A Decade Later: The Case of Morgan Geyser and the Slender Man Stabbing
Introduction to the Case
In a chilling and highly publicized case, Morgan Geyser, now 22, has been at the center of a decade-long legal and psychological saga following her involvement in a brutal stabbing incident in 2014. At just 12 years old, Geyser and her accomplice, Anissa Weier, lured their classmate, Payton Leutner, into a park and stabbed her 19 times in an attempt to appease the fictional horror character "Slender Man," a figure they believed would harm their families if they didn’t carry out the attack. The crime shocked the nation, sparking debates about mental health, criminal responsibility, and the rehabilitation of juvenile offenders. After spending seven years at the Winnebago Mental Health Institute, Geyser was cleared for conditional release into a group home earlier this year, but the decision was met with resistance, leading to a recent court hearing.
The Legal and Psychological Journey
Geyser’s case has been marked by significant psychological evaluation and legal proceedings. In 2017, she pleaded guilty to attempted first-degree intentional homicide and was sentenced to a maximum of 40 years in a mental health facility. Over the years, her progress in treatment has been closely monitored, with medical experts testifying in January that she was no longer a threat to public safety. Her proposed release into a group home was contingent on strict supervision, a plan that Waukesha County Circuit Judge Michael Bohren ultimately upheld. During the hearing, Judge Bohren emphasized that Geyser would be under "substantial supervision," which he described as being "in many ways more strict" than the freedoms she currently enjoys at the institution. He concluded that there was no reason to halt the conditional release process, as the state had not met its burden of proof to block it.
The Debate Over Geyser’s Release
Opposition to Geyser’s release centered on two key concerns: her alleged consumption of dark-themed media and her interactions with a man who had been "sexually aroused" by her crime. Prosecutors argued that these factors raised questions about her readiness for reintegration into society. However, Geyser’s attorney, Anthony Cotton, countered that she had willingly disclosed both the book and the inappropriate contact to her treatment team and had even requested a no-contact order with the man. Judge Bohren addressed these concerns, noting that Geyser had stopped communication with the individual once she realized his intentions and that her actions did not necessarily indicate a risk to herself or the community. He also pointed out that the testimony regarding the book was based on a doctor’s assertion that it was "humorous," a characterization that went unchallenged in court.
Testimony and the Judge’s Decision
The hearing featured testimony from multiple medical experts, including Geyser’s therapist, who expressed no concerns about her behavior or attitude during treatment. The therapist described Geyser as "extremely open" in therapy and noted that her communication within the institution was "truthful and accurate." Judge Bohren found this testimony satisfying, stating that he saw "no hidden agenda" or evidence of deception on Geyser’s part. He also acknowledged the progress she had made during her time at the mental health institute, a sentiment echoed by the medical experts who testified that her risk to public safety was now negligible. While acknowledging the severity of the crime, Bohren emphasized that the court’s decision was based on her current mental state and ability to function under supervision, rather than the nature of the offense itself.
The Bigger Picture: Mental Health and Juvenile Justice
Geyser’s case raises important questions about how society handles juvenile offenders, particularly those with mental health conditions. At the time of the stabbing, both Geyser and Weier were diagnosed with severe mental illnesses—Geyser with schizophrenia and Weier with a delusional disorder. Their belief in Slender Man, a fictional character they encountered online, was a product of their psychiatric conditions, which impaired their ability to distinguish fantasy from reality. While Weier was released from the mental health institute in 2021 after serving four years, Geyser’s longer confinement reflects the complexity of her mental health needs and the cautious approach taken by the court to ensure public safety.
Conclusion: A Difficult Balance
As Geyser prepares for her conditional release, the community remains divided. While some argue that her progress and adherence to treatment justify her reintegration, others express concern about the trauma inflicted on Payton Leutner and her family, who have endured unimaginable pain. The upcoming hearing on March 21 will provide further details about the conditions of her release, ensuring that her transition is carefully managed. Ultimately, Geyser’s case serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between rehabilitation, public safety, and the ethical treatment of mentally ill offenders. It challenges society to consider how to support individuals like Geyser while also addressing the needs of victims and their families. As the legal process continues, one thing is clear: the road to healing—for all parties involved—is long and fraught with complexity.
