Lindsay Clancy’s defense lawyer sharply challenged the police work in what has been described as “America’s saddest murder trial,” telling the court that unresolved questions remain before jurors begin deliberating.
During arguments Wednesday over the charges Clancy should face, defense attorney Kevin Reddington urged the judge to let the jury consider instructions tied to what he characterized as a deeply flawed investigation.
“It was no investigation,” Reddington said in court. “They basically accepted the fact that she strangled the children and moved on.”
Reddington argued that investigators failed to examine key pieces of potential evidence, including a window screen and the tumbler in which Clancy allegedly crushed pills. He also pointed to lingering questions surrounding blood spatter evidence.
“I could go on and on about the horrific investigation,” he told the court.
The defense attorney maintained that jurors should be permitted to acquit Clancy based on shortcomings in the investigation itself.
“To have a lack of criminal responsibility, you have to admit involvement in the crime, but when you’re trying the case with lack of criminal responsibility, the government still has the burden to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of, based on the evidence, that particular crime,” Reddington said.
Kevin Reddington criticized the police investigation and argued the jury should be allowed to acquit Lindsay Clancy based on the investigation
The judge ruled that the jury could consider a manslaughter charge for Clancy, who has pleaded not guilty to murdering her children by reason of insanity
‘If there’s evidence of a police investigation that is deficient, a jury does have a right to consider that as a basis of an acquittal.’
Judge William Sullivan denied his request to allow the jury to consider a inadequate police investigation.
However, the judge did say he will give a manslaughter instruction – meaning that the jury could find Clancy guilty of the lesser charges of manslaughter rather than murder.
Clancy, 36, is on trial for the murders of her three children, Cora, five, Dawson, three, and eight-month-old Callan, at her home in Duxbury, Massachusetts, in 2023.
She strangled her children with exercise bands and then allegedly attempted to kill herself, but her efforts failed and left her paralyzed from the waist down and in a wheelchair for life.
Clancy has admitted to killing her children but pleaded not guilty to murder by reason of insanity, citing postpartum psychosis, and is seeking to be committed to a state mental health facility rather than face a prison sentence.
The prosecution rested its case on Wednesday after its final witness, forensic psychiatrist Dr Gregory Saathoff, testified Clancy had ‘preparatory planning’ ahead of killing her children.
‘My opinion is that she did have the capacity to appreciate right from wrong,’ Dr Saathoff testified.
This is based on several things, he said.
Forensic psychiatrist Dr Gregory Saathoff testified Clancy is responsible for her actions and had ‘preparatory planning’ ahead of killing her children
One day before the killings, Clancy met with Dr Jennifer Tufts and denied suicidal or homicidal thoughts. They had also spoken about future treatment.
He also said that he noticed ‘preparatory planning’ in her online searches for the distance to restaurant 3V and for CVS, before asking her husband about getting takeout and ‘adding on’ the pharmacy trip as another errand.
Then, Dr Saathoff claimed, she could commit the crime when there were no witnesses. She needed a window of time to kill the children and herself, the medic added.
‘She was conscious of time,’ he said, adding that this was seen in the locking of the door to delay Patrick from entering the bedroom.
The weapons used – the exercise bands – being readily available and nearby also shows planning, he said.
And the phone call between her and Patrick was said to be significant. Clancy called her ex-husband back, showing presence of mind to conceal from him what was going on, Dr Saathoff said.
‘It is my opinion, within a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that Lindsay Clancy was criminally responsible,’ he added.
On cross-examination, Reddington poked holes in the evidence Saathoff used to reach his conclusion.
Clancy is on trial for the murders of her three children, Cora, five, Dawson, three, and eight-month-old Callan
Saathoff had cited that Clancy told Patrick ‘I tried to kill myself’ when he found her injured in the yard as a reason to show that she was competent at that time.
When asked where he got that information, the psychiatrist testified that Patrick said that.
But he admitted that, having heard the 911 call, Clancy was not making any audible words.
Reddington asked if he heard anything from Clancy other than ‘guttural grunts.’
‘Not on that call,’ he testified.
Reddington also questioned Saathoff about the timing of when Clancy began to hear voices telling her to kill the kids.
Clancy told Saathoff that her hallucination – the voice – occurred when she was standing at the refrigerator making the children their dinner.
However, Dr Saathoff testified that she had told Dr Margaret Spinelli that she heard it almost as soon as Patrick left the home at around 5.15pm.
Patrick testified that Dawson was eating chicken nuggets on the couch when he left.
The different accounts to him showed inconsistencies in Clancy’s story, according to Saathoff.
Reddington said that the crime scene photos show some cucumber or carrot in the bowl, and is showing there are holes in the facts on which he is basing his evaluation of Clancy.
Court will resume on Thursday for closing arguments, then the case will be sent to the jury for deliberation.
