The “Slender Man” stabbing case continues to grip the nation as Morgan Geyser, one of the two perpetrators, was denied release from a mental health facility. Judge Michael Bohren ruled that clear and convincing evidence demonstrates Geyser still poses a significant threat to the community, casting doubt on her claims of faking prior psychotic symptoms. This decision follows a hearing featuring testimony from multiple mental health professionals, sparking debate about Geyser’s current mental state, the efficacy of her treatment, and the potential risks associated with her release.
Morgan Geyser sits in court. (Court TV)Alt: Morgan Geyser sits in court during her hearing for release from a mental health facility.
Geyser’s case began nearly a decade ago when, at age 12, she and a friend lured a classmate into the woods and stabbed her 19 times. They claimed they acted to appease the fictional horror character Slender Man, a claim that led to their commitment to mental health institutions. Now, Geyser argues she fabricated the psychotic symptoms that justified her initial commitment. This assertion has become central to the judge’s decision to deny her release.
Judge Bohren emphasized the importance of Geyser’s credibility, stating that it underpins her risk assessment. Her recent claims of feigning psychosis raise concerns about her reliability in reporting her mental health status to her treatment team. The judge expressed skepticism, highlighting the substantial evidence of psychosis documented throughout her years at the Winnebago Mental Health Institute. “The credibility of the reporter is paramount because it sets the factual basis for what occurs,” Bohren stated, concluding, “At this point, the Court is convinced the scales tip in favor of the public.”
The judge offered an analysis of the evidence before issuing his ruling, emphasizing that Morgan Geyser's credibility was an issue.Alt: Judge Michael Bohren analyzes evidence in the Morgan Geyser case, highlighting concerns about her credibility.
The hearing included testimony from three court-appointed mental health experts and the medical director of Winnebago. Their opinions diverged on Geyser’s readiness for release. Two state-appointed psychologists acknowledged Geyser’s progress but maintained she remains a danger, citing her claims of fabricated symptoms. They emphasized the unlikelihood of malingering given the extensive evidence of psychosis but conceded it could impact her trustworthiness in reporting her mental health moving forward.
Dr. Deborah Collins, a psychologist retained by the defense since shortly after the 2014 attack, suggested Geyser could be ready for release within a year if she adheres to her treatment and medication plan. However, Dr. Brooke Lundbohm expressed reservations about Geyser’s resistance to certain therapies she perceived as contributing to her “label” of psychosis. This resistance, according to Lundbohm, raises concerns about her commitment to future treatment compliance. While acknowledging Geyser’s openness about current symptoms, Lundbohm questioned her motivations, suggesting a desire to alter her diagnosis to facilitate release.
Dr. Kayla Pope, Winnebago’s medical director, advocated for Geyser’s release, arguing that the facility has exhausted its therapeutic resources. She stressed the critical need for Geyser to experience socialization outside the institutional setting, a need hampered by staffing limitations at Winnebago. Pope’s perspective aligns with that of defense expert Kenneth Robbins, who has also evaluated Geyser since 2014. Both experts emphasized that Geyser has shown significant improvement and now requires opportunities for socialization, education, and independence that Winnebago can no longer adequately provide.
Geyser’s current diagnoses, which no longer include psychosis, encompass post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety disorders, and borderline personality traits. Experts revealed that Geyser attributed her previously reported psychotic symptoms to a desire to avoid being placed in the custody of her now-deceased, allegedly sexually abusive father. This previously undisclosed allegation of abuse further fueled the prosecution’s skepticism about Geyser’s credibility.
The Assistant District Attorney questioned the timing of this revelation and the shifting narrative surrounding the attack’s motivation. Initially, Geyser claimed she acted to appease Slender Man to protect herself and her family. Now, she suggests she believed in Slender Man but also sought escape from her family situation. The prosecution argued that this evolving narrative clouds the understanding of the initial crime and raises significant doubts about her trustworthiness.
Judge Bohren ultimately agreed with the prosecution’s concerns, concluding that Geyser’s shifting narrative significantly impacts her diagnosis and risk assessment. The shift in focus to sexual abuse as a catalyst for the attempted murder, he argued, creates a substantial credibility issue. The judge’s decision reflects the ongoing complexity of the Slender Man case and the challenges in balancing mental health treatment with public safety.
In conclusion, Morgan Geyser’s request for release has been denied due to concerns about her credibility and the potential risk she poses to the community. The judge’s decision highlights the difficulties in assessing the long-term effects of mental illness and the ongoing need for a balanced approach that prioritizes both individual rehabilitation and public safety. The Slender Man case continues to raise important questions about the intersection of mental health, criminal justice, and the lasting impact of childhood trauma.
