Illinois Mom Deemed Too Dangerous for Release Amidst Child Murder Charges

An Illinois judge has ruled that Corie Walsh, a Frankfort mother charged with the murder of her 2-year-old son, Barrett, is too dangerous to be released from custody pending trial. Prosecutors argued Walsh posed a threat to her husband and three surviving children, leading to her continued detention without pretrial release.

The judge also ordered that Walsh receive psychiatric medication immediately, after her attorneys indicated she had gone days without treatment despite a hospital recommendation for round-the-clock psychiatric care. Walsh faces three counts of first-degree murder.

Prosecutors allege that Walsh believed her toddler was the devil and that she also threatened to kill her husband and their other children following her arrest. Walsh has not yet entered a plea, and her case is ongoing.

Forensic psychiatrists emphasize that a determination of "dangerousness" is not a permanent label but rather a forward-looking assessment that can evolve as an individual's mental condition improves through treatment. Dr. Stephen Dinwiddie, a professor of psychiatry at Northwestern University with extensive forensic experience, explained that assessing dangerousness involves evaluating a person's current risk to others, considering past behavior and stated intentions.

"Obviously we're talking more about what we're afraid they're going to do tomorrow," Dinwiddie said. "Part of that prediction is based on what they did yesterday ... what they did in the past ... and what they have said they intend to do."

Unlike a criminal verdict, which focuses on past actions, the concept of dangerousness aims to predict future risk. Dinwiddie described this assessment as "pretty squishy," noting the need to clarify if the danger is imminent or long-term, and whether it is physical or of another nature.

In civil commitment cases, judges may order treatment for individuals posing a short-term danger to themselves or others, based on the rationale that intervention is necessary to prevent imminent harm. Dinwiddie stated that effective treatment can significantly alter the perceived future risk posed by an individual.

"If they've behaved in a violent fashion while ill in the past and now they're ill, obviously that's important information and obviously that's something to worry about," he said. "The intervention obviously is to try to get at that particular symptom of illness and get it under control."

While a judge's finding of dangerousness is not necessarily permanent and can be reconsidered if circumstances change, any decision on pretrial release remains at the court's discretion. Dinwiddie expressed a belief that therapeutic interventions can prevent tragedies.

He also addressed common misconceptions about psychosis, stating that it does not automatically equate to dangerousness and that individuals experiencing psychosis can still think logically within their delusional framework. "The tragic fact is they are like us and severe mental illness can affect family members. It can affect anybody," Dinwiddie said. He added that psychosis is not a choice and that no one would wish such a condition upon themselves.