A convicted Ohio killer is facing renewed scrutiny after a former inmate claimed she privately admitted to deliberately causing a deadly crash that killed two teenagers — and allegedly treated the story with disturbing detachment behind bars.

Mackenzie Shirilla, widely known as the “Hell on Wheels” killer, was sentenced in 2023 to two consecutive terms of 15 years to life after a judge ruled she intentionally drove her car into a brick structure in Strongsville, Ohio, killing her boyfriend Dominic Russo and their friend Davion Flanagan.

Shirilla has consistently maintained in public statements and in a later documentary that the crash was not intentional, claiming she lost consciousness due to a medical condition. But new allegations from a former inmate have reignited debate around her account and her behavior while incarcerated.

The claims come from a woman identified only as Anastasia, 30, who says she shared a housing unit with Shirilla at the Ohio Reformatory for Women. According to her account, Shirilla described the crash in graphic detail and framed it as a deliberate act rather than an accident.

“She said she was suicidal, but she almost looked as though she was enjoying telling the story — like she was amused by it,” Anastasia alleged. “It didn’t feel like remorse. It felt like performance.”

Anastasia further claimed Shirilla made an explicit statement about Russo during one of these conversations, allegedly saying, “Dom had to die,” while recounting the moments leading up to the fatal crash.

If accurate, the remarks would directly contradict Shirilla’s long-standing public defense that the crash was unintentional. In court, prosecutors argued that data from the vehicle and surveillance footage showed sustained acceleration and a lack of braking prior to impact — evidence they said supported an intentional act.

The case itself became one of Ohio’s most controversial teen murder trials, partly due to Shirilla’s age at the time of the incident and the emotional volatility of the events that preceded it. In July 2022, she drove her Toyota Camry into a brick building at high speed, killing both passengers instantly.

Anastasia also described what she characterized as unusual behavior by Shirilla in custody, alleging that she frequently spoke about the crash in a way that blended shock value with dark humor.

“She said the devil made her do it,” Anastasia claimed. “She said the devil was pressing on her foot. It was like she wanted it to sound theatrical.”

The former inmate further alleged that Shirilla had developed a disturbing fixation on the crash, including keeping a scrapbook that referenced the incident. According to Anastasia, the scrapbook reportedly included a drawing or image of a brick wall accompanied by the word “BOOM,” which she interpreted as a reference to the fatal impact.

“She didn’t have pictures of Dom or Davion,” Anastasia said. “That part stayed with me. It felt cold.”

Those claims, however, remain unverified and have not been independently confirmed by prison officials or legal representatives.

Shirilla’s defense team has previously rejected characterizations of her behavior as intentional or malicious, instead arguing that she suffered from a medical episode consistent with Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome, or POTS, which they say could cause fainting or loss of control. That argument was central to her trial and later documentary appearance.

A former cellmate’s account also disputes that version of events. Anastasia said she never observed Shirilla lose consciousness or exhibit symptoms consistent with fainting while incarcerated.

“I never saw her pass out,” she said. “She was very aware of everything around her.”

Shirilla’s case has remained highly polarizing since her conviction, particularly as it gained renewed attention through streaming platforms and true crime documentaries. The portrayal of her story has divided viewers between those who accept the prosecution’s theory of intent and those who believe her medical defense was not fully considered.

Public reaction has also been shaped by broader comparisons to other high-profile criminal cases involving young offenders and media attention. Some critics argue that Shirilla’s case highlights how violent crimes committed by teenagers can become amplified through digital storytelling, while others say renewed coverage helps ensure accountability and transparency.

Separate from the inmate allegations, Shirilla has also faced reports of disciplinary issues during incarceration. These include claims of inappropriate behavior and possession of restricted materials, though prison authorities have not publicly released detailed findings beyond general references to institutional rule violations.

Meanwhile, Shirilla’s ongoing legal efforts continue to move through the courts. Her legal team has pursued appeals arguing procedural issues in her original trial, but those efforts have so far been unsuccessful. A request for a new trial was denied earlier this year, and her conviction remains in place.

As it stands, Shirilla is serving two consecutive life sentences with the possibility of parole only after several decades. Her next potential eligibility date is currently projected for 2037, though that could change depending on future appeals or legal developments.

The families of the victims have consistently rejected any suggestion that the crash was accidental, pointing to trial findings and forensic evidence as confirmation of intent. For them, renewed allegations and media attention only reopen wounds tied to a night they say permanently changed their lives.

For now, the claims made by Anastasia add another layer of controversy to an already widely debated case — one that continues to raise difficult questions about intent, accountability, and how violent crime narratives evolve long after the courtroom verdict has been delivered.