State of Wisconsin vs. Client
Feb 04, 2013OUTCOME: Not Guilty of 1st Degree Intentional Homicide by Reason of Mental Disease or Defect
Client accused of 1st Degree Intentional Homicide in the stabbing death of her ten week old daughter. At the time of the offense, client was suffering from postpartum psychosis and had been taking Zol ... oft (sertraline) for the past approximately 5 days, as prescribed by her gynecologist. At the time of the offense, client was experiencing insomnia, violent impulses and both auditory and visual hallucinations. Auditory hallucinations included voices she believed to be alternately from god and satan instructing her to murder her child. which she ultimately succumbed to. Profoundly tragic and very bizarre, mindboggling case from a factual standpoint, particularly given that client was a model defendant—well educated, articulate, loving suburban mother with no priors, absolutely no alcohol or drug issues currently or in the past, superb work history, strong marriage with 2 beautiful kids and an overwhelming support group consisting of family, friends, co-workers and employers, past and present. Approximately 20 letters of support were received. Early on in the case all defenses and theories regarding culpability were explored, among them that client was perhaps covering for another actor, including her husband or one of her small children. Once these theories were debunked early on in the investigation, sole focus was put on an NGI adjudication (not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect). Once a thorough investigation revealed no rational alternative explanation for client's actions (no marital issues, no financial issues, a strong, stable marriage by all accounts, no overwhelming outside stressors, a healthy and happy baby who slept through the night, etc.), all that was left was a loving, doting mother with some prior postpartum depression after her last child and a recent prescription for Zoloft (sertraline). The first doctor's report came back supporting NGI, which was not a huge surprise— client's behavior as observed prior to and especially in the days immediately after the incident were simply too bizarre to support an argument that she was malingering. Without going into detail, some of the reports read like something out of ‘The Exorcist’. However, when the first doctor recommended immediate release into the community, that caught all parties a little off guard. The DA expressed an unwillingness to endorse such a recommendation, which was expected. Certainly with a case this horrific there would be serious concerns about the safety of client and those around her. The possibility that the judge would follow the first doctor's recommendation regarding immediate release into the community was virtually nonexistant and so when the DA requested a second opinion, no objection was made. Granted, client was totally lucid, asked intelligent questions regarding her defense, had been declared competent early on and appeared to baseline to where she was prior to her postpartum psychosis, but everyone wanted to ensure that symptoms did not reoccur. The second doctor's report came back supporting NGI, again not a surprise, but it also called for institutional care, which is more along the lines of what all parties expected, including client. However, prior to and even during the plea and disposition, DA suddenly appeared reluctant to even go along with the NGI for reasons that were not clear to me. But DA had nothing to support such a position in terms of any reports contradicting the opinions of the first and second doctors and so the judge then made an excellent record in stating his reasons for finding that the defense had met its burden and he adjudicated client as not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect before sentencing her to institutional care until such time as she is deemed to no longer be a threat to herself or others.
