Mackenzie Shirilla “Loves Being Hated” - A Psychological Deep Dive

Summary

Criminally Obsessed – Episode Summary

Title: Mackenzie Shirilla “Loves Being Hated” – A Psychological Deep Dive

Air Date: June 4, 2026
Host: Anne Emerson
Guest: Dr. John de la Torre, Forensic Psychologist

---

Episode Overview

This episode takes a hard look at the case of Mackenzie Shirilla, a 17-year-old who deliberately drove her car at high speed into a brick wall, killing her boyfriend (Dominic Russo) and their friend (Davion Flanagan). With the recent Netflix documentary reigniting national discussion, host Anne Emerson and forensic psychologist Dr. John de la Torre explore the psychological, familial, and societal factors behind the tragedy. The conversation also delves into the role of entitlement, impulsivity, parenting, and social media, bringing new clarity to the chaos around this notorious case.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. First Impressions & Case Background

• Anne’s Reaction: The documentary painted Mackenzie as “an entitled, self absorbed brat” ([00:00]).
• Synopsis of Event: Mackenzie survived the crash but not without legal consequences; she claimed to have blacked out due to POTS syndrome, an explanation Dr. John finds highly improbable ([00:43], [04:01]).
• The Burning Question: Why would she do this if not to harm herself? Is this a case of an “entitled mean girl turned murderer?” ([01:05]).

2. Youth, Immaturity, and Entitlement

• Dr. John’s Take: Two things immediately stood out – her extreme youth/immaturity and a pervasive sense of entitlement ([02:37]).
  • “When someone...believes themselves to be entitled to something, they act impulsively...they’re not considerate of the consequences.” ([04:19])
• Impulsivity vs. Suicidal Ideation: Dr. John firmly believes Mackenzie’s actions were impulsive, driven by rage or a need for control, not a desire to die ([05:49], [07:47]).
  • “It wasn’t that she was suicidal; it’s that she wanted him to hurt more.” ([08:09])

3. Personality Disorders: Contextualizing the Behavior

• Discussion around potential diagnoses: BPD, Bipolar, and Antisocial Personality Disorder ([08:15]).
  • “Antisocial personality disorder just simply means that the rules, norms, regulations, laws...the individual doesn’t believe they need to live by them.” ([09:14])

4. Nature vs. Nurture and Parenting Dynamics

• Parenting Analysis: Exploration of how “gentle parenting” taken to extremes enabled Mackenzie’s entitlement and lack of boundaries ([10:04], [11:10]).
  • “If you don’t teach her to be a regular human being...then you’re not really keeping them around so much as you’re fostering a sociopath.” ([14:45])
• Parental Role: The parents’ inability or unwillingness to instill consequences fed into Mackenzie’s worldview ([13:43], [15:35]).

5. Toxic Relationships and Control

• Mackenzie’s relationship with Dominic was marked by inappropriateness, immaturity, and control ([16:00]–[17:45]).
  • “She’s doing the same kind of behavior, like, trying to control that situation as well... she needed that power and control over Dom.” ([17:45], Anne)
  • “The language that she’s using with Dom isn’t just automatic...she’s practiced and experienced using this language.” ([18:23], Dr. John)

6. Premeditation vs. Impulse

• Dr. John doubts clear premeditation prior to the crash; impulsivity fueled the fatal outcome ([19:54], [31:59]).
  • “When she makes that turn onto that road...something happens in that intervening time that sets her off...” ([31:59], Dr. John)

7. Social Media, Narcissism, and the Need for Attention

• Focus on Image: Mackenzie’s obsession with her online persona, driven by narcissism and entitlement ([23:14], [25:49]).
  • “The only thing worse than feeling bad is to feel isolated and alone...Strangers liking her, strangers wanting to be her, even strangers hating her are all more important to her than accepting responsibility for the damage that she’s done.” ([24:49], Dr. John)
• Halloween Photos: Again underlining immaturity and a lack of appropriate emotional response ([29:36], [30:17]).

8. Legal Strategy Missteps and Privilege

• The decision to pursue a bench trial instead of a jury was described as a strategic mistake ([19:54]).
  • “You only go to a bench trial if you don’t want emotions involved...this is a case where you need emotions involved.” ([20:27], Dr. John)
• Privilege: The family’s belief that they could always “get out of it” colored Mackenzie’s own sense of impunity ([21:00], [21:52]).

9. Mean Girl to Murderer: Is It A Leap?

• Dr. John sees a natural progression from extreme bullying and dehumanization to lethal action ([22:03]).
  • “If you’re already a mean girl...then you’ve been working your entire young adolescent life demeaning people...It’s not that far of a leap.” ([22:03], Dr. John)

10. Would Therapy or Intervention Have Helped?

• Dr. John: Would have needed whole-family therapy; Mackenzie’s red flags would have suggested self-harm, but not necessarily this form of lethal violence ([34:02]).
• Parental dynamics: “We need to start transitioning parents from friends to parents.” ([34:22], Dr. John)

11. Her Life in Prison – and Beyond

• Continued disciplinary problems in prison highlight ongoing defiance and lack of personal growth ([39:14]).
• On the possibility of release: “If she hasn’t [changed], the very first thing that she’s going to do is...get back online.” ([41:22]–[42:19], Dr. John)
• Proposed “Dom’s Law” would prevent profiting from her infamy ([42:19]).

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Dr. John on Entitlement:
  “When someone...believes themselves to be entitled to something, they act impulsively...They want what they want when they want it. That’s entitlement.” ([04:19])
• Dr. John on Parental Responsibility:
  “You’re not really keeping them around so much as you’re fostering a sociopath.” ([14:45])
• Dr. John on Social Media & Narcissism:
  “Strangers liking her, strangers wanting to be her, even strangers hating her are all more important to her than accepting responsibility.” ([24:49])
• Dr. John on Mean Girl to Murderer:
  “If you’re already a mean girl...then you’ve been working your entire young adolescent life demeaning people...It’s not that far of a leap...” ([22:03])
• On Impulsivity:
  “She was so angry that dying was overridden. That’s how angry that she was.” ([28:32])
• Anne on Modern Parenting:
  “When you hear entitled with a kid, to me, it also means that the parents are just feel like they’re losing their ability to hold on. They want that child to like them so badly.” ([13:43])
• Dr. John on Possible Intervention:
  “If the parents brought her in to see me, we’d have a problem because I need to see the parents too.” ([34:22])

---

Important Timestamps

• 00:00–01:32: Case recap, initial thoughts, and the question of intent
• 02:00–04:00: Dr. John details first psychological impressions
• 04:19–05:49: Entitlement, impulsivity, and how they play into Mackenzie’s actions
• 07:47–09:43: Discussion of potential personality or mood disorders
• 10:04–15:35: Parenting failures, household environment, and creation of entitlement
• 16:00–19:37: Toxic relationships, manipulation, and control dynamics
• 19:54–22:03: Premeditation, trial strategy, and legal analysis
• 23:14–26:52: Social media, narcissism, and Mackenzie’s post-crime persona
• 29:36–31:41: Halloween corpse photos – further examples of immaturity
• 31:59–34:02: Timeline of impulsivity vs. premeditation in the act itself
• 34:02–35:47: Could therapy have stopped her?
• 37:44–39:32: Dr. John’s approach if interviewing Mackenzie
• 41:06–44:01: Post-crime life, prison behavior, and potential future
• 42:19: Emerging legislation: "Dom’s Law"

---

Conclusion & Final Thoughts

The episode concludes with Dr. John and Anne reflecting on what makes this case both unique and typical. Mackenzie Shirilla stands as a tragic product of unchecked entitlement, impulsivity, and ineffective parenting—magnified by the amplifying effects of social media and contemporary culture. Dr. John is clear:

“She’s not unique. She’s not special...people like her have existed well before her. They’ll exist long after her.” ([44:30])

---

For Further Listening

Listeners are encouraged to comment with their own theories, especially if they have watched the Netflix documentary "The Crash."

---

End of Summary

Transcript

[A]

Hey, everyone, I'm Ann Emerson and this is Criminally Obsessed. When I watched the Crash on Netflix, I kept thinking, Mackenzie Cirilla sounds like an entitled, self absorbed brat.

[B]

You can go yourself.

[A]

Shurla drove 100 miles per hour straight into a brick wall on purpose, killing her boyfriend Dominic Russo and their friend Davion Flanagan. She was 17 years old. She was injured, but she survived. That split second changed all of our lives forever. Prosecutors charged Sherilla with murder. She says she blacked out from a medical condition. Can't remember a thing.

[B]

It didn't add up. It was hard to comprehend that she could just drive into a wall.

[A]

She was found guilty by a judge in a bench trial. With the Netflix documentary out, it seems like the whole world is talking about this case. And I couldn't get this question out of my mind. Was Mackenzie Cirilla really a mean girl turned murderer?

[B]

I think she likes being loved. I think she loves being hated.

[A]

So what separates Sherilla from just being another dumb teen like her father called her? Forensic psychologist Dr. John de la Torre says this was no murders.

[B]

She was either thinking that Dom was going to get maimed or Dom was going to die. She was okay with that.

[A]

I wanted to get inside her head and also figure her parents out.

[B]

This is the monster of their making. And I don't think they recognize just how much damage they've done by the choices that they made.

[A]

Be sure to like and subscribe for more in depth interviews like this one that go beyond the headlines. Let's get into it. Foreign. Doctor John is so great to see you. I was so excited to talk to you specifically about this case.

[B]

Yeah, thanks for having me. It's, it's certainly, it certainly captured the zeitgeist the way that, you know, every new true crime documentary comes out and the, the scandalous nature of it. And I think there's a lot, I think there's a lot here that is kind of brewing under the surface that if they were older, would be more complex than probably what they are right now.

[A]

That split second changed all of our lives forever. What jumped out at you most about, about Mackenzie Shurilla?

[B]

Two things kind of half and half jump out. The first one is the, the youthfulness of her and I. That's a. When I say that word, I'm meaning it very broadly and I'm sure we'll get into what that means as we go through this episode. But the other part was entitlement. There is a level of entitlement that I experienced her having throughout the entirety of what the, the documentary kind of presents us with. And I think it's that level of entitlement that might be confusing people as to the question of. And this was the most prominent question in the series, which was, why would she do this? Right. She's not suicidal. So then why would she do this particular behavior? And I think the entitlement is an element of why she would do this specific behavior.

[A]

Dr. John, we know old souls that are also 17 years old, if, if you know what I mean. So the youth, to me is also just this deep, deep level of immaturity.

[B]

Yeah, yeah, I would agree with that. Sure.

[A]

This case has sparked an enormous amount of conversations and speculation. When you look at the evidence, when you look at her behavior, what makes you think that this was an intentional act or not?

[B]

The probability that she, that her POTS syndrome. Right. That, that this diagnosis was actually complicit in her, you know, passing out, not knowing, I think is not very likely. Right. I, I, I think the, the, the probability of it is not very high. Is it possible?

[A]

Sure.

[B]

It's possible. Other people who have POTS have experienced this thing, but I, I don't think it's the most likely thing to have happen. When I, when I observe her actions as presented in the documentary, the level of spoiledness, I think, is probably a word that might be triggered, you know, activated in a lot of people's minds. The level of entitlement that I experience, her having suggests to me a high level of impulsivity. Right. When someone is in, when they believe themselves to be entitled to something, they act impulsively. They, they're not considerate of the consequences. They're not consider it of the damage that they could do. They want what they want when they want it. That's entitlement. And so we can take a look at her parents, we could take a look at her, we take a look at, you know, the dynamics that are happening in the relationship. But it seems to me as though she wanted someone to suffer for a specific reason and she wanted them to suffer greatly. It did not matter to her what the consequences were going to be to her, so long as the, the consequences that she wanted the person to experience were of the level that she wanted them to have.

[A]

So, interesting. Basically, at whatever it takes, she wanted to inflict the most damage.

[B]

Yeah. And anything, and like anything could have happened in that car. There's, you know, the description of how this house party was going doesn't suggest that there was something immediate in that house party that, or get Together or however it was that, that one, that one girl was describing, it doesn't suggest that there was a fight happening right then and there. But something could have happened in that car that activated her to the point where she felt Dom wasn't listening or wasn't doing a behavior that she wanted him to do, or engaged in a behavior that she told him not to do and he did it anyway. Anything could have happened or which would have activated her to the point of. I'm going to make you hurt right now. I told you not to do this thing. You're doing this thing. I'm going to make you hurt right now. And through that impulsivity, right through that lack of recognizing the consequences of her actions and what could happen to her, she decided to, you know, push on that gas pedal and drive straight into a wall. So I, I think it's important to understand that that doesn't mean that she was suicidal. I don't think that she was suicidal. What I think is that she was acting impulsively, she was already high and she was upset about something. It could be anything, who knows with her. You know, that's the thing, is that she gets upset at anything at any point, for any reason. And that's the relationship that, that Dom has been experiencing. But it's through that immaturity, it's through that youthfulness, it's through that entitlement that the, the, the ability to o. To that the body has to override a behavior that would engage in self harm. Right. The body's built to survive if it wants to survive. It's gonna, it's gonna stop you from doing something that's gonna harm it. But she was so activated by something that happened that her desire to inflict something, whatever this was, overrode her. Even her own ability, her body's own ability to, to survive. And so it wasn't that she was suicidal, it's that she wanted him to hurt more. That's the worst crash I've ever seen. Three occupants, 17 year old female, still breathing.

[A]

Have you ever seen anything like that before?

[B]

Sure. But I mean, we're talking about, we're talking about individuals who either suffer from borderline personality disorder or they suffer from, you know, a pretty serious case of bipolar disorder. These things are two different things, right? I want to be clear about that. Borderline personality disorder is about a person's interactions with other people, their relationships that they have. They're often hot and cold or, you know, good and bad. Right. They, they see relationships as binary and bipolar. Is more about when you enter into a hypomanic or a manic phase. You. Your ability to inhibit problematic behaviors kind of goes out the window. You start using drugs, having anonymous sex, doing all kinds of just things you wouldn't be doing if you weren't in that. In that phase. But also sometimes you would see it in individuals with antisocial personality disorder. And I want people to understand that antisocial personality disorder is not a person that doesn't like to be around other people. That's not true. Antisocial personality disorder just simply means that the rules, norms, regulations, laws, anything that society lives by, the individual doesn't believe they need to live by them. And they'll act, you know, under their own rules, thinking that they are justified for whatever behavior that they engage in. So, sure, I've seen it before, but usually we're talking about someone who has pretty serious diagnosable either personality disorder or

[A]

mental illness, not just something that you. I feel like so much of her diagnoses, psychosis, whatever's coming out now is, you know, we are sort of Monday morning quarterbacking the situation. She was so young. At 17, all of those developmental things are still happening, right?

[B]

All of them. And, and also we have to. Now we have to then bring in the nurturing aspect, right, that there's always a conversation about nature versus nurture. The, the reality is, is that it's not verses, it's nature and nurture. Right? So we're talking about. We've been initially discussing sort of her disposition and any sort of potential underlying mental illness that were there. But she also has, you know, extensive use of. Of marijuana. Marijuana is not a safe drug. Despite what her father believes. Marijuana is not safe to use in high quantities. And it also comes across as if her parents really took this idea of gentle parenting to its most extreme end and really did not put guard rails, safeguards or, or had Mackenzie experience a significant consequence for an inappropriate behavior. It seemed like they just kind of let her have the run of whatever it is she wanted to do. And if that's the household that you live in where you don't suffer consequences, then why would you consider consequences in your decisions?

[A]

Well, she was living with, I mean, her, her boyfriend. She's not 18. She wasn't an adult. She was 17. And you know, and I, I don't want to judge anybody else as a parent at all. You never know. Like, you know, all of the back conversations that have, that have taken place. And, and also you have to. This is for TV, right? We've talked about this before. Dr. John. That they're putting on a front for television. I mean they may, they may feel a little differently when the cameras are not on, but right now they're 101%. When you were watching the documentary, these parents were 120% on their kids side that was, you know, sitting behind bars.

[B]

Now. Yeah, and, and, and, and I'm sure, you know, as we continue, we'll discuss this even more about the difference between how you present yourself when there's a camera in versus how you actually are. I think there the difference is, is that we get to see her mother testify on her own behalf during the, the, the penalty phase. And I, I think that was awful. Was, it wasn't great. I, I, I, you know, that's, I think I understood where the mother was wanting to go, but I don't think she was sophisticated in her thinking about how to get there. And so that, I think that's less about playing up to the camera and I think demonstrates a little bit more of, of how the home life actually was going, which was coming up with any excuse, rationalization, justification, coming up with anything that you could to explain away her behavior. And I think that's their default kind of mindset. And it's played up by the father because he makes the statements about, you know, I'd rather you guys, you know, the camera people and producers and stuff smoking around like why that's, that's ridiculous. Why would you want that? That's, that's ridiculous. So, but it's when her mother is describing, I think that really demonstrates what's going on, which is they just explain away her behavior. And it's hard to know why. Right. It's, it's, it's hard to know just what exactly it is that they see from the perspective of a parent. Your job is to be a parent, not to be a friend. And they decided to be a friend instead of a parent.

[A]

That I totally agree with you and I'm sure that you have to have this battle on a regular basis with your own patients and people that you are in contact with. Because that is the biggest problem is that I think you cross this line that you, you're afraid, you're always afraid. I'm thinking, I'm just talking for a friend here. As a parent, you're always afraid that your kid is not going to stay with you on some level, that you're going to lose them. And in this case it was a real physical, she's not going to be with us And I think that that, that unbelievable level of fear of losing your child, even losing them from being in your life because you're not doing and being what they want to do, that's where parents really cross a line. And I feel like I see it all the time. And when they, when you hear entitled with a kid, to me, it also means that the parents are just feel like they're losing their ability to hold on. They want that child to like them so badly.

[B]

Yeah, well, yeah, I think that, I think that last part really kind of solidifies a lot of what's going on because this isn't just something that happened when she was 16, 17. I mean, this had been, this level of entitlement has been happening for a very long period of time. And so I can certainly see where these two individuals as parents have decided that, you know, what, whatever, whatever it takes, whatever we need to say to keep her around, she's the most important thing that we will ever have. The reality is, is that, yeah, it's great, but if you don't teach her to be a regular human being and consider other human beings feelings and the consequences of their behaviors, then you're not really, you're not really keeping them around so much as you're fostering a sociopath.

[A]

Exactly. And you know, and let's talk about the relationship that she has with Dom, her, her boyfriend. You know, we hear about text messages that we hear about fights that are going on between the two of them. Or is this just like a teenager induced behavior, you know, hormonal? In, you know, when you look at this dynamic, what do you see?

[B]

Inappropriate. It's been inappropriate from the beginning. I, I, I, you know, the, the father again, seems to just excuse away the age imbalance that was happening here. And I think that yes, there's all kinds of hormonal issues that are happening. Obviously there's also the, the imbalance of, of maturity that's happening. There's, there's all different kinds of things that you have to navigate as an individual growing into early adolescence to middle to late adolescence that you don't really understand. You can't really express to your parents. Your parents kind of have a problem understanding. But again, all of those things are certainly true that this relationship was toxic. But where was any of her parents? Right. When he turns 18, 19, 20, I mean, he still seems to be interacting with his mom less his dad, but there's very little that, you know, that the parent can really do to provide an intervention. They could go get him and say hey, you're only staying at my place. They could do that, but that's, that's a very difficult thing to do. But she's 16. She's 14, 15, 16, 17. They could have grabbed her and said, you're not leaving.

[A]

You're not doing anything.

[B]

You're not doing anything. You're not seeing anybody. You're going school, you're coming home. You mess up in school, then you know what we're gonna do? Homeschool. And you're not gonna like it very much because there's going to be even more rules than you're gonna like. There's so much more that they could have been doing. I find this relationship had been inappropriate from the start and only got worse because of all of these other biological, hormonal, all these other, you know, societal changes that were going on that they were experiencing.

[A]

Well, and also, Dr. John, I saw, like, with the parents, you know, her, her need to sort of control them or that narrative. And then she gets over to Dom and she, she's doing the same kind of behavior, like, trying to control that situation as well, really controlling language. I, I, we hear one fight that I remember, it was through a doorway, and she's like, you let me in now or else kind of thing. And it was obviously she was learning how to use her voice in a way that she needed that power and control over. Dom.

[B]

Oh, absolutely. And what we have to remember is that the relationships that we have with our parents are the relationships that we're going to have with other people in our sphere. And so the, the language that she's using with Dom isn't just automatic. It's not just learned right then and there. This is someone who is practiced and experienced using this language. So more than likely she's using it with her parents. More than likely they're allowing this. They had allowed this language to occur with them and did. They did not punish that behavior. They didn't do. There wasn't a consequence. So what she's learned then through that interaction would be, I'm the one in control. Now. Dom is, you know, an early 20s guy who, you know, is exuding his own authority in his own agency, so he's going to push back against that. But Mackenzie's grown up in a life where she always gets what she wants whenever she wants it. So Don, pushing up against that is really going to force her to escalate the power and control feelings that she has and the, and the behaviors to include language, the behaviors that she needs to exhibit in order to get it back.

[A]

And, you know, we hear there was a great example too, of. Of this. Dom's mother, you know, talked about how she was driving recklessly, and Dom was heard saying, you're. You're going to crash this car. Was there some level of premeditation going on, do you think, in her head?

[B]

Yeah, I. I think. I think that's a little bit more of a stretch. I think that was more of a stretch in their case that had it gone to a jury. I. I don't know that the jury sees it the way that the prosecutor sees it. So I think it was a miscalculation on the defense team's part to have a bench trial. They should have. They should have taken this to her jury.

[A]

I totally was thinking the same thing. I was totally thinking the same thing. I thought, bench trial. Why would you do that? Like that. At least with the jurors, you can be backing up to the idea that they've got kids, too.

[B]

Exactly, exactly. You only go to.

[A]

They're not a perfect parent, you know.

[B]

Right. You only go to a bench trial if you don't want emotions involved. But this is a case where you need emotions involved. You need people to remember what they were like when they were 16, 17, 18, up to 21, and the. The complicated relationships that they had with loved ones, with significant others. Right. This. This is a case that calls for a jury to at least get a hungry. At the very least, I think they could have gotten a mistrial.

[A]

I do, too. I was. That was one of the first things. And, you know, she never talked to the police ever.

[B]

No. And. Or should she? I mean, that's one of the. That's one of the only things that the parents got right. Giving them the phone is absolutely not something that they ever should have done. But telling her. Telling her not to talk to anybody was the only true, like, correct parenting advice that they've ever given her. Giving up the phone was what. I. I don't know what you're like, you're just hanging her out to dry at that point. But. But again, that goes to. I don't think. I think the level of privilege the parents had really underscores just how much they believed that they could get away with anything. And they put that onto their daughter that she could say, do whatever it is and they will get them. They will get her out of it, or that whatever she finds herself in is not going to be that bad because of who she is.

[A]

And she was a mean girl, according to a lot of people. She was a bit of a mean girl. I mean, can you, can you make that leap to a violent crime from being a mean girl?

[B]

You can go yourself. Yeah, I don't see why not. I mean, what we have to remember is that individuals who are willing to engage in an aggressive behaviors towards others don't see others as people. And if you're already, you know, a mean girl, right. And you, as we understand that definition to be, then you've been working your entire young adolescent life demeaning people, objectifying people, viewing people as, as subpar and less than you. So it doesn't, it's not that far of a leap to then go from saying negative things to a person to then doing negative things against another person. It's not that far of a leap, especially if you've been doing it from such a young age.

[A]

Well, and bullying, I mean, we're talking too about bullying and cyberbullying and that sort of thing as well. And you know, that kind of leads us straight into like what played such a prominent role in the, in the documentary. And I know that in the sentencing it played a prominent role as well, which is her, her use of social media, her wants to be famous, to be the TikTok influencer kind of thing.

[B]

It's hard, I think, for some people to navigate this very fine line of someone who would be experiencing grief and loss and how, how much attention that person would get from a social media audience. I don't think that she was actually grieving, so let's just put that out there. I don't think she was actually grieving.

[A]

Why don't you think so?

[B]

There's nothing about her that I've experienced that suggests that she actually recognizes what she's done. And by that what I mean is she knows she's done something wrong and she knows she's being punished for it, but she views her punishment as being excessive. She views it that way because she cannot, she cannot convince herself to say that she is actually culpable of this crime. She continues to use some other excuse to pass off culpability. If she knew she had this disorder, what's she doing driving? There's no evidence to suggest that she's ever had a blackout from this disorder while driving previously. So, so the. She's using these different excuses to keep her an arm's length away from the true feelings of shame, of guilt, of grief, of accepting responsibility. She's keeping herself at arm's length, capable of emoting the way someone would expect you to emote. She's capable of doing that. But the underlying reason for that emotion is more about, you know, oh, woe is me. As opposed to, I've. I've destroyed families, I've destroyed my family, I've destroyed their families. I've destroyed my entire life because of some nonsense that was going on in my head. So I don't experience her as grieving. But what I will say is that for her, the only thing worse than feeling bad is to feel isolated and alone. And she can't get the attention that she wants from her parents because her parents are wrapped around her little finger. But what she can do is get the attention, likes, clicks, everything from strangers, and that's more important to her. Strangers liking her, strangers wanting to be her, even strangers hating her are all more important to her than accepting responsibility for the damage that she's done.

[A]

That level of self absorption to, to me, to a just a layman that is not allowed to psychoanalyze anything really. But to me that sounds so narcissistic

[B]

that, I mean, that's the underlying element of the entitlement. In order for someone to feel that entitlement, they have to believe themselves to be other than to be more than other people. Now, whether, whether it came from an internal thing, but I think it actually probably stems more from her parents. Her parents constantly telling her, you can do no wrong. You're the most perfect angel. I can see them saying all of these things and then her internalizing it to truly then say, I am above each and every one of you. And you saying or doing something against me either fuels me or it makes it. Or if you're closer to me, it makes it that I need to do something then against you. And so yeah, at that level of entitlement requires a high level of narcissism that has as its underpinning, as the foundation of having that in time.

[A]

Well, and that, I mean, is that how we go from being a mean girl, like a teen girl that goes to a bully for a mean girl, that. That ends up being a murderer?

[B]

Sure. I think I. I don't know that she would have murdered under any other circumstance other than against a significant other? I can certainly see it possible that she would take a bullying instance too far, but I think that would have been more reckless and negligent as opposed to purposeful and knowing. She, I believe obviously she was found guilty of murder, which, which indicates that she purposefully, knowingly engaged in a behavior that would cause harm. So I believe that she was purposeful and making that car go 100 miles an hour and into a wall. I think she knowingly knew that she was either going to maim Dom again. She's only thinking about Dom. Davion in the back, he's just collateral damage. She didn't care about him, not one bit. But she was either thinking that Dom was going to get maimed or Dom was going to die. And those. She was okay with that, that, that, that was perfectly fine for whatever slight that she believed she, she in. She was inflicted. That was inflicted on her by Dom. She believed that that was justified, that, that that end result maiming her death was justified, which is why she could go 100 miles an hour. I mean, once you push on that gas and you go down a road, a dark road, a dark and somewhat windy road, 100 miles an hour, your anxiety gets up, right? Your heart starts flying, right? Your adrenaline starts pumping and there was not a moment's hesitation, right? You saw the log, right? Where never once did that break. Never once did she experience any, any sort of sense of fear. There was no, I mean, yes, the, the, the wheel turns, but that could have been anything. But there was, There was never. There was never a, a moment of hesitation where, where she's thinking, I might die. So let me stop this. She was so angry that dying was overridden. That's how angry that she was. And only she can know what she was angry about. This, you know, loss of memory, I mean, we could. Sure. But I mean, is it possible, sure, it's possible that she doesn't have a memory, but the. Her saying that she's not culpable, that she didn't do this on purpose, I think is fairly ridiculous.

[A]

The Halloween photos, I've got to ask you about that. What do you think about that? I understand the excuse I heard the excuse that her friend gave in the, in the documentary. I kind of accept it, honestly, because I know kids that age and they do stuff that are beyond stupid. But to dress up like a corpse, again, to me, that shows that her parents had no clue what she was putting on her phone. By the way, that's also why I think they handed over her phone, is because they truly had no understanding of how damaging Tiktoks and all that stuff can be.

[B]

Yeah, I 100% agree with you. They had no idea what was on her phone. They had no idea.

[A]

Yeah. No guardrails, so they. Why would they know?

[B]

Yeah, none. None. None whatsoever. But with regard to the Halloween thing, I agree with you. I, I think, I do think the prosecutor's case, I think his lens is, is of, of an adult man and not an immature 17 to 20 year old girl. And so I can certainly see that her generation and generations younger would. They're not considerate of the time and appropriateness of a behavior. They just kind of do what they want to do or what their friends have influenced them to do. I don't, again, I don't know that it's as premeditated as the prosecutor believes that it, that it is. Do I think it is uncouth? Do I think it is, you know, inappropriate? Do I think that it suggests that she is not as engaged in the grieving process the way that most people would consider the grieving process to be? Yeah, I would say that. But again, we also see her as immature and entitled and a brat that of course she's going to do this. Oh, why would we expect anything other than entitled, spoiled, bratty behavior from an entitled spoiled brat?

[A]

And just to be clear, you're saying what you see is someone that wasn't thinking, really was just thinking about hurting that other person, which is impulsive to me, that does not convey an intent to hurt someone, you know, in a premeditation sort of way.

[B]

I think my actual issue is the linkage of something that happened two weeks ago where, you know, there was this issue with the car and you know, he's grabbed the wheel. Right. I think my issue is more with that in terms of premeditation. When she makes that turn onto that road, the car is controlled and it's making the turn appropriately. So in my mind then she's not considering, hey, I'm going to drive this car into a wall. Like that's not in her mind at all. But something happens in that intervening time that sets her off to the point where she's able to push her foot onto the accelerator all the way down to the floor and never consider, like, I'm going too fast. So any, once that car goes a hundred, if all you were trying to do is scare the person, then you've accomplished that. That's a fairly reckless behavior. But she's going a far amount of time down that road and she's making, you know, you know, her curves down that road. That's where the premeditation comes from. That's when you're, that's when it happens, right? That's when it starts. Now it's, this isn't just scaring someone else. This isn't scaring my passengers. This is, now I'm going to harm you. I think My, I think my problem is linking it to a behavior. She's too impulsive for that, right? She's too, she's too. She doesn't consider what's going to happen the next day. She only cares about getting high and getting what she wants right then and there. She's not thinking about tomorrow or the, or the next week. Who cares about being satisfied in the moment? So I think my problem more was linking those two things together. But once she made that turn and pushed on that accelerator and kept it and kept going, I didn't stop, didn't hesitate, nothing. I think that's when it turned to premeditation. I know now that if I continue to do this, people are going to get hurt. And that's, that's, that's the premeditation.

[A]

With a kid like this, would you have, if Mackenzie was brought into your office ahead of time before this happened, do you think that there would have been enough warning signs that you had a very dangerous, possibly incredibly violent person on your hands?

[B]

Violent, probably not dangerous. I think we probably need to expand the dangerous more. I think if she was, if the parents brought her in to see me, we'd have a problem because I need to see the parents too. Because just interacting with her a little bit, you get the sense that oh, this isn't just you like there, there's, there's other dynamics that are at play. The whole family needs to come together. We need to start transitioning parents from friends to parents to parents. So I, I don't know that I would have anticipated her, her ability to engage in this specific behavior. I think I probably would have been more concerned about her willingness to engage in a self harm behavior. Again, I don't think she was suicidal when she did this thing. I think she just didn't care that she was going to get hurt. What I'm saying is that my instinct probably would have been, I think she's probably engaging in self harm behavior. The amount of marijuana that she's smoking, her thinness, I'd be real concerned about, you know, restricted eating. There are a lot of things that I would have been considered would have been more self harming behaviors, not necessarily suicidal, but I think those things would have been where my yellow to red flags would have been raised and not something like this.

[A]

So, you know, at the end of this documentary we see the, the curtain kind of comes off, right? We see behind the curtain and her lawyer is present the whole time. There's a, a lot's been made of how this documentary ends and I think it was a good decision by the director to show that there was a lawyer present during this. During this interview with Mackenzie. But did you see anything wrong with that? Because I want to hear what you have to say. And I'll tell you what I think too.

[B]

No, of course not. Again, the. The only thing that they've ever done right is to let the lawyer speak. And if the lawyer tells you to, this is how it needs to go. I think. I think the problem is, is that they probably needed a better lawyer than this lawyer that they had. Should she be getting this stuff from her lawyer? Of course. But if she truly wanted people to. To believe her, then none of this should have been something that she ever should have done. But she can't help herself. She needs the attention.

[A]

Okay, so that's why you think she did this, was that she needed the attention. You don't think it's because of the appeal that she's going for?

[B]

Nah, I. I doubt she even knows what an appeal is. But I. I think. I think she knows what attention is, and I think she lives by. Even bad publicity is good publicity. I don't think she really cares. I think. I think in some ways she might thrive when. When, you know, more people say that she's bad. I think. I think that that bolsters her a little bit. I think now she feels more, you know, empowered when people think that she's wrong because, you know, people. People don't understand her or something, whatever nonsense is going on in her head. I think. I think she likes being loved. I think she loves being hated.

[A]

Okay, so Netflix had one hour with her, and I heard it was a hell of a get to be able to. Be able to sit down with her in the first place. If you had an hour with her, what would you be asking Mackenzie?

[B]

I don't know that I ask her anything. I would just sit and stare at her. I want her to feel uncomfortable thinking that, you know, wondering what. What exactly it is that's going on in my mind. I would probably ask her, you know, tell. Tell me about your relationship with Dom. Right. And then at. At various points, kind of challenging based on what the evidence have suggested, you know, asking her to elaborate more and more. But I would always want to center it on pauses and pregnant pauses and, And, And. And just there would be long periods of time when I'm just kind of staring at her blankly because I think. I think she, she. She. She drop. She's fueled by. And driven by being able to know that she's Getting under your skin and feels that. That power and control when she knows that she's getting there. And so as a forensic psychologist, when I know that that's what the person wants, then I'm not going to give that to them because it's going to frustrate them more. And the more frustrated they are, the more likely they are to reveal the reality of whatever that situation is. So I want her. I think she. She's fueled by the attention, so I'm not going to give her what she wants. Right. I'm not going to flicker when she says that, you know, she's exposed herself and used, you know, had, you know, video chats. Okay. Like, that's great for you. Like, I'm not going to give her what she wants.

[A]

And you're talking about in prison, all of them, our friends over at Law and Crime, Angenette Levy. I was. I was seeing something that she was just reporting on. I think they foiaed some of the prison records. And, my God, she's been in trouble since she walked in that door two years ago. She's only been there for a couple years.

[B]

Yeah. And so I think. I think I would spend less time talking and more time getting her on till the. The. The more that I can make her frustrated, the more I can probably get to the truth. I. Again, I don't know that she actually has the crash memory. It is certainly possible that the crash happened so quickly, that memories were not encoded. That is certainly possible. But she knows why she pushed on that accelerator. She remembers why. Her willingness to admit to. To why she pushed on an accelerator. That's a different story. And I think that's the only story that we have any reality of getting out of her.

[A]

Just, you know, she's not going to be up for parole. If she even makes Pearl. I mean, you know, I know, like.

[B]

No, no, no, no. Not this first time. Not.

[A]

There's no.

[B]

I can't.

[A]

Not in Ohio.

[B]

Yeah. I can't. I can't envision all of these things. I mean, I think one. One of member of the parole board would say, oh, well, you know, this was all sort of relative. You're new to this. This isn't. You're still young. I could see one parole board member maybe going like that. But if she continues on this road, I mean, she's going to lose all of her good time. She's. She's going to get even more sanctions. She's not gonna. She's not gonna get out, and she's not doing any programming she's not in any therapy, you know, drug treatment. Like if she's not doing any programming at all. Never gonna get out. Never.

[A]

No. It's extraordinary actually. Talk about self harm and self sabotage. Maybe this is where she's going to learn her lesson.

[B]

Could be right, but a lot of people find God in prison, so that doesn't, that doesn't mean that you actually did. That just means you said that you did.

[A]

If she gets out, just by the chance, what would her life be like when she gets out?

[B]

Honestly, I don't know that it's any different. I, I, honestly, I think if she's able to maneuver her way out, I think the first thing she does is get back online and promote her story. I think, I think the first thing that she does is truly try to capitalize on using social media. Again, I think that's the first thing that she does. But it's also possible that she starts internalizing a lot of different things and starts recognizing where the problems were. She starts developing healthy, you know, habits about her life. That again, that's all possible. I, I, I don't know that she's in a position right now to, to do those things, but that doesn't mean she won't ever be. But if, if she truly incorporates everything, we'll never hear from her again. If she hasn't, the very first thing that she's going to do is she's going to get back online.

[A]

I know, I do know that they're trying to pass, I think it's called Dom's Law. Right now they're trying to close the loopholes with Son of Sam in which, you know, prisoners, inmates can't, convicted felons can't profit on their crime. So we'll see how that plays out. Because I think everybody's worried that she could actually profit from, from any of this. And it'd be so interesting if she, I could see her want to tell somebody that she is close to in prison. So it'll be interesting to see if she wants to share anymore. Also for her parents, I have to say I feel sorry for them in some ways that they can't take, they can't take this, the filters off and the lens off and see, see what's going on with Mackenzie. Or maybe they can. And that's the whole thing about having a camera in front of you.

[B]

Yeah, I, I, I, I, I mean, I feel less concerned probably than you do for the parents. I think the parents, this is the monster of their making. And I don't think they recognize just how much damage they've done by the choices that they made and, and parenting her, that this didn't need to happen. She didn't need to be this way. I think, unfortunately, the living situation that she found herself in really festered and molded her thinking to, to, to, to, to a such a degree that she was willing to engage in such destructive behavior for a long period of time. This isn't, this is just the end result. But she's been destructive for a long period of time.

[A]

Unbelievable. Well, thank you so much. It's just fascinating. Talk to you like we talked at CrimeCon. I was like, I can't wait to talk to Dr. John about this because this is an extraordinary kind of window into, I hate to say modern day kid life, but this is sort of the extreme of it. But still, I feel like we're sort of falling off that precipice a little bit right now.

[B]

I wouldn't say that it is. I would say that it's just more in our face nowadays in contemporary times than it had been previously. But she's not unique. She's not special. I shouldn't do none of those things. She people like her have existed well before her. They'll exist long after her. She's just another thing in a long history of people who are willing to harm others just because they can.

[A]

Drop a comment below, I want to hear your latest theory on Mackenzie Shirla as well. And if you watch the crash and be sure to like, subscribe and turn on on your notifications because I don't want you to miss any of these incredible interviews like Dr. John's.