Jury begins deliberations in Carlos Asencio murder trial

No one disputes that Carlos Asencio killed Amanda Dabrowski on the evening of July 3, 2019. No one disputes that Asencio stabbed her 58 times in O’Connor’s Restaurant in Worcester. No one disputes that Allen Corson was injured in the struggle to subdue Asencio.

The central question for the jury is whether Asencio killed Dabrowski “to stop hearing the voices” that plagued him, as his defense claims, or out of “jealousy, anger and rage,” as the prosecution claims.

Asencio’s mental state is critical to his defense attorney’s claim that Asencio is not guilty by reason of a mental disease or defect.

Worcester County Superior Court Judge Janet Kenton-Walker instructed the jury that the phrase “mental disease or defect” is “a legal term, not a medical term,” meaning that the defendant lacked “substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality or wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.”

Assistant District Attorney Edward Karcasinas characterized Asencio in his closing statement to the jury as “someone who has a clear mind” throughout the circumstances leading up to and including the killing.

Karcasinas walked the jury through the commonwealth’s evidence — Asencio’s belief that Dabrowski “ruined his life” by breaking up with him, creating plans to track Dabrowski down, taping a cell phone to her car to use as a tracking device, then methodically searching the restaurant until he found her and stabbed her 58 times in 15 seconds.

“The mind’s working,” Karcasinas said, calling Asencio’s actions “purpose-driven and goal-orientated behavior all working to the eventual attack on Amanda.”

Karcasinas also highlighted the testimony of psychiatrist Margarita Daou, who testified Asencio performed poorly on tests designed to determine if he was making up or exaggerating mental symptoms.

He also referenced Daou’s testimony that Asencio’s self-reported symptoms of voices in his head abating for periods of time without medications were not consistent with schizoaffective disorder, from which a psychologist testifying for the defense said he believes Asencio suffers.

Asencio’s defense attorney, Robert Griffin, told the jury that Asencio’s intelligence isn’t evidence that he isn’t mentally ill.

“Many mentally ill people are intelligent. Many mentally ill people function, and you don’t know what’s going on in their head,” Griffin said.

He pointed to Asencio’s apparent lack of an escape plan after the killing, as well as his behavior of giving his car to Lydia Willey and her partner, Richard Contreras.

“That’s what people do when they want to commit suicide,” Griffin said.

He pointed to psychologist Paul Zeizel’s assessment of Asencio as having schizoaffective disorder, as well as a previous opinion by a different medical professional that Asencio suffered from an “unspecified” type of schizoaffective disorder.

Zeizel previously testified Asencio reported hearing “commanding” voices that he said he believed he had to follow.

“His motive was to stop hearing the voices,” Griffin told the jury.

“In his defective mind, the only way he could do that was to do what he did.”

He asked the jury “to assess and evaluate the evidence and to make a decision on the evidence. Not on sympathy, not on empathy, not on revulsion for the unwarranted act of violence,” but to hold Asencio responsible “in a nontraditional sense.”

The judge told the jury that, if they find Asencio not guilty, he will be placed in a mental facility or Bridgewater State Hospital, after which he will be assessed after six months, then every year after that.

If he is judged to still be mentally ill and dangerous, Asencio will remain hospitalized. If medical professionals determine Asencio is not still suffering from his mental illness and is not dangerous, a judge presiding over the hearing will determine whether to release Asencio.