Dr. Yaakov Weill, who wrote the psychiatric evaluation of the mother suspected of starving her three-year-old son, has changed his mind and now says the woman does pose a threat to her children.
Weill's opinion, among other factors, contributed to the court's decision to release the suspect to house arrest with her children.
Following his meeting with the mother last week, Dr. Weill concluded she was not dangerous to her children. However, in a letter recently sent to the rabbis who assisted the mother during her arrest, the psychiatrist wrote that he wishes to recant on his earlier estimate that the mother "can continue carrying out her parental duties to her children without risk."
"I did not have the sufficient tools to determine this," Weill said in a letter to Rabbi Avraham Froelich, who hosted the woman after she was remanded to house arrest.
"I wish to stress that I did not consider myself an expert witness appointed by the court, but was merely obliging you, the rabbis, who asked me to examine her," he added.
The State Prosecutor's Office submitted Weill's letter to the court as a "supplementary document to his evaluation."
In a conversation with Ynet Weill confirmed sending the letter, but refused to comment on its content.
History of controversial decisions
Since Weill issued his evaluation, new information has come to light regarding controversial evaluations he has given in the past. Four years ago, during a verdict hearing of a pedophile sentenced to 13 years in prison, the court harshly criticized Weill for stating that the man merely
failed to resist the "sexual come-ons" of five minors and therefore assaulted them.
In the recent affair, Weill has been criticized by the Jerusalem District Psychiatrist Dr. Moshe Kalian, who rejected his opinion regarding the mother's mental state. A day after he published his opinion Ynet learned that Weill was fired from his post at Hadassah Ein Kerem Hospital several months ago.
Ynet also learned that in 1989, during his residency Weill examined an abused woman and concluded she "exaggerated in describing her pain and was very dramatic." Following this opining the woman was sent home and died several hours later.
The court found Weill's evaluation to be "wrong and unfortunate," but did not find him guilty of malpractice.