Commonwealth v. Clancy

 2383CR00198 · Plymouth Superior

Commonwealth v. Clancy, August 18, 2026

TuesdayreporteddefenseDay 15 of 28

The defense expert case opens: the former mother-in-law, a psychiatrist admitted over objection, a forensic pathologist fought to a standstill on cross, and the first account of the voice.

Key points
  • THE COMMAND HALLUCINATION ENTERS THE CASE, AND IT ENTERS AS HEARSAY. The account of a male voice ordering the defendant to kill her children and then herself reached the jury through Dr. Paul Zeizel, describing what she said to Patrick Clancy on a speakerphone call from her hospital bed on February 6, 2023 — not through her, and not through any contemporaneous clinical record. On the same day the Commonwealth had already drawn from Dr. Condie that the records show her reporting voices only from January 24, 2023 onward. That pairing is the shape of the whole contested issue and both halves of it landed on this one sitting.
  • THE STRONGEST MATERIAL AGAINST THE DEFENSE CAME FROM ITS OWN PSYCHIATRIST. Condie had never met or evaluated the defendant; his CV does not state that he has worked with postpartum women; he reviewed medical records but not the criminal investigation materials; he had read a New Yorker article about the case, which Buckingham put to him was the source of most of his affidavit; and asked whether he was speculating about why the defendant would have concealed psychotic symptoms from her providers, he said yes. CBS Boston adds that the cross also brought out his involvement in the family's civil case. He was the defense's first expert and the concession that he was speculating is the sharpest single answer of the day.
  • THE JUDGE STRUCK A QUESTION ABOUT MORTAL SIN. Cross-examining the defendant's former mother-in-law, an active Catholic, Shanan Buckingham asked whether she was aware that murder is considered a mortal sin. Judge Sullivan called counsel to sidebar at once, struck the question, and instructed the jurors that they were not to consider it for any reason or any purpose. Every outlet read carried it and NBC Boston's day-15 recap headline led on it.
  • CONDIE WAS ADMITTED, BUT FENCED IN. The Commonwealth objected on three grounds — that it was unclear what he would say, that his affidavit went to a standard-of-care question belonging to the civil suit and not to the criminal case, and that his evidence would be cumulative. Judge Sullivan admitted him but barred any opinion on the standard of care the defendant received. On the cumulative point East Idaho News reports the judge observing that Condie was the first defense witness on the subject and that the objection would bite only if a later witness said the same thing. Reddington told the court his questioning would go to psychopharmacology rather than to criminal responsibility, which is a meaningful limit on what this witness was offered for.
  • A FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST WAS FOUGHT TO A STANDSTILL ON THE FALL. Laposata's account — a headfirst freefall dive producing a burst or Jefferson fracture — met a cross that put to her that there was no bump, scratch or scrape on the top of the defendant's head, no skull fracture, no brain bleed, no hemorrhage and no injury to the brain itself. Shown a color hospital photograph she agreed there was no visible external injury, said she was nonetheless sure there had been bruising, and was told she was guessing. She conceded she had never examined or treated the defendant. Whether the fall was a genuine suicide attempt or, as the Commonwealth has framed it, staged, runs through this witness.
  • THE OUTLETS DISAGREE ON WHO CROSS-EXAMINED LAPOSATA. The Boston Globe names Jennifer Sprague and Boston 25's account is consistent with that; CBS Boston names Shanan Buckingham. Both are recorded and neither is treated here as settled.
  • THE OUTLETS DISAGREE ON THE SLIDES RULING. Boston 25 reports Judge Sullivan disallowing defense slides 1 to 3 and permitting slides 4 to 6. East Idaho News reports him permitting 4 to 6 and voicing concern about 1 to 3 but ultimately allowing all of them. The Boston Globe reports the argument without reporting an explicit ruling. This is a live conflict about an evidentiary ruling and is recorded in evidence.json rather than resolved here.
  • PRIOR INCONSISTENT TESTIMONY WAS PUT TO LAPOSATA. She was confronted with her own evidence in a 2011 Rhode Island asphyxiation case on how quickly strangulation causes unconsciousness and death, and answered that the two cases involved distinct mechanisms — ligature rather than manual. The intervals the outlets report her giving do not match one another and are set out in her witness entry; none should be quoted from this page as the figure she gave.
  • SUSAN CLANCY'S CROSS CUT BOTH WAYS. She gave the defense its clearest lay account of a woman asking for help, and on redirect confirmed that the defendant had called suicide hotlines twice and been turned away and had been declined admission to a mental-health clinic. Against that, Buckingham established that the children never slept over at the grandparents' house, that the defendant had told therapists she was not close with her in-laws and did not generally let them watch the children, and read from Susan Clancy's own grand jury testimony that things were better around Thanksgiving — which she said she did not now recall. East Idaho News alone reports the prosecutor putting to her that Julie Paul, the provider she recommended, is among the few of the defendant's providers not named in the family's pending civil litigation.
  • THE INVESTIGATORS' COACHING THEORY WAS MET HEAD-ON. Reddington asked Zeizel directly whether he had told the defendant to lie or make up the account, and whether he had suggested she say she heard a voice; he answered no to both, and said he allowed the call to Patrick Clancy out of human compassion. The Boston Globe notes that a State Police sergeant, Dan Lawlor, had testified earlier in the trial that investigators theorized Zeizel coached her. Zeizel's cross-examination had not begun when the court rose — the Commonwealth's answer to this came the following day.
  • A VIDEO LINK COST THE COURT THE BEST PART OF AN HOUR AND REORDERED THE DAY. Laposata could not be connected in the morning, the judge at one point saying he was not sure it was going to work, and the defense took Condie out of order in her place; she was reached after lunch. This is the second sitting in the defense case to lose substantial time to a remote witness, the other being August 21.
  • ZEIZEL'S MEETING COUNT DOES NOT MATCH THE FIGURE HE GAVE THE NEXT DAY. On August 18 the Boston Globe reports him saying he had met the defendant more than 45 times; the August 19 entry records about sixty meetings over roughly thirty-five hours. Recorded as a conflict in evidence.json; not resolved here and the August 19 entry has not been altered.
  • ONE OUTLET DATES THE VOICE TO JANUARY 23. East Idaho News's rendering of Zeizel's evidence has the defendant telling Patrick Clancy she heard the voice on January 23; no other outlet attaches a date to it, and the killings were on January 24. Recorded as a conflict in evidence.json. Do not carry the January 23 date into the timeline on the strength of this page.
  • NO EXHIBIT NUMBERS WERE REPORTED for anything shown on this day, including the defense reconstruction slides that were the subject of an argued ruling. The exhibit list below is descriptive only.

Witnesses (4)

Susan ClancyDefense
The defendant's former mother-in-law, mother of Patrick Clancy. A nurse in labor and delivery for about 38 years; the outlets render her title differently — the Boston Globe calls her a registered nurse, Boston 25 a nurse practitioner at South Shore Hospital, ABC News a former labor-and-delivery nurse, and East Idaho News gives only the 38 years in labor and delivery. She had briefly supervised the defendant when the defendant was a student.
Direct: Reddington Cross: Buckingham
  • TESTIMONY COMPLETE. Called first, at about 09:34 to 09:42 depending on the outlet, and stepped down at about 10:08 to 10:11. Direct, cross-examination, redirect and a further round of prosecution questions all took place within roughly 35 minutes.
  • The relationship. She described a very good relationship with the defendant and a beautiful relationship with the children, seeing the family a couple of times a month.
  • Her view of the defendant as a mother. Very nurturing, very loving, a wonderful mother who loved all her children very much.
  • November 2022. The defendant reached out saying she felt unwell, with insomnia, loss of appetite, and feeling very anxious and sad. Asked whether the defendant was seeking help, she said very much so — she was begging for help.
  • The referral. She put the defendant in touch with colleagues running a perinatal program; ABC News names it as South Shore Health's Perinatal Behavioral Health Program, East Idaho News refers to colleagues at South Shore Medical Clinic, and the Boston Globe reports that she recommended the psychiatric nurse practitioner Julie Paul. East Idaho News adds that she is familiar with Dr. Margaret Spinelli, an expert in postpartum illness, but denied reaching out to her about this case.
  • The text messages. The jury was shown messages between the two women, which East Idaho News describes as coming in through a device extraction report. In them the defendant said she had never been this depressed and that it had been brought on by the medication; that she feared she was becoming dependent on benzodiazepines but could not sleep without them, and that when Susan Clancy suggested stopping she said she could not; that no one was hearing that or addressing it; and, in a message boston.com dates to November 30, 2022, that she was not okay and was terrified of taking her medication that night.
  • On the medication generally she said there were a lot of medications and that it seemed confusing, and that she and the defendant were in touch by text daily.
  • REDIRECT (East Idaho News, at about 09:57). Reddington drew from her that the defendant had called suicide hotlines twice and been turned away, and had been declined admission to a mental-health clinic. She confirmed both.
  • CROSS — the in-laws' distance from the household. She agreed the children never had sleepovers at her house; she and her husband never stayed overnight at the Clancy home; and the family had decided together that the children were best in their own beds with their own belongings, with the defendant's parents actively helping out. She had not attended the defendant's medical appointments.
  • CROSS — what the defendant told her therapists. Buckingham put to her that the defendant had told therapists she was not close with her in-laws and did not generally allow them to watch the children, and that she had given no particular reason for it. Susan Clancy said she did not know any of that.
  • CROSS — prior inconsistent statement. Buckingham read from Susan Clancy's grand jury testimony, in which she had said that things were better around Thanksgiving. She did not recall saying it (East Idaho News).
  • CROSS — the civil suit. East Idaho News alone reports Buckingham asking whether she knew that Julie Paul, the provider she had recommended, is one of the few of the defendant's medical providers not named in the pending litigation. She was uncertain.
  • CROSS — the November emergency room visit. She met the defendant at the South Shore Hospital emergency department, where the defendant had driven herself and stayed one to two hours before leaving in her own car. The defendant reported heart palpitations, sleep trouble and anxiety after taking a cannabis gummy. Asked whether THC or CBD could cause a faster heartbeat or anxiety, she said she did not know.
  • CROSS — the mortal sin question, and the strike. Buckingham established that she is an active Catholic, that the family had a Christmas Day breakfast which she remembered as great and a church service she remembered as beautiful, and that the defendant had said she was glad she went. Buckingham then asked whether she was aware that murder is considered a mortal sin. Judge Sullivan called counsel to sidebar and struck the question, instructing the jury that they were not to consider it for any reason or any purpose. Boston 25 reports the question and answer both stricken at about 10:03.
  • CROSS — January. Asked whether she was at the house much between January 7 and January 24 she answered that she did not remember, and Boston 25 records her answering in one or two words through this part of the cross. She was aware of the defendant's January hospital stay and of a Museum of Science visit.
  • WHAT SHE COULD NOT SAY. She did not know what the defendant had told her therapists about the in-laws; did not recall her own grand jury answer about Thanksgiving; did not know whether cannabis could have produced the emergency-room symptoms; did not remember how often she was at the house in the weeks before January 24; and was not present at any of the defendant's appointments.
Dr. Donald CondieDefense
Clinical and forensic psychiatrist. East Idaho News reports over 40 years in practice, board certification in child and adolescent psychiatry, a career largely at the Massachusetts Mental Health Center treating mood and psychotic disorders, a Harvard Medical School fellowship teaching general, forensic and child and adolescent psychiatry, and clinical experience with pregnant women experiencing psychosis and with postpartum patients admitted for suicidal ideation or depression; CBS Boston gives the Massachusetts Mental Health Center training through Harvard. Boston 25 places him at Cambridge Health Alliance. Outlets consistently describe him as a psychiatrist.
Direct: Reddington Cross: Buckingham
  • TESTIMONY COMPLETE. Taken out of order when Laposata's video link failed. Called at about 11:00 (Boston 25), 11:10 (East Idaho News) or 11:17 (Boston Globe) and finished at about 12:23 (Boston 25, East Idaho News) or 12:35 (Boston Globe); CBS Boston puts the end at about 12:15. Direct, cross and redirect all completed before the lunch recess.
  • ADMITTED OVER OBJECTION AND FENCED IN. See the rulings track. He was allowed to testify but barred from opining on the standard of care the defendant received, and Reddington told the court the questioning would go to psychopharmacology rather than criminal responsibility.
  • HE NEVER MET OR EVALUATED THE DEFENDANT. He testified he had never met her and did not know the family; Reddington had consulted him. His opinions rest on records: Dr. Jennifer Tufts's notes, Rebecca Jollotta's notes, and records from Brigham and Women's, Women & Infants and McLean, by East Idaho News's list.
  • The quality of the treatment records. He called Tufts's records somewhat sparse: many check boxes, but not a great deal of sentences describing what was done during the sessions. All of the defendant's sessions with Tufts were by telehealth.
  • The medication history. An initial 25mg of Zoloft for anxiety and depression, which she did not take at first because she was breastfeeding and worried about the drug reaching her milk, and later did take. On the increase to 50mg he said she felt numb, not herself, worse rather than better, and East Idaho News reports she could not sleep for 48 hours. Antidepressants can take weeks to help while side effects can arrive quickly.
  • Deterioration in the notes. Tufts's check boxes recorded worsening; racing thoughts, not feeling like herself, deepening depression. East Idaho News reports Tufts considering Zulresso, which he described as no longer available and as having cost $34,000 for a 60-hour monitored infusion. She stopped the Zoloft and felt less anxious. She reported brain fog, dizziness and morning sedation; asked whether these were things patients live with, he agreed it is a very unpleasant experience.
  • Psychosis, defined for the jury. Psychosis means a lack of understanding of what is real as opposed to what is not, and can involve delusions and auditory or visual hallucinations. Asked by Reddington whether being dissociated and out of touch with reality can be a symptom of psychosis, he said it certainly can be, and that dissociation can mean feeling that things around you are not real — pretty serious feelings to have. He said the records show that at times she reported hearing a voice.
  • Postpartum illness. He set out the hormonal picture after childbirth — a rapid fall in progesterone, a rise in prolactin — and distinguished postpartum blues from postpartum depression, which can prevent a mother bonding with her baby. He listed the symptoms as an inability to connect with the baby, isolation, low energy and insomnia, and said the defendant reported all of them, along with dissociation, which he said could point to postpartum psychosis. Boston 25 reports him describing an inability to bathe or get out of bed.
  • THE MISSING BLOOD WORK. Neither Tufts nor Jollotta ordered blood tests that could have checked for postpartum hormone changes; East Idaho News adds thyroid testing. Asked whether such testing was important, he said yes.
  • BIPOLAR DISORDER. He called it a very serious possibility that had to be considered and said passive suicidal ideation appears very frequently in the records; Jollotta had raised bipolar disorder as a possible secondary diagnosis. He described the disorder's alternation between manic and depressed phases, with most patients spending more time depressed, and said psychotic thinking can accompany bipolar mania — the Boston Globe reporting his example of believing that God is speaking to you.
  • SSRIs AND BIPOLAR DISORDER. Prescribing an SSRI to a bipolar patient should be done cautiously and usually with a mood stabilizer started at the same time, because an SSRI can worsen manic symptoms. He repeated this on redirect.
  • Exercise. He noted many references to exercise in the records and called the intensity unusual; Julie Paul had recommended long runs. He testified the defendant ran a road race the day she delivered Callan. The Boston Globe reports this passage as bearing on undiagnosed manic onset.
  • Crisis resources. East Idaho News reports him testifying she called the Aspire hotline twice and was told that without a suicide plan she did not need a higher level of inpatient care.
  • Other medications and the literature. Diazepam and amitriptyline were prescribed. East Idaho News reports Reddington producing a roughly 1,000-page psychiatric reference work containing a single reference to postpartum psychosis, and Condie noting that the World Health Organization lists postpartum psychosis as a separate entity in the classification insurers bill against.
  • CROSS — his qualifications. Asked where his CV says he has worked with postpartum women, he answered that it does not say that specifically.
  • CROSS — what he did not read. He reviewed medical records but not the criminal investigation materials; CBS Boston puts it as not having reviewed police reports.
  • CROSS — the New Yorker article. Buckingham put to him that most of the facts in his affidavit came from a New Yorker article about the case. He answered that he had interviewed Patrick Clancy for 90 to 100 minutes (Boston Globe; East Idaho News says about 90 minutes) but acknowledged he was not sure whether he had documented that interview in the affidavit.
  • CROSS — the civil case. CBS Boston reports the cross bringing out his involvement in the family's civil case. The Commonwealth had made the same point in objecting to him.
  • CROSS — whether she was actually taking the medication. She was prescribed a great deal but took only three or four at a time, with doses raised while few pills were taken; East Idaho News reports blood testing indicating use of under a week.
  • CROSS — treatment she declined. She was admitted at Massachusetts General, where clinicians recommended inpatient treatment at McLean, which she declined (East Idaho News). On Seroquel, prescribed at 25mg for sleep against a maximum of 800mg, Jollotta suspected bipolar disorder and intended to work her up to 400mg.
  • CROSS — THE CONCESSION. Buckingham put to him that the records show the defendant reporting hearing voices only on January 24, 2023, and never to Tufts, Jollotta or the clinician Latiesha Dukes before then. He agreed that is what the records show, said he did not know whether she had heard voices before the killings, and when asked whether he was therefore speculating about why she had withheld the symptom, answered yes. Asked whether someone begging for help should be focused with her providers about what she is feeling and hearing, he said it should be, but that is not always what doctors find.
  • REDIRECT — why a patient might not disclose. He said postpartum women may withhold symptoms out of fear: the defendant had reported worrying that the Department of Children and Families would take her children if she disclosed severe symptoms, and licensing boards sometimes take a dim view of health professionals with psychiatric illness. The Boston Globe and East Idaho News place this exchange at different points relative to the speculation concession; the substance is the same.
  • WHAT HE COULD NOT SAY. He had never examined the defendant; he could not point to postpartum work on his CV; he could not say whether he had documented the Patrick Clancy interview; he did not know whether she had heard voices before the killings; and he was barred by the judge from any opinion on the standard of care she received.
Dr. Elizabeth LaposataDefense
Forensic pathologist, appearing by video. A former Rhode Island state medical examiner — CBS Boston gives twelve years as chief medical examiner there, a Brown University professorship, and work on the 1999 EgyptAir 990 crash and the Station nightclub fire — now in independent practice. She was a defense expert in the Karen Read case, where the Boston Globe notes her evidence about dog-bite injuries was controversial and was ultimately disallowed. NBC Boston spells the first name Elisabeth.
Direct: Reddington Cross: Sprague per the Boston Globe; Buckingham per CBS Boston
  • TESTIMONY COMPLETE. She was to have been the second witness of the morning but could not be connected; after the lunch recess she testified from about 14:13 to 14:17 through about 15:02. Judge Sullivan told the jury to consider her evidence the same as if she were testifying in the courtroom.
  • What she reviewed. Medical records, autopsy reports and photographs of the three children and of the defendant, grand jury testimony and criminal investigation materials.
  • The children. She testified that bruising on Callan was not caused by squeezing or pushing but by the leads used to measure brain activity, and that Dawson's injuries were consistent with end-of-life medical treatment.
  • The wrist and neck wounds. She described hesitation injuries — shallower marks alongside the deeper ones — and called them a classic finding in suicide attempts. The Boston Globe reports her saying the injuries caused significant bloodshed.
  • THE FALL. She testified the defendant went out of the second-floor window in a freefall dive, head first, and that the impact of her head against the ground drove the force down her spine to produce a burst or Jefferson fracture — the same injury pattern seen when a diver strikes the bottom of a pool. The fracture damaged the spinal cord and left her paralyzed; ribs were broken and the flexion of her neck injured the thyroid and vocal cords.
  • HYPOTHERMIA. A core temperature of 82 degrees Fahrenheit against a normal 98.6 followed from lying on frozen ground at about 32 degrees in wet clothing, without sun, with a thin build, and — critically — from the loss of the ability to regulate temperature below the level of the spinal injury, so that the blood vessels dilate and shed heat. East Idaho News reports her adding that she likely went into spinal shock and hypothermia at the hospital, arrested, and needed transfusion for blood loss.
  • CROSS — SHE NEVER EXAMINED THE DEFENDANT. She agreed she had not treated her and had not physically examined her.
  • CROSS — THE ABSENT HEAD INJURY. The prosecutor put to her that there was not a bump, a scratch or a scrape on the top of the defendant's head, no skull fracture, no brain bleed, no hemorrhaging and no injury to the brain itself, and asked whether she was saying the defendant fell head first from 13 feet onto hard frozen ground with no visible injury to the exterior of her head. She answered yes, and said she was sure there had been bruising. Told she was guessing, she said no, she was sure. A color hospital photograph was displayed showing no visible swelling or blood, and she maintained her account. Her explanation was that the trauma from the impact was transferred to the vertebrae.
  • CROSS — PRIOR TESTIMONY IN ANOTHER CASE. She was confronted with her testimony in a 2011 Rhode Island asphyxiation case and answered that the two cases involved distinct forms of strangulation, manual there and ligature here. THE OUTLETS DO NOT AGREE ON THE INTERVALS SHE GAVE. East Idaho News has her putting manual strangulation at 10 to 20 seconds to unconsciousness with a further 2 to 3 minutes of pressure before death, and ligature strangulation at 4 to 10 seconds to unconsciousness with death in 5 to 10 minutes. Boston 25 reports her giving 5 to 20 seconds to unconsciousness in ligature strangulation and death after continuous pressure of up to five minutes. Both are recorded; neither is treated here as the figure she gave.
  • CROSS — THE EXERCISE BAND. The prosecutor produced an exercise band and put to her that a band wrapped and left does not hold tight pressure the way a ligature would — Boston 25 renders it as the band falling apart if left alone. She maintained that these were ligature strangulations in which wrapped pressure stays continuous, so that blood cannot return from the brain, unlike manual strangulation which can be on and off and which can fracture the bones of the neck.
  • THE EXCHANGE THAT DREW THE JUDGE IN. She grew visibly frustrated at being cut off, saying excuse me, that she had not finished her answer. Judge Sullivan told her to listen to the question, answer the question, and go from there.
  • CROSS — HER FORMER OFFICE. CBS Boston reports the prosecutor putting to her that the Rhode Island medical examiner's office had ten violations and unsafe conditions; she answered that the unsafe conditions included a light bulb that was out in the hallway and other minor issues.
  • WHAT SHE COULD NOT SAY. She could not point to any documented external head injury, and could not do more than infer bruising she had never observed.
Dr. Paul ZeizelDefense
Clinical and forensic psychologist. He was retained by the defense within days of the killings and has been present through the trial, sitting with the Clancy family (Boston Globe). East Idaho News reports him describing work assessing combat soldiers in Afghanistan for psychological injury and fitness to continue.
Direct: Reddington Cross: Did not begin on this day; the Commonwealth cross-examined him on August 19
  • TESTIMONY INCOMPLETE ON THIS DAY. Called last, at about 15:14 to 15:18, and still on direct examination when the court rose at about 16:00 to 16:05. He resumed on Wednesday, August 19, which is where his criminal-responsibility opinion and his cross-examination belong; nothing from that day is recorded here.
  • Foundation. He explained the difference between psychologists and psychiatrists — psychologists do treatment, testing and counseling and, he said, 99 percent cannot prescribe — and described neuropsychological and personality testing including the MMPI, which he said began as a way of identifying military leaders and is now used to assess adult personality traits and mental health disorders.
  • THE LIE SCALE. He described the lie scale built into such tests, designed to catch a subject presenting either as healthier or as less healthy than they actually are, and confirmed to Reddington that the testing can detect someone pretending to have a psychological disorder. Judge Sullivan then called a sidebar.
  • NO MALINGERING. His opinion on the testing was that the defendant was not faking, that there was no evidence of any malingering, and that she presented as an honest citizen.
  • How he came into the case. Reddington approached him on February 2, 2023, about a severely injured client in hospital. He could not evaluate her at once; permission came on February 4, eleven days after the killings, by East Idaho News's reckoning.
  • The first visit, February 4, 2023, at Brigham and Women's. She was in bed on tubes and wires and handcuffed to the bed, with police outside and a nurse at the bedside. She did not know where she was or what time it was, but recognized herself and had a vague recollection of what had happened. She was concerned about Patrick Clancy, not having spoken to him.
  • THE CALL. She asked to call Patrick Clancy on Zeizel's phone, on speaker. The first attempt went to voicemail; two days later, on February 6, 2023, he answered. Zeizel was present throughout. She told him she loved him very much, and — unable, Zeizel said, to express much emotion — that she had heard a male voice ordering her, telling her that she did not have any choice, that she had to kill her children and then kill herself. NOTE: East Idaho News's rendering has her placing the voice on January 23; no other outlet dates it, and the killings were on January 24.
  • THE COACHING QUESTION, MET DIRECTLY. Reddington asked whether he had told her to lie or make it up to help herself, and whether he had suggested she say she heard a voice. He answered no to both. Asked why he had let her call her husband, he said: human compassion. The Boston Globe notes that State Police Sergeant Dan Lawlor had testified earlier in the trial that investigators theorized Zeizel coached her into the account.
  • How often he has seen her. Over 45 times, including after her transfer to Tewksbury State Hospital. He also described visiting her in the lock-up during the trial and before it, out of concern for her stability.
  • A STRICKEN REMARK. Beginning to explain the lock-up visits, he said he saw her because the nature of the presentation in this court has been gut-wrenching for anyone exposed to it. Judge Sullivan struck the remark. A sidebar was called before he could be asked about her suicidal ideation in the lock-up.
  • Dissociation and depersonalization. Going through a note of Jollotta's in which the defendant reported feeling out of touch with herself, he called it depersonalization — feeling removed from your body, as if you are not in your full body — and described her as feeling numb, unable to feel her feelings, and struggling to get out of bed. He said she reacted badly to Seroquel.
  • Paranoia. He testified she feared that other people could actually hear her thoughts, believing them loud enough for strangers to hear, and worried about the consequences, including losing her children. He described her going to emergency rooms, suicide hotlines and inpatient programs for help, and not staying long with any one provider.
  • PSYCHOSIS AS INTERMITTENT. He described psychosis as a major mental health disorder whose symptoms typically include hallucinations, distinguished benign, benevolent and malevolent auditory hallucinations, and said patients absolutely believe what they hear. He said the defendant had auditory hallucinations only, no visual ones. On duration he said symptoms come and go — the Boston Globe reports him saying people with psychosis can function fine one day and hear voices the next, and East Idaho News reports his image of hallucinations as waves at the beach, coming and going. Asked whether someone psychotic can still hold a conversation or drive, he said yes.
  • WHAT HAD NOT HAPPENED YET. He had not given a criminal-responsibility opinion when the court rose, and had not been cross-examined. Both came the following day.

Exhibits and evidence

Rulings and objections

Procedural

Sourcesglobe-day-15 b25-day-15 eastidaho-day-15 cbs-boston abc-mil boston-0818
◀ August 17, 2026 Open in the index August 19, 2026 ▶