Law&Crime Sidebar - ‘I Had To’: Alabama Man Accused of Murdering Four People Over Dirty Dishes

Episode Date: May 17, 2023

An argument over dirty dishes turned deadly when Alabama man Jared Smith-Bracy allegedly killed his grandparents, brother, and a friend in February 2023. The 21-year-old, who may face the death penalty, allegedly told arresting officers, “I had to get them before they got me.” Authorities said Smith-Bracy committed the brutal murders with a pickax and firearm before he ran off into the woods. Now, he’s pleading insanity. The Law&Crime Network’s Jesse Weber breaks it down with psychologist Dr. John Delatorre.LAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokePodcasting - Sam GoldbergWriting & Video Editing - Michael DeiningerGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane Kaye Social Media Management - Vanessa Bein & Kiera BronsonSUBSCRIBE TO OUR OTHER PODCASTS:Court JunkieObjectionsThey Walk Among AmericaDevil In The DormThe Disturbing TruthSpeaking FreelyLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondry Plus in the Wondery app Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. View Shadows. Joshua Jackson delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller that will

keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible. A man allegedly brutally kills four people, including his grandparents, over an argument over dirty dishes. And now he's claiming an insanity defense. But will it work? psychologist Dr. John Deletori comes on to break it down. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by law and crime. I'm Jesse Weber. All right, let's start off in Alabama, where 21-year-old Jared Tarant Smith Bracey is facing capital murder charges for allegedly killing his grandparents, 80-year-old Leonard Smith, 72-year-old Barbara Smith, his brother, 27-year-old Jeremy Smith, and family friend

70-year-old Sheila Glover, all on February 22nd, 20, 20. And this was bad. This was really bad. He allegedly used a pickax and a gun to carry out these killings. So why would someone do this? Why would Bracey do this? Well, apparently, it was over an argument regarding dirty dishes. Yeah, we learned this during the course of a preliminary hearing. And apparently, Bracey confessed to the killings telling law enforcement when they apprehended him in a nearby woods, I had to get them before they got me. But the question now is, is not if he did this, but rather a mental health defense, which could really complicate this case. So let me bring him, psychologist, Dr. John Delatori, a friend of the sidebar podcast,

a friend of the long crime network, dressed so casual today. I almost didn't recognize you, but good to see you, doctor. Thanks for taking the time. Yeah, thanks for having me, Jesse. So he is pleaded not guilty by reason of mental defect or disease, essentially the insanity to defense, right? What does that mean? Well, what it means to me is that the, individual really does not have an understanding about how their behaviors are wrong right when it comes to and generally speaking we're looking at legally wrong not morally wrong there's there's been some case law that has kind of eliminated this aspect of moral wrong fullness so what we're looking at is is there a mental illness at play that prevented the

individual from recognizing the behaviors that they were doing were legally wrong. And that's that it's a it's a really fine tooth comb type type of evaluation here where you're really trying to parse out what might be going on with this individual. How long was it going on for? And is there any other sort of maybe substances or maybe personality characteristics that might get in the way that actually were the cause of the person engaging in the behavior and not so much the mental illness? So important to to explain that because majority of the cases we cover, you can argue there's something wrong with the person that commits a murder, right? There's obviously something off. But that's only

one part of the analysis, right? So like you said, even if they have a mental disease or defect, it's if it causes them to not appreciate what they're doing, to not appreciate the wrongfulness of their acts, that's when you could be declared legally insane and not guilty by reason of a mental disease or defect. Now, his attorneys, or his attorney, I should say, came out and said, quote, we believe that coming to right now, there was a break in his normal behavior. I think you heard that today. There were family members who said he was normal. This was absent his normal behavior.

This was not his normal behavior. Is that how that typically works? Is this common that there's a break, just a sudden break with reality or what's happening? Or is this not, is he not framing it the right way, his attorney? I don't think he's framing it the right way. There's no such thing as a break. There's a buildup of emotional vulnerability that's going on within inside the individual. And it's when the coping resources that a person has becomes overwhelmed so that they're not working anymore.

That's when the person engages in whatever maladaptive behavior that they're going to engage. Do I think that there was a straw the brook that camel's back? Yeah, I do. I do think that there's people that can manage and control their impulses, but only to a point. I think it's important to understand that there is a possibility that someone could be what we'll call derange, what we'll call insane, what will call someone who is absolutely floridly psychotic, but still have behaviors that some would consider rational, where, yes, it could be that someone thought that the people that they were killing were space aliens. Now, it's not illegal to kill someone. space aliens, but they just, for whatever their psychosis, they believe that the space aliens had taken over their family members. They needed to save their family members by doing some behavior, which ended up in their deaths. And then the person runs, right? The person flees.

And so someone's going to say, well, that's, that's, that's, that's consciousness of guilt. But the reality is, is that the voices inside the person's head could have said, well, now more space aliens are going to come get you. So you got to run. So it takes a psychologist to really dig down deep thinking about what were the behaviors, what were the impetus for these decisions that the person was made. Let's be clear. You're saying even if he ran away from the scene, because we know he was apprehended in the woods, that doesn't necessarily mean that he's not insane. He could still be insane. Yeah, absolutely. It's really picking that fine tooth comb to, and this is what makes this kind of evaluation so hard because it's a retrospective evaluation. We're asking the person,

what were you thinking at the time? And so if he's in jail and he's taking his meds and he recognized, oh man, I killed all these people. I didn't want to. It's possible that he's not telling me the full truth when the reality is that if I could have been inside his head at that moment, it's possible that if there was a psychosis, and I'm saying that there is, but I'm just saying if there was, it's possible that someone could engage in behaviors that we would consider logical and rational or actually derived from a psychotic episode. Well, let's talk about what we do know, right? As I mentioned, when he is apprehended by police, he says, I had to get them before they got me. According to the police, he was very cooperative in his

interview with them. He was very polite, but he showed no remorse. What are your thoughts on that? I think on its surface, people could say, well, maybe he's, you know, insane, right? Maybe he has some kind of psychosis. But the other issue is that maybe he's been institutionalized, right? Maybe he's someone who's been inside and outside of jail and prisons and stuff like that, where he becomes paranoid. And through that paranoid, right, that's that's derived particularly from being in an institution, that paranoid leads him to believe that other people are engaging in problematic behaviors that are going to challenge him. And in prison, right, in these kinds of institutions, you have to get them before they get you. So that's one of those things where you've got to start

thinking about what other alternatives or why he would say this as a psychologist what are the what are the alternatives that someone might be saying this that are outside of psychosis okay but this level of attack let's just give everybody a little bit of an understanding of the timeline of how this went down because i think the idea of this happening over a family argument is interesting as well so it has been reported that bracy bonded out of jail on a criminal mischief misdemeanor charge for allegedly breaking the family's front door and bedroom over an argument regarding dishes and when he gets out his friend bails him out bracy then takes the friend's gun charges into the house and allegedly kills everyone the idea that this a happened over a family argument about dishes that sets him off

um you know if he was arrested because of that and it was the arrest that fueled him and not the dishes, but also there's that moment in time, right? If there was a break between the moment of when he felt wrong and him actually carrying out the killings, I think that that's critical as well in terms of his mental health defense. What do you think? I do. And that's where we've got to start thinking about in some statutes, right? In some jurisdictions, it says at the time of the offense alleged, right, that's the duration that your evaluation is going to have to be. So I'm not going to be able to look at some of the behaviors that he was engaging before unless he's charged

with that kind of crime. And so what I'm going to say is that, yes, I'm going to ask him about what he was thinking about. But that's not part of my analysis. Now, if the prosecutors decide to charge him with crimes when it comes to stuff that happened prior, then I can. But what I can say is that it is both the dishes and not the dishes.

There is some level of paranoia. There is some level of impulsiveness. There is some level of animosity that he asked towards his family members. And it is centered around the dishes for whatever reason. And everybody has their own peculiarities. So it is both the dishes and it is not the dishes. There's something going on within that family that has compelled him to engage in multiple aggressive acts to the point where he's killed him. Brutal with a pickaxe.

I mean, the level of anger and animosity that you have to have. To use that weapon, there's something else that's going on that as a psychologist, I'm certainly going to evaluate. Yeah, you've talked to me before about stabbings or using these kinds of weapons. That's close, that intimate, that's personal, that's anger. You've talked to me before about how someone could do these to their family members. They almost don't treat them as human beings. They don't see them as human beings before. Now, the judge was asked to order, the defense attorney is asked to order a psychiatric evaluation.

the judge has delayed it for now, wants to see where the investigation goes. What would a psychiatric evaluation look like for the defendant in this case? So it depends on the referral question. Now, there has been some reporting that the defense attorney has also said that there's issues of competency. Now, the competency evaluation is not the same as a sanity evaluation. Those are two very different evaluations. But they can't be done at the same time. And so if the court order says you need to conduct a.

competency to stand trial evaluation and you need to conduct an insanity evaluation if your opinion is he is competent. If he's not competent to stand trial, you're not doing a sanity evaluation. Can't do it. So you have to wait. So it's two separate things, but they can kind of be done at the same time where you're asking the same kinds of questions, but really the sanity evaluation is, hey, I'm going to read the police report to you. And then I want you to tell me what your thought process was you tell me what was going on in your head at that time for you to engage in these alleged behaviors. And then you go from them. So the last question I want to ask you is there's been reports that he might have had paranoid schizophrenia. If that is true, is that

consistent with what you're seeing in this case? Yeah, it could be. It could be. But the issue then becomes, is he also using methamphetamines, cocaine, heroin? What other drugs might he be using that have essentially Swiss cheese his brain to the point where he's experiencing these sort of perceptual abnormalities so that it looks like schizophrenia, but it's not schizophrenia. So that's part of the evaluation as well, that I'm not just going to say someone has a mental illness when they maybe have a pretty significant drug history. Well, we will see where this goes.

I should tell everybody that the death penalty could be on the table in this case. Obviously, the mental health issue would play a substantial factor in that. And this defendant, Mr. Bracey, is currently in jail without bond. Dr. John Deletori, thank you so much for taking the time. Thanks, Jesse. And that's all we have for you here on Sidebar, everybody. Thank you so much for joining us. Please subscribe on Apple Podcast, Spotify, YouTube, wherever you get your podcast.

I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next time. You can binge all episodes of this long crime series ad free right now on Wondery Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.