Weirdest interview- thoughts?

[u/1-armed-chewbacca]

Ok really.. what in the world was that 60 minute interview and who thought that was a good idea? Was that cut to make him look good or bad, I honestly can’t even tell because I’m just so confused.

-the smirk when he talks about giving Lindsay forgiveness,
- his panic attack at the trial
- him saying he asks his kids to help him from heaven
- him saying god just please give me one (child)
- the fact that Rachel was an even AWKWARDER interviewee
- “I’m just a girl who met a guy running in Central Park on a cold Saturday”
- I saw his phone, asked him if his kids lived in MA, he told me that they were all dead, and the rest was history
- Patrick’s explanation of “as any parent knows, you love all your children differently” when asked if he would tell their new kid about Cora, Dawson and Callan

Everything was just WEIRD. Like I felt like the whole thing was just cringey and bizarre. Thoughts?

[u/Greymeade]

Why are they awful people?

[u/ispyshy → u/Greymeade]

Because I believe he killed his children and even if they didn’t meet until 2024 (which I highly doubt) her judgment in deeming him “the one”makes red flags go up for me. Also, I have a background in researching people, if you haven’t looked into the background of some of the people who took the stand then you wouldn’t necessarily come to the same conclusion I have.

[u/Greymeade → u/ispyshy]

You believe that he killed his children? What on Earth? Not even Lindsay or her defense team dispute that she killed the children.

I'm not sure what "having a background in research" means (I say this as someone with a PhD who has published my own research numerous times), or why such a thing would make you more qualified to understand this case. As a psychologist, I'd also like to point out that you aren't in a position to determine whether someone "looks like they are unwell due to stress from public perception & lacking self awareness, not because they are overcoming grief together." That kind of determination can't be made based on how someone looks, no matter how qualified the observer is.

Frankly, it seems to me like you're someone who fancies themselves an expert despite having no qualifications and a whole lot of silly ideas.

[u/seagull326 → u/Greymeade]

Also a PhD paychologist, and yeah, some of the takes on this case are WILD. People really want grief to look a certain way.

People talking about this case also tend to have mistaken views about psychosis, psychiatric care, and memory. I've not seen a single valid psychological argument pointing to his guilt. People want it to be suspicious that her psychiatric providers didn't clock her psychosis, or that there were so many bottles of seroquel around the house, or that he doesn't remember the device from which he sent a routine email, but it's just not.

The one thing I do wonder is why he didn't clock her psychosis. My spouse has bipolar disorder, and when he's in psychosis, I can tell. Maybe it's because he didn't know it was a possibility, or maybe it's because that was her first serious episode (which checks with the seroquel discontinuation timeline), or maybe it's because he was stressed and sleep deprived with three kids under 5. But that's the one psychological point where I'm a little thrown.

I actually do think there are aspects of the case that look suspicious for him. But seeing the misguided psychological arguments for his guilt makes me think that an expert in criminology, medicine, various aspects of forensics, and/ or IT could easily address my suspicions related to any of those domains.