been smoking marijuana and drinking. Dissociative state? I did not believe him. Until, about eighteen years later, I had my first general anesthesia. I was told that in post-op I carried on a lucid conversation with the nurse and my wife. I did not then and do not now remember anything like that.
nk (db4a41) — 4/25/2010 @ 9:07 pmIt’s a good thought, DRJ, but I think we look at people in ways probably more similar, looking at how you describe it. When I am clear thinking and alert I am always comparing what a person is saying and what I know of their actions to see if they corrolate. Patients will lie to doctors all of the time, sometimes because they don’t want to be embarrassed to say they haven’t been following through on a treatment plan, or “not wanting the doctor to feel bad that I’m not taking that medicine”, and for who knows what reasons.
Had a patient once who came to the office every 2 weeks to pick up pre-filled med boxes (lowish IQ, multiple drugs for AIDS, etc.) After having made a near-miraculous recovery (“Lazerus Syndrome”). His blood tests showed that his condition was deteriorating, and that the most likely cause was that he simply wasn’t taking his meds. He insisted he took them, showed up right on time every two weeks. He developed an infection on a heart valve and had to be inpatient for 4 weeks. Over that time he was observed taking his HIV meds and his numbers responded accordingly. We never did find out what was going on, but he didn’t take his meds and he “relapsed” to AIDS and died.
MD in Philly (59a3ad) — 4/25/2010 @ 9:15 pm#65 MD in Philly:
I am of the almost totally unfounded opinion that people lie to their doctors more than they do their lawyers.
Why that would be so, I have no idea, but I have observed on a couple of occasions.
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 4/25/2010 @ 9:21 pmMD & EW1(SG): You’ve convinced me!
Was it Versed, nk? That’s magic stuff.
DRJ (09fa6c) — 4/25/2010 @ 9:42 pmMD in Philly
to me psyc is the toughest of all professions but in all fairness to the jury – they saw her behavior up close and the dueling experts did not.
Also as some lawyerly Houston blogs noted at the time that in the second trial the full jury consultant playbook was in play.
I can believe the assessment that anyone who kills 5 children especially their own in such an upfront personal manner – is not sane
However, sic or demented they were, the ever moving goalpost standard of insanity should not cover murderous intent
EricPWJohnson (a12f23) — 4/26/2010 @ 12:10 amOriginal recipe of course (that’s where all the salt is!) with mashed potatoes AND potato wedges . . . gotta have them taters!.
Icy Texan (de6635) — 4/26/2010 @ 2:57 amEPWJ-
As most of my comments, I was not saying specifically that I thought the jury made a mistake, just pointing out the general concerns on the pros and cons of putting one’s common sense over the testimony of experts, but I think you knew that.
If the duling experts did not evaluate her themselves, then they couldn’t do a much better job than I have, but at a much greater fee. Where can I get a job like that, or will DRJ fork over a consultant’s fee? 😉
Hm, I think either I’m missing something (no snickers from the gallery, please), or Icy Texan posted on the wrong thread.
MD in Philly (59a3ad) — 4/26/2010 @ 6:34 amI think Icy Texan has a sense of humor as well as a sense of right and wrong, MD in Philly. It was something between me and him.
nk (db4a41) — 4/26/2010 @ 7:54 amThanks nk for the heads up, now I can go on to my next challenge for the day. 😉
MD in Philly (59a3ad) — 4/26/2010 @ 8:05 amI am of the almost totally unfounded opinion that people lie to their doctors more than they do their lawyers.
Why that would be so, I have no idea, but I have observed on a couple of occasions.
Comment by EW1(SG) — 4/25/2010 @ 9:21 pm
I only lie to mine about drinking, smoking, and keeping guns in the house. 😉
DRJ, I did not mean to ignore you. I don’t know what they gave me. The anesthesiologist put his finger on the hollow of my throat and told me to count backwards from one hundred. When I got to ninety-four I heard him say “Let’s go” and the lights went out. A nurse woke me up seven hours later in my hospital room to ask me if I wanted something to help me sleep.
nk (db4a41) — 4/26/2010 @ 5:24 pm#73 nk:
Your lawyer?
I don’t lie to my doctors…first, because I love the horrified expressions, and second, because I can usually get a discount for doing 50% of the work myself.
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 4/26/2010 @ 6:22 pm