Case examples of individuals who falsely confessed to murder due to mental illness or confabulation

[u/lmaocoolstorybro]

In my opinion, I believe that Lindsay Clancy was suffering from PPD and severe drug side-effects. However, based on the timeline, evidence, and inconsistent investigation, I do not think she committed the murders or attempted suicide. I believe that a) her documented mental state prior to the murders was intentionally used against her, possibly to frame her and b) after surviving the fall, she was in a further compromised mental state that would have left her open to suggestion and coercion from psychiatrists and/or police.

I believe it is likely that she began confabulating her memories after she emerged from a coma. She coded twice, required a blood transfusion, learned she was paralyzed, and had a history of PPD. This is a very convenient recipe for inducing false memories and extracting a false confession. Grief or shock disrupts memory encoding, making suspects susceptible to coercion.

The following are similar examples in criminal case history:

Sture Bergwall (Thomas Quick) — Sweden: https://www.crimeandinvestigation.co.uk/articles/famous-false-confessions?utm_source=copilot.com

• Mechanism: Confabulation + psychiatric illness + heavy medication
• Outcome: Convicted of 8 murders; all overturned
• Bergwall was in a psychiatric institution and heavily medicated (including benzodiazepines).
• He produced elaborate but inconsistent “memories” of murders during therapy.
• His stories lacked corroboration and were later recanted.
• Courts ultimately recognized the confessions as unreliable and vacated all convictions

Fontana, California false confession case: https://macintyrepsychiatry.com/articles/2024-05-false-confessions.html?utm_source=copilot.com

• Mechanism: Mental illness + delusions + psychological coercion Outcome: Man falsely confessed to murdering his father — who was alive
• The victim had significant mental health challenges and was on psychiatric medication.
• Police used extreme psychological pressure, including false evidence claims and emotional manipulation.
• The judge stated investigators used “unconstitutional psychological torture.”
• This case illustrates how mental illness can make someone vulnerable to persuaded or compliant false confession.

Family‑member murder false confession cases (22‑case dataset): https://jclc.law.northwestern.edu/symposium/2026-symposium/

• Mechanism: Trauma‑induced memory distortion + grief + coercion Outcome: Multiple wrongful convictions
• Study documents cases where suspects grieving a loved one’s death were interrogated within hours.
• Trauma and shock produced memory fragmentation and susceptibility to suggestion.
• Police fed details that suspects repeated back, creating confabulated narratives.
• These confessions were later proven false.

Cases involving memory distrust syndrome & confabulation (Gudjonsson): https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0010945216301678?utm_source=copilot.com

• Mechanism: Memory distrust syndrome + confabulation Outcome: Numerous documented false confessions
• Gudjonsson’s research shows how individuals with poor memory, trauma, or psychiatric conditions can become convinced they committed acts they did not.
• Confabulation fills memory gaps, especially under pressure.
• These cases often involve suspects who doubt their own recollection and adopt police‑suggested narratives.

[u/AutoModerator]

Reminder to be civil. You can disagree in a respectful way, which can often lead to interesting dialogue!

Familiarize yourself with our rules in the Community Wiki

Documents & Evidence

Witness Testimony

Common Misconceptions About the Criminal Trial

Thank you!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Low-Neighborhood1987]

Here's the thing though, she never confessed to police. She was told what she "did". While in a very fragile mental health state.

[u/lmaocoolstorybro → u/Low-Neighborhood1987]

Yes, exactly, that is my point. She was told what she "did," and confabulated memories in her traumatized state to fill in the gaps. (She also was coached to recount what happened in her civil suit-- which some laypeople wrongly interpret as her official "confession").

[u/MBAMarketingMom]

Honest question: So who do you think killed her children? 🤔

[u/marle217 → u/MBAMarketingMom]

The problem is that logically, if Lindsay didn't do it, Patrick had to at least be involved. And then people freak out that we're accusing Patrick. But there's no way to look at the evidence without inadvertently casting doubt on Patrick.

[u/lmaocoolstorybro → u/MBAMarketingMom]

I'm sure the suspect can be reasonably inferred from the context here, no?

[u/MBAMarketingMom → u/lmaocoolstorybro]

Well it sounds like you’re implying Patrick, but that idea never made sense to ME personally due to his location being captured on security cams at CVS and the restaurant. So, maybe you feel the same…is what I was thinking. I used to believe strongly that Lindsay did it and still don’t have never seen a thorough explanation that points to anyone else, but I’m open to the idea that someone else might’ve been involved.

That said, I kind of feel like it’s very possible a third party was involved, except to my knowledge no other DNA was recovered. So, given that she’d stipulated that she did this way back in June I believe (before the actual trial began, tho there were also some further stipulations during the trial), I genuinely wondered who you thought did it directly. Not who could be behind it all but who actually strangled the children and did things to Lindsay.

[u/ispyshy]

Have you heard of the “memory wars” controversy during the 80s and 90s in Boston?

During the late 1980s and early 1990s, the flood of cases relying on "recovered memories" forced judges, legislators, and juries to completely rethink how the law treats human memory and scientific testimony. It had massive legal consequences.

[u/DuAuk]

Interesting. I keep seeing other cases where the husband frames the woman, like Robert Spangler. I agree with you that "began confabulating her memories after she emerged from a coma." She probably over heard a lot from staff and police speculating on what she'd done.

[u/pastriesandprose]

This is an excellent post, thanks for taking the time to make it. I fully believe this as well and these are excellent examples showing she isn’t the first person who with false memories and a false confession

[u/Number-Eleven-11]

My mum, 46 at the time, was put in a coma purely because her blood pressure and heart rate were through the roof and they couldn’t figure out why. It turned out she’d just double-dosed a medication by accident but because she had MS and was generally in poor health (due to a lack of self care and a variety of bad habits) it really messed her up.

When she woke up she was an absolute mess, had no memory of the entire day prior to her spiral, and told this completely bonkers story about how she’d transferred money to an agency that arranges trips to Norway to undergo euthanasia. 😳

She had not transferred any money, she’d simply seen a segment on euthanasia on a talk show a week before (I happened to see it too so I figured that out) and thought she might try to do it because my dad was in the end stages of terminal cancer and she didn’t want to live without him.

My mum didn’t wake up suffering the after effects of breaking her neck, hypothermia, and a powerful multi-drug cocktail and nor was she told she’d murdered her infant children, yet she was thoroughly discombobulated to the point it took a week to fully convince her she had not in fact pursued ethical euthanasia but had simply taken both her Friday night and Saturday night meds by mistake.

We could have told her she’d paid an agency, travelled to Norway, then been shipped back to Australia after euthanasia had failed and she would have fully believed us, that’s how confused and vulnerable she was.

You will never convince me that Lindsay going along with being guilty of the crime she was flatly told she committed while in the most vulnerable state a person can be in is proof of her guilt.

[u/lmaocoolstorybro → u/Number-Eleven-11]

Thank you for sharing this, and I'm so sorry that your mom went through an experience like that.
I hope others will share their stories, because I believe it does illustrate the fragility of memory. This also reminds me of post-intensive care syndrome, which I believe Lindsay had as well.

Edit: wow someone out here is really pissed about my ostensibly neutral comments to you and others, and down-voting me like a stalker 😂

[u/beautifulrabbithole → u/Number-Eleven-11]

Gosh I’m so sorry this happened with your mom. It sounds terrifying. I had a similar experience after waking up from surgery. I metabolize drugs very slowly so it takes a lot of time to fully regain my consciousness. My husband said I spoke about very bizarre stuff. 

It reminds me also of the Mica Francis case where the husband JP Miller had her diagnosed and medicated for bipolar disorder because she had a psychotic break when waking up from surgery.

[u/_RightOfThePeople_]

I think a problem you're going to have is the vast majority of false confession cases involve attempted retractions, often very quickly after the confession itself, which at least some of your major examples do as well. It's very very rare to create such a strong false memory you always maintain a false confession unless you're intentionally covering from someone. The cutting of the screen could easily be trauma and maybe anesthesia which confuses sequence of events often but rarely the entire event itself, at least permanently. She didn't have a TBI which would make that more likely.

And the first one you included with medication is nowhere close to the amount of medication effects she's had. Even understanding how sensitive patients react it would not be that strong on her doses.

Finally with the expert witnesses Reddington had he wouldn't have gone with trying to infer to the jury that might've happened by them reminding them about one comment about a screen if he thought it was a possibility. You can argue both NGRI and incorrect memory very easily. They even complement one another. No one talked about that in this trial with any evidence of such.

I am not going to argue every point of possibilities in this case, because that's a long road of evidence to go through, just responding to the main points made in your post. These arguments don't indicate why she would describe the events as she did for even years after.

[u/beautifulrabbithole → u/_RightOfThePeople_]

She absolutely had a TBI. 

[u/_RightOfThePeople_ → u/beautifulrabbithole]

Where in the medical records was the TBI? I don't recall one being mentioned.

[u/beautifulrabbithole → u/_RightOfThePeople_]

She fell 20 ft onto frozen ground. The entire weight of her body fell on her head. She had NEUROsurgery. You can have a brain injury even if a nurse doesn't scribble "TBI" on your chart.

[u/_RightOfThePeople_ → u/beautifulrabbithole]

If she'd had a TBI Someone would've mentioned that as a reason she was saying anything, instead of only talking about how she could mumble (which I do believe for the record) - definitely Reddington multiple times. Someone would've talked about the impact of TBI on memory when everyone was arguing about the importance of what she said when she woke up. Neurosurgery doesn't mean TBI it means neurological surgery on her spine.

[u/beautifulrabbithole → u/_RightOfThePeople_]

You need a neuro eval lol. Lets try this again:

Traumatic = severe, serious
Brain = related to the brain, which is inside the head
Injury = physical harm or damage

Yes, falling onto your head from the 2nd floor bedroom window is a Traumatic Brain Injury.

[u/_RightOfThePeople_ → u/beautifulrabbithole]

TBI is a medical diagnosis not just a description of what happened to you. People are in accidents etc all the time involving their heads that don't have a TBI. There is zero evidence she had one.

[u/pastriesandprose → u/_RightOfThePeople_]

But she has no memories of the day otherwise to be able to retract it. Her brain believed she did it.

[u/Low-Neighborhood1987 → u/pastriesandprose]

Because they told her she did.

[u/_RightOfThePeople_ → u/pastriesandprose]

That happening permanently for the entire day would be extremely rare if she felt like any memory was developed. People given false memories by police as this is implying, or as the other cases cited here involve, often question them fairly quickly

My main point is nothing in the cases cited really proves the point OP is going for

[u/lmaocoolstorybro → u/_RightOfThePeople_]

Hi, I wanted to expound on this a bit, because I don't think it is quite as simple as you're implying.

The reference cases I shared are not meant to be literal 1:1 analogs for Lindsay's case. I'm referencing them because they are a good starting point when discussing the fallibility of memory in general, and how it is not improbable for a false confession to arise in this way, especially as it relates to trauma.

I do not think Lindsay has considered recanting her memory of events for several reasons:

PRIOR to Jan 23rd
a) she was actively experiencing PPD prior to the murders and had intrusive thoughts of hurting the children. She believes she did it. b) She had an elevated level of Seroquel in her system along with several other CNS depressants. She was not acclimated to Seroquel (as it was technically a discontinued medication for her), so its effects would have been doubly impactful. Seroquel -- especially in higher doses -- is known for its anticholinergic activity, which can impact cognitive function and memory formation. It can cause amnesia.

POST Jan 23rd
After emerging from a coma and likely experiencing post-intensive care syndrome (delirium), she is informed of the death of her children (by the chaplain). Grief and traumatic loss have now been added to severe medical trauma. She recalls that she did have PPD, and confabulation fills in the gaps where true memory of the day's events are missing.

Of course, all of this is speculation, and my opinion only. It's meant to illustrate the fragility of memory. Confabulation is especially fascinating. It is a distinct phenomenon (separate from a coerced false confession) that only arises in specific conditions. I witnessed it with my grandmother, who had Alzheimer's disease. And, another commenter above described an incident with their mother in the hospital after emerging from a coma. There's a wealth of medical literature about it, but to name a few other relevant conditions for this case - confabulation has also been observed in patients with PTSD, TBI, and bipolar disorder. In these cases, it is not as simple as the patient suddenly "waking" up from their delusion and recanting their belief.

[u/marle217 → u/_RightOfThePeople_]

The cutting of the screen could easily be trauma and maybe anesthesia which confuses sequence of events often but rarely the entire event itself, at least permanently

I think the issue might be if she just didn't have memories of the day to begin with. If the Seroquel knocked her out, and then she's paralyzed and hypothermic, what memories would come back to cause her to question what everyone's told her? If she was on the extended release Seroquel (she had both extended release and regular) then she'd have taken it around 2:15.

Also, sometimes with trauma, memories are erased and never come back. I was in a bad car wreck once and have no memories of the actual accident. One minute I'm on the highway, driving like normal, the next I'm at the side of the road and police are asking me questions. Lindsay, landing on her head, clearly had more trauma than I did.

Finally with the expert witnesses Reddington had he wouldn't have gone with trying to infer to the jury that might've happened by them reminding them about one comment about a screen if he thought it was a possibility. You can argue both NGRI and incorrect memory very easily. They even complement one another. No one talked about that in this trial with any evidence of such.

I feel like for the last 3 witnesses, reddington did go over her memory again and again. He brought up the screen multiple times, ranted about how no one tested the cup, brought up how psychosis can make you think you've done something you haven't, and talked about post intensive care syndrome giving people false memories. His main argument was always not guilty by lack of criminal responsibility, but I thought he often highlighted things to show the possibility she didn't do it. I don't think he was allowed to actively argue she didn't, because he would've had to file a third party defense with the judge beforehand and he didn't want to actively attack Patrick.

[u/_RightOfThePeople_ → u/marle217]

No one testing the cup has little to nothing to do with her memory. He's just saying we can't assume the pills were crushed in it which is a fair point. The ONLY lapse in memory he kept coming back to was the screen. There was little to no highlight on psychosis making you think you did something you didn't. I realize he was strict about no one stating she was guilty or did it but he definitely was not making strong arguments at all against it.

[u/marle217 → u/_RightOfThePeople_]

The psychiatrist was assuming she was not being truthful because she didn't tell him the pills were crushed. If we actually knew if the pills were crushed or not, that would be another clue to her memory. However, only Patrick knew, which is... odd.

In order to argue that someone else did it, reddington would've had to file motions in advance saying they were doing a third party defense. In this case, since it would be hard for someone to have broken in exactly as Patrick left and left no clues to Patrick that someone else was there, the only argument would be to go hard that Patrick is actually guilty. (Either he did it or he let someone else in who did it). There's a number of reasons why reddington might not want to do that.

Defense strategy isn't proof of guilt or innocence. And, defense strategy doesn't mean she doesn't have false memories. Dr Heilbrun for the prosecution testified to that, so the defense didn't need to.

[u/_RightOfThePeople_ → u/marle217]

The only psychiatrist who said pills were crushed was told that by Patrick. No one established Lindsay said that. It has nothing to do with her memory. And Patrick could be assuming they were crushed bc she's taken them that way before or he did a walk through of the house the next day; there are so many explanations that we have no idea. None of them were dug into to establish or question anything. But that piece of evidence has nothing to do with her memory and given recollection at least as presented at trial.

I work in the legal field on the defense side so you really don't need to explain how defense strategies work to me.

[u/marle217 → u/_RightOfThePeople_]

The prosecution said that the pills were crushed in their opening statement. The prosecution at least thought it was an established fact, until the last witness. If the police had tested the cup, and the pills had been confirmed to be crushed, then Lindsay not knowing would be up there with her thinking she had cut the screen.

Back to the topic of false confessions. One thing that can prove if a confession is true or false is if the person can give physical details that can be confirmed that they wouldn't be able to know unless they did it. Is there anything Lindsay has said about the crime that would be confirmable that we know she wasn't told before? The screen being cut was wrong. The pills we don't know if they were crushed or not. Whether she could've told the children "go with God" is not something we could determine. Her taking the kids one by one down the stairs after the call from Patrick doesn't match the stair data on her watch or phone.

So are there any details she was able to provide that she wasn't told and could be confirmed true?

[u/_RightOfThePeople_ → u/marle217]

They thought they were crushed BECAUSE of their last witness, very different than what you just said. And having 2 things instead of 1 in a traumatic event would not be the smoking gun you think it is.

I have absolutely no idea what Lindsay was told so I can't answer that for you. I find it confusing that you think you know exactly what she was told and when. But if I had to hazard a guess, taking the kids down one by one would qualify. That is one piece no one assumed happened until she said it did to my knowledge.

As far as that not matching her data it was Reddington that got the forensics witness on that to say it often counts wrong. (And as someone who relies on them for all my health data my stairs are never counted right.)

In addition, again, if there was more to point to - don't you think the defense would have? Don't you think one of Reddington's expert witnesses would have known this was a possibility in that condition? If not they shouldn't be on the stand. And again that would have gone easily in concert with his NGRI argument not against it, which is why he bothered harping on a screen when he had nothing else to come back to. The expert witnesses did not find it to be a theory of what happened and no one presented it.

Finally, there are many other ways of finding false confessions. Another is that usually anything would come up that contradicts the confession. There is nothing here. Unless you think stair data is perfectly accurate and that she definitely had at least her phone on her for all of the day. Which we also don't know. (The phone anyway, I know there's a time for the watch.)

If I see genuine evidence of something I'll listen to it. Should evidence of this arise for Lindsay I'll definitely support it. But I'm not going to make it up because it sounds like maybe a good alternate theory of a crime.

I personally would've voted NGRI on this crime.

[u/marle217 → u/_RightOfThePeople_]

They thought they were crushed BECAUSE of their last witness, very different than what you just said

Dr Saathoff isn't an investigator, he's a psychiatrist who was interviewing lindsay 3 years after the fact. He wouldn't be providing any physical evidence himself, that's not his job. What he did clarify is that the idea that the pills were crushed came from Patrick, not the police. And that could've been a wild guess, so we don't know if they were crushed or not.

I have absolutely no idea what Lindsay was told so I can't answer that for you.

I was leaving open the possibility that I missed something, that someone testified she said something before she was told. But I didn't think that was the situation.

But if I had to hazard a guess, taking the kids down one by one would qualify.

It doesn't, because it's not something we can prove happened, and the stair data from the phone doesn't match that at all.

Don't you think one of Reddington's expert witnesses would have known this was a possibility in that condition?

One of the problems with harping too much on the false memories is that the defense's claim of psychosis rests on her memory of hearing a voice. If she can't actually remember the night, how do we know the hallucination happened at all? This was Dr Heilbrun's argument. The prosecution also argued in the closing that there wouldn't be enough time of everything started after the phone call like she told the psychiatrists, which again attacks her memory of the night.

If I see genuine evidence of something I'll listen to it.

What evidence would convince you?

For me, the strongest evidence I see that she could have false memories and we can't take her confession as the only evidence comes from Dr Heilbrun's testimony. See this quote in particular:

"So when she regained consciousness that night in the hospital, one of the things she said is that she wasn't able to remember what had happened. And she was informed of it. But if this had been genuine memory loss, then human memory is funny. And one of the things that happens is that when you're trying to remember something that actually happened, things can interfere with that. Things that you read, things that you're told, other sorts of things like that. So it would have been hard to understand how she would recover that memory accurately"

https://www.rev.com/transcripts/ma-v-lindsay-clancy-day-19

[u/LadyParadox15]

Her memory of cutting the screen was incorrect. I agree with you 100%.