2.Paul Zeizel — Cross (Part 3)

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Good morning, sir.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So, yesterday, when you first took the stand, Attorney Reddington asked you a little bit about your background. You recall that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you, in this field of being a psychologist and a forensic psychologist, you circulate a curriculum vitae where all that is outlined, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And, fair to say, you testified yesterday, and on your curriculum vitae, you speak briefly about the fact that you have previously testified for the Commonwealth, you said, as well as for the defense, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: You referred to defendants and respondents, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And so one of the things that you've done in the past is to be what's called a qualified examiner, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: You aren't currently, not actively doing those examinations, are you?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. And so in those respects, is that when you say you testify for the Commonwealth, is that primarily the work that you would do where you say you testify for the Commonwealth?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And in those evaluations that you do, is it fair to say that you're actually an independent contractor with a company that contracts with the Department of Correction on those cases?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Right. And you're... But, an examiner, a qualified examiner, is retained or takes work in doing evaluations in order to perform independent assessments, are they not?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So they're not hired by the Commonwealth.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So, yeah, big umbrella Commonwealth, meaning Department of Correction, an agency that is under the seal of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. But as far as when we talk about Commonwealth, like Commonwealth versus Lindsay Clancy, that's the prosecution. In those proceedings, the Department of Corrections sometimes is the moving party, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And sometimes it's the district attorney's office who's the moving party.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But it's never the defendant who's the moving party.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And in those types of proceedings, sometimes if you opine a person is what they call sexually dangerous, you would testify for the Commonwealth, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And if they're not, or if you find they're not sexually dangerous, you'd testify for the respondent.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So you're not—

MS. BUCKINGHAM: ...testifying for the Commonwealth. You're in, as in the prosecution, you're testifying under the big umbrella of the Commonwealth.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you haven't done that work in, mm, closely rough, a decade, fair to say?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well, pre-pandemic, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So when was the last time you testified for the Commonwealth, meaning the prosecution, in an SDP proceeding?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And have you testified at a probable cause hearing for that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Where you opined that somebody was sexually dangerous?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. Fair to say, though, the majority of your work here in Massachusetts over the last few years is contracted with the Committee for Public Council Services, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And for the fiscal year of 2024, you were paid by CPCS and the open checkbook for approximately $340,000 worth of time and work?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And for the fiscal year of 2025, it was approximately three hundred thousand that you were paid through the Committee of Public Council Services?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: You also indicated yesterday that you have known Attorney Reddington for a number of years, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Fair to say you've done quite a bit of work with him over the years?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: It just requires a yes or a no.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. And you've also testified that you have your doctorate in clinical psychology, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you testified yesterday, or you told us a lot about your military experience, but as you sit here today, you are not a prescriber of medications here in the Commonwealth, are you?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: You do not have a—

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Right. You just... You told us all about your experience in the military and having that limited ability to prescribe years ago. But as far as you sit here today, and in your evaluations that you do today, you don't do forensic psychiatry evaluations, do you?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: I believe I said you work with the military, but thank you. So in, here in Massachusetts, you conduct primarily forensic psychol- or you conduct evaluations in forensic psychology, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. And you are aware that there are particular standards for forensic psychologists working within the criminal justice system, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well, I'm referring to your role when you come into the court and you testify as you are today as a forensic psychologist. That's what I'm referring to. You're aware that there are particular standards in place by, the ABA Criminal Justice Mental Health Standards is one of them, right? You're familiar with that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you're familiar with the American Psychological Association Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And fair to say that with those standards, they're not required, but people are encouraged to follow them, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And the criminal justice, the ABA Criminal Justice Mental Health Standards actually identify the different types of roles that forensic evaluators have in the criminal justice system, including evaluating, consulting, and treating, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And so, fair to say standard seven dash one point three indicates that for evaluative experts, the obligation is to make a thorough and impartial assessment based on sound evaluative methods to reach an objective opinion. Would you agree with that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And so, again, in the American Psychological Association Specialty Guidelines, section one point zero two indicates that forensic practitioners strive to be unbiased and impartial and avoid partisan presentations of unrepresentative, incomplete, or inaccurate evidence. Would you agree with that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Is that a standard you strive to follow?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. In this case, you indicated that you've been with the case since February 4th of the year 2023, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you've authored a report, you said, in June, I believe, of 2026, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But you've also offered other reports or updates of the defendant's condition over the years. Is that fair to say?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you provided a report, an update I should say, in July of 2025.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Do you recall that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And in that report, you identify that as of July 23rd, 2025, that the defendant was residing at Tewksbury Hospital. Do you recall that, putting that in?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And that there was a planned transfer to Worcester Recovery Hospital or Worcester Recovery Center and Hospital. Do you recall writing that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well, I can provide you with your report if you'd like to review, but it reads, "Currently, Ms. Clancy resides at Tewksbury Hospital with a planned transfer to Worcester Recovery Center and Hospital."

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Does that sound right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. And that she is presently medication stabilized and is in the process of discontinuing most, if not all, psychotropic medications, demonstrating an emerging capacity to stabilize without them. Do you recall writing that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So in July of 2025, it was your opinion that she was stable and she would be, hopefully, as you say, transferred to a different facility, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you're aware that currently she's still at Tewksbury Hospital?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And currently she's still taking psychotropic medications?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: I think you also write in that report...

MS. BUCKINGHAM: We'll strike that. Going back to your most recent evaluation in June of 2026, you would agree with me that, in an evaluation for criminal responsibility, being a forensic psychologist, it's really important to be as accurate as possible in your reports, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: You wanna make sure you get the facts right, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Because your evaluation's not just based on what you learn from the individual you're evaluating, but also an independent review, an unbiased review of the records, of the facts. Is that fair to say?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. So in your report, you indicate that the period of evaluation that you had with this individual is approximately 45 hours. Do you recall writing that and testifying about that yesterday?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. And you also said yesterday that in addition to that, you've met with her several other times for a total of approximately 60 times at least.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. Is that typical for you to spend 35 hours with a person that you're evaluating?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: You also indicated yesterday that one of—how you became involved in this case is Attorney Reddington called you and asked you to go check on the I think you said mental wellbeing. Is that what your assessment was?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And your first time there was February 4th, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Were you examining her as a potential patient at that point?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So you went in to visit her?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And when you went in to visit her, you indicated that she had recently been extubated in your testimony yesterday. You're aware from the review of the records that she was extubated on January 28th?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you're aware-

MS. BUCKINGHAM: You're aware that she had been communicating with staff at the hospital, including psychiatrists, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well, a person who-

MS. BUCKINGHAM: ... a person who goes through major trauma and is at a hospital, and has made suicidal attempts, you ... In your opinion, it would behoove the hospital to have that person talk to a psychiatrist, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Now, in addition to meeting with the staff and the psychiatry team prior to your arrival, were you aware that she had an attorney that had came to visit her a few times?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Not Mr. Reddington, but a different attorney.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. So there was somebody that came in to see her prior to you coming in to see her?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Now, you testified yesterday that you performed a mental status exam that day on February 4th. Do you recall that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Where in your report or the previous report from July or your June report do you outline the results of your mental status exam?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But you indicated yesterday that she didn't know who she was, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: She didn't know where she was?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But I believe your testimony was that she did remember what happened, but she was foggy as to what happened?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And she actually, according to your testimony yesterday, asked you for your phone or to access your phone to make a phone call. Is that correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So she was able to communicate with you.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: She asked you for something, and you clearly understood what she was asking for.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you indicated that she asked to call her husband, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Had you spoken with her husband before that time?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So how'd you get the phone number to call him?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So she provided you with a phone number to dial so that she could call him on speakerphone, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And she remembered the number?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And so you indicated on that day, on February 4th, that she left a voicemail, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So in that voicemail message, were you able to identify that it was Patrick Clancy's phone? Did it say, "Hey, this is Pat, leave a message," or something to that effect?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And as far as her confidence in the number, she gave it to you with no issue, did she not?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: She didn't have her own cell phone to refer to, did she?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Or a pad of paper where all the numbers were written down?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: You indicated that she left a message. Do you recall what the message was?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And again, you said that you didn't write down what the mental status exam was, but the fact that she was able to relay that message, was it clear and coherent what she was saying?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And she was able to have a conversation with you that day?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Now, you said you went back on February 6th and met with her again, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you guys made another attempt at calling Patrick.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Again, did she... Did you remember the number?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Did you have it stored in your phone?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Did she provide you his phone number to call?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But you don't recall, as you sit here today, which it was, do you?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you didn't write a report about that interaction, did you?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So in this, in the second phone call, you were able to actually hear that she was talking with Patrick on the other end, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And at that time, when you were now second time meeting with her and having this phone call, were you aware that she had already changed her healthcare proxy from Patrick to her parents?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Did you talk to Patrick in between the 4th and the 6th to find out if he had tried to come in to visit her?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Your testimony yesterday was that she had called him to tell him that she loved him and to see where they were at, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: That was your testimony? Meaning what, their relationship?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But in that subsequent conversation that you were a witness to, where they were speaking on the phone and she told them about these voices or explained about the voices, did she ask about the kids?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Now, in all of the times over the course of the last few years that you've met with Ms. Clancy, how many times has she told you since the incident that she's heard a voice currently?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you've now testified that, over the course of a period of time, that she did hear voices, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And is that based on one of these 35 hours worth of conversations you had with her? How do you know that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well, I'm asking you—

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So who did she tell that she had a voice that told her to kill herself?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So the same message that she delivered to Patrick that day on the phone, you heard from a chaplain at Brigham and Women's Hospital after the incident occurred in January of 2023?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And so from all of the records that you reviewed of her treatment and all of the interviews with her family, who did she tell that she heard voices telling them to kill... telling her to kill herself?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Which family members?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: In the records with the providers, you're aware, you've reviewed them all, and you've sat through all of their testimony. You're aware that when she described intrusive thoughts, she never referred them, referred to them as a voice telling her to kill herself. Did they? Did she?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: It's just a yes or no.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So as far as her reports of these intrusive thoughts that appear over and over in the notes, you would agree that it was simply... When asked about what they were, it was simply that she felt like she wanted to die, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: It's just a yes or no.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Now, in your report, you go through...

MS. BUCKINGHAM: What's called the sources of information. You're familiar with that part. It's pretty standard in a forensic report, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Where you list all of the things that you've gone through and reviewed in compiling the information for your report.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. So, not on the list are the Tewksbury Hospital records that you said you reviewed recently, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Did you review records from the Spaulding rehab facility?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: That's not contained, though, in your list in your report, is it?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you don't cite to any of the Spaulding rehab records in your report coming to your ultimate conclusions, do you?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And how about the women and infant records? Did you list that in your sources of information section?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. But you've testified about that, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Did you review them at all?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And as far as the McLean records, you don't list the McLean records as a source of information in your report, do you?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Now you've described and you describe in your report that you believe that Ms. Clancy was hypomanic, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And I believe you testified to some extent, and you've written in your report, that you identify her as euphoric, excessively energetic for three months postpartum. Do you remember writing that in your report?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: That you note that she exercised early, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But you're aware that she exercised pretty frequently before birth—

MS. BUCKINGHAM: ... and while pregnant with Callan.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So it was part of her routine, fair to say, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you identify what you refer to as a marketing scam being that Beachbody business, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But you're aware that that's a series of workouts and a line of nutritional shakes and exercise plans that millions of people engage in across the country.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So it's not a scam. It's just a way of—

MS. BUCKINGHAM: ... a lifestyle choice.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well, did she—

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Sorry.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Did she tell you she lost money with Beachbody?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: When was that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: No, when did she tell you that she lost money?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And is it in your report?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well, I have it with me, or do you have it up there? Can you look and point to me where she told you, at what point she told you she lost money in this endeavor?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well, you—

MS. BUCKINGHAM: You've described it as a scam because you said she lost money. So wouldn't it be important to know if she actually lost money?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. You also identify the 5-mile race that she completed. Was it a 5-mile race or a 5K race?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you've sat in the courtroom each and every day of this trial, so you've heard all the testimony about the evidence, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: You're also aware that prior to the kids being born, that she considered herself a runner?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Right? She had a treadmill at her house. She went to the gym and used the treadmill. She ran other races.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Now, in your report, you indicate that part of…

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Her, the timeline of her medication and her decline is the September time period where she was prescribed the Zoloft, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you indicate that she had reported, and it's reflected in the records, that she increased the Zoloft, and that's when she couldn't sleep for 48 hours straight, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you're aware of what the instructions were, having reviewed everything in this case, what the pill bottle said as far as the plan for the Zoloft?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well, I have the bottle, exhibit number two. Sertraline, that's Zoloft, right? Brand name Zoloft?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Says, "Take one oral tablet once a day for one week, then increase to two tablets daily thereafter."

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Right on the label.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And again, having been at the majority of this trial, you're aware that there were 30 in that prescription and 23 left in the bottle when they were inventoried?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And those are pills that were in Patrick Clancy's possession at the time of these events in January, you're aware, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So if there's only seven pills missing from a prescription that requires the person to take a particular dosage for one week or seven days, how did she double the dose?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well, I'm looking at exhibit number one, a record from CVS Pharmacy, which all of these bottles are from. And the only time a prescription for Sertraline is filled is on September 15th, 2022, for 30 pills. You're aware of that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So there's no prior prescription for Sertraline, is there?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Now, in your report, you also refer to 1129, and your report on page eight, paragraph two, says, "On 1129, Paula Gelata…" Is that supposed to be Rebecca Gelata?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. So it also says that she prescribed Seroquel to treat Ms. Clancy's anxiety, depressed and unstable mood, and psychotic symptoms of disassociation and derealization. Where is that in Rebecca Jollotta's record, that that's why she prescribed Seroquel?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And in fact, you were present when Ms. Jollotta testified and said that she prescribed it at 25 milligrams for insomnia, not for anxiety, depression, unstable mood, or psychotic symptoms. Did she not?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But you're aware from reviewing the records and hearing testimony that that initial prescription was for a 25 milligram dose, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: I know you're not a prescriber, but you're aware that a dose for treatment of bipolar is significantly higher than 25 milligrams?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Now, you've described in your testimony in this court auditory, repeated auditory hallucinations about wanting to kill herself or that she should kill herself and that she is damaged, that her brain is damaged, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Now, did you have a conversation with her in one of these 35 hours about that particular voice or thought or belief?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So when you quote in your report—

MS. BUCKINGHAM: "When questioned about the nature and content of these horrible thoughts, Ms. Clancy stated, 'Like a really bad and intrusive thought that I didn't feel like it was mine, telling me I should kill myself, your brain is damaged, you're never gonna get better.'" Where does the quote come from?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Right.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: To you, at some point?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. And this is well after the incident occurred, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you reviewed all the records to know that she did not endorse that she was hearing a voice to any of her providers between September and January 23rd of 2023?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: A yes or no, sir.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: My question to you, though, was where in the records from September to January 23rd of 2022 did she tell any of the providers she saw that she heard a voice telling her to kill herself?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. And you're aware that she has spoken to several forensic psychiatrists and psychologists over the course of this case, right? Not just yourself.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well, you're aware that she… You're referring to Dr. Halperin, Dr. Mack, and Dr. Saathoff, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But you're aware that she also spoke with Dr. Resnick and Dr. Spinelli well before that.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you're also aware, sir, that she has never told—she never told Dr. Resnick in a recorded interview, nor Dr. Halperin, Dr. Mack, or Dr. Saathoff—

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Your testimony is that she told you that she heard this voice. Fair to say she identified to you that it was her own voice that she heard, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So she told you that she heard a male's voice?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: When?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: No, I'm referring to the fact that you've now testified that she heard this, as you call it, a persistent percu- per- what's the word you used? Persecutorial voice over the course of time. Is that, was that your testimony?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Right.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So, but I'm ask—

MS. BUCKINGHAM: In those voices that you are saying she told you she heard about wanting to die or to kill herself or her brain was damaged prior to January 24th of 2023, did she say it was her own voice she could hear? It was her own thoughts?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Fair to say the only time she specifically said she heard a male voice was when she recounts the events on January 24th of 2023?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you'd agree that there's a difference between the idea that somebody believes their thoughts would be or could be heard by others, and the belief that they are being heard by others, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And believing, having a fixed belief like that would be a delusion, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And the idea that she believed that something was wrong with her brain, or that if she, if people could know what was happening, that the police might get involved. That is something that could happen if somebody articulates those things, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Now, in your report, you also indicate that, in your testimony you indicated that on January 5th of 2023, that that's when Ms. Clancy was discharged from McLean Hospital, and I think your testimony was that she went in there on Seroquel, and I think you indicated Klonopin, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And your report says Seroquel and Klonopin. You recall that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: You're aware that based on the medication journal that is in evidence, that she hadn't taken Klonopin since November 27th of 2022?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But you've seen the pages of her journal to know that she's pretty diligent about saying exactly what she took on each particular date?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Leading up to her stay at McLean, and even after?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Now, kind of sticking with these medications for a second. You have testified, I think this was yesterday, you testified that you were familiar that after Dawson's birth, that she had sought some medication, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And I believe you testified yesterday that she was on Trazodone. But in fact, she was prescribed Zoloft after Dawson—

MS. BUCKINGHAM: ... and reported she did never take it, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And again, you've talked a lot about that the medications that she was taking, the different medications, haven't—didn't provide her with any sort of relief. So it's important to know the different medications she was taking and what the reactions were, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And her history, whether it be a medication history, a social history, a family history, those are all important things overall for you to look at and examine when coming to ultimate conclusions, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So it's important to be accurate when you're recalling or reporting that information.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And as far as the medication goes, I think you testified yesterday that she also took medication in nursing school, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And having met with her as many times as you did, and reviewing all these records, you're aware that those were in fact Prozac, Wellbutrin, and propranolol that she took in nursing school.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But that's not what you testified to yesterday.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And—

MS. BUCKINGHAM: You also mentioned—

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Today in your testimony, you were asked about the date of December 15th. And I believe your testimony was that's the day she went to Women and Infants. Is that correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Would it—if I show you the record, is it fair to say she didn't go to Women and Infants on the 15th, but it was actually December 20th?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you said in your testimony today that at the Mass General ER, she did not get any help. Do you recall that testimony?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: She didn't not get help.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well, sir, I—that wasn't the question. And your testimony was she went to the ER and did not get help. That was your testimony, not hers.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: She chose to decline the bed at McLean on December 15th, did she not?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And she then indicated to the Mass General Hospital that she was going to opt for an outpatient program at the Women and Infants, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: That's what's in the records.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And did she tell you that as well?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And as it pertains to the Women and Infants, again, after you review the records, you're aware that a referral had been made to her well before her visit to the ER on the 15th for that same program.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Now, you've indicated in your testimony that it's your opinion that her diagnosis is bipolar disorder with psychotic symptoms, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And fair to say, you've reviewed, prior to your report, you had reviewed Dr. Resnick's report?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So the question, I believe, was, did you review other, a report of Dr. Resnick, in— All your sources of information and before you came to a conclusion about diagnosis?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: One moment. Sorry.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: On page four of your report, where you—

MS. BUCKINGHAM: On page four of your report, where you list the sources of information, you do identify as number 24, forensic psychiatric evaluation of Philip J. Resnick from nine/27/24, do you not?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And so that's something you reviewed?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: That wasn't the question, sir.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Did you review his report?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So the question, sir, is did you review Dr. Resnick's report prior to authoring your report or coming to your conclusions about diagnosis?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. Now, in talking about your review of records, you indicated that there are several thousand pages of Tewksbury Hospital records, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And did you review all of those?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Were you aware that on May 26th, 2023, that the defendant was observed by staff in a note stating that she was visible along the unit hallways, self-propelling her wheelchair with her one-to-one staff, that she had a visit with her mother who brought dinner for her. They ate and played games during the visit. Are you aware of that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: May 26th of 2023.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: That would have been approximately four months after the incident and on the date of Callan's first birthday, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: You don't, or you do?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: If I tell you that was read from page one seventy-six of the Tewksbury Hospital records, would you agree with that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. And on December 24th of 2023, were you aware that the defendant was observed at Tewksbury, monitored on one-to-one for safety, that she accepted medication, meals, and snacks. She spent time in the TV room or sitting outside her room, utilizing phone, and visited with family. Do you know—do you recall that, reading that note on page six thirteen of the Tewksbury records?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Yes.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And that would have been Cora's birthday.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But would you agree with me that if I read that from page six thirteen in the records, that that would be within that seven thousand and one page that, of the record?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: How about on January 24th, 24, 24, where she's observed in a note from Tewksbury State Hospital on page 674 saying, where the note reads, "Patient was visible in the milieu, engageable with both staff and select peers. Patient accepted select medications as her baseline." That she was pleasant during interactions, self-propelling in wheelchair in the halls, spending much of the morning and early afternoon in her room and hall on her electronics. Do you recall reading that record?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And January 24th, 2024 would have been the year anniversary of the incident, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But if I read from page 674, you would agree with me that that's part of the Tewksbury record?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And on Jan—excuse me, May 26th of 2024, from page 922 of the Tewksbury record, patient monitored one to one for safety. She's been monitored for high suicide risks. Accepted medication. Says BFK and snacks. She spent some time in the TV room or sitting outside her room utilizing phone. Would you agree that that's a fair reading of page 922?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. And that she's also observed on that same day visible on the unit while utilizing her phone outside her room, was able to make her needs known appropriately. Patient was observed playing dominoes with peers in the TV room. That was later in the day on May 26th, 2024, which would have been Callan's second birthday.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: How about on September 30th of 2024, page 1,229 of the Tewksbury record, where it's noted that she was visible in the unit, attended startup slash coffee group, assisted with AD—or she was assisted with ADLs as needed. She was in safe behavioral control for the duration of the shift, and that later it reads, "Patient visible in the hallways, seated in her wheelchair outside her bedroom using her cell phone. Pleasant upon approach. Social with select peers." That would have been on September 30th, 2024, which would have been Dawson's fifth birthday. Do you recall reviewing that in the record?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: December 24th, 2024, page 1,442 of the Tewksbury records, says the patient was visible on the unit utilizing her phone. Her parents were in to visit, and they brought dinner with them. Patient accepted medications and fluids. Patient in good behavioral control, maintaining safety. No SIB noted or reported. Do you have reason to doubt that that's on page 1,442 of the Tewksbury record?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And what's SIB?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And so December 24th, 2024, that would have been Cora's seventh birthday, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So January 24th, 2025, from page 1,514 of the Tewksbury records, where it reads, "Inpatient treatment goal: To work on my mental health and to feel better." Says, "She participated in morning ADL routine with staff assistance. Patient was visible on the milieu at times in the hallway utilizing her phone. No SIB has been reported this shift."

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Do you have any reason to doubt that that's contained on page 1,514?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And further observations on that day were that the patient was visible on the unit. She was social with select staff and peers and also seen utilizing her phone. Her parents were in to visit and brought her dinner—or excuse me, and they brought dinner with them. That was again, on January 24th, 2025, which would have been the second anniversary of this incident, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: May 26th, 2025, page 1,782 of the Tewksbury records, it says, "She did not engage in any SIB. She was visited by her parents this shift. She attended startup group and watched TV." That would have been on May 26th, 2025, which would have been Callan's third birthday. Do you have any reason to doubt that in the record?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And on September 30th, 2025 of the Tewksbury record on page 2,056, reads, “Patient was visible in the hallway using her phone.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: No SIB or behavioral issues observed or reported.” Do you have any doubt—do you have reason to doubt that that is an accurate read of page 2,056?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And that would have been September 30th, which would have been Dawson's sixth birthday, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And on December 24th of 2025, page 76 of the patient notes in the Tewksbury Hospital records reads, “Ate breakfast, refused lunch, took snacks, utilizing phone, assisted with ADLs, spent some time in the TV room, attended PT, resting in bed after lunch.” Do you have any reason to doubt that is contained within the Tewksbury records on page seventy-six?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And December 24th would've been Cora's eighth birthday, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And on page one hundred and fifty-two of the Tewksbury records, January 24th, 2026, this year.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Patient observed her safety,

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Assess mental status, encourage safe behavior control, monitoring for abrupt behavior change and attempt to prevent escalation or self-harm, encourage patient to participate in groups. That in, on this particular day, she was also observed, compliant with meds, ate breakfast, participated in coffee group, visible in the hallway utilizing her phone, later visited with parents, and had a early lunch. That was on January 24th of 2026. Do you have any reason to doubt that's within the records?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And that she was later observed to not have any SIB or behavioral issues, again, on January 24th, 2026. Do you have any reason to doubt that's contained within the Tewksbury records?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And again, you reviewed or looked at some of them, but not every one of these, but these are already currently in evidence, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Your Honor, I would move to admit these excerpts as the next exhibit, please.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And, Dr. Zeizel, as far as the records that I just read in, do you know if in those records it indicates that she slept well on all of those occasions?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But you would agree that noting her sleeping habits based on this particular individual's history would be important thing for the hospital to monitor, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Now, in this particular case... Well, let me ask you, are you familiar with the concept of confirmation bias?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And fair to say it's pretty prevalent in most areas of science and forensic psychology and psychiatry, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And as far as confirmation bias for psychiatry or providers, fair to say that clinicians are warned that they may lean towards or support their own theories and overlook contradictory evidence, and that you have to be aware of that, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And again, in forensic psychology, the goal is to give, render an objective opinion, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. And there's a danger for clinicians and forensic psychologists of quickly forming an initial diagnosis before having all the information, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And that confirmation bias accounts for the fact that a lot of times people, clinicians, and providers will cling to diagnoses and interpret subsequent information in light of that kind of already perceived idea. Is that fair to say?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well, once a diagnosis is reached, they cling to that diagnosis when interpreting subsequent information.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And, but you would agree that in practice of forensic psychology, that it's important not to do that, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: A diagnosis are helpful in understanding whether the person was suffering from this legal construct of a mental disease or defect, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And it's fairly accepted in the field that if somebody has a disorder or a diagnosed mental illness, that they then in turn suffer from a mental disease or defect.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Or could.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you're aware of the danger of this idea of confirmation bias of having multiple relationships and conflicts in this type of work, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And that's why it's important not to be treating somebody as a patient when you're also evaluating them for this type of legal issue, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Do you recall in this case submitting recommendations to the court in November of 2025 about the defendant regarding accommodations for her?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But you, you wrote, you authored and signed a letter dated November 13th, 2025 to the court, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: I'm not asking you that. I'm just asking if you wrote the letter.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: I'm asking if you wrote the letter, sir.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And in that letter, you refer to providing essential clinical findings regarding the transportation of "my patient, Lindsay Clancy." Do you recall writing that?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And so at various points throughout, over the years of this case, you have referred to her as your patient, have you not?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well, you referred to the court outside of this evaluation you're testifying about to her as your patient in this letter from November 13th of 2025.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But you call her "my patient" in the letter.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Mm-hmm.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. And you're aware of, again, the APA guidelines on forensic psychology, where it warns, "Therapeutic forensic role conflicts. Providing forensic and therapeutic psychological services to the same individual involves multiple relationships that may impair objectivity and/or cause exploitation or other harm." You're aware of that Section four point zero two?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And in this particular case, since the beginning, you've appeared regularly in court hearings, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: You've appeared with Attorney Reddington at arraignment proceedings.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Both here and at Tewksbury State Hospital, where you were sitting next to the defendant.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you also, on February 8th of 2023, participated in a news conference, did you not?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: It was outside the courthouse here.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you gave an interview with the Daily News, where you commented on Ms. Clancy.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And at this time, Your Honor, I'd like to play a clip of the news conference, please.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So sir, on December 8th of 2023, when you provided that, your observations, you had met with the defendant on two occasions, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. Had you all—had you any of the records that have been presented in the course of this trial?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Any of the records that are listed in your sources of information?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And as you sit here and testify today, you've testified to the same conclusions, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But as you sat here today, you've talked about the fact that people... that she had delusional thinking, the fact that she had command hallucinations, the fact that she believed that, these voices, and that she was paranoid and worried. You've consistently testified about that throughout the course of yesterday and today, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: It's a yes or no.

MS. BUCKINGHAM: In addition to... Well, you testified today that a person in a psychotic state can do things they've done before, but it might be hard for them to do new tasks, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: So if it's something that is part of their daily life, getting up, caring for the kids, feeding, making a meal, driving a car. Those are things that people do every day, and a lot of times don't even have to think about, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: You're aware that on this particular day of this incident on January 24th of 2023, that the defendant took Cora to the doctor's, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And you indicated in your testimony today that it was for a regular checkup. But in your report, you identify that it was for a stomach ache, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: But in addition to maybe her having a stomach ache, she had previously had this visit scheduled, and you're aware of that now, correct?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And at the doctor there was a recommendation made for an over-the-counter medication, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And the defendant was able to process that information, take it back with her, and then later, not immediately after the visit, but later in the day, search for where to get that medication, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Well, that wasn't my question. My question was did she do those things?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: Okay. And would you... You've talked a lot about that a person can operate as normally as they can. But fair to say, if you're in a psychotic state, that person themselves has a significant amount of distress, right?

MS. BUCKINGHAM: And that in order to mask those symptoms, it requires an enormous amount of control, does it not?