379. The Lindsay Clancy Trial Part 7

The moment a body is found, the clock starts ticking, 48 hours before the trail goes cold. From A&E and Crime House, this is the official podcast from the famous true crime series, The First 48. I'm Carter Roy. Every Thursday, I revisit a landmark homicide investigation in depth, with long-form storytelling built for your ears. Listen to and follow The First 48 on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, or wherever you listen to podcasts. I'm Brett. And I'm Alice. And we are The Prosecutors. Today, on The Prosecutors, things get fiery in the Lindsay Clancy case. The Prosecutors. Hello, everybody, and welcome to this episode of The Prosecutors. I'm Brett, and I'm joined, as always, by my cross co-host, Alice. I'm really cross. Do you notice just how calm my voice is right now, Brett? You're so calm. Because you know that I am very cross. What a British way of saying how angry I am. I'm very cross. I'm so intensely cross right now, because, of course, we told you guys over the weekend, get ready, watch the doctor who treated Lindsay Clancy, Jennifer Tufts, direct testimony, because it was going to be a fiery cross-examination today. And it was. Fiery doesn't capture everything we want to say. This is how calm I get right before I yell at my kids. You're so calm. I'm so calm right now, because some of you told me last time that I get a little bit too loud when I get excited. I don't know what you're talking about. I, an excitable person, never. Certainly not about the law. Certainly not about murder trials. The machine just goes all the way to the red when Alice starts talking. It actually really does. I watched it, and I was like, oh, better turn that down. So, yeah, I am a bit cross for so many reasons. So many reasons that I'm sure we'll dive into, Brett. But I'll leave it at that. Why'd you say my name like that? Is that a teaser or what? That was a teaser. Okay. So before we get into the actual substance and the cross, I have a few things to say as well. I want to apologize for my naivete when it comes to this case, because I was very hopeful that out of all the tragedy in this case, that it nevertheless would shine a light on mental health, shine a light on the deficiencies in women's mental health in particular, maybe lead to some positive things, maybe enlighten people about all that. And today that hope was just dashed. And I realize how foolish that hope was now, because the defense. His job is not to accurately represent the mental health system. His job is to advocate for his client. And one way you can do that is to confuse the jury, to make them believe certain things that aren't true. That's his job. I thought he did a really good job of that today at times. But the problem is so many of the things that he spent time mocking are things that are actually incredibly helpful for people out there who are suffering from mental health issues. And so, before we even get into it, there's just a few things I want to say. I was going to try and wax poetic about this, but as always, you guys are much better at this than me. So I want to read to you a comment on the gallery that I think sums this up and is really good message to those of you out there who may be struggling with these things and may have watched this today and may now have all sorts of concerns about various drugs that you thought might be helpful and how your doctor's treating you and everything else. I just want to read this. I'm not going to say the name, even though it's public, just because. Just because they're saying it on the gallery doesn't mean they want all of you to see their name. So here's what they say. I just want to share some words of encouragement based on what I've seen Ray the Cross of Dr. Tuss today. For anyone who finds themselves in the same trial and error phase of psychiatric medications that LC unfortunately was going through, trial and error is unfortunately how psychiatry works. Please don't give up and don't let this case deter you from pursuing medications as a possible mental health management tool if you need them. Everyone is different. And just because Lindsay may have had a negative experience with certain medications doesn't mean that you will too. I promise sticking with it and trusting the process can absolutely be worth it. It took six years for my psychiatrist, who is absolutely phenomenal, to find the right medications plus dosages that work for me. It was a long and difficult journey, but it was absolutely worth it. My medications have fundamentally changed my life for the better and enabled me to be functional and truly happy member of society. I can say with confidence, trusting and working in lockstep with my psychiatrist to find the right medication for me. I'm not going to lie. The right meds for me has saved my life. Please don't be afraid of meds because of Lindsay Clancy. Thank you for posting that. And I wish I were more naive about this. And I don't like to say called it. But when I posted that video last week, imploring people not to not seek medical help because of this case, this is exactly what I had in mind. I didn't know where this would ultimately go. But unlike Brett, I had no hopes that this trial would shed any sort of light on mental health for women or the difficulties of being a parent, because I actually will talk about it more within all of her treatment plan. But I'm beginning to think these are two different things. There's mental health and then there's just like separately how difficult it is being a parent. And I think there is conflation of these two. And the difficulty of being a parent is just never, ever an excuse for harming your children. I yell at my kids all the time. I just yelled at them before I got on here. I get how hard it is. But there are so many things that are being glommed together right now and being misrepresented, honestly, mostly by defense counsel, because his goal is to make sure his client is found not guilty and everything else can fall to the wayside. There's no other truth that you're seeking in that because he could flip all this next week for a different murder trial. Or for a different rape trial, because he says it. He's in trial all the time. So he's not worried about how this will affect the next case, because it won't. Whereas I would say the prosecution and the way the law is, you do have to think about how your charging decisions affect all other types of prosecutions, all other types of cases. So I say all this to say, usually I'm the Pollyanna of this relationship. And I truly wasn't. And I'm very saddened that today was one of those days in which it was a travesty, truly, I think, for the millions of people who do try to seek professional help for their mental health. And for the thousands, tens of thousands of practitioners who go into what I understand to be one of the most difficult medical fields, psychiatry, talk therapy, dealing with human beings who are the most complex in the order of creation. And therefore, imagine this, not a simple math problem, where you can give a Prozac and a Trazodone and it will always equal healed within minutes. That is not how the human brain works. And because of the beauty and complexity of the human brain, our brains cannot do that. And because of that, the entire field of psychiatry and talk therapy and everything that exists to support mental health is a massive complex that is not perfect, because it cannot be perfect because the brain is not merely science. There is incredible mystery in it. And it's not just science. It's a mystery of the brain. And it's a mystery of the brain. And therein lies the mystery and beauty and wonder of creation. That also leads us to a devastating case like this. And here's the thing. Everything Alice just said and everything I just said may be true. Doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad cross-examination in this case. Whatever people took away about the mental health system, the real question for this attorney is, was it effective for Lindsay Clancy? We're going to get into the cross-examination here now. I will say this there are a couple different ways to do cross-examination. I think one general way to describe it is you can either turn them or burn them. You can either turn someone to your side and sort of get them to help you. And if you can do that, that's the most effective thing in the world. If you can get their expert to start agreeing with you about the case, man, that's just fantastic, right? But the other thing, which you see more often, and the simpler thing is just to burn them. And that's the most effective thing in the world. And if you can get their expert to start agreeing with you about the case, man, that's just trying to make the witness seem like complete idiot. They don't know what they're talking about. You shouldn't trust a word they said. I think there was an option to go with the first way here. And we can talk about that more later. But that is not how this attorney decided to do it. He decided to go for the burn them option. And with that, I'll turn it over to you, Alice, to get started. All right. So, of course, Jennifer Tufts is the one who started treating Lindsay Clancy in the fall. And there were other providers she saw, but she was the one who kind of saw her all throughout the fall leading up to, of course, that fateful day. So today. was her cross examination. And she said that she was in Vermont from 2014 to 2018. We know from, of course, her direct that she's a relatively young psychiatrist. She's been practicing about four years. She did her residency at Boston Medical Center. And she describes her residency. She rotated through all the different aspects of psychiatry and internal medicine. And that was from 2018 to 2022. And of course, that encompasses what we all know now to be COVID-19. And she talks about the effects of the pandemic on her practice. She said from 2020 to 2022, her residency would have been restricted. And she goes through how that really affected the way she had to figure out different ways to treat her patients. Because before she could meet with them in person, if you guys remember the pandemic, because we sure do, that's when this podcast started, she had to start meeting people over a computer screen, or as the defense continually called it, the television or computer. Now, she goes through that she still went to the hospital and outpatient stuff was done through Zoom. And there were differences, of course, you know, she wasn't physically in a room with them, but she said, I was still able to treat them. Now, she was board certified in psychiatry as of September 12, 2022. And she was a doctor during her residency. So she's not as inexperienced, I think, as the defense was trying to make her. She isn't, right? It takes a while. It takes a long time to become a doctor. Not every doctor is board certified, and she has been board certified for four years. And she started working independently with Aster in August of 2022. They had offices in Braintree and Peabody, and that she has treated many postpartum women. She had specific training at Boston Medical Center in that population. And she says she's treated at least 50 women who are postpartum. And this is relevant because at times, the defense wanted to argue that a relationship between a doctor and a patient is not a relationship. And she said, I don't know, residency isn't being a real doctor, which is not true. You have to be a doctor to be a resident. Just like, by the way, Brett and I were clerks once we were lawyers, like we passed the bar and we had gone to law school to be clerks. And so we were lawyers as we were clerks. So they kind of simultaneously tried to argue that as well as tried to say that she was an expert in postpartum. She's like, it's not my specialty. I've done a lot of it. I have an interest in it, but I'm a general psychiatrist. Now, they wanted to seem like she basically became a doctor, the day she met Lindsay and Lindsay was her guinea pig and the guinea pig went horribly wrong. I don't think this was a great strategy, because I do think the way that Dr. Tufts was able to explain all of her reasoning behind the treatment, both during the direct and cross examination, belied that sort of characterization. So jumping off what Alice is talking about, this whole notion that she had only been a doctor for a month. So he starts asking her how many patients she treated in the month prior to seeing Lindsay, because she saw Lindsay in September. She started in August. Who had postpartum psychosis. Now she said none, which isn't surprising because it is such a rare diagnosis. And then he asked, well, how about how many postpartum depression patients in the month? This actually surprised me because she said she had treated some in that month, which a month is not a long time. But nevertheless, he's trying to limit her experience to a month, which is going to come back to bite him as soon as the redirect comes up and probably was biting him even as he was saying it. Here's the thing. And this attorney does this throughout this cross. If you're going to treat your jury, if you're going to insult their intelligence, you better hope they're not that smart. Because if they are, and they know things like they know, what are you talking about? A person who's working independently as a doctor has had so much training and experience. It's not like being a lawyer when you graduate from law school and then you're like, I'm a lawyer now. I do the whole med school thing, which is longer than law school. And then you're doing the residency where you're basically working on your own. Yeah, you got some people you can go to, but you have your own patients. You're doing specialized training there as a doctor. And now she's operating independently. And it's just she wasn't a doctor for just a month. She was a doctor for longer than that. This goes back to what I was saying earlier, the turn them or burn them strategy. I think there was a way to point out that she is a relative young doctor. She is. She looks young. Even now, even four years later, she looks young. You could have talked about that. You could have done it in a respectful way. You could have talked about how this was a good opportunity. How many people you treat with postpartum psychosis? It's incredibly rare. Incredibly rare. Hard to even get experience with that, isn't it? You might have been a doctor for 10 years and not seen anybody with that, right? Really hard to recognize because of that. It's so much easier when you've experienced it, right? Friendly with her and drawn out. This is really hard to diagnose. It's not that surprising. Here's the thing. I get that they're suing these people civilly and you want to blame them civilly. And I don't know how involved he is in the civil trial, but we're in the criminal trial. And in the criminal trial, we really need to win the criminal trial. And I don't know that trying to paint the doctor as it's her fault, that might work in the civil case. I don't know that it's going to work in the criminal case. I think much better to have those people on your side talking about, yeah, this is a really complicated thing. It's not surprising that her friends and family didn't notice it. It's not surprising that she saw so many doctors she didn't pick up on this. Because when you don't do that, when instead you go to you must be incompetent, there's going to be a lot of doctors who are going to testify, a lot of nurses, a lot of practitioners, and they're all going to say the same thing. And at some point, the jury's going to be like, is it really possible that this woman just saw all the most incompetent psychiatrists in the Boston area? Or is there something more going on? And he could have done that. There's more going on. And that would have been a sophisticated cross. Any decent lawyer could do what he did, which is be a jerk and yell at the witness. Anybody could do that. It's much more difficult to get the good stuff out of him. And I feel like he just repeatedly lost that opportunity. And this was the first time that he lost that opportunity talking about her quote unquote inexperience. Then he brought up the civil lawsuit. And I got to tell you, this is like one of those things where it just seems so dirty. So dirty. I get why it comes in because it goes to your credibility. You're being sued. I mean, that could affect how you testify. But what a way to manipulate the system. You file a lawsuit against the people who are going to testify. And then you use that lawsuit that you filed that hasn't been adjudicated. No findings been found against them to then attack them because they're being sued. I mean, I don't know. He doesn't represent them in the civil suit, does he? I don't think so. I'd have to look. Attorney. Now, I don't think he's that savvy. I'd be able to do a civil suit as well. But I did think it was dirty the way he used. It was it was low. I did see a lot of people asking, like, can he bring up the civil lawsuit? You can. It absolutely goes to your credibility. It goes to like what your motivations may be. But like Brett said, all that's out there is her allegations of what these things are. And I will say both her cross and her direct made her look pretty good for purposes of the civil lawsuit. Anyways, so they go through all those prior history notes. For example, the prior prescription that Lindsey got for SSRIs in nursing school, which, by the way, it didn't stick out to me on Friday, but it really stuck out to me because the defense spent so much time on it. It kind of really registered with me when they kept talking about how Lindsey tolerated the Prozac well when she was in nursing school, was that this anxiety is sounds like it's been around for quite some time. Remember, in nursing school, she didn't have kids yet. She wasn't married yet. And not that there's anything wrong, but I think a lot of what the defense was trying to frame at the beginning or throughout the defense was trying to frame at the beginning or throughout this trial so far has been that postpartum was the thing that triggered all of the anxiety and the insomnia. Maybe it made it worse. But I hope the prosecution brings this out a little bit more. But it really solidified in my mind today. Oh, this is something she has struggled with probably for most of her adult life and doesn't mean that postpartum cannot trigger worse things among it. But the fact that she is already getting medication for it back in nursing school tells you about the length of her mental health history. So they go through these prior prescriptions and that she had gotten these SSRIs. And Lindsey told Dr. Tufts that she didn't have any side effects or she didn't mention any side effects. And so Dr. Tufts' interpretation was that she tolerated these well. Now, the defense attorney suggests that somehow Dr. Tufts listening to Lindsey Clancy was a problem. He brought this up multiple times. Oh, you didn't get these health records. Oh, you didn't do this, this or that. You didn't call her parents. Oh, you didn't call Patrick. You talked to him once. All these things just by the way. And so, you know, I think that's a big problem. And I think that's a big problem. She's an adult woman. It would be super weird if her regular practice was to call her parents. She's not 16 or 12 or nine years old. Yes, she can sign a release to do these things. I don't know about you, but I don't think in my adult life I've ever signed a release for my doctor to call my parents, especially because Dr. Tufts has a really good response to all this. Why do you listen to her? She says, well, I treat the patient in front of me. Records are only so good because remember what we said at the very beginning of this episode? I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't I have to observe them. I have to hear what they're telling me, interpret what that is like and treat the patient in front of me because those records are historical and they are obviously not comprehensive in the sense that a sitting human being sitting in front of you telling you what they're struggling with at the moment is. And the best thing to treat is what's right in front of you. And she noted that Lindsay was very clear about the historical timeline and she had the to Dr. Tufts, her medical history. So she felt like it was trustworthy and it comported with what she was observing. so even though the defense went on and on and on for hours and hours about what a problem it was that the psychiatrist daint talk to lindsey and listen to lindsey by the way i'm not a psychiatrist i'm not a doctor but i sure like it when doctors listen to me too and pretty sure that's an important part of any treatment plan can i just say the parents thing like i mean here's the thing about lindsey clancy and i think this is obvious at this point lindsey clancy clearly had some issues i don't think there's any question about that but it she also is a grown woman she's a nurse she's working through them she's attending these meetings she's going to different providers she's getting different prescriptions she's communicating with her providers yeah i mean i guess she could have said do you mind i mean just put yourself in these shoes you're seeing a psychiatrist you're unburdening your soul to them you're getting prescriptions for them and they say do you mind if i speak to your parents i really feel like i need to talk to mom and dad about this when you're an adult with three children yeah you're an adult with three kids but honestly you kind of seem like a liar i don't know i mean what about do you have a man in your life maybe i should talk to him maybe he would be a better a better person to go to for your mental health what do you do you have a keeper yeah can i talk to your husband are you someone's chattel i mean look we're being a little over the top there there are certainly circumstances in which you would talk to the husband or other people in their life and in fact they did talk to patrick but this just repeated notion that after every meeting with her she should pick up the phone and call mom and dad and be like hey hey mom did you know that she had sexual side effects when she took prozac was that something you're aware of do you think that could be why she doesn't want to take it now could that be the cause i'm just curious you know i'm just trying to get the real story here right i mean that's it's just absurd that's not how that's not how any of this works but he kept asking the question so you know of course he he had to dig in and like make fun of the questions she was asking and she was like oh so you talked to her and she told you about drinking you didn't think she had a problem she's like it did not appear to me that she had a drinking problem and he said well what was her drink of choice what difference does it make what her drink of choice is she's not going for alcohol addiction and what she was representing didn't seem to be the problem you know what she was reporting was apparently the same anxiety that she had suffered from since nursing school so then of course he goes on another trope which i think again he could have done in a way that was not burnham it could have been getting on the same page what do we all know about the medical profession during covid horrible they were all sacrificing themselves they were still going in it was hard for everybody but that was the medical field that was like putting everything on the line to continue to treat people despite who knows maybe catching the covid and dying we didn't know at the time and she describes how difficult it was at the time and of course what happened during covid telemedicine now what has continued including what you're seeing right now a lot more electronic communication brett and i now probably do most of our court hearings by zoom when that was not really that much of a thing before covid and can i just say you raised something what you just said at the beginning about what the medical profession went through during covid and i don't want this just to all be these are all the ways that the defense attorney made me mad but one way he made me mad was when he asked her if she was still in 2020 were you still scared of covid were you still afraid and i was like who are you how many in-person hearings were you wanting to have are you kidding me she was having to see people all the time who had covid or could have had covid you were probably hiding in your home old man like i don't know it was just so irritating and so pointless like why why impugn her like that like she was scared and that's why she's doing telemedicine i don't know there were just there were just several things he did that did not go to her testimony and that's the thing it's one thing to be a jerk when it goes to the testimony if you think back to karen reed and proctors on the stand and alan jackson as being a jerk when it goes to the testimony that was really effective because proctor was so unlikable and had done so many bad things and deserved to have somebody be a jerk to him right that makes sense but here it was just gratuitous at times and i don't know i just a lot of it just really rubbed me the wrong way we're not just picking on the fact that he said the telemedicine thing he tried to impugn that the telemedicine that and this i think going to our theme that mental health treatment really took a hit today like for regular people in terms of effectiveness and people actually wanting not the stigma to go for it is of course we know that lindsey saw dr tufts by telemedicine for 14 appointments and they never met in person and he can go into different things like well don't you think that there may have been things that you could have missed given the fact that you didn't see her like there are things that he could have gotten her to agree with like all things equal would you rather sit in a room with him but instead he does things like well when she was struggling did you give her a hug she's like no i didn't give her a hug we were meeting by telemedicine right and he's like so you didn't give her a hug no i didn't give her a hug and by the way my doctors don't hug me so like i'm not even sure that's part of the treatment plan but it was things like that where he was belittling her which i thought was ineffective because i think there are ways you could show that the telemedicine may have been less than ideal than being in person i think most people in the jury would have agreed and said like yeah i also think i can better read someone's tone when i'm sitting a foot away from them rather than a computer screen away so this was something that was again not one thing but like multiple strings of his cross throughout also if your psychiatrist keeps trying to give you a hug consider getting a new psychiatrist there could be a problem yeah they might get reported by the way you don't really put your hands on patients i'm actually very battery like we're lawyers right like if you touch someone without like the last doctor i saw i was for like an ear infection because i apparently am a child if that doctor leaned because my ear really hurt and i was like i'm in a lot of pain doc and if that doc touched me and come in for a hug i probably would have run out of the room and been like can i see someone else so anyways then the defense now this is something the defense had to do the defense wants to attack her screening process right something didn't go right in the defense has to do something to get her out of this situation and then the defense has to do something to get her out of this situation and then the defense has to do something to get her out of this situation so like they have that on their side that's what's wild the defense actually has something wildly good on their side which is all these practitioners it's really effective if you get up and say wow it sounds like you really did all the right things wow it sounds like you really you know stayed on top of it and you listened to everything she said and you saw her every week blah blah blah but something was missed wasn't it because if it were successful we wouldn't be here with her and we wouldn't be able to get her out of this situation and we wouldn't be able to get her three dead children would we right like what do you say to that but instead he kind of just digs into the fact that dr tufts listed that she had postpartum anxiety and that she did some screening tests but she didn't do all the screening tests again i'm not a doctor but i've read enough in the medical field because of the prosecutions i have done there are like countless tests you can do and doctors tend to lean towards one or the other based on what's presenting to them what and she says look there are a lot of screening tests out there but the most important thing is what the patient is telling you and then what you observe as the trained doctor during that session and he goes well what about the edinburgh test edinburgh test and which is a scale that looks at symptoms of postpartum depression and he's like it's a commonly used test right and she's like i don't use it he's like you didn't use it on lindsey and she's like no but i used other tests and she's like no but i used other tests and she's like no but i used other tests and she's she used the phq-9 which is a depression screening form now she says in her practice she just doesn't use the edinburgh test so which and this is why you really have to listen later on other practitioners do use that on her and it doesn't give the answer that the defense wants so like this is what we call a complete sideshow the defense knows that it doesn't matter which test she's getting she didn't tell anyone she was ever going to kill herself or kill her children and if the defense just keeps harping on suicidal ideation okay all these things she thinks about maybe being afraid of thinking about suicide what does she not talk about across the board actually hurting herself because that's going to get her hospitalized in a section 12 admittance anything about hurting her kids she never never never mentions that but he doesn't focus on that doesn't matter what screening test and she says that she goes i wouldn't give her that screening test because once she's denied having any sort of suicidal ideations she'll deny everything else on that list and she's like no i don't want to do that i don't want to do that because it's about planning the suicide so that was the defense's tactic i thought it could have been executed better that's what you do as the defense but i think it could have been executed better the prosecutors is brought to you by progressive insurance do you ever think about switching insurance company to see if you could save some cash progressive makes it easy just drop in some details about yourself and see if you're eligible to save money when you bundle your home and auto policies the process only takes minutes and it can be a little bit more hundreds more in your pocket visit progressive.com after this episode to see if you could save progressive casualty insurance company and affiliates potential savings will vary not available in all states guys if you're like me the past few months with kids out of school lots of travel has just meant that i have not been in my normal routine going grocery shopping cooking healthy and so i really need to get back to eating real food and i'm so glad that factor makes it easy even if you're on the go because i'm always on the go it seems factor meals are ready in two minutes yes you heard me two minutes it requires no prep and no clean up, which is music to my ears with four kids. So even on the days your schedule is completely out of control, eating well is still achievable. And let me tell you, their meals are delicious. I didn't really think that they could send well-made steak to my door. So I put them to the test. I ordered like five different steaks. And let me tell you, it was actually the best filet mignon I've ever had. My kids ate it all. And I kind of wish I got more so that I could eat some more. Every week you'll find over 100 nutrient-dense menu items to choose from and new options like salmon burgers, shredded pork, collard greens, and more. Plus add-ons you'll crave like pumpkin flavored cheesecakes and protein shakes. It's no surprise that 97% of users agree that Factor Meals help them live a healthier life. So you can feel confident that you're doing something good for yourself with every meal. Let's eat real. Head to factormeals.com slash prosecutors50off and use code PROSECUTORS50OFF. to get 50% off and one free breakfast item per box for one year while supplies last until 10-31-2026. That's code PROSECUTORS50OFF at factormeals.com slash prosecutors50off. factormeals.com slash prosecutors50off. See website for more details. And you know, this is one of those things where these various tests and people get really hung up on this like, well, how could you not use this test? Okay, fine. You really think they should use the test. But the whole point of the test is to indicate to the doctor whether or not depression is a problem. Because if it is, they need to work on that. Guess what? She diagnosed Lindsay as having depression. She reached the conclusion that the Edinburgh test would tell her. And she knew that Lindsay was postpartum. So she knew that Lindsay was postpartum. from postpartum depression. And as she noted, these different scales are all getting at the same question. The treatment that you use for postpartum depression might be a little different, but the way depression presents itself is going to be similar across the various things that cause depression. This is something she explains later. So using the other, the PHQ-9, which is what she uses and what she's familiar with, gets her to the right place. So the defense attorney wants to talk about why didn't you use this tool? But, you know, it's like, you built a house. Did you use a right angle? No, I used a computer. How could you not use a right angle? It's like traditional tool. Well, I built the house. You know, it's sort of a similar thing. Then we get more into his dislike of technology. We go through the fact that she was quote unquote deteriorating. You may recall she described this last time that essentially you're either getting better, you're staying the same, you're deteriorating. There are drop boxes. She has to fill out all these things. There are standardized forms across practices. A lot of them are required for billing. And things such as that, that's the way they're built. So she says, I did that because of the drop down. And he's like, well, you didn't take a pen and write something. And she's like, well, it's on the computer. And I'm noting in other places, the findings that I'm having about her. But this is something that he continues. He wants to present her as a box checker. She's going through checking boxes, whatever. And she's continued. She's not really doing anything. This sort of what he wants to present her as. He talks about what are you doing when you're having therapy for the patient? She says, you're listening to her. You're listening to her concerns. You're providing support. Hope that things will improve. You're determining what sort of medications might be helpful. They go through what incongruent means again. And there's a lot of repetition in this cross. They're also hammering on relying on what Lindsay is reporting. And look, there was a minor point to be made here about the American medical system as a whole, which is our different medical entities don't talk to each other. And in order to get medical reporting, they don't talk to each other. You don't just need a HIPAA release. You got to go through the whole process. It can take a long time. Every doctor has emailed us, has talked about this, about how this he's oversimplifying how this works, but sure. In a perfect world, you'd love to have all the various notes and records and everything else. But generally speaking, as a physician, you're relying on the answers to the questions that your patient is giving you. You know, I need to be more honest with my doctor. That's what I've realized with this. So that's one good thing that's coming out of this trial. And when you're asking questions of someone like Lindsay, and she's giving you detailed responses with dates and exact prescriptions she's getting from different people and exact amounts and how she's supposed to take them and what she's telling them. Yes, that all has the indicia of truth. And she's taking her at her word. And guess what? Everything she told her was true. Like, it's not as if there was this wealth of information in these records that she didn't receive. You know, the criticism is you didn't request the records. But at some point, and I kept thinking about ineffective assistance to counsel when I was in the hospital, I kept thinking about ineffective assistance to counsel when I was listening to this, because it was so much of in a perfect world with unlimited time, what would you do? Why didn't you do that? How could you not do that? What well-functioning doctor slash attorney wouldn't do X. And at some point in the legal field, you start looking at, okay, well, what's the prejudice? What was the effect? Okay. You think they should have done that? They didn't do it. What's the bad thing that came from it? If at the end of the day, Lindsay's actually giving her the same information she's giving to the other doctors, then generally speaking, it's going to be fine. There were things here, there, and there. But at the end of the day, Lindsay's actually giving her the same information One doctor, she told them that she used a marijuana gummy. She didn't tell Dr. Tufts that. That was like the most significant thing the defense could come up with that she would have known if she had gotten the records. Anyway, so she keeps going through this, like, how could you just trust what she said? And this is when he kept going back to, did you talk to her husband? She talked to her parents, all this other stuff. And I just don't feel like that's a reasonable thing to ask someone to do. And he also gets out her definition of postpartum, which varies, depending on who you ask. And she said it was typically one year after birth. I will say she did a very good job. Like, I wouldn't know. I mean, it is her profession, but he would ask very basic questions that even I as a lawyer knew wasn't quite medically accurate. And I'll say she did a really good job. Like, he was like, what's a thyroid? I remember thinking, how do you answer that? I would object it to be like, what is your question? But I thought she did a very good job actually explaining some of these concepts. Now, then they go through the drug Zoloft. The defense attorney, says that Zoloft shouldn't be used for anxiety. He doesn't know anything. And Dr. Tufts says as much. She's like, no, no, actually Zoloft is a very effective treatment for various forms of anxiety disorders, as well as depression. And if I remember correctly from this testimony, but also just like general knowledge, Zoloft may be like one of the safest drugs to use for breastfeeding. And I think at this time she may have still been breastfeeding, whatever, what have you. Dr. Tufts disagrees with it and says, no, no, no, it can be used, to treat anxiety. One of the most common things to treat it with. And she told Lindsay told Dr. Tufts that she wasn't on any medications and that she'd stopped drinking, but Dr. Tufts wasn't sure exactly when she'd stopped drinking. So then they go through the potential problems with SSRIs and they talk about informed consent and the potential side effect of Zoloft being sleep issues. And the defense attorney says, well, wouldn't, you know, the potential side effect of sleep issues, clash with Lindsay's problem with sleeping that she's already reported to you. And Dr. Tufts explains how side effects works. She says that Zoloft is the first line safe medication for women, including postpartum medication. And she talks about how Lindsay expressed all this fear of side effects, but she did eventually take Zoloft. And after she took it, she did have some stomach aches and some difficulty eating, and she did have more difficulty sleeping. And after she took it, she did have more difficulty sleeping. And after she took it, she told her to stop taking Zoloft. Now, of course, if you have a high dose of Zoloft, you need to slowly decrease it or taper it. But because Dr. Tufts already started her on a very low dose of Zoloft, she said that Lindsay could stop it. At 50 milligrams, it was perfectly fine to stop. So this was in October. And honestly, it's not completely clear that Zoloft had anything to do with the murders. This was several months beforehand. And you know, this is something that's never been quite clear to me. In the opening, the defense attorney said he talked about Zoloft. He talked about how this is an SSRI. You're not supposed to give SSRIs to people who have bipolar. This could have set her off and led to the murders. He's going to have to explain that at some point. I assume he's going to have an expert talk about this because the Zoloft itself would have been out of her system. Of course, that doesn't mean it could not have triggered some sort of mental episodes that got worse and worse and led to the eventual murders. But the problem is we don't really see that. We don't see like in October, she stopped Zoloft and she's rapidly getting worse. In fact, she's getting better. She's getting worse. She's taking different drugs, taking this drug, that drug. So he's going to clarify that at some point. He may be able to do that, but we'll just have to see. So they talk a little bit about her experiences having children. He has this weird thing that difficult births can lead to, I guess, a bipolar episode or something. And she was like, I don't think that's right. They move on to bipolar and talk about that a lot. SSRIs are bipolar. And he tries to tie these difficult births to bipolar at that point. She says that's not the way it works. So by December, there's this whole question about whether or not she's suicidal or not. And you've seen this. At some point, she's worried about being suicidal. She's not suicidal, but she's worried about it and the defense attorney asked her, how often did she have thoughts of this? She said, I would have asked her that and I would have said, I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. discussions, but I didn't write that down. He hits her for not writing it down. He gets onto this repeatedly. She's not writing down everything that Lindsay said. And she says, look, I'm writing down anything that's clinically important, that's going to be important for the treatment regimen or whatever, but I'm not transcribing our conversation when we're just talking. So he asks about whether or not Lindsay could be minimizing because she's a mandated reporter. Now, look, maybe Lindsay was, but it's unclear to me how Tufts is supposed to know that Lindsay is minimizing. I don't know what she was supposed to do, how she's supposed to get into Lindsay's mind if Lindsay's not telling her everything that's going on in her mind. And it's not evident and it's not obvious to anybody. Patrick has the best stuff. And he talked about when he was a first witness, but even it's very sort of ephemeral. And unclear. You know, we said that she had thoughts of harming her kids, but when he described those on the stand, it was almost like she didn't really have thoughts of harming her kids. She had thoughts of something bad happening to her kids. So it's not even clear that even if he had have talked to her, her mail keeper, he would have been able to give any kind of insight into what's going on with Lindsay. And that was one of the things like, and obviously the person on the stand can't ask the attorney, well, what exactly would you have done? But I kept thinking like, what was she supposed to do in these circumstances other than meet with her very regularly to figure all this out? She's also, by the way, and this comes up later, telling Lindsay to go to talk therapy, go talk to the counselor we have, which would have been a great opportunity to maybe dig into some of these thoughts and provide Tufts some more information. Lindsay only does that twice. It's going to be discussed. And look, he's like, what do you do? What do you tell them if they're feeling suicidal? They can call suicide hotlines. They can go to an emergency room. He asks her whether or not she would be surprised if she called a suicide hotline twice. She said she would. She didn't know about that. Once again, you would expect if you're going to your doctor for all these thoughts and you're having suicidal thoughts, and she's asking you for having suicidal thoughts, that the time you went to your doctor after you called the suicide hotline, you would say to your doctor, I called a suicide hotline this week. I was feeling really down. But apparently Lindsay never did that. And I'm not sure how Dr. Tufts was supposed to know that she had called a suicide hotline if she's not telling her. Yeah. Again, it's easy for all of us to dissect when it's just cross-examination for one doctor. But I think about all the times that I have to figure out what's wrong with my kids, whether I have to bring them to the doctor or not. And a lot of it falls into this category, I only know what they tell me, right? Like I've brought one of my kids. I don't want to surprise none of you. Squanto, the second one. He is like the absolute highest pain tolerance. And there are so many times when he was young that he would have double ear infections. And they'd be like, the doctor would say it was a 10 out of 10. He's like, your kid's going to go deaf. Like I've heard that so many times from the doctor. And they're like, how could you as a mother not know? He like should be writhing in pain. He's not sleeping. And I'm like, he sleeps through the night. He just this morning told me, it feels like there's water in my ear. So I was like, oh, crud. That's his sign. That when he feels water in his ear, he's like, oh, crud. That's his sign. And they're like, no, no, no. You must have him like on all these pain meds. And I'm like, he has asked for nothing. He's never complained about anything. And he just has an incredibly high pain tolerance so that I miss these ear infections and don't bring him in until basically like, you know, his eardrums might burst. And that's because I can only act upon what I know. I can't get inside. How would I even know to ask him if his ears hurt? Because nothing would have indicated that to me. That's like kind of the frustration I feel with the defense's questions here. You have to, especially when you're talking about mental illness, no one else can report these sorts of things. And it's not like she was indicating a psychosis or confusion in a way where she couldn't communicate. Anyone can always keep back information from their doctor. And if it's not medically indicated that she would be holding back information because she didn't understand up from down, what is the doctor supposed to do? They can only treat who wants to be treated. So then they talk about, I'm going to say it right this time, y'all. You made so much fun of me. Is it Buspiron? Buspiron? You said you're going to say it right. So I just assumed you knew how to pronounce it. I heard it like a hundred times today and I still am not positive I said it right. Okay. I just heard it so many times. You would think that I remember it and it's frustrating. I don't. So Buspiron, they talked about the side effects. So she said that Lindsay tolerated it well, but she did have some upset stomach and some dizziness and that she was also taking Ativan at that time. And Lindsay told her she was taking Benadryl, which is obviously an over-the-counter drug and not really supposed to be taking Benadryl. And so she said, I'm going to take Benadryl. And not really supposed to be used for like mental health treatment. So the Ativan and the Benadryl together can have a combined depressive effect. And so Dr. Tufts prescribed Hydrazazine, a prescription drug that's an alternative to Benadryl and the Buspiron for anxiety. And she says that when she kind of changed around these medications, trying to treat the symptoms that Lindsay is reporting to her, her symptoms were not significant. Now, she said the Ativan was prescribed at 0.5 milligrams, just a little bit helpful. And so they went up to one milligram. And they did discuss using Remeron, but Dr. Tufts never prescribed it, even though it was a reasonable option because Lindsay said she didn't want to take Remeron. And we've talked about this before, like the patient ultimately has to fill the prescription and take it. So if they say they're not going to take it, then they're kind of, you work alongside your patient in terms of what you ultimately treat them with. And then, of course, we know that Lindsay ultimately went to South Shore inpatient. And Dr. Tufts did not know about this until after the fact. And the defense hammered on her and said, well, did you look at her South Shore perinatal records? And she says, no. And he says, why? She says, well, I don't have access to them. He's like, you as her doctor don't have access to the records? She says, no, we're different practices. And that it's a completely separate clinic. And she could have gotten them. She's right. Lindsay could have signed a HIPAA release form to get those records transferred to her. But because she was still treating Lindsay and talking to her in person, she didn't think she needed those records because Lindsay was providing all the relevant information about her treatment. She says she spoke in detail about what she was prescribed, the timeline, the amounts, and she had that medical sophistication that it all made sense what she was saying. And she was like, well, I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't she was able to recall the names, the dates, the doses, just really detailed stuff. And so she didn't get the records. And of course, this goes back to what Brett was saying about kind of the ineffective assistance arguments that you'd make about an attorney. For what it's worth, my doctor recently asked me, I'm just thinking about this, like whether, I don't know, I'm just, you have to like, at some point, take it back to your own experience. I went to the doctor and he was like, have you had a mammogram? And I was like, yeah. And he said, I don't know. I don't know. It wasn't at this practice. And he's like, all right, I trust you. Like, he wasn't like, well, you signed the records to transfer it over. Like, maybe I didn't. And, you know, I guess if I developed like breast cancer tomorrow, would I sue him because he didn't get my record? You know, but like, it was totally normal for him to just ask me. I seemed like a coherent person who understood what a mammogram was. And I told him, you know, I was like, it was in the fall. I can't exactly remember the day. He's like, yeah, good enough for me. But that's the reality of medical care. That's the way it works. I mean, maybe it shouldn't work that way, but that's the way it works. Because here's the thing, medical records, despite the electronification of records that's required, it's still very difficult to get everything over. And I know this because we recently moved and I had to transfer four kids' pediatrician records over and they were all electronified. I know because my doctor in my old city had gone through that whole process of like digitizing all of my kids' records because at the time they had like all these boxes out. It was like such a headache. And even though they were digitized, it took them four months to transfer all four kids' records over to my new doctor. And in the process, by the way, all my kids had like the flu and like ear infections and had to be treated in that time period. So like it's because it's cumbersome. Lawyers know this. If I give you all my discovery, it takes forever, even though it's all on a thumb drive. It just takes a lot of time to kind of organize the volume of records that exist for each patient. And look, I'm not saying this is a bad argument that the defense attorney is making because he has the benefit of hindsight, right? So everybody in that courtroom sitting there thinking this woman killed her three kids. You are the doctor seeing her. What could you have done to have possibly prevented this? And whether it would be standard operating practice or not, whether the average doctor would do it or not, everything she didn't do is a strike against her, whether it's a fair strike or not. And that's what one of the defense's theories is the medical system failed her. If only this doctor had gone a little bit above and beyond, if only she had recognized these deeper problems. But maybe the doctor did make mistakes. She absolutely could have. She's a human being. Everybody makes mistakes. Once again, that whole ineffective assistance to counsel thing. That's the whole reason we don't just say you made a mistake. New trial. And the problem is here, it's not just, well, you know, maybe you could have asked that question or tried to get that evidence out. It's well, three kids are dead. So maybe you should have asked for records. Totally effective. Totally get why he's doing it. But if you step back and really think about it, there are a lot of things we don't understand about this course he's taking. And then, of course, he harps on. We've already said this before. He talks about how she doesn't Patrick and her parents. And she says, I talked to Pat once and that was it. Guys, it's summer, which means it's hot out, which usually means I want to wear less clothes. But the reality is I still need to wear shapewear and bras to feel supported. And I have to wear it all day when it's like 100 degrees outside. Well, that's why I love Honey Love. It is truly the most comfortable bra you will ever put on that you're never going to wear anything else. I'm so glad that I have now stepped into the next age of Honey Love bras because they're so supportive. They're so comfortable. And, you know, I kind of noticed that I need a little more lift or structure than I used to. And my body changes over time. But Honey Love knows that and they support me in all the right ways. There's no slipping, no constant adjusting, just a secure, flattering fit that actually stays in place. And I also love their shapewear. I have lots of shapewear because let's be honest, I'm a lawyer. I'm in suits all the time, dresses all the time. I've had a lot of kids. Their shapewear, you will love. You'll forget you're even in it. It won't be the first thing you take off when you come home. That's how comfortable it is. Honey Love is an independent female founded brand and all Honey Love products are intelligently designed by women who actually wear them, including their founder, Betsy, who's highly involved in the development of each product. And let's be honest, finding that right bra, the older you get, can get really frustrating. What used to work just doesn't work anymore. But with Honey Love, they know what you need. And it's without stiff wires digging in or bulky padding that feels outdated. And their Cloud Embrace bra, it's just a game changer. It's my favorite. It's soft, it's breathable, and it's incredibly comfortable, but still supportive enough to replace your old underwire bras. It's the kind of bra you put on in the market. Use our exclusive link to save 20% off Honey Love at honeylove.com slash prosecutors. That's honeylove.com slash prosecutors. After you check out, they'll ask where you heard about them. Please support our show and tell them we sent you. Experience the new standard and comfort and support with Honey Love. Guys, we talk about therapists and mental health a lot, and we know that finding a therapist you like is hard enough. But what can make it even more difficult is finding someone who actually takes your insurance. And that's where most online therapy platforms fall short. Many don't work with insurance at all, which means you're stuck paying the full cost of out-of-pocket or paying for an expensive monthly subscription. And that keeps a lot of people from going and getting the therapy that they really need. Well, that's where Rula does things differently. They partner with over 100 insurance plans, making the average co-pay just $15 per session. That's real therapy from licensed professionals, and they're not just at a price that actually makes sense. Think about it. You use your insurance benefits to maintain your physical health, so why wouldn't you do the same for your mental health? And Rula isn't just affordable. The experience is tailored around you. Other online therapy platforms might match you with the first available provider, whether or not they're the right fit. Rula considers your goal preferences and background to provide you a curated list of licensed in-network therapists who are actually aligned with what you need, because they know that finding the right therapist can make all the difference. There are no wait lists, no frustrating back and forth. Rula makes it easy to find a mental health provider who's accepting new patients and appointments are available as soon as tomorrow. Plus, Rula sticks with you throughout your journey, checking in to make sure that your care is helping you move forward. So get the help you need now, whether it's dealing with burnout at work or just having a bunch of anxiety and stress piling up because there's a lot to deal with in life. Now is your chance to really deal with it with Rula. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Go to Rula.com slash prosecutors to get started today. That's R-U-L-A dot com slash prosecutors for quality therapy that's covered by insurance. So then they go back to Zoloft because we just have to keep going back to Zoloft. We talk about some other programs that the doctor looked at that she thought might be helpful for, including one that was a postpartum. There was a medication that was infused through an IV at a hospital. I guess it took 60 hours to do. She talked about how this would have, she could not have just ordered this would take a lot of difficult coordination. Then Lindsay actually ends up going to one of the hospitals that does that, women's and infants. And they discussed while she was there asking about that. And either Lindsay didn't ask about that or maybe she did. And it just wasn't that big a deal. This is another circumstance where she doesn't have the records for women and infants. And so of course we have to spend some time on that. She noted that she didn't end up receiving any treatment there. So it didn't even really make sense for her to get the records. And he once again brings up the fact that she never spoke with Lindsay's mother and father, which every time he mentioned it, I was just like, thank God that is not how medicine works. I can tell you with 100% assurance that my dad does not know if I've had a mammogram. Yeah. My mom started saying, how much does Brett drink? She'd be like, what? He drinks. He drinks. Love you, mom. He, he, he does not. Never. Brett's mom. Can't call her Mrs. Brett. Put that glass down, son. Somebody yelled at us earlier for laughing during these episodes. We must never laugh. We must never laugh. I have to, you guys, because this is such a depressing case. It is such a sad case. Okay. So then Lindsay met with McAllister who that's the talk therapist that Dr. Tuff said best treatment plan for what she's going through is both medication and talk therapy. So McAllister is the therapist that she refers her to. And they ask a bunch of questions about what McAllister did, which of course, Dr. Tuff's doesn't know beyond what the records say because she wasn't there. And they again, ask about a suicide assessment, but the document she has is blank on the suicide assessment. So Dr. Tuff's doesn't know if there had been a suicide assessment beyond asking her whether she was suicidal. Again, these questions are better directed at McAllister. And I understand what he's getting at, which is like, well, you're treating her and you referred her to talk therapy. How could you not know all these things? And I understand what he's getting at, which is like, but that's the, like McAllister is trained in one thing. She's trained in another thing and you work together. Right? So then the defense asked for a bunch of rare tests that are seldom done. They all like, he just got on Google and looked for like most obscure tests, you know, see if she knows, including genetic testing. It's as if we have unlimited time and resources. She explains it very well. She's like, yes, that is a genetic test that exists, but that doesn't help us with treatment. So because we can map the entire DNA genome, of a human body, if that doesn't help us treat, we're not going to do that test. Even if it is a test you can do, but he didn't care. He was like, well, you didn't do it. People have done it. And it can be a common test. She's like, well, it's not common for me. I don't use this genetic test. It wouldn't change the way that I treat her. So I'm not going to do an unnecessary test. And here's what he's going to do. He's going to call an expert and he's going to say, is this a test you can do for this? Is this a test you can do for that? Is this a test? Is this a test? Is this a test? He's going to go through them. And then he's going to say, is there any records where Lindsay was administered that test? And the expert's going to say no. And that's what he's going to do. He's going to have this long laundry list of all the various things that you could do. And she's going to say no, because I think it's, I think we know who it is. She's going to say no, never administered. And then on cross, prosecution is going to have to dig through each one of those tests and when they should be administered and why they should be administered and all that. But that's going to happen. Just expect that sometime in the future. So he then how many articles she's published on postpartum depression. She actually has published something about postpartum depression. Now it wasn't a full peer reviewed article. She had published something, which I was surprised by. And she noted later, she's a clinician. She's not an academic. So she's not out there publishing articles all the time. He then brings up all these articles about the thyroid. He's obviously going to have an expert later on testify that this is some thyroid related thing. And if only they had tested her thyroid, they would have figured it out. Not read all these random articles about the thyroid, by the way, I don't like, I think the medical field is similar. There are a million, a million law review articles, and they're mostly academic and not actually something you use in practice. Like people will write like, how we get rid of the first amendment. And like, it's not actually rooted in practice. They're like think thoughts and people who are in ivory towers like to think about things and you have to like actually push the envelope to be able to be published in general. And they're super niche. They don't indicate best practices within a place. And so he picks this like random article, so random. And he's like, you haven't read this article. And she's like, no, I read a lot of articles, but like there are thousands of articles. So I wrote a law review article. I've written one. Did you write one in law school? I wrote one. Yeah. Everybody writes one in law school. I'll tell you what it is. It's going to be very relevant to what I do now. Is it about postpartum depression in the law? No, it's not. It's, it's about rabies extantibus and the Nile treaty. Oh, wow. So very relevant to what I do now. Don't legal breeze. Rabies extantibus. Mine was about Kelo. Oh, you'd said this. What a great topic. I wrote one about Kelo. And it's so funny. I have this throwaway line in there about how the court has changed, but the two people who were replaced, they voted against the majority position. So it's unlikely that that would change anything in the future. And that has been cited so many times because when you write a law review article, you want to cite basically every sentence you say. It gets cited so many times for the proposition that just because the court has changed doesn't mean the outcome of the case would change. and i'm like that's pretty cool funny it's actually awesome just throw away line but anyways i can i can promise you i don't think anyone has cited my nile treaty you never know yeah they definitely haven't you never know okay all right anyways so they talk about trizone wasn't particularly helpful for her asked if she ever suggested coming in in person she said she didn't think there was a need they were doing just fine with their conversations over the internet and she later would say that telehealth since the pandemic has become the standard in psychiatric treatment for all sorts of reasons yeah i mean for what it's worth just about everyone i know in my life who does therapy or psychiatric help does do it by i'm saying this not about the legal standard about people because you know what's really hard for a busy mom to do get a babysitter and leave to be able to go get a 30 minute or hour long appointment i can't even get away to like get my hair cut which is my hair why my hair is never cut so sometimes the only way to be able especially if you're postpartum to get kind of these treatments is through telehealth and that's so much better than no health care so i'm only saying that more as a don't listen to the cross on telemedicine better than not getting it at all okay so then they talk about saraquell so another provider suggested saraquell and they discussed the possibility of like a bipolar diagnosis we already knew the defense was going to go into this because this was part of their opening dr tuff says she does not have bipolar disorder she assessed it pretty much every time that she saw lindsey and she never assessed her to have mania so she didn't ask her do you have bipolar she asked all the questions that would indicate having these like manias and lows and she explained what the symptoms would be and she said she didn't display any of those and i looked for it every single time so then the defense goes back to the suicidal ideation now i don't really understand reddington's like focus on this but he keeps telling dr tuff's to answer yes or no that's not a great signal to the jury when you won't let the witness answer and i'm actually surprised the prosecution did object several times i'm actually surprised for the most part the judge overruled the objections because most judges get really mad when an attorney won't let a witness talk when they are not filibustering and she finally says she's like i cannot say yes to that entire statement and he just blows past it because he doesn't actually care he just wants a soundbite but what i think that signals to the jury when you yell at someone and someone who's trying to be thoughtful about the way they are approaching a question if you say dr tuff's just give me a yes or no sounds like you want to shut them down you don't want the jury to hear the real thing so who knows what the jury is actually hearing but i don't think it's a great signal to the jury and dr tuff is asked what it means when you say you have suicidal thoughts she said that lindsey was feeling hopeless about it remember she said that she was afraid she was going to have fun and she was going to have a lot of fun and she was going to have a lot of fun about suicide but not that she actually had suicide and so she tries to parse out what that means and she says if you have thoughts about suicide you would treat differently than if you had a plan and an intent to carry out those thoughts and she said that lindsey did not have a plan and an intent to carry out self-harm the defense keeps asking about what saraquel is that it's an anti-psychotic and i guess presumably he hopes the jury will think that means she's psychotic but there has still been no diagnosis of bipolar or any sort of psychosis then we go through he says did you know that she told her husband she had thoughts of harming the children she did not know that once again why didn't you talk to the husband at one point he did appear on one of these sessions and he was unhappy with her care he was unhappy with the medication she was receiving and he may have said that she was turning into a zombie so she went to mclean and dr tuff's family and she said that she was turning into a zombie and he said that she was turning into a zombie and he said that she was turning into a zombie and he said that she was turning into a about this when they sent the discharge summary to her they didn't send any other records and she wasn't notified about the hospitalization until she received the discharge summary so then on january 23rd of course the day before the murders dr tuff's did see lindsey at that point she did not recommend hospitalization she thought she could titrate the amitriptyline to get her to a place where lindsey felt better but it was actually increased that day and she was able to and so the defense i guess has an interesting theory they i think are going to say that the increase in amitriptyline is quote and that pushed her over the edge yeah but amitriptyline is not what caused the murders the next day so if that's what it is then let's go for the guilty i was so angry about this i just thought this was so i mean i get it you're trying to win for your client but there was something about this that just struck me as you have no evidence that amitriptyline is what causes like amitriptyline it's a drug you can take it it has side effects it can affect you not saying it can't if there was evidence you know his theory is all about zoloft but all of a sudden he's wanting to say in this throwaway line that i guess was supposed to be some sort of matlock moment that increasing the amitriptyline is what pushed her over the edge blaming dr tuss for this it's her fault not lindsey's fault it's her fault because the amitriptyline and this goes back to what we talked about at the very beginning so many people out there who need these medications and you're essentially saying that an increase in a drug that she had been taking tolerating well without symptoms is what caused her to kill her children what is the message that you're sending to anybody out there who's listening to this and look these trials matter they matter to people out there for a lot of us we're watching these we're interested in these we're debating these you know we're going back and forth on the meaning of these cases but a lot of people learn about the world through these and the things that are said in these trials can really affect people it can affect how they view things it can affect the decisions they made and today you have a defense attorney saying that amitriptyline and not just amitriptyline but an increase in amitriptyline caused a woman to kill her three kids i thought it was credibly irresponsible like even if i didn't believe him man if i'm about to get amitriptyline i probably should be better safe than sorry maybe i shouldn't get it so irresponsible so damaging and let me just say once again he did not see the truth and he didn't see the truth and he didn't see the truth and he didn't see the truth and he didn't see the truth and he didn't see the truth and he didn't see the truth and he didn't set this up with anything and there's another side to this there's a throwing spaghetti against the wall that better not be his theory because if that's his theory it's so weak it's so underdeveloped it's so unsupported that i think a lot of people are just going to say look you were literally just throwing spaghetti against the wall she must be guilty that's what they're going to say if he can back up this amitriptyline thing then fine do it now weird you didn't mention that in the opening weird that you haven't set out to do that you didn't mention that in the opening that amitriptyline was what caused her to do this you wanted a flashy moment for the end of your cross that's what you wanted and i just thought it was completely irresponsible and silly and unsupported and not effective it drove me crazy it really made me angry and i just was surprised because i think he's a better lawyer than that honestly maybe got carried away i mean we were many hours in of him like brett reminded me when i was very angry on text we had a recent guest randy barnett who wrote a great book about being a cook county prosecutor amidst all of the crazy corruption of the 70s and 80s maybe 80s maybe i make him older than he is and he says look when you start at a 10 there's nowhere to go and he had started at a 10 and he had a long cross today he had to perform i guess he thought he was on broadway and maybe just got the better of him i don't know but i thought it was incredibly irresponsible and we'll have ramifications past this trial unfortunately so then of course the i thought it was a good redirect they must have spent a lot of time with dr tufts because the prosecutor definitely feels more fluid and comfortable with dr tufts and some of their other witnesses she says i never met really okay well maybe she read a lot of her records what whatever it is but i thought maybe the prosecution has hit their stride maybe they have there you go this was honestly this redirect was probably the best they've been that's what i mean i thought she maybe they were just so angry about what was happening i don't know but i thought it was a very effective redirect so they focused first remember how the defense wanted to focus on how she was not a real doctor until basically the day she met lindsey well they talked about residency that she was already a doctor and it was a four-year period where she was a resident and during that time she treated patients no one was telling her teaching her what to do she treated thousands of psychiatric patients during her residency and in fact she even chose to do a one-year elective fellowship to treat postpartum women and because it's something she has an interest in and she knows that postpartum psychosis is rare but she dealt with it with many other patients who have had psychosis and they can present differently but it's the same general disorder so she's not some ingenue who's never seen this before she's an experienced doctor who has a passion for treating postpartum women and elected to spend an entire year treating postpartum women and yes while psychosis is rare she has seen it before and she knows it's a spectrum none of this presented here with lindsey now for psychosis she says that she assesses appearance she assesses behavior cooperation answering questions aggressive speech speaking too much or not enough and she has thoughts based on what they say to her and she says that lindsey was able to communicate very well with her not like someone who has any sort of psychosis and she made sense you know everything she was saying lined up with her medical history and she had no signs of psychosis and she said that she was able to communicate very now she did say that mental health issues were worse during covid and that telehealth is the standard in the industry now nothing wrong with using it and she also defended and was able to defend her use of the PHQ-9 screening because that's the practice at Aster. You look for various symptoms of depression and the symptoms of postpartum depression are the same as depression for anyone. It just happens to be during the postpartum period, which she's already defined as a year after you give birth. So it's not like by putting postpartum depression, postpartum is actually just a temporal definition of the depression. It doesn't change the fact that it's depression and how it manifests itself. She talks about how you don't reach out to family and friends. She talks about HIPAA laws. She talks about how that's just not the practice. You also don't keep a transcript of everything you say in a session. And she also said, look, this isn't a script. It's a conversation. She's trying to actually learn about the patient. And she also notes, and a lot of this is through some very leading questions by the prosecution. Eventually, Reddington did finally object to this. One of the few objections that was sustained, the prosecution was leading. And you can't do that because redirect is still direct. But anyway, talks about how she only saw Jennifer McAllister twice, despite Dr. Tufts repeatedly urging her to speak with her in addition to medication. And honestly, I think this is a really important point because Dr. Tufts said, the way to do this is I am speaking with you. Then you're having more in-depth conversations with a therapist. The therapist and I are working together and we're using that information to figure this out. In a lot of ways, Dr. Tufts, she only has so much time. She can meet with her. She met with her a lot. She followed up with her a lot. A lot of these appointments were close in time. But the fact of the matter is she only has so much time to spend with her. And she's a psychiatrist, not a therapist. It would have been much better if Lindsay had taken advantage of this opportunity, but she only did it twice. Now, she met with people prescribing her medication all the time, but she only met with this therapist twice. And I think that became a big issue. So they talk about the Zoloft suicide warning. It's primarily for children and adolescents up to 24 years. Lindsay was 32. We reiterated that you can go straight off of Zoloft at 50 milligrams and no problems. And we noted that Lindsay did not have any side effects of Prozac or Welbutrin. And to the contrary, she said they were effective. So there was every reason for Dr. Tufts to think an SSRI would be effective now. So then Dr. Tufts says if a patient's denying suicidal ideations, she would not ask if they called a suicide out. It's like repetitive, right? That's why you don't get the screening about how you would carry it out if you deny that you have suicidal ideations. The expectation would be that she'd tell you if she called a hotline. Now, the job of the therapist is to listen first, talk second. So she would listen. And then in each of her sessions, give recommendations. Talk therapy was explicitly recommended to her on multiple occasions, kind of like those medications. She can't force her to take medication the way it's prescribed, just like she can't force her to go to talk therapy, but she can recommend titrating. The Ativan, for example, which she never did. She could have recommended going to talk therapy, which she only did twice. So Dr. Tufts said that she told Lindsay, Ativan is not long-term, and Lindsay understood that. The plan, of course, was to reduce over a period of time. Now, Lindsay told Dr. Tufts she was in therapy and exercising daily and did not tell her that she went to the South Shore Emergency Department or that they'd prescribed Trazodone. Now, she was in therapy for a long time, but she was not able to tell her that she was in therapy. So she couldn't know if Lindsay didn't tell her. She is not omniscient. She is not. So I talk about this first time when she said she had fear of thoughts of suicide. Up to that point, Lindsay had consistently denied any thoughts of suicide. And I'll just note, to my knowledge, she never told any medical providers that she had homicidal thoughts. There were no symptoms of mania. In fact, all her symptoms were the opposite of mania. Remember, what are her problems? She's. Depressed. She's feeling sluggish. She's not having the mania that you would expect to see with bipolar. And they used this opportunity to discuss all the things that Lindsay did in January, all the normal things that she did. And this was sort of the opposite. This was the prosecution doing what the defense always does. The were you aware series of questions about all the things Lindsay had done, which, of course, she was not aware of. But that wasn't the point. The prosecution then says, were you aware that her thyroid numbers were normal? Well, she didn't really have those records, so she didn't know. But this becomes like an issue later on. It's just so funny because you have this witness who doesn't know. But because the judge will not sustain objections, and this is a line of questioning that should have been sustained, you end up having the defense attorney asking the witness about the question the prosecutor asked about something the witness doesn't know. And then asking the witness, isn't it true that they were actually low? And the witness is like, I have no idea. It's just absurd. That's not how trials are supposed to work. Anyways, so then they talk about that discharge summary and how she didn't get the record. She said that was fine because they had all the information that she would need, how the patient initially presented, what they said, what the assessment was, what the course of treatment was, how things progressed, changes that were made, how the patient appeared on the day of discharge. And she said that was the amount of information she would typically review for a patient. She said she saw no reason to hospitalize her on the 23rd, no signs of psychosis, mania, and she was denying all ideation. And then the prosecution had what I think is their best moment that they've had because they dug into the records for this relatively quickly. Because remember, Reddington has this whole thing about this is all your fault because you increased the amitriptyline. The prosecution notes that she had taken eight pills of amitriptyline, which was 10 milligrams. That's how much she would take per day. She'd been taking it for eight days. And after the eighth day, she asked her if she could increase it. It was at that point she increased it. There were only eight pills missing. So it wasn't what tipped her over the edge. She didn't even take the pills. And it's like it made me even madder because it's like you did that for no reason. Anyways, just very frustrating, but good point for the prosecution to end on. And banger of a point for the prosecution to hammer on. This is the doctor who, by all accounts, that's why she's been on the stand so long. Of course, she got other, you know, health care and the ER, all these things. But she has been seeing her the most consistently throughout these months leading up to the murders, including the day before the murders. And the day before the murders, she says there's no reason to suspect psychosis, no reason to hospitalize her. And she is not coming off to me as an out of touch doctor who doesn't know her patient. This is huge. The day before the person who probably in her mental does not see signs of psychosis. Then, of course, there's recross. So the defense asked Dr. Toss, can you reach out to a third party? Yet again, the mom, the dad, Patrick. But she did not have HIPAA permission. And they asked about what HIPAA was. It's the law that says you're not allowed to talk about a patient's treatment to anyone or even to say that they are a patient unless that patient waives those rights. And the defense says, well, you never asked her to sign a HIPAA form, right? Now, this was not the main reason that Dr. Toss didn't reach out. So correct. She did not ask for a HIPAA release. But also, she says it's not typically something you do with an adult patient who is able to speak for themselves. The defense is like, what? My God, you don't do this. No, you don't. So I don't know if that resonated with the defense or not. And hopefully the defense is like, no, of course you don't. I hope they answered that question in their own heads. Then they talked about, of course, the marijuana. Now, the CBD gummies. Dr. Toss says, no, she didn't tell me she was using marijuana. So then the defense introduces the women in health records where she did say she used, I think, one marijuana gummy and said she didn't continue to use it because it wasn't effective for her. I don't know why the prosecution keeps bringing this up. It smacks them in the face every time they do. Yeah. So they ask about the thyroid test yet again, even though, of course, she doesn't know about this. So we're not asking her things that the prosecutor said that she didn't know anything about the thyroid tests. And we're through the looking glass yet again. Guys, if you know us, you know that we're always feeding children. And usually that means we're having to cook something. That's where our place comes in. Our place makes beautiful, high performance kitchenware designed to make home cooking easier, simpler and more enjoyable. Everything is designed to be multifunctional. So you're not filling your kitchen with single use pans and appliances that only do one thing. And in this case, we're going to use the Wunder Oven Pro. And this is important to me with three little kids. Their cookware is made without forever chemicals and has been since day one. It's third party tested to meet global safety standards. Their products aren't just aesthetically pleasing. They generally perform, which is what keeps people coming back. OK, guys, I heard all the hype about the Wunder Oven Pro. And I thought, I don't know, I have so many devices in my kitchen. I am cooking literally three times a day, every single day. I don't know what's going on. I should add yet another appliance to my countertop. Hold up, because I got it. I got the Wunder Oven Pro and I can honestly say it has now become one of my most used appliances in my kitchen. It's eight in one that preheats 60% faster than a traditional oven and cooks up to 40% faster. So meals actually happen quicker. It air fries, it roasts, bakes, toasts, reheats, proofs, dehydrates and broils all in one compact footprint. And every cooking surface is made without forever chemicals. It's especially great for quick meals, reheating leftovers, crisping things up on nights when you don't want to turn off the oven. turn on the full oven. I did that tonight. We were out late. The kids were so hungry. Everyone was dirty. I had maybe 10 minutes to prepare dinner before everything just melted down. So while the kids were still taking off their shoes, washing their hands, I started the Wonder Oven Pro with the air fryer. I made fries, fresh chicken, and vegetables in minutes. They were ready to eat quite literally in 10 minutes and everything tasted amazing. And it fed my entire family of six people. Upgrade your kitchen with Our Place today. Visit fromourplace.com slash prosecute and use code prosecute for 10% off site wide. That's F-R-O-M-O-U-R-P-L-A-C-E.com slash P-R-O-S-E-C-U-T-E and use code prosecute for 10% off site wide. With a 100 day trial of the Wonder Oven Pro, you can get the most out of your kitchen in just a matter of a while. You can try it completely risk free. Then we've reached just like another level of absurdity in this case. So she has repeatedly said that Lindsay did not have any symptoms of mania. Some of those symptoms include hyper speech, pressured speech, various other things. So in one of her documents, she writes not hyper comma pressured speech. So Reddington wants to interpret this as she doesn't have hyper speech, but she's got pressured speech. So he barely gets the question out before the, before Tufts is like, yeah, that's not at all what I'm talking about here. And this was, this was interesting because this was the one time Tufts got feisty. She was like, yeah, you were completely misreading that. Obviously it applies to both. And this is the kind of stupid trick, right? Like once again, if you treat your jurors like idiots, you better hope they're idiots. This is a, as he likes to say, this is a murder case. We're in a murder trial. We're trying to figure out whether or not she actually had these symptoms. She did not have this symptom. It's confirmed by the rest of the document as the prosecution points out on redirect that she did not have this symptom or any other symptom. And he's trying to have some gotcha moment because she didn't put not hyper, no pressured speech instead of just not hyper comma pressured speech. And when she's obviously saying that's not what happened, it's just one of those like absurd things. And then she says, I am telling you, your interpretation of what I wrote is not correct. And he responds as opposed to yours. It's like, yes, she wrote it. She wrote it. And it's not even like, this isn't like some obvious reading typo, right? Like he he's creating a typo. And I just, that was stupid. I'm sorry. Maybe the, you know, look, the Karen Rangers bought every single thing. The defense sold them hook, line and sinker. Maybe this will be the same way. Maybe the judge will be the same way. Maybe the judge will vote not guilty. And I come out and be like, you know what? We really think she was guilty until we realized she did have pressured speech. Maybe that's going to happen, but I've got to think most people would be like, why are you trying to trick me here? Why are you playing games here in this case where three kids are murdered? And I'm trying to figure out whether or not this woman meant to do it or was under some sort of mania. Like, I don't think jurors tasked with this kind of thing who are weeping when they hear the 911 call, who are having to view the autopsy photos of the little gotcha games that maybe the people on Twitter like, and maybe you get a lot of praise from YouTube. But let me tell you, I don't think the jurors appreciate that. And I guess we'll just see what happens, but this is not advancing the ball in my opinion. Okay. So then we have redirect because we need to have read or this is no, it's redirect redirect. So the same record he was talking about where throughout the record, it says there's no evidence of mania, including speech issues. Then we have to go over the whole thing. So we have to go over the whole thing. So we have a thyroid again to clarify the question that the prosecutor asked that she doesn't know anything about that the defense attorney attacked on cross. And then of course we have to have re recross where he asked yet another question about the thyroid records that she doesn't know anything about him. It's silly. It was crazy. The judge should have stopped it, but he did not. And I was tired for her. So we got to one other witness today. And that was Julie Paul. You guys may remember her because she's a licensed nurse practitioner who was recommended or maybe friends with Lindsay Clancy's mother-in-law. Now, Julie Paul spoke about why she went into perinatal care. She said she, you know, already had her degree, but she felt compelled to go back into perinatal care because there were so few resources available for postpartum women. So she started a program at and she got to know Patrick's mom, Sue, where they both worked at South Shore. On November 20th, Sue Clancy calls Julie Paul. And as a result, she gets in contact with Lindsay Clancy. And she does talk to Lindsay on her personal phone. This was like going back and forth for a long time. The point being like, she's reaching out like a family friend, but also as a practitioner. And she was fine for the first 12 weeks after Callan was born. But when Patrick went back to work, Lindsay said she had anxiety. And that's very typical of, you know, new moms. So she said that she'd met with a psychiatrist and also said she'd been in the emergency room and that she had tried Zoloft for a week. Ativan and Benadryl were working well, but she was concerned about becoming dependent on those drugs. So Lindsay told Nurse Paul that she weaned herself off of that, which we know is not true because she was continuing to take Ativan and that she did not want to be on any sort of long-term care. And so she said, well, I'm going to go to the hospital and I'm going to take the long-term medications. And she also reported to Paul that Trazodone somewhat helped her. Can you believe she didn't get all her records while she was talking to her on her personal cell phone? What a travesty. And let me just say about Julie Paul, the woman, like, bless her for all the efforts she put into perinatal care and helping postpartum women. And the willingness she had, she had a calling to go back and do this. She started this program. No telling how many women she helped. If this defense attorney- If she tries to pull what he pulled today on this woman, I'm going to be irritated. And I think a lot of people will be too. I think this woman does not deserve, I'm not saying the Tufts did. This woman does not deserve the treatment. She so clearly, she was like a more, this is not her fourth year of practicing. She was like a more mature nurse practitioner. And it was very clear the way she spoke that she had a passion. And this was difficult. This was a difficult field to go into. She was talking to Lindsay on her personal phone, right? Doctors are like, or nurse practitioners are like, only talk to me through my chart, you know, online or something like that. She's talking to her to try and help this woman. So they meet. Oh, another thing I want to point out. I'm just continuously becoming more and more obsessed with Ativan. Many of you have written in, doctors, about Ativan, about how it can be addictive, the dangers of Ativan. I just wonder about Ativan. I'm becoming more and more curious about whether Ativan, not amitriptyline, but whether Ativan could have been a trigger. It's interesting that she says she doesn't want to be on long-term medications because Ativan. Ativan is not a long-term medication. Exactly. Exactly. Ativan is as needed. So is she sort of trying to signal like, you know, Ativan's working great. I don't want to be on long-term medication. Maybe I could just have some Ativan for when I need it. I don't know that that's true, but the Ativan angle is becoming more and more interesting. You can trick yourself, right? If it's not for long-term use, but you end up popping it every day, then it's not long-term medication. I don't want to necessarily, you know, demonize Ativan. There are doctors who prescribe Ativan for long-term use. There are people who've written into us who use Ativan on a regular basis. So I don't necessarily even know that Ativan is something you can't use like that, but I think it is certainly possible one could have some sort of dependency on it. And maybe there could be some long-term or even short-term side effects. Okay. So she talks about talking to Lindsay on the 20th and, you know, she didn't use illicit drugs. She didn't use tobacco. She's saying, you know, she didn't use alcohol, which is another question I have, whether that's true. By that point, by November 20th, she had stopped breastfeeding at that point. On November 21st, they have the intake and the major concern that Lindsay shared is the same one she shared with just about everybody. She couldn't sleep. That was a big problem. She talks about the gummy briefly. She tried Zoloft. She had not taken her bus par yet, but she had taken Ativan. In college, she tried Welbutrin and Prozac with no side effects other than some sexual assault. Nurse Paul described her, and this is a problem for the defense. It's one thing to try and tear down one doctor. If she'd only seen one doctor, that's one thing. But you just have multiple doctors saying the exact same thing. Now, she's not a doctor. She's a nurse practitioner, but whatever. Who cares? And she describes Lindsay as a great historian who actively participated in her care plan. She did a great job of telling her exactly what she was thinking, exactly what she'd been on, what her treatments were, what her prescriptions were. The same thing that you heard from Dr. Tufts. In this case, they did do the Edinburgh test for postnatal depression and other screenings, and it indicated extreme anxiety and depression. The same thing, by the way, that Dr. Tufts had diagnosed Lindsay as having. And the most important part of the Edinburgh test was negative. And what was the negative for? Suicidality. And this was something that gave Nurse Paul some comfort, because this is what she really looks for. Talked about how she's planned to go back to work in October, but she had pushed back to November, and she eventually has. you know is going to try and push back to january and they discussed putting her on prozac which i had forgotten she was even on prozac at this point it had a history of success so she gave her a prescription for prozac for the first 10 milligrams for the first few days with 20 to follow if it worked and i'm kind of surprised that the defense didn't hammer on prozac because this is taken later than the zoloft it's also an ssri i think i don't think i'm wrong about that so you think you'd want to point to this as the triggering event i'm not sure why they don't we'll see what they say later and she knows that prozac is a first-line treatment for depression and it is common to pair it with another drug so they also set her up for therapy with letitia dukes hmm someone else who decides to use medication and talk therapy so she's a clinician at the time in the program and they had scheduled her for an appointment for december 2nd the meeting was 30 minutes with the nurse and 60 minutes with her now she was supposed to come back in two weeks which is a short-term arrangement when she contacted her which was in november before she even was entering kind of this care with lindsey nurse paul had already planned to move back to new hampshire so she was already going to leave in like mid-december so in two weeks time she was going to leave so this was not going to be long-term care at all she was just trying to help her in the time that she was going to leave and she was going to leave in the time that she was going to leave and she had left there now she was there until mid-december and then she moved back to new hampshire which was pre-planned to her ever coming in contact with lindsey as a patient so when she moved nurse paul transferred lindsey's care on november 30th to gelada who they had a few messages back and forth using that online system my chart and we also established of course that lindsey had nurse paul's personal number as well they texted on november 22nd that was of course the initial contact at the time of the appointment and then she was able to move back to new hampshire asking her to be in touch with lindsey and most of their subsequent conversations were through the online program my chart so lindsey had expressed nervousness about starting the prozac but nurse paul encouraged her to take it so on november 23rd lindsey told nurse paul that she started taking zoloft on the 22nd now by the 25th she was told she wasn't tolerating the prozac so i think she just expressed everything was going horribly she wasn't sleeping and so paul told lindsey to stop taking the prozac and instead she told her to start taking clonopin and to stop the ativan so another doctor telling her to stop ativan and i think this is interesting because you're not supposed to take clonopin and ativan together and i'll just what do you think world out there let's say you're not really following this this closely do you think the clonopin worked do you think she liked the clonopin do you think she stuck with the clonopin the thing that would have kept her from taking ativan that's my question for you do you think this worked out so she did say the prozac made her disconnected and spacey the doctor said much like tufts with the other medication that she had no concerns about her stopping because she was on such a low level and she also said look she didn't have buy-in to the prozac so there was no point in continuing she also prescribed remeron and she said i rely heavily on what the patient reports to me i have we heard that before yeah no no doctors have ever said that that's crazy wait did dr tough say that too oh yeah she did so she's relying on that and what does lindsey tell her well the remeron was working and she asked if she could increase it to stay asleep longer and the doctor said that she could but she stopped taking clonopin after two days and she described that she was having some disorientation she wasn't feeling like herself and so the clonopin gets stopped so now she's on remeron but not clonopin that was on november 27th on november 28th she sent a message she needed a note for work then she decided not to do that that she was just to go on personal leave she wasn't going to go back in november on november 28th she had a panic attack and at this point the doctor suggests what are we going to use for a panic attack let's go back to that event it's worked so well before let's do that also suggested a partial hospitalization at women and infants lindsey told her that wouldn't work for her she didn't want to do that and she said no she didn't want to do that and she also told her she should go on the long run because she knew that runs had always been helpful for lindsey in the past and she thought maybe this would work out for her and make her feel better so on november 29th this is all in very fast succession remember they first communicated november 22nd but nurse paul is leaving the practice so on november 29th that is when lindsey first meets rebecca gelotta who nurse paul is going to transfer her care to and nurse paul received a message from lindsey that morning saying that she was taking care of taking the remeron and that she also took a cbd gummy but that the cbd gummy didn't do much and so she also went on to say that she had tried those breathing exercises and meditation but she decided to take the ativan because her panic attack was so bad at this point lindsey's care was transferred to gelotta and that was the end of nurse paul's contact with her so they were really just in contact for like a really intense week i think she still got sued i think she's still in the lawsuit even though she's a week seven like seven days and once again just how responsive she was she's talking to you every day she's talking to her on on her cell phone she's texting with her she's talking to her on my chart one thing i did want to note this is relevant again for the like the broader not not for the legal case i think it was nurse paul who explained what therapeutic levels was and she's like well yeah therapeutic levels take four to six weeks to reach and maybe this was tough i'm sorry one of them said it and they explained it very well they said you're not going to see effects of the cbd gummy but you're not going to see effects of the cbd gummy any of these medications any of the ones that we've been talking about these 13 or beyond in one or two days or even a week or even two weeks it takes four to six weeks for them to reach a level that is meant to help subside the symptoms they were meant to treat now this was explained to lindsey and lindsey as a nurse likely also knew this independent from being told this by her practitioners she didn't even get close to four to six weeks on any single one of these drugs so what you have into that but her experience is not indicative of what medications can do for mental health treatment because there wasn't even a chance for them to reach those therapeutic levels so that's the end of the day we're gonna have cross tomorrow hopefully the defense attorney i think well he should definitely take a different tact with this witness i just think he should i think you should use this witness to talk about postpartum psychosis how hard it is to treat how hard it is to see you know how this woman's dedicated her life to it and even she didn't see it like there's not always someone to believe now i know we all want to blame somebody and i understand the defense wants to give someone to blame other than lindsey i totally get that but it could just be the case that lindsey had such a difficult mental issue that she was struggling with and the complications thereof that even someone who had dedicated their career to this didn't see it and that's fine and it doesn't mean that nurse paul is a failure or she needs to be sued or she's conducting malpractice it doesn't mean that in fact it's even better if she doesn't see it and she doesn't see it and she doesn't see it even better if nurse paul was doing a great job and still couldn't see it because it was so deep and it was so hard to see and it had such a control over lindsey that she couldn't even share her own thoughts that's so much better than just bashing her like angry old man shaking his fist at the sky you don't have it cross-examination doesn't have to be that and it doesn't have to be that with this witness and so i'm hoping we'll see something different tomorrow we'll see if he takes feedback and if he will adjust we'll see so one thing i wanted to know i realize especially seeing how many people are in this particular live that some of you may be finding us for the first time with this trial and you might be thinking wow who are these two fiery people and so we don't always cover trials in real time like this really it's only the the real depressing ones shall we say the real child murder ones that we always say we dislike the most but we've only done this a couple of times so you're actually catching us in the midst of kind of one of our special eras shall we say we by famously it's only famous but it's only famous because we've done this a couple of times and we've done this a but we covered the murder trial in real time which was very intense to do so whenever you cover these trials i'm sure you guys know because you guys are probably watching this in real time we're both practicing attorneys and we watch the trials just like you do in real time and you know sneak in every free moment during the day to try and get all the information and report it back to you in real time because we've been prosecutors and we have no special insight into this trial other than what you're seeing except we've been there and we're trying to shed some light on you know what the strategy may be and we're trying to shed some light on what the strategy may be and we're trying how it's coming off to the jury and you know you're always going to be able to see things better when you're not in the midst of the trial we get that we've been in the middle of trial where you can barely see two feet in front of you because you have no sleep and you've been prepping all day but we're trying to give you some insight into what's happening with trial typically what we do is we cover stories more in a storytelling format so for example scott peterson has really made the news today or every single day i guess when you have documentaries written about you all the time we cover cases like scott peterson and add more stories to it and we cover cases like scott peterson on syed and john bonnet ramsey and cases you've probably never heard of before and they're not in the format that you're hearing now so if you've never heard of us before i don't know give us a try we don't rant quite as much but maybe i do look at alice selling the podcast i'm trying i'm trying to do my i don't want you to leave us when this trial is over i want you to stick with us i'm actually interested while we're just doing public service announcements here i'm interested if people enjoy this like this is do you like should we do this more often should we do this should we have a trial thread yeah you know it might kill us but we'll do it it might kill us i'm very tired in September. I was thinking about doing that one. I don't know. We'll just have to see. We can do it. So this has been fun. Look, we are covered up in our emails right now. I'm sorry that we haven't shared more. You guys have sent us so many fantastic emails with your thoughts, with your expertise, with your experience. It's been incredible. I hope you're seeing us, even if we're not reading the emails, including that knowledge that you're providing and experience that you're providing in our discussion in this case. So I hope you're seeing that. Thank you so much. Keep sending them. We're reading them. We're just not getting to read all of them because these episodes are going kind of long. Continue to shoot us those emails. Prosecutorspod at gmail.com at ProsecutorsPod for all your social media, for Twitter, for Instagram, for TikTok. If you want to join the gallery, do that. It's on Facebook. It's our fan run, fan moderated, fan created group on Facebook. So much fun. Tons of great discussion on this case. We'll get a little fiery, but that's okay. We're all friends. We're all friends at the end of the day. So it's fine. Also, if you want to watch us record these episodes live, you can join Patreon. If you would rather just get them early and ad free because you hate ads because everybody does. We also provide those through Patreon or you can join Apple subscriptions. And if you want to watch us record these, but not live and you'd rather have us edit out all the little mistakes and coughs and everything else. What mistakes? You can join our sub stack, the True Crime Times. Just Google the Prosecutors True Crime Times. You'll find it and you can see those videos as well. All right, Alice. Been going for an hour and 45 minutes. Do you have anything else you want to add before we sign off? I feel like I'm older because I'm more tired than when we did Murdoch. I know, seriously. Like there really is. Murdoch was a jaunt in the park compared to this. It felt like it. I don't know, honestly, because there was someone we could, this one is very complex in the sense of like nobody wins. We've said this all along. Like Murdoch murdered his wife. His own child and wife. And it was kind of easy to just like hold him accountable for all of that. And this one is obviously a little bit more complex and a little bit more emotional because I think all of us touch upon this case in our own way, in our own experiences. And like you said at the very beginning, this will have and already is having an effect on the way mental health is viewed for everybody and certainly for women who are in a postpartum stage. And I'm not sure it's a particularly positive one and that saddens me because as someone who's been postpartum, I don't know, a million times at this point, it is a difficult time for anyone whether they're suffering from mental health struggles or not. And it's not like we need another thing to make it more difficult. So if you're there, hang on, get help. You know, she is not you, as I've said, and you are not her. This is truly an extraordinary case. And as we get more and more testimony out, I think you'll begin to see how this is not your typical case. I mean, look, trials are supposed to be truth-finding exercises. They're also not the real world. And what the defense attorney says isn't necessarily true. And what people say about the cases isn't necessarily true. And this case has taken on a life of its own at this point. And people are using this case to push their own views and their own opinions and everything else. And some of those views and opinions are true and some of them are as untrue as they could possibly be. If you're out there struggling, somebody, if you're out there struggling, I posted about this on Facebook and they're like, well, I would hope no one would get their medical advice on trials. And I was like, I have lots of hopes in life. I have lots of hopes, but also, unfortunately, I mean, this is screamed like entertainment. Exactly. Right. If you are someone out there and you're struggling with this stuff, don't let this affect the way you view it. Go out, find yourself someone you trust, get the help you need. That's going to be a lot more valuable for you than what someone says about a true crime trial on TikTok. All right, guys, we may be back tomorrow. Who knows? We'll see how the day goes. We'll probably be back on something. We have a whole other podcast, you guys, that we need to record for. You're apparently pregnant. Someone thinks you're pregnant. Oh, gosh, guys, come on. If we were for every trial, there would not be enough babies in the world. That's true. All right, guys, this has been fun. We will see you soon. But until then, I'm Brett. And I'm Alice. We'll see you next time. across the street from Peabody. There you go. Where a horrendous murder happened. We should cover it. We should cover that. That was a Yale-Harvard fight right there. Is my sound too loud? I turned it down last time. You sound fine to me. It's only when you get excited and scream into the microphone that it becomes a problem. But then it's going to be any time I scream. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. They'd love for you to discuss the verdict of the Lindsay Clancy case. We don't know when that will happen, so can you just keep open your late August, early September? And I'm like, sure. Okay, yeah, I will keep open a month. And I just said, yes, of course, I'm happy to talk about it. Some woman's football podcast wants me to come on? I was like. Is that what it is? I was like, yeah, I'm happy to talk about it. Hello, and welcome to PlutoFo. If you know the name of the movie you'd like to see, just stream it for free on Pluto TV, where all your blockbuster favorites are landing all summer long. Catch Anchorman, The Legend of Ron Burgundy. Fantastic. The Matrix Trilogy. Welcome to the real world. Mean Girls. Shut up. Titanic. I'm the king of the world! And so much more. For showtimes, press nothing. They're free, 24-7. That is so fetch. On Pluto TV. Stream now, pay never.