November 1, 2023 • 22 mins
The judge prepares to rule in Catherine’s competency hearing. Will Troy finally get the justice he’s been seeking for almost a decade?
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
It's the latest turn in a battle by Montgomery County
Prosecutor John McCarthy to get Hoggle declared competent to stand trial,
despite doctor's opinions that she's not. Hogel has been in
a secure state psychiatric hospital since the children's disappearance in
twenty fourteen. Their bodies have never been found, and.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
April doctors report at Hogle's competency is unrestorable. The state's
attorney's office has continuously challenged this conclusion.
Speaker 3 (00:30):
It's November twenty twenty two, and Catherine Hoggle, charged with
two counts of murder, has been considered incompetent for nearly
five years.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
The Montgomery County community has wondered what happened to three
year old Sarah and two year old Jacob. Their mother,
thirty six year old Katherine Hoggele, was the last person
seen with them. She was charged with murder after refusing,
police say to share any information about their whereabouts.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
The media following the case has ebbed and flowed over
the years since the kids disappeared, but this week they
are back in full force. In three days, murder charges
will be dropped against Catherine Hoggele if she is not
found competent to stand twile this is according to state law.
Speaker 4 (01:25):
Hey really down to the wire here, huh Yeah.
Speaker 5 (01:29):
Three days of.
Speaker 3 (01:30):
Hearings, Sarah and I are catching up with Troy Turner,
his wife Stephanie, and their friend and lawyer, Matt Alleged.
Speaker 6 (01:38):
It's just really overwhelming. I don't know.
Speaker 7 (01:41):
I mean, I think she's going to be out.
Speaker 4 (01:43):
I just think she's going to be out, and I.
Speaker 3 (01:45):
Think that's the wrong thing.
Speaker 8 (01:47):
I think that society looks at her as a child murderer,
and so they're like, dude, we'll never let someone like
her out.
Speaker 9 (01:54):
But that's just not the way the world works.
Speaker 5 (01:57):
My read is that it doesn't look good.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
Over three days, Judge James Bonifront has been hearing testimony
about whether or not Catherine could capably assist her attorney
in her own defense. As part of the state's argument,
prosecutors asked the judge to go back and watch tapes
of Catherine during this and prior hearings to pay attention
to her interactions with her attorney, David Felson, her attentiveness
(02:26):
and body language.
Speaker 5 (02:29):
During the cross examination.
Speaker 1 (02:31):
She's sitting there yelling at the attorney, pulling him over,
pointing at notes telling him things.
Speaker 10 (02:37):
The last day she came in, she brought in a
piece of paper to Felson, handed to him where she
had highlighted things for him.
Speaker 1 (02:43):
I mean that's where I keep going.
Speaker 10 (02:44):
Well, there has to be at least some chance because
they were literally doing in front of him what they're saying.
Speaker 5 (02:50):
They can't do.
Speaker 11 (02:53):
All right, Well, well you really await news and thank
you for your time again tonight.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
Thanks thanks Bie.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
I'm Beth Carris and this is Unrestorable, an original podcast
from anonymous content and iHeartRadio.
Speaker 4 (03:28):
So doctor Brown, would you please raise your right hand
and listen to the courtroom clerk.
Speaker 12 (03:33):
Please THEMSLF swear or firma the bounties a perjurb that
the response is giving us think it's maybe the whole
truth or nothing but the truth.
Speaker 5 (03:41):
He thank you.
Speaker 3 (03:44):
This is the hearing Troy has been pushing for for
more than eight years. He wants Catherine questioned by a judge,
her competency examined by a court outside of what he
sees as her protectors at Perkins. He's been trying to
convince anyone who will listen that Catherine needs to be
(04:05):
held accountable. This competency hearing is his last chance. If
she is yet again determined to be not competent to
stand trial, the murder charges will be dismissed in advance
of the December first deadline, and Troy's determination to have
her charged with his children's murders will be defeated. Maybe
(04:26):
for good.
Speaker 5 (04:29):
Doctor Stationer, informing Adam Brown, thank you.
Speaker 3 (04:35):
Doctor Adam Brown, a psychiatrist at Clipton T. Perkins Psychiatric Hospital,
is the doctor who most recently evaluated Catherine and concluded
she was incompetent.
Speaker 5 (04:49):
When you conducted your evaluation of miss Hovell. What diagnosis did.
Speaker 3 (04:53):
You confirm, doctor Brown, is being questioned by David Felson,
Catherine's attorney.
Speaker 12 (05:00):
I confirm the diagnosis of schizophrenia any other diagnosis. She
also has diagnoses of a major depressive disorder and generalized
anxiety disorder.
Speaker 11 (05:11):
And are the psychotic related manifestations concerning that diagnosis, Yes,
there are.
Speaker 5 (05:18):
Can you explain to the court what is psychosis?
Speaker 12 (05:22):
So in a general sin psychosis is the main product
of schizophrenia's kind of the syndroom that schizophrenia produces, so
generally that in a nutshell is disconnection from reality and
one or more ways you know, they're commonly understood disconnects
are auditory hallucinations or visual hallucination.
Speaker 11 (05:45):
Someone with psychosis, as you've described, says it manifests itself
with miss Hoggle. Can they answer questions like who's the judge?
What the charges are against you? In other words, what
we've been calling sort of the prong one question.
Speaker 12 (06:02):
Yes, they can, As in my report, in some of
the examples of miss Hoggle answering those questions, she might
initially answer the question correctly, albeit maybe superficially. It is
just kind of a generalization for most of her responses
during my assessment, But then she would derail, as a
term used for it. She would move on to another
(06:23):
topic that was either loosely related or.
Speaker 5 (06:26):
Not related at all to the prior question.
Speaker 12 (06:28):
So, even when she answered the question appropriately, if allowed
to continue to remove very far our way from the response.
Speaker 5 (06:36):
That was needed.
Speaker 3 (06:40):
This question of derailing is key to the insistence that
Catherine is not competent to assist counsel. That while she might,
upon superficial examination appear capable and aware, that appearance masks
a highly disoriented core that prevents her from grappling with
anything beyond the most basic question. From what doctor Brown describes,
(07:03):
she just isn't capable of providing the kind of complex
information required to defend herself against murder charges, information like
alibi witnesses and exculpatory evidence. But for the prosecution, the
question isn't one of Catherine's capacities. It's what she's willing
and unwilling to do. And this is the tag Assistant
(07:25):
State's Attorney Ryan Wexler takes as she cross examines doctor Brown.
Speaker 8 (07:31):
It's certainly possible that Miss Hoggle is making a choice
to derail because she doesn't want to answer questions about
her case.
Speaker 3 (07:44):
That's possible, isn't it.
Speaker 5 (07:46):
It's possible, but I don't think that's what's going on.
Speaker 8 (07:51):
You heard mister Turner testify last week, right, and that
he testified that Miss Hoggle told him that she was
advised to stay incompetent.
Speaker 7 (08:05):
I call that.
Speaker 3 (08:05):
Yes, Troy Turner isn't the only person who has noted
that Catherine has expressed interest in remaining incompetent. Another psychiatrist
at Perkins, doctor Christian Tullibson, also examined Catherine.
Speaker 8 (08:21):
And were you also aware that in doctor Tollisson's report
when doctor Tollison talked to Miss Hoggle. Miss Hoggel told
her she did not want to become competent. Were you
aware of that?
Speaker 5 (08:37):
No, I've not read doctor Tullison's report.
Speaker 8 (08:42):
That if miss Hoggle stays incompetent, her case will be
dismissed by the court.
Speaker 3 (08:50):
Right sure, Doctor Brown was a witness for Catherine's side.
Doctor Tullison was called by the state.
Speaker 13 (09:00):
You know, competency is in the moment, it's in the
here and now, But it's also a question of their
capacity to be competent. So we're looking at somebody's underlying
abilities to sort of rise to the occasion.
Speaker 5 (09:20):
You know, can they.
Speaker 13 (09:22):
You know, can they pull themselves together if they have to?
So I'm looking I'm looking at the how you know, like,
what what have they been doing in the past. How
does that affect their ability to, you know, be able
to pull themselves together at certain times for their court proceedings.
Speaker 6 (09:45):
Is there a difference between capacity and willingness to become confident?
Speaker 14 (09:51):
In your opinions, plenty of defendants are fully capable of
being competent, But will you know, exhibit all sorts of
symptoms in order to.
Speaker 5 (10:03):
Not be competent?
Speaker 3 (10:08):
Doctor Tellibson was also questioned about whether doctor Brown's assessment
was sufficient. He spent ninety minutes with Catherine, and that
was seven months prior to this hearing.
Speaker 6 (10:20):
In the course of a normal evaluation for competency, would
you feel comfortable announcing an opinion relative to competency if
you had not seen the patient for seven months.
Speaker 14 (10:33):
I could talk about what I thought the defendant.
Speaker 5 (10:38):
Was like seven months ago.
Speaker 3 (10:40):
But you know, sometimes it depends on the defendant.
Speaker 15 (10:45):
Because I've certainly had patients or defendants at Clifton T.
Perkins who were exactly the same from year to year
to year, and so you know, seven months.
Speaker 5 (10:59):
Is not going to make that much of a difference.
Speaker 14 (11:00):
But when you have a defendant or a patient who
is doing.
Speaker 15 (11:06):
Education trials, or situations changing, or things are revolving in
their case, then you would want to revisit them right
before their court appearments.
Speaker 6 (11:18):
If there was evidence in the records that you were
examining that suggested that the defendant that you were evaluating
refused to answer questions that were asked of them because
they were following the advice of their counsel not to
answer the question. Would you consider that in terms of competency.
Speaker 13 (11:41):
I think that would be evidence of their ability to
work with their.
Speaker 3 (11:44):
Attorney up to this point. After new where is hearings,
dozens of reports, years in a psychiatric hospital. What we
(12:05):
know about Catherine we know through others. This hearing would
bring something different to the table.
Speaker 5 (12:14):
What are your name?
Speaker 7 (12:15):
Happened Ashley Hackel?
Speaker 3 (12:17):
This hearing would have a judge ask Catherine questions directly.
Speaker 5 (12:23):
Thank you? How old are you? Thirty six? What's your birthday?
Eleven thirteen eighty six? Do you know what evidence is?
Speaker 4 (12:38):
Yes, sir, mat don't want you tell me anything about
circumstances in this case, but generally, what is evidence?
Speaker 7 (12:49):
Something that makes things, something that's used for a case,
good or bad.
Speaker 4 (13:01):
When someone is charged with crime, should they talk to
an attorney?
Speaker 5 (13:08):
I'm not sure.
Speaker 3 (13:12):
When prosecutors pushed the judge to question Catherine, they submitted
more than a hundred questions they suggested he use to
assess her competency.
Speaker 5 (13:22):
Do you know what attorneys do?
Speaker 7 (13:24):
Yes, sir?
Speaker 5 (13:25):
Tell me what attorneys.
Speaker 7 (13:26):
Do they prosecute or defend station? I mean a client?
Speaker 5 (13:36):
What should an attorney know.
Speaker 7 (13:42):
What happened at the alleged crime?
Speaker 3 (13:46):
Catherine isn't under oath, and this isn't a criminal trial,
but the consequences our major. If the court upholds the
repeated conclusions of incompetency by the doctors at Perkins, then
the charges will be dismissed.
Speaker 5 (14:02):
Is there anything else that they should know?
Speaker 7 (14:07):
I can't think of anything right now. I'm not very
good at public speaking.
Speaker 5 (14:15):
Have you ever heard of the phrase attorney client privilege? Yes, sir,
what do you think that means?
Speaker 7 (14:24):
It's private conversation with you and your attorney?
Speaker 5 (14:30):
Okay, thank you very much, man, thank you.
Speaker 3 (14:34):
And then it was over. The interaction you just heard
isn't a small clip of the exchange between Catherine and
the judge. It's the sum of his questions for her,
eleven questions in total. Even More, each of his questions
(14:55):
appeared related to the first prong of competency, that she
understands the sys and charges and proceedings, something her lawyer
has already conceded. It was impossible to guess what Judge
Bonifront would do with this information. What he saw when
he looked at Catherine Hoggle slightly slumped in her seat,
(15:16):
what he heard when she answered his questions capably, Though,
not without some hesitance and with a certain childlike simplicity.
Were these the answers of a woman who couldn't see
through a fog of mental illness? Were they the words
of a woman who has been scheming, manipulating, lingering, and
ultimately prevailing over any number of medical professionals for the
(15:40):
last eight years. Everyone in the courtroom listened intently, but
maybe most of all was Troy. He was sitting just
feet away, closely watching every move, clocking every statement. Catherine
made a slow reel of eight years of surreal history
(16:00):
flashing through his mind. But all Troy could do was
wait for the afternoon of November thirtieth, twenty twenty two,
when Judge Bonavent delivered his decision.
Speaker 5 (16:13):
All right, thank you, everyone, Please have a scene. All right, everyone.
Speaker 4 (16:23):
The first issue before the court is whether the defendant,
Catherine Hoggele, is presently common.
Speaker 5 (16:29):
To stand trial.
Speaker 3 (16:32):
If the judge decides that Catherine is competent, contradicting the
repeated findings of several doctors at Perkins, then she will
be arraigned on murder charges in the deaths of Jacob
and Sarah, setting up a rare no body double homicide prosecution.
Speaker 4 (16:50):
Pursuant to an indictment handed down September fourteen, twenty seventeen.
Defendant faces two counts of murder. The defendant is charged
with first two murder of her two children, Sarah and Jacob.
The court does not find the state has met its
burdened beyond a reasonable doubt in light of the fact
(17:13):
that has now been five years since the first finding
of dependence and competency. Count one and two of the
indictment are dismissed.
Speaker 3 (17:21):
And with that the murder charges against Catherine Hoggele are gone.
Speaker 4 (17:27):
The court finds the defendant meets their criteria for involuntary confinement.
Prestuan to Section three one O sixty one.
Speaker 3 (17:35):
Catherine will not be released. She will be remanded to
Perkins until she's deemed no longer a threat to herself
or others, but she will be outside of the purview
of the criminal justice system. Now she's just another patient.
Speaker 4 (17:52):
She has been diagnosed with schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, and
general anxiety disorder. She suffers from chronics symptoms of impaired judgment,
poor insight, paranoia, and disorganized thinking. Without the structure and
stability of a hospital setting, she would be a danger
to herself for others. Given the limited insight into illness
(18:12):
and her desire to discontinue her medications, she is unwilling
and unable to sign a voluntary treatment agreement. There is
no less restrictive environment that is consistent with her welfare
and safety.
Speaker 3 (18:28):
After the judge is finished delivering his decision, he invites
Troy to speak to the court.
Speaker 5 (18:34):
Mister turneres, sir, thank you.
Speaker 3 (18:37):
After taking a moment to collect himself, Troy stands. He's
wearing a t shirt with Sarah and Jacob's pictures on it.
Sarah and Jacob are smiling sweetly at the camera, maybe
at their dad.
Speaker 10 (18:51):
This is a travesty, and my kids are gone.
Speaker 5 (18:55):
She's gone, going with her lafe. My kids don't have one.
Speaker 10 (19:00):
They were two and three when they were taken, and
everything that they were ever going to be or accomplished.
Speaker 5 (19:06):
Is taken from them by her.
Speaker 10 (19:08):
And now I have to sit here and listen to
charges to get dropped, and her rights are being talented.
Speaker 5 (19:14):
Where are my kids rights? Where are the children advice
to be safe? Where's anyone's rights? And this whole.
Speaker 10 (19:20):
System other than a criminal like her and I'm telling
you right now, I'm not disregarding that she is mentally ill.
I know that I personally have had her committed. But
what I can tell you is there was a lot
of lies told in this court, none of them by me, but.
Speaker 5 (19:38):
That has all now prevailed. I do appreciate you. I
don't mean any disrespect to you or your sport.
Speaker 10 (19:45):
But the system's broken and it's got to change.
Speaker 5 (19:48):
Thank you.
Speaker 3 (19:56):
A little while later, the state's attorney held a press
conference in front of the courthouse.
Speaker 5 (20:02):
Thank you.
Speaker 6 (20:03):
My name is John McCarthy. I'm a states attorney from
Montgomery County. The charges were dismissed against her today by
Judge Bonifitt in court about five minutes ago, but there
still remains several important points for the community to know
about this matter. Missago will not be free in the community,
(20:23):
as we just witnessed a few minutes ago. She will
be involuntarily committed by an order assigned by this judge
because she remains a danger to herself for others. She
is committed by court.
Speaker 9 (20:36):
Order today today we have the right to recharge. There
is no double jeopardy that applies here.
Speaker 6 (20:47):
This is not a double jeopardy situation, the state has
the right to recharge. I will tell you, as long
as I'm state's attorney, it would be my intent, if
she is a judge, to be safe to we turned
to the community, the circumstances would be such that we
would recharge her, even if we have to revisit the
(21:10):
issue of competency again. My personal hope is that we
will not have justice ultimately denied but merely delayed.
Speaker 3 (21:31):
The next day, Sarah and I jumped on a plane
and headed to Maryland. Next time Unrestorable, we dive into
the biggest remaining question what happened to Sarah and Jacob,
as far.
Speaker 10 (21:51):
As where their bodies are as a mystery, as far
as what.
Speaker 5 (21:53):
Happened, who took them, who did it?
Speaker 10 (21:56):
There's no mystery there.
Speaker 5 (21:58):
When we first got as she had dirt under her fingernails,
like it.
Speaker 2 (22:02):
Looks like she was in the bloods.
Speaker 15 (22:04):
So there's still a part of me that thinks, hey,
they're still out there and maybe we.
Speaker 5 (22:08):
Just passed on.
Speaker 3 (22:12):
Unrestorable is executive produced and hosted by me Beth Carris
and Sarah Trelevin. Our story editor is Kathleen Goldhar. Mixing
and sound designed by Mitchell Stewart for Anonymous content. Jessica
Grimshaw is our executive producer, Jennifer Sears is our executive
in charge of production, and Nick Yaniez is our legal council.
(22:34):
For iHeart executive producer Christina Everett and supervising producer Abu
Zapfhar
It's the latest turn in a battle by Montgomery County
Prosecutor John McCarthy to get Hoggle declared competent to stand trial,
despite doctor's opinions that she's not. Hogel has been in
a secure state psychiatric hospital since the children's disappearance in
twenty fourteen. Their bodies have never been found, and.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
April doctors report at Hogle's competency is unrestorable. The state's
attorney's office has continuously challenged this conclusion.
Speaker 3 (00:30):
It's November twenty twenty two, and Catherine Hoggle, charged with
two counts of murder, has been considered incompetent for nearly
five years.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
The Montgomery County community has wondered what happened to three
year old Sarah and two year old Jacob. Their mother,
thirty six year old Katherine Hoggele, was the last person
seen with them. She was charged with murder after refusing,
police say to share any information about their whereabouts.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
The media following the case has ebbed and flowed over
the years since the kids disappeared, but this week they
are back in full force. In three days, murder charges
will be dropped against Catherine Hoggele if she is not
found competent to stand twile this is according to state law.
Speaker 4 (01:25):
Hey really down to the wire here, huh Yeah.
Speaker 5 (01:29):
Three days of.
Speaker 3 (01:30):
Hearings, Sarah and I are catching up with Troy Turner,
his wife Stephanie, and their friend and lawyer, Matt Alleged.
Speaker 6 (01:38):
It's just really overwhelming. I don't know.
Speaker 7 (01:41):
I mean, I think she's going to be out.
Speaker 4 (01:43):
I just think she's going to be out, and I.
Speaker 3 (01:45):
Think that's the wrong thing.
Speaker 8 (01:47):
I think that society looks at her as a child murderer,
and so they're like, dude, we'll never let someone like
her out.
Speaker 9 (01:54):
But that's just not the way the world works.
Speaker 5 (01:57):
My read is that it doesn't look good.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
Over three days, Judge James Bonifront has been hearing testimony
about whether or not Catherine could capably assist her attorney
in her own defense. As part of the state's argument,
prosecutors asked the judge to go back and watch tapes
of Catherine during this and prior hearings to pay attention
to her interactions with her attorney, David Felson, her attentiveness
(02:26):
and body language.
Speaker 5 (02:29):
During the cross examination.
Speaker 1 (02:31):
She's sitting there yelling at the attorney, pulling him over,
pointing at notes telling him things.
Speaker 10 (02:37):
The last day she came in, she brought in a
piece of paper to Felson, handed to him where she
had highlighted things for him.
Speaker 1 (02:43):
I mean that's where I keep going.
Speaker 10 (02:44):
Well, there has to be at least some chance because
they were literally doing in front of him what they're saying.
Speaker 5 (02:50):
They can't do.
Speaker 11 (02:53):
All right, Well, well you really await news and thank
you for your time again tonight.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
Thanks thanks Bie.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
I'm Beth Carris and this is Unrestorable, an original podcast
from anonymous content and iHeartRadio.
Speaker 4 (03:28):
So doctor Brown, would you please raise your right hand
and listen to the courtroom clerk.
Speaker 12 (03:33):
Please THEMSLF swear or firma the bounties a perjurb that
the response is giving us think it's maybe the whole
truth or nothing but the truth.
Speaker 5 (03:41):
He thank you.
Speaker 3 (03:44):
This is the hearing Troy has been pushing for for
more than eight years. He wants Catherine questioned by a judge,
her competency examined by a court outside of what he
sees as her protectors at Perkins. He's been trying to
convince anyone who will listen that Catherine needs to be
(04:05):
held accountable. This competency hearing is his last chance. If
she is yet again determined to be not competent to
stand trial, the murder charges will be dismissed in advance
of the December first deadline, and Troy's determination to have
her charged with his children's murders will be defeated. Maybe
(04:26):
for good.
Speaker 5 (04:29):
Doctor Stationer, informing Adam Brown, thank you.
Speaker 3 (04:35):
Doctor Adam Brown, a psychiatrist at Clipton T. Perkins Psychiatric Hospital,
is the doctor who most recently evaluated Catherine and concluded
she was incompetent.
Speaker 5 (04:49):
When you conducted your evaluation of miss Hovell. What diagnosis did.
Speaker 3 (04:53):
You confirm, doctor Brown, is being questioned by David Felson,
Catherine's attorney.
Speaker 12 (05:00):
I confirm the diagnosis of schizophrenia any other diagnosis. She
also has diagnoses of a major depressive disorder and generalized
anxiety disorder.
Speaker 11 (05:11):
And are the psychotic related manifestations concerning that diagnosis, Yes,
there are.
Speaker 5 (05:18):
Can you explain to the court what is psychosis?
Speaker 12 (05:22):
So in a general sin psychosis is the main product
of schizophrenia's kind of the syndroom that schizophrenia produces, so
generally that in a nutshell is disconnection from reality and
one or more ways you know, they're commonly understood disconnects
are auditory hallucinations or visual hallucination.
Speaker 11 (05:45):
Someone with psychosis, as you've described, says it manifests itself
with miss Hoggle. Can they answer questions like who's the judge?
What the charges are against you? In other words, what
we've been calling sort of the prong one question.
Speaker 12 (06:02):
Yes, they can, As in my report, in some of
the examples of miss Hoggle answering those questions, she might
initially answer the question correctly, albeit maybe superficially. It is
just kind of a generalization for most of her responses
during my assessment, But then she would derail, as a
term used for it. She would move on to another
(06:23):
topic that was either loosely related or.
Speaker 5 (06:26):
Not related at all to the prior question.
Speaker 12 (06:28):
So, even when she answered the question appropriately, if allowed
to continue to remove very far our way from the response.
Speaker 5 (06:36):
That was needed.
Speaker 3 (06:40):
This question of derailing is key to the insistence that
Catherine is not competent to assist counsel. That while she might,
upon superficial examination appear capable and aware, that appearance masks
a highly disoriented core that prevents her from grappling with
anything beyond the most basic question. From what doctor Brown describes,
(07:03):
she just isn't capable of providing the kind of complex
information required to defend herself against murder charges, information like
alibi witnesses and exculpatory evidence. But for the prosecution, the
question isn't one of Catherine's capacities. It's what she's willing
and unwilling to do. And this is the tag Assistant
(07:25):
State's Attorney Ryan Wexler takes as she cross examines doctor Brown.
Speaker 8 (07:31):
It's certainly possible that Miss Hoggle is making a choice
to derail because she doesn't want to answer questions about
her case.
Speaker 3 (07:44):
That's possible, isn't it.
Speaker 5 (07:46):
It's possible, but I don't think that's what's going on.
Speaker 8 (07:51):
You heard mister Turner testify last week, right, and that
he testified that Miss Hoggle told him that she was
advised to stay incompetent.
Speaker 7 (08:05):
I call that.
Speaker 3 (08:05):
Yes, Troy Turner isn't the only person who has noted
that Catherine has expressed interest in remaining incompetent. Another psychiatrist
at Perkins, doctor Christian Tullibson, also examined Catherine.
Speaker 8 (08:21):
And were you also aware that in doctor Tollisson's report
when doctor Tollison talked to Miss Hoggle. Miss Hoggel told
her she did not want to become competent. Were you
aware of that?
Speaker 5 (08:37):
No, I've not read doctor Tullison's report.
Speaker 8 (08:42):
That if miss Hoggle stays incompetent, her case will be
dismissed by the court.
Speaker 3 (08:50):
Right sure, Doctor Brown was a witness for Catherine's side.
Doctor Tullison was called by the state.
Speaker 13 (09:00):
You know, competency is in the moment, it's in the
here and now, But it's also a question of their
capacity to be competent. So we're looking at somebody's underlying
abilities to sort of rise to the occasion.
Speaker 5 (09:20):
You know, can they.
Speaker 13 (09:22):
You know, can they pull themselves together if they have to?
So I'm looking I'm looking at the how you know, like,
what what have they been doing in the past. How
does that affect their ability to, you know, be able
to pull themselves together at certain times for their court proceedings.
Speaker 6 (09:45):
Is there a difference between capacity and willingness to become confident?
Speaker 14 (09:51):
In your opinions, plenty of defendants are fully capable of
being competent, But will you know, exhibit all sorts of
symptoms in order to.
Speaker 5 (10:03):
Not be competent?
Speaker 3 (10:08):
Doctor Tellibson was also questioned about whether doctor Brown's assessment
was sufficient. He spent ninety minutes with Catherine, and that
was seven months prior to this hearing.
Speaker 6 (10:20):
In the course of a normal evaluation for competency, would
you feel comfortable announcing an opinion relative to competency if
you had not seen the patient for seven months.
Speaker 14 (10:33):
I could talk about what I thought the defendant.
Speaker 5 (10:38):
Was like seven months ago.
Speaker 3 (10:40):
But you know, sometimes it depends on the defendant.
Speaker 15 (10:45):
Because I've certainly had patients or defendants at Clifton T.
Perkins who were exactly the same from year to year
to year, and so you know, seven months.
Speaker 5 (10:59):
Is not going to make that much of a difference.
Speaker 14 (11:00):
But when you have a defendant or a patient who
is doing.
Speaker 15 (11:06):
Education trials, or situations changing, or things are revolving in
their case, then you would want to revisit them right
before their court appearments.
Speaker 6 (11:18):
If there was evidence in the records that you were
examining that suggested that the defendant that you were evaluating
refused to answer questions that were asked of them because
they were following the advice of their counsel not to
answer the question. Would you consider that in terms of competency.
Speaker 13 (11:41):
I think that would be evidence of their ability to
work with their.
Speaker 3 (11:44):
Attorney up to this point. After new where is hearings,
dozens of reports, years in a psychiatric hospital. What we
(12:05):
know about Catherine we know through others. This hearing would
bring something different to the table.
Speaker 5 (12:14):
What are your name?
Speaker 7 (12:15):
Happened Ashley Hackel?
Speaker 3 (12:17):
This hearing would have a judge ask Catherine questions directly.
Speaker 5 (12:23):
Thank you? How old are you? Thirty six? What's your birthday?
Eleven thirteen eighty six? Do you know what evidence is?
Speaker 4 (12:38):
Yes, sir, mat don't want you tell me anything about
circumstances in this case, but generally, what is evidence?
Speaker 7 (12:49):
Something that makes things, something that's used for a case,
good or bad.
Speaker 4 (13:01):
When someone is charged with crime, should they talk to
an attorney?
Speaker 5 (13:08):
I'm not sure.
Speaker 3 (13:12):
When prosecutors pushed the judge to question Catherine, they submitted
more than a hundred questions they suggested he use to
assess her competency.
Speaker 5 (13:22):
Do you know what attorneys do?
Speaker 7 (13:24):
Yes, sir?
Speaker 5 (13:25):
Tell me what attorneys.
Speaker 7 (13:26):
Do they prosecute or defend station? I mean a client?
Speaker 5 (13:36):
What should an attorney know.
Speaker 7 (13:42):
What happened at the alleged crime?
Speaker 3 (13:46):
Catherine isn't under oath, and this isn't a criminal trial,
but the consequences our major. If the court upholds the
repeated conclusions of incompetency by the doctors at Perkins, then
the charges will be dismissed.
Speaker 5 (14:02):
Is there anything else that they should know?
Speaker 7 (14:07):
I can't think of anything right now. I'm not very
good at public speaking.
Speaker 5 (14:15):
Have you ever heard of the phrase attorney client privilege? Yes, sir,
what do you think that means?
Speaker 7 (14:24):
It's private conversation with you and your attorney?
Speaker 5 (14:30):
Okay, thank you very much, man, thank you.
Speaker 3 (14:34):
And then it was over. The interaction you just heard
isn't a small clip of the exchange between Catherine and
the judge. It's the sum of his questions for her,
eleven questions in total. Even More, each of his questions
(14:55):
appeared related to the first prong of competency, that she
understands the sys and charges and proceedings, something her lawyer
has already conceded. It was impossible to guess what Judge
Bonifront would do with this information. What he saw when
he looked at Catherine Hoggle slightly slumped in her seat,
(15:16):
what he heard when she answered his questions capably, Though,
not without some hesitance and with a certain childlike simplicity.
Were these the answers of a woman who couldn't see
through a fog of mental illness? Were they the words
of a woman who has been scheming, manipulating, lingering, and
ultimately prevailing over any number of medical professionals for the
(15:40):
last eight years. Everyone in the courtroom listened intently, but
maybe most of all was Troy. He was sitting just
feet away, closely watching every move, clocking every statement. Catherine
made a slow reel of eight years of surreal history
(16:00):
flashing through his mind. But all Troy could do was
wait for the afternoon of November thirtieth, twenty twenty two,
when Judge Bonavent delivered his decision.
Speaker 5 (16:13):
All right, thank you, everyone, Please have a scene. All right, everyone.
Speaker 4 (16:23):
The first issue before the court is whether the defendant,
Catherine Hoggele, is presently common.
Speaker 5 (16:29):
To stand trial.
Speaker 3 (16:32):
If the judge decides that Catherine is competent, contradicting the
repeated findings of several doctors at Perkins, then she will
be arraigned on murder charges in the deaths of Jacob
and Sarah, setting up a rare no body double homicide prosecution.
Speaker 4 (16:50):
Pursuant to an indictment handed down September fourteen, twenty seventeen.
Defendant faces two counts of murder. The defendant is charged
with first two murder of her two children, Sarah and Jacob.
The court does not find the state has met its
burdened beyond a reasonable doubt in light of the fact
(17:13):
that has now been five years since the first finding
of dependence and competency. Count one and two of the
indictment are dismissed.
Speaker 3 (17:21):
And with that the murder charges against Catherine Hoggele are gone.
Speaker 4 (17:27):
The court finds the defendant meets their criteria for involuntary confinement.
Prestuan to Section three one O sixty one.
Speaker 3 (17:35):
Catherine will not be released. She will be remanded to
Perkins until she's deemed no longer a threat to herself
or others, but she will be outside of the purview
of the criminal justice system. Now she's just another patient.
Speaker 4 (17:52):
She has been diagnosed with schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, and
general anxiety disorder. She suffers from chronics symptoms of impaired judgment,
poor insight, paranoia, and disorganized thinking. Without the structure and
stability of a hospital setting, she would be a danger
to herself for others. Given the limited insight into illness
(18:12):
and her desire to discontinue her medications, she is unwilling
and unable to sign a voluntary treatment agreement. There is
no less restrictive environment that is consistent with her welfare
and safety.
Speaker 3 (18:28):
After the judge is finished delivering his decision, he invites
Troy to speak to the court.
Speaker 5 (18:34):
Mister turneres, sir, thank you.
Speaker 3 (18:37):
After taking a moment to collect himself, Troy stands. He's
wearing a t shirt with Sarah and Jacob's pictures on it.
Sarah and Jacob are smiling sweetly at the camera, maybe
at their dad.
Speaker 10 (18:51):
This is a travesty, and my kids are gone.
Speaker 5 (18:55):
She's gone, going with her lafe. My kids don't have one.
Speaker 10 (19:00):
They were two and three when they were taken, and
everything that they were ever going to be or accomplished.
Speaker 5 (19:06):
Is taken from them by her.
Speaker 10 (19:08):
And now I have to sit here and listen to
charges to get dropped, and her rights are being talented.
Speaker 5 (19:14):
Where are my kids rights? Where are the children advice
to be safe? Where's anyone's rights? And this whole.
Speaker 10 (19:20):
System other than a criminal like her and I'm telling
you right now, I'm not disregarding that she is mentally ill.
I know that I personally have had her committed. But
what I can tell you is there was a lot
of lies told in this court, none of them by me, but.
Speaker 5 (19:38):
That has all now prevailed. I do appreciate you. I
don't mean any disrespect to you or your sport.
Speaker 10 (19:45):
But the system's broken and it's got to change.
Speaker 5 (19:48):
Thank you.
Speaker 3 (19:56):
A little while later, the state's attorney held a press
conference in front of the courthouse.
Speaker 5 (20:02):
Thank you.
Speaker 6 (20:03):
My name is John McCarthy. I'm a states attorney from
Montgomery County. The charges were dismissed against her today by
Judge Bonifitt in court about five minutes ago, but there
still remains several important points for the community to know
about this matter. Missago will not be free in the community,
(20:23):
as we just witnessed a few minutes ago. She will
be involuntarily committed by an order assigned by this judge
because she remains a danger to herself for others. She
is committed by court.
Speaker 9 (20:36):
Order today today we have the right to recharge. There
is no double jeopardy that applies here.
Speaker 6 (20:47):
This is not a double jeopardy situation, the state has
the right to recharge. I will tell you, as long
as I'm state's attorney, it would be my intent, if
she is a judge, to be safe to we turned
to the community, the circumstances would be such that we
would recharge her, even if we have to revisit the
(21:10):
issue of competency again. My personal hope is that we
will not have justice ultimately denied but merely delayed.
Speaker 3 (21:31):
The next day, Sarah and I jumped on a plane
and headed to Maryland. Next time Unrestorable, we dive into
the biggest remaining question what happened to Sarah and Jacob,
as far.
Speaker 10 (21:51):
As where their bodies are as a mystery, as far
as what.
Speaker 5 (21:53):
Happened, who took them, who did it?
Speaker 10 (21:56):
There's no mystery there.
Speaker 5 (21:58):
When we first got as she had dirt under her fingernails,
like it.
Speaker 2 (22:02):
Looks like she was in the bloods.
Speaker 15 (22:04):
So there's still a part of me that thinks, hey,
they're still out there and maybe we.
Speaker 5 (22:08):
Just passed on.
Speaker 3 (22:12):
Unrestorable is executive produced and hosted by me Beth Carris
and Sarah Trelevin. Our story editor is Kathleen Goldhar. Mixing
and sound designed by Mitchell Stewart for Anonymous content. Jessica
Grimshaw is our executive producer, Jennifer Sears is our executive
in charge of production, and Nick Yaniez is our legal council.
(22:34):
For iHeart executive producer Christina Everett and supervising producer Abu
Zapfhar
Hosts And Creators
Beth Karas
Sarah Treleaven
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com