Elyse, we heard Clancy's lawyer argue, where is the evidence that she did this? Does that show a departure from her earlier defense?

Good morning and thank you for having me.

Yes, so Kevin Reddington is making the argument that he wanted to make a trial but was not able to.

Essentially, when you go forward with a criminal responsibility defense, you have to, as a lawyer, actually concede that your client did it in order to ask for the jury to find her not criminally responsible.

And that removes your ability as a lawyer to go forward with the presumption of innocence and argue reasonable doubt.

He wanted to bifurcate.

He wanted to split the trial to figure out, does the jury think she's guilty or not, and then argue criminal responsibility that was denied.

Talk a little bit more about how that potentially could impact a new trial if, in fact, there is a new trial.

do you think this all ends uh do you think that there's that this is heading towards not an acquittal but not guilty by reason of insanity or do you think some jurors might struggle

i think the prosecution is hoping that some of the jurors struggle with the emotional aspect of it and the immorality of it and just the ultimate outcome which is three children are dead because of her you know, undisputedly, but to move past the emotion, the defense and the court is going to instruct the jury to move past the emotion, put the emotion aside, put any pity or anger or empathy aside and look at what is the burden of proof? What are the elements? And did they prosecution prove this beyond a reasonable doubt? And I, you know, So even if you think the prosecution is close now, the defense is going to put on a case.

And from what we've heard and what their witness list looks like, it looks like a really strong one.

He's going to have.

But we anticipate and he said that he's going to have an expert in infanticide.

So.

mothers that kill their children and what type of mental illness is involved with that a postpartum psychosis expert so all of the providers that have testified mostly nurses are not postpartum psychosis specialists if anything their postpartum depression where they work with perinatal patients totally different and they were speaking about general psychosis symptoms but from what i understand and working with my experts and we'll hear that from the defense That this particular type of psychosis is totally different.

this whole thing was one of those cases that uh you know I I lived through this in the 90s and remember what a huge cultural impact this had and for the longest time uh it got to the point where we thought this would never be solved and now it is and it's being solved in a way where it's like the guy kind of gave himself up in a book how strong a case is this

Did they ever testify as to like, no, it is kind of quite common for us to handle these types of patients?

That's exactly right.

They... all seemingly testified to very similar things.

She wanted to end her life, but she didn't have a plan to do it.

Unless, so I take that from all of them, unless you have an exact plan as to how you're gonna end your life, it's not an emergency.

How can that be? You know, that might be the procedure and that might be the rule.

But can you not step outside the line for a particularly concerning case? Can you not take it a step further? And they're saying we asked, you know, one of them, the nurse practitioner, I think yesterday she's talking about, well, you know, on cross examination saying, well, you know, if she were wielding a knife.

What do you think? Points scored or not so much?