2.Closing Argument — Defense
40 linesMR. REDDINGTON: Jurors, about five weeks ago that we met like this, and I indicated to you that thank you for incredible service. That, all of us mean that sincerely. You took, literally, more than a month out of your lives and sat here, incredibly incredible, through some of the toughest, most gut-wrenching things that any person can be subjected to. And I think I indicated that sadly, jurors carry this burden with them for years. And the service that you have performed, I have never seen before. You have listened to evidence. You have been fair. You have been objective. You've listened to the judge's instructions, and you've carried them into your heart, consistent with your oath, which is a very, very solemn oath passed between government and Lindsay, who has placed herself on her country, which country you are, as a jury of her peers. When you consider what's at stake here in the sense of what we've been dealing with,
MR. REDDINGTON: Cora,
MR. REDDINGTON: Dawson, Callan.
MR. REDDINGTON: She knows loss. And that's why we think Cora, Dawson, Callan, for a minute.
MR. REDDINGTON: They are the victims of this case. They are the victims of the horrible, horrific act that has been laid at your feet as jurors to decide whether or not Lindsay is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, as His Honor instructed you and will instruct you, what that means, that standard of proof that we as citizens in this country are so blessed to have, proof beyond a reasonable doubt before the government charges any citizen with a crime. I don't care how many cops you have in here, how many DAs are sitting here, how many people are sitting in the front row, and they're all gonna sit there and be proud of this prosecution. I told you in the opening statement that this is a prosecution that has ripped the soul out of this girl. This is what they had. This is their family.
MR. REDDINGTON: How does
MR. REDDINGTON: this
MR. REDDINGTON: turn into this? How? Because of the damn medicine and the lousy medical care that she got. You can troop as many paid experts as you want to come in here and tell a jury, "Oh, well, she didn't say that she heard voices inside her head. She said she heard voices from outside her head. She said she was making Chicken McNuggets. There was a bowl on the sofa. She wasn't making Chicken McNuggets. She said something." As I think and I muse, and I try real hard to tell you what my opinion is, that this woman was acting in her right mind when these children were killed.
MR. REDDINGTON: So when you consider the evidence in this case, you consider the person who is in front of you, who is the defendant, as the government refers to her. And as His Honor would likely tell you, even though a person is a defendant in our system of justice, you don't have to defend against anything.
MR. REDDINGTON: The government has the burden of proof. When the DA decides to charge someone with a crime, he has the burden of proof. His assistants have the burden of proof. To prove, number one, that Lindsay is guilty of this offense beyond a reasonable doubt, and then prove, number two, that Lindsay, at the time, killed her children, was not suffering from a mental disease or defect that caused her to have a lack of substantial capacity to appreciate, to know, to realize that what was being done while she was in a psychosis. But we'll laugh about that. It's just, just another woman, I guess, that's just gonna make an excuse. She's depressed. GAD, general anxiety, give her a couple of pills, she'll be all right. You know from looking at the objective evidence in this case, this young lady... Believe me, I don't have many clients like that. This young lady—
MR. REDDINGTON: Did nothing wrong in her life. She was a nurse, a daughter, a wife, and a darn good mother. You can see from the objective evidence, you can see, and you'll have all the exhibits for you to look at, and you can see by looking at these photographs, which you will have in the jury room, you can see the Facebook postings. You can see what she indicates about, for example, I just randomly grabbed this one, a son, my prince, that they would have you think she killed him first cruelly because she didn't like him. That is repulsive.
MR. REDDINGTON: So she's living her life with Pat, her kids, having a great time that summer. Life is good. She had to go back to work. In an opening statement, I told you, I said, "Watch the evidence. Watch the manipulation," because that's what this case was built upon originally, and how it developed as the case progressed until it's in front of you. And how does that happen? Well, in the very beginning, going all the way back to when the first 911 call that you had to suffer through was made. You could hear in the voice, Pat Clancy, the horror, what he had obviously experienced. You can see from the evidence that's before you, the injuries that she suffered. You will have in the jury room the exhibits that indicated the extent of the injuries from, I don't have to go through all of them, the extent of the injuries to slitting her throat, to slashing her wrists, throwing herself out a window, blood all over the bedroom floor, window open, screen slashed. Oh, no, the screen wasn't slashed. My bad. That's what she thought. It's called a delusion. She was in a psychosis when she thought that. Probably right here, sitting here, believes that she slashed the screen. She didn't. Subjective evidence. And why did we spend almost a week showing you the extent and the severity of that suicide attempt?
MR. REDDINGTON: The reason that we had to do that is because they were arguing that it was a fake suicide. Dinky little cuts. No bleeding. She didn't mean to kill herself. She's gonna throw herself out the window, I guess, and slide down the house. Remember that one hanging off of the window? Sliding down the house and Lindsay screwed up, and she hurt herself bad. You know that's not what happened. You know that she made, the testimony of Dr. Velkovich, that she made a very, very significant suicide effort, slashing her wrists, slitting her throat. And isn't it interesting when you consider objective evidence? Googling slitting a throat. Googling suicide. Googling drugs. Googling side effects. Googling ketamine treatments. Googling all of these drugs. Googling the effects of tough medications, lorazepam, sertraline, hydroxyzine, lorazepam, buspirone, lorazepam, buspirone, trazodone, fluoxetine, zolpidem, mirtazapine, clonazepam, quetiapine, diazepam, diazepam, quetiapine.
It goes on, and on, and on, and on, and on. We have the chat, and we have the prescriptions to see. And obviously she wasn't consuming all of these at the same time, because one thing this kid did was try to do what she was supposed to do. She took the drugs as she was told to take them. She was religious in her obligations to take care of her health. She went to Dr. Tufts when she was a young lady, living in her house with her husband and her babies. Respected nurse, wife, friend, mother. Should have kept drinking, huh? That was a big deal, wasn't it? Remember that? We're just gonna assassinate this young lady in every which way we can. Remember that evidence? I was concerned she was drinking, five drinks a day. She was worried about... You heard the evidence. The evidence. Up to 2019. What are you talking about? She wasn't drinking while she had her kids. She wasn't drinking while she's breastfeeding. She would have a couple of beers with her friends. That's bad. We'll put that over in the bad pile. Right here. We spent all that time showing through Dr. Laposata's testimony that this was a legitimate, dreadful, horrific suicide attempt. You think about this beautiful young girl throwing herself out a window. That's a quarter. I don't know if you ever played pool. I challenge you to tell this jury why we spent a week showing that she committed-
THE COURT: Counsel.
MR. REDDINGTON: ... as your witness-
THE COURT: Counsel, address the jury, please.
MR. REDDINGTON: ... said. They're witnesses. Serious suicide attempt. Remember that?
MR. REDDINGTON: Tried to kill herself. So now they'll back off on that and they'll agree: a serious suicide attempt. That's why I say watch the evidence. Watch the manipulation. Remember
MR. REDDINGTON: the argument with the bands. She took the bands out of the bag, put the gloves on, talks to Dr. Laposata on the Zoom. Slams the bands down out of the paper bag. Does the movement of the bands and yells at Laposata and says, "Wrapped." They were just wrapped. They weren't knotted. Because you gotta get Lindsay tightening the band, right? You gotta hold it. You gotta hold it for a minute, you gotta hold it for two minutes, three minutes, four minutes. That's why she needed the bands knotted. And then she said, "It's like this," and they sprang open. Remember that? Dr. Laposata said, "Yeah, I saw what you did." And she walked away like if the glove won't fit moment.
MR. REDDINGTON: Quarter number two. What did Patrick Clancy testify to? You heard his testimony. He indicated clearly, unequivocally, they were knotted around the necks of those children to the point where he had to struggle. And it's your memory, not mine. If I say something you don't recall, forget it. It's what you remember the evidence to be. But clearly I would suggest he struggled to get it off of Dawson's, off his head. And a police officer saw through the window. This is horrific stuff, but it's objective and it shows the manipulation. This government, this prosecution is a mess. They would take their evidence and argue to you that she did not tie a knot and walk away because, as Dr. Laposata said, you're talking about four, five seconds 'til somebody passes out. No, they gotta have the four minutes, and that's not what the evidence shows, is it? So as we move on, Lindsay's in the hospital, and this whole thing about conversations and she's talking to people and the kids are in the basement. Her throat was crushed. You heard the 911 tape. You draw the inference whether or not there's a conversation about where the children are. Tried to kill myself, the kids are in the basement. All that, you determine whether or not that was something that could be discerned. In the police investigation, because as His Honor indicates, you know, there are two, there are two things here. Number one, proof beyond a reasonable doubt that she's guilty, and number two, proof beyond a reasonable doubt that she was not suffering from a disease or defect, as His Honor instructed you, at the time of these killings. Those are the two things they have to prove. And when the police charge somebody with a criminal offense, they have an obligation to investigate.
MR. REDDINGTON: And at the end of the day, when you're talking about, "Well, we've got the charges are before the court," you can sit there in the court and you can feel proud of yourself. Did you do a good investigation? Do you even know what this ... You'll see the photograph of the cup and the powder. What is it? What is ... They don't even analyze— Do they take pictures? Did they test the blood? Did they ... Lousy investigation in this case. Well, that's okay because she was guilty, and they put her in the hospital, and she's the evil woman that killed the three innocent kids, and they're gonna stand there while she's chained to the bed, paralyzed. You heard testimony from Dr. Zeizel. They weren't little fluffy cuffs that were securing her to the bed. They were handcuffs. Not the medical treatment. Medical treatment would be, you know, like restraints, so you don't do whatever, pull lines out and things.
We're talking about when the big men were in there with their guns and their badges and they're sitting outside the door, and they're gonna make sure that Lindsay Clancy, paralyzed, chained to the bed, doesn't get up and run away from the hospital, I guess, and they just have to suffer their way through. "Hmm, I guess I worked, I don't know. I worked eight hours. I had another shift I had to work that night." This is the treatment. And what's important about that is what kind of treatment did this young lady get from the healthcare providers? You remember Meg Collins? She came in this court. Well, Meg, you might remember. Tall woman, short blonde hair, squared away. Unbelievable. Unbelievable. She was not only a nurse taking care of her in the hospital, she advocated for her. She stood up for her patient. She protected her.
During the pandemic, you know that Meg Collins was in that emergency room when half of us were hiding at home behind our computers, hoping that we're not gonna die in a week, drinking our chardonnay at 11:00 in the morning. Meg Collins was in a hospital treating people and advocating for them. That's an example of what nursing is all about. Not having attitude, not treating somebody like they're to be disdained. And what's even worse, she comes out of a coma. She is intubated. She has had major, major surgery of her broken, crushed spine, vertebrae, ribs, thyroid. Massive, massive, not my words, medical records, massive testimony. Blood transfusion for the blood loss. And when someone, you've heard evidence, comes out of surgery, they are delusional. You've had anesthesia. You've had a ... Think about having a tooth pulled.
MR. REDDINGTON: Think about the trauma that somebody has when they're in a hospital bed laying there paralyzed, unable to feel the lower half of their body, but able to feel, with the meds and the pain medication and everything else, the damage to the spine. And then the hospital has a meeting. Remember the other doctor, I think it was Dr. Shah? An Indian woman. Wicked impressive. She was amazing.
MR. REDDINGTON: She had the facts. She was able to tell you exactly what she observed. She was able to tell you what they were doing to treat Lindsay. She treated her like a human being. She was a damn good doctor. Came in here and told you all of her observations about her and told you one of the things that ultimately that they were concerned about is they had to have this big confabulation about, “We're gonna take her off the—” You know, what is it? “The healthcare process.” They had to have lawyers. They had to have people there. They had to have her signing documents. They had to determine whether or not she was gonna be signing something to have her parents take over because Pat was not gonna be responsible for her care. Lawyers, cops, handcuffs. “Do I need a lawyer?” Write that down. Where are you? You're out there somewhere. Write that down. Why is she wanted a lawyer? That's a bad thing. Must be guilty. Let's put that in the guilty pile. That's why she said that in a delirious state, dealing with all of these people about that issue. But what's even more nefarious, if you think about it, as I said, your eye on the ball because of the manipulation. Paul Zeizel, big deal. I'm friends with the guy. You heard evidence that I called him. I was with Pat a night or two after this incident in the bedroom with all the blood. I was with Pat taking evidence that the police didn't even see in their thorough investigation, and I was able, as you know now certainly, to grab this. Why wouldn't the police have grabbed this?
MR. REDDINGTON: They're all empty. You can see when they were prescribed. You can see what they are. You can see what she took. You heard the testimony. It's tough to take a handful of pills. Remember the guy saying that yesterday? “Tough to take a handful of pills.” Well, no, they were crushed. Oh, shit, they were crushed. Okay. Where's the residue? Where's the crusher? Where's anything? Doesn't matter. Doesn't matter. Great investigation, guys. So you have a situation where they leave this behind. They don't even look at. One, one of them, and again, young memory don't worry, one of them testifies, “Well, they might have looked at it and saw it and just didn't seize it.” Seriously?
MR. REDDINGTON: They go down to the kitchen, they seized every pill bottle that was in the cabinet along with the books. And speaking of books, one of the things that they found: smoking gun. Good Moms Have Scary Thoughts. Hallelujah. Put that in the guilty pile. We're gonna put this in a plastic bag. We're gonna show it to a jury so they know that this young lady had scary thoughts. Turns out that Gelati gave it to her.
MR. REDDINGTON: So you have this evidence. You have evidence of sleep aids. You have evidence in the bag, 'cause obviously this stuff was just thrown in there. It wasn't in a bag when it was—when I saw it inside this thing here and we seized it, and we held it for three and a half years. Anybody care about it? No. You heard evidence that police knew that I had it. They could have it. They could look at it. They could analyze it, do whatever they wanted to. They didn't have to. This here, you've heard evidence. This is a little wish jar that they bought on their honeymoon in Hawaii many years prior to even having kids. And when you look inside it, you see that there's all sorts of little folded up pieces of paper. Some of them are dated, some of them aren't. They go all the way back to 2017, 2018, '20. And they reference her wishes to have healthy kids, her wishes for her kids to be successful, her wishes to have a good birth. Second time around, hoping for a good birth. Worrying about the child with the—about the—I forget where they rub the thing there.
MR. REDDINGTON: This woman lived for her kids until she had the pleasure running into Dr. Tufts of her two months experience. And after she ran into Dr. Tufts, it was not a wonderful life anymore. And what did Dr. Tufts do? And everybody laughs at me. I said the television. Okay, I know it's a telemedical thing on your telephone or on a Zoom.
MR. REDDINGTON: Take more pills. You have the medical records. You heard the testimony. You know her concerns. You know her fears. Does this seem like a young lady that didn't care and wanted to score more drugs off somebody? That's another repulsive allegation. I think the evidence is pretty clear there's no basis for that at all. She was scared. September into October of '22. Young, vibrant, hardworking. You've heard all this, not my words, witnesses' words. Holding goals for herself. Hardworking nurse, hardworking mother, would take the kids to the Kingsbury Club. That's another thing. Sounds pretty snooty, doesn't it? Oh, they're at the Kingsbury Club. It's a swimming pool and a place where you can exercise.
MR. REDDINGTON: Watch the manipulation, because now you've got a situation where you've got manipulation with the Kingsbury Club, you've got manipulation with these other items here, and you've also got manipulation of—Paul Zeizel told Lindsay what to say. Say that you're hearing voices. Think about how ugly that is, because you know beyond a reasonable doubt, even though we don't have any proof, you have no burden. You heard from Sheila. Remember Sheila? The woman that's, you know, the reverend or whatever, she's the chaplain at the Brigham and Women's Hospital. She didn't know Lindsay from anybody that night when she came in all broken up. And she told you that she continued. She was there when Lindsay came out of—was extubated. She was there when Lindsay was going through her treatments. She was there for eight days before Paul Zeizel even knew Lindsay existed.
But they would be in here telling you that Lindsay saw the psychologist because the lawyer went and got the psychologist to go and speak to her. And then you have these guys here, the cops. They're having meetings, talking about it. They're talking about it. Must have been the shrink. Must have been the psychologist. Must have been Zeizel. He's the guy that told her what to say, and he did not. How can you ruin a man's reputation with the career that he has had and still has, thankfully, to put him in a position where he tells a broken young woman who is vilified by her society for killing her three children, that he goes in the hospital and tells her to say she heard voices? Disgusting. So now you know that she told Sheila first that she heard voices. Command hallucinations. She didn't say command halluc—“I heard voices. It was a male voice. Told me.” You had these other guys that came in, the government's rebuttal witnesses, very, very impressive. Very, very impressive.
The first two, Mack, we're gonna say. You've got the other doctor as well. So Mack is—why he was freaked out when I asked him where he stayed, and the other guy looked at me like his eyes were bugging, why did I ask where he stayed? Whatever. Point is, they don't see her for years. Years. And why? The guy, the other guy, he, Halbron, I think it was Halbron, he had to wait until they pro... Maybe it was the last name. I forget. They had to process his payment from the DA's office through the school. Who cares? If you have an obligation to try and be objective, to try and even look as though you're competent and objective, why would you wait for so long? Why would you go with another guy? Why would you take this young lady and have her in a room and question her one right after the other?
MR. REDDINGTON: Wouldn't you like to sit there and be questioned by Dr. Mack? Boy, that'd be an experience. For three hours, four hours, and the other guy's gonna pepper his questions at her as well between that period, and the next day she can take tests, and then go back at it again with Mack and with Halbron. And she was cooperative. She was pleasant. She was friendly. She answered the questions, and she owned what she did, huh? She never ran from anything. She's gone through evaluation after evaluation after evaluation, recorded. You have the video to look at as they're questioning her, as she's sitting there in her wheelchair hour after hour after hour, three years after this incident, but that's okay. They're busy. Paul Zeizel was there literally in Brigham and Women's because I called him, because I was asked to represent this young lady. You've heard evidence. I saw her in the hospital. I saw her laying in the bed broken. I saw her laying in the bed practically dead. I reached out to Dr.
Zeizel, and I asked him, "Please, can you talk to this woman?" Concern, as he testified, for her mental well-being. What kind of demons, what kind of horror was in her mind as she lay there paralyzed and hurting and medicated, swollen, tubes, cops, chains? He went and talked to her. Big deal. I asked him to go. You judge the credibility of a person. Did Paul Zeizel have the ring of truth when he told you that he's there out of humane feeling to try to help this young lady, and he's been by her side for three and a half years? Same thing with Sheila. Why would Sheila, for all this time, visit with Lindsay, as she testified, at the Tewksbury Hospital? She's not getting paid. She's not a hired gun. She's not somebody that's coming in to say something at my request. She loves—she loves Lindsay. He's a good kid. He's a beautiful soul. So you have Zeizel that has been with her all that time. You've got Sheila who's been with her all that time.
You've got evidence that her mom and dad, who live in Connecticut, come up, and they stay, and they visit with her, and that they sit with her, and God forbid they actually sometimes had dinner. Remember that? They got the Tewksbury records. Boy, there's a good score. Let's go through the Tewksbury records and see what she's doing on the anniversary of the deaths. How about on their birthdays? Can you see them sitting there going through the medical records? "Okay, Doctor, what did she do then?" She propelled herself down the hallway, met with her parents, laughed, had dinner, watched TV, talked on the telephone. God forbid. She's not curled up in the fetal position, wailing, self-flagellating constantly.
MR. REDDINGTON: The three and a half years she's acting like a human being trying to exist, but they go through the records, and they want to get those dates and use them against her. Manipulation. And then you consider we're three weeks away from a trial. The guy yesterday that's looking up to the heavens while he's testifying, Cesar, tells you that he wanted to establish a rapport. Can you imagine? You know that you're three weeks away from your murder trial, and you know that this is doctor number three who's been hired by the government to come in and evaluate you and testify against you, and he's gonna establish a rapport. There is no rapport, but yet she was cooperative. She was friendly. Interestingly enough, just like the treating doctors don't talk to each other, they don't communicate with each other. They don't have access to medical records. She signs the HIPAA forms. They don't know what her records are, but they know for sure what Dr. Resnick had in his report.
They know for sure what Dr. Zeizel had in his report. They know for sure what Meg Spinelli had in her report, and they incorporate that into their report. But then you have the MMPI and the other psychological tests that were administered to her on the second day of the Mack/Hilebrand team interviewing, interrogating, questioning her. She passes the MMPI. Testimony is presented. She answered the MMPI honestly, and they're pertaining to state of mind. They're pertaining to questions about what occurred. They're questioning this young lady as to what her state of mind was then, in the middle, and now, and she didn't lie. She didn't malinger. She didn't exaggerate, and more importantly, if anything, she minimizes. But she certainly was off the chart on the suicide scale. And then you have testimony from Dr. Resnick, Dr. Zeizel, Dr. Carney, and they were paid for their testimony. We're all paid, like I said, not the jury so much, but the judge, myself, Chrissy, everybody gets paid.
These doctors came in and testified. Phil Resnick, the man is something out of a scary movie. He has the world record of investigating, examining, and treating people in psychosis that kill their children. Filicide. He has a world-renowned record for checking fakers to see if a person is malingering. Their doctor agreed that his article on voices is a leading article with research in the world. Their doctor agreed that he, Phil Resnick, is an expert on malingering. You heard him testify by Zoom because he had surgery. But he showed up by Zoom and testified that again, four months after this incident, he met with Lindsay, he evaluated Lindsay, compared, looked at all the records just like all the rest of them. Everyone says they looked at all the records, the police reports, grand jury minutes, everything else.
MR. REDDINGTON: He indicates clearly in his opinion that she was in a state of psychosis at the time of this death, James III. Has any of the government doctors rebutted that? One of them, Hilebrand, said it's possible either way. That's not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The other one, Mack, you can accept his testimony if you wish, but I suggest that you probably won't. And then you're left with the doctor yesterday, who didn't even know. She didn't even know what killing during the course of a psychosis was, and when I was questioning him about it, he agreed. And I said, "Don't just agree with me. Are you just agreeing with me because I said that?" And he basically said, "Yeah." What kind of expert testimony is this? It's a mess. But the government uses them to try to rebut a man like Phil Resnick, who tells you that she was suffering from a horrific mental disease and defect at the time of the killing of her beautiful children. Why?
The how and the fact that under the law, as His Honor has given you, she's not criminally responsible, and the burden is on them right here. Prove to you that at the time of the killing, as Dr. Resnick says, that she was suffering from a disease, a defect. As Dr. Zeizel said, that she was suffering from a disease, a defect. As Dr. Carney said, she was suffering from a disease, a defect. And Carney took you down the road of all of these medications as a psychopharmacologist, as a doctor that specializes in prescription medications. And you got the evidence, so you're able to look at that and determine, see what the side effects are, what she was complaining of, and look at her records. I mean, they have really turned her inside out. I mean, they've got every single text, every single email, every single picture, everything that she did in college. Oh, that's another thing. She lied according to the guy yesterday that testified. She lied to Pat about being on Prozac.
They were dating for three months. She's living in Boston. She meets this kid. She thinks that she might like him, and they're dating. "Oh, excuse me, before you go out with me, let me tell you that about a year ago, when I was studying for my exams, because I'm nervous about talking in public, I get on Prozac." Seriously? That's what the government is arguing in this case. You're gonna have this journal, which talks about her being... This is how controlling she was. Manipulation. In the opening statement, you may recall that the district attorney said that she was a hard-charging, manipulating woman that was controlling, and everything in their life was controlled, and she ran it, to the water, to the carrots, to the beets.
MR. REDDINGTON: You look in this book, and as you might recall, Ms. Rossi testified when asked, "Did you feel that she was being controlling of you?" Because she says, for example, Monday, ten twenty-four—Callan put down for a nap. Hopefully will nap for two hours. If he wakes shortly, let him resettle himself. Bottle when he wakes up. Then it goes on and on. Make salad, romaine lettuce. He likes peppers, broccoli. Cut the sweet potatoes in chunks. Thank you, with a heart.
MR. REDDINGTON: Another good score. You look at her journals that she took. You'll see as you go along, and the dates that she's recording in these journals, she's talking about the drugs that she was prescribed. And look at the first page. Look at how detailed. Dates, how she felt, 10 milligrams Prozac, and it goes on like that. Goes on through November into December. December, December 9th, 10th, 11th, horrible intrusive thoughts. Horrible thoughts in the AM. Horrible thoughts. Horrible thoughts. No motivation. And then finally, horrible thoughts, no motivation, deeply depressed. Then that's around the time she went to Women and Infants Hospital, right? Looking for help. Look at this. As she runs into January,
MR. REDDINGTON: There's nothing other than little chicken scratches because her mind was gone. In January, as she's on these drugs and she's suffering from what you've heard is postpartum depression that can lead to postpartum psychosis, and you have these men coming in here that don't even know psychosis from schizophrenia as experts, telling you that if a woman doesn't have these symptoms, like it's a disease, of symptoms of postpartum depression within four weeks, that's it. Lights out. You're not a person that can be considered. You're not a real person for purposes of postpartum depression and/or postpartum psychosis. Well, I suggest that he's wrong. I suggest the second guy's wrong, and the third guy... Well, actually, I didn't even know it's your memory if the gentleman, Mack, even knew. I think he said four weeks. It can go up to a year or longer. But we don't really know because you heard the evidence. There's no evidence. There's nothing in the DSM, but that's the Bible. God forbid you should go to Europe. You should look at the World Health Organization records. You should look at the way they treat pregnant women that have problems with their children. No, we're the most advanced country in the world, but we still have doctors that come in court on a murder trial and talk about four-week cutoff on something that they don't even know exists. They've never treated it. They've never written about it. You have terrorism experts. You have an expert that comes in and talks about his focus and his interests, and it's about juveniles and drugs and, like I said, kids that like to drink and smoke weed.
MR. REDDINGTON: Those are the experts, quote, unquote, to support their burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Lindsay was not suffering from a disease or defect at the time she killed her children.
MR. REDDINGTON: You all remember this. October. This is not in evidence. It's my prior identifications to Bailey myself. But basically, it shows clearly and unequivocally the depths of despair that this young kid was in, trying to raise three kids, trying to be a wife, ready to go back to work. Did anyone say that she was just lazy and just didn't wanna go back to work? That's manipulation. They're arguing, "She didn't wanna go back to work." She didn't wanna go back to work because she didn't wanna leave her kids, especially Callan, because she loved her children. They were her life. Manipulation. And when you consider the journals... I don't know if you ever watched the movie The Shining with Jack Nicholson. Remember the scene when he's sitting there in a state of complete psychosis and he's writing a book and he's typing, and the wife finds the book and opens it up and looks at it and it says, "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy," repeated after repeated after repeated. And he says, "Do you like it?" You look at the records of her Googling drugs. You look at how many times, how many hours of the night, in the afternoon she's looking this stuff up in between taking care of the family, in between all of the stuff that was going on with visiting doctors, seeing doctors, going to Rhode Island, being told, "No, we can't help you," calling a suicide hotline, "We can't help you," calling another suicide hotline, "We can't help you." My God, what does she have to do? She was reaching out for help, and she was not getting it. She turns herself in to McLean Hospital. You saw the doctor, nice woman. She's testifying. She didn't know. I suggest to you that she didn't know hardly anything, let alone psychosis involving a young lady like her going through what she was going through.
MR. REDDINGTON: The government bears the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. They bring, for example, Ian Whiffin, the guy, you might remember him, was the guy that's, I guess he developed or helped develop Cellebrite. What you get when you look at the records, you don't measure on an Apple Watch... Well, I shouldn't say Apple Watch 'cause we know that they didn't have the Apple Watch, but on a cell phone. You don't measure—going down the stairs. You measure stair climbing, right? That's what the testimony was. And there were three stairs that were climbed. Okay. The last record is 5:38. At 5:38 PM, we went through that on cross, what happens to the phone? Don't know.
MR. REDDINGTON: It was on the bed. Was it dropped on the bed and left there for 20 minutes? She could have been anywhere in the house during all that period of time, right? Right. You've got a compressed period of time that Patrick leaves to go to the restaurant to pick up the CV, and oh, you heard the guy yesterday say, "And then she sent him off to go to CVS." It's on the way. It's on the way to... She didn't want him out of the house long. She was in distress. She wanted him home to help with the baby, to help with the kids, to help putting them to bed. How long is he gonna be gone? She Googles it. Is that something that is so nefarious? You'd think that that goes right along the line with the book about good mothers having bad thoughts. My God, she actually Googled the timeframe that Patrick would take to go to 3B and pick up the food and then lea- and stop at CVS on the way.
So I guess the government is suggesting she's not in a psychosis, so she's Googling MiraLAX because the doctor earlier that day told her that the baby needed, Cora needed MiraLAX. Why would she do that? Because remember the government's opening when they told you she wasn't suffering from a psychosis. She was a woman that didn't wanna live her life anymore. Wasn't happy being a mother. Didn't wanna live that life. So she's gonna kill her kids and hopefully throw herself out the window and not paralyze herself, and then she could run off into the sunset, I guess. That's what their theory was. Along with the fact it wasn't a real good suicide, it was fake. Well, now we know, don't we? The mess that this young lady was in, in her brain, "My brain is being damaged. I will never be better." That's the evidence. That's the evidence that you have in this case.
Burden of proof is on them to prove to you that at the time that she killed these three beautiful kids, that she just wanted to move on with her life. And I suggest to you, just as there's no chicken nugget residue, and then when you look at those photographs, there's a slice of a cucumber, there's a slice of a carrot. There's no chicken nuggets in that bowl. Patrick wouldn't know what the kids were eating. She was the one that would cook their dinner. She was in the refrigerator, but the guy yesterday is like, "Oh, no. Patrick said that the kid, the child was eating the chicken McNuggets in the bowl." No. She was getting food out for the two kids, not the little baby. The two kids for dinner. There's no evidence that she's lying. There's no evidence that she's malingering.
MR. REDDINGTON: And finally, you remember there was a big deal about whether or not the voices are within the head or whether or not they're outside of the head. Dr. Resnick's article with the largest research on voices and malingering in the world indicates that 38% of almost 1,000 people that were examined report voices from inside their head. And it stops. You're gonna buy that guy yesterday? He doesn't know what he's talking about. This young lady is not guilty of the killing of her children 'cause she was suffering from a disease and defect, as His Honor instructed you. And they're not gonna be able to prove otherwise, and it's their burden, not ours. Thank you.