Home · World · Nov 2 archive
Judge Weighs Dismissal of Lindsay Clancy's Murder Charges
ConfirmedShare on
In Short: Lindsay Clancy's lawyers urged Judge William Sullivan to dismiss her first-degree murder charges, arguing that retrying her would violate her constitutional rights.
Lindsay Clancy's lawyers urged Judge William Sullivan on Monday to dismiss the first-degree murder charges against her in the state of Massachusetts, arguing that retrying her for killing her three young children would violate her constitutional rights.
Clancy, now 36, has never disputed killing her children in 2023, but her lawyer has argued she was suffering from postpartum psychosis and was unable to control her behavior at the time.
At her first trial, Clancy’s attorney conceded that she had killed the children by strangling them with exercise bands in the basement of her family’s home, but argued that she was not legally responsible for their deaths due to postpartum psychosis.
After weeks of evidence and deliberation, the jury reported an 11-1 deadlock, leading Judge Sullivan to declare a mistrial.
Clancy’s attorneys are now asking the judge to dismiss the murder charges, citing the September 4 mistrial as a violation of double jeopardy protections.
The judge also addressed a prosecution request to restrict lawyers from making public statements that could prejudice future proceedings.
The absence of a clear, standardized DSM-5 definition of postpartum psychosis meant that the defense struggled to show Clancy's psychotic state met a specific criteria.
Clancy has been held at Tewksbury Hospital, a state-run public psychiatric hospital in Tewksbury, Massachusetts, about 20 miles from Boston, throughout her murder trial.
What's confirmed
- Prosecutors have acknowledged that Clancy, now 36, had mental health problems but said she acted deliberately and understood her actions were wrong.
- Clancy has never disputed killing her three young children in 2023, but her lawyer has argued she had postpartum psychosis and was unable to control her behaviour.
- "You were the one who looked them in the eyes and asked them the questions and was in the best position to judge their credibility."
- Prosecutors disagree, arguing that double jeopardy “does not bar the Commonwealth from seeking justice on behalf of the three victims.” Monday's hearing before Judge William Sullivan will also address a prosecution request to restrict lawyers from making public statements that could prejudice future proceedings.
What's still developing
- The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court addressed that principle in Commonwealth v. Nicoll, a 2008 case in which it upheld dismissal of criminal charges after finding that a judge had declared a mistrial without adequately considering an available alternative.
- Jurors have since spoken out, with several pointing to one juror they said would not uphold the reasonable-doubt standard and was the only one of 12 jurors who wanted to convict Clancy.
- The reported charges are especially alarming considering fellow juror Nick Dargie previously told ABC News that the unnamed holdout once used a water bottle to mimic how Clancy's kids were strangled.
- Meanwhile, the Plymouth County District Attorney's Office is reviewing the evidence and testimony to decide whether Clancy will be tried again on the murder charges.