Massip Jury Urged to Deny Defense Based on Psychosis

The prosecutor in the emotionally charged trial of Sheryl Lynn Massip told jurors Wednesday that finding the Anaheim woman not guilty of murdering her newborn son 18 months ago would be tantamount to giving frustrated young mothers “a license to kill.”

“We’d be in bad shape as far as our society goes” if women such as Massip are not punished for killing their children, Deputy Dist. Atty. Thomas James Borris said during closing arguments in Superior Court in Santa Ana.

Borris and defense attorney Milton C. Grimes are expected to wrap up their arguments today, followed by instructions to the jury in the complex case by Judge Robert R. Fitzgerald.

The fate of the 24-year-old Massip--who admits running over her 6-week-old son with the family car, dumping the infant’s body in a trash can and telling police that the child had been kidnaped--will then be in the hands of a jury of eight women and four men.

The jury will be asked to consider simultaneously two distinct phases of the trial: whether Massip is guilty of consciously murdering her son on her 23rd birthday in April, 1987, and, if so, whether she was sane at the time of the act.

Massip, backed by testimony from several psychiatric experts, has testified that she was insane at the time of the killing, suffering from postpartum psychosis. She is the first defendant in Southern California to use a postpartum defense, which is being used increasingly in other cases, with mixed success.

The condition, which may be hormonally rooted and is thought to afflict about three out of 1,000 new mothers, can cause extreme irritability, anxiety and, in drastic cases, sparks of violence, researchers testified.

Massip testified earlier this month that she suffered hallucinations after her son’s birth and heard voices telling her to “put him out of his misery.” Often unable to eat or sleep, Massip said she was despondent and heard the child’s crying even when she was away from him.

Defense Claims of Insanity Assailed

Borris attacked the defense’s claims of insanity Wednesday, asking the jury: “Do we need psychiatrists to come in and tell us when someone’s crazy?”

He painted Massip as a calm, collected young woman who became frustrated with her colicky newborn, then deliberately and brutally killed the child.

And he labeled as “Johnny-come-latelies” the many friends and family of Massip who testified that, before the killing, she had seemed tired, distraught and prone to unusual behavior, such as not bathing regularly.

Borris asked skeptically why these people did not lend more assistance at the time and came forward only after Massip was charged with murder to offer their stories of her strange behavior.

The prosecutor also attacked the defense’s tactic of diverting attention away from the defendant by “dirtying up” her former husband.

Alfredo Massip, who divorced her shortly after their infant’s killing, was portrayed in defense testimony as an unhelpful husband who often became angry with his wife and refused to let her seek medical help for her condition.

Borris reminded the jury: “Alfredo Massip is not on trial in this courtroom. The issue is whether or not the defendant killed her baby.”