Lindsay Clancy’s Lawyer Defends Ex-Husband as Rumors Swirl

The attorney representing Lindsay Clancy has forcefully pushed back against what he called “horrific conspiracy allegations” aimed at her former husband, saying Lindsay herself has been distressed by the claims circulating online.

Kevin Reddington urged the public to “stop with the speculation” about Patrick Clancy and the deaths of the couple’s three children during a Wednesday appearance on CBS Mornings.

“Stop with the speculation and horrific conspiracy allegations that he was involved with some massive conspiracy to kill his children,” Reddington said.

He added that Patrick has endured an unimaginable ordeal, saying, “It’s horrific what this man has been going through and he’s entitled to move on with his life.”

Reddington also told NBC News’ Laura Jarrett in a separate Wednesday interview that Lindsay, 36, is “upset” by the growing wave of online theories targeting her ex-husband and “certainly does not agree with that.”

“The guy was her husband. They had a very, very, very strong relationship,” he said, underscoring the closeness of the couple before the tragedy.

Reddington said Lindsay understands that Patrick has been unfairly targeted, adding that it is “readily apparent” his world has been thrown into a nightmare “that he doesn’t deserve.”

Lindsay Clancy is accused of deliberately strangling her three young children — five-year-old Cora, three-year-old Dawson and eight-month-old Callan — using exercise bands inside the family’s Duxbury, Massachusetts, home in January 2023.

Patrick divorced Lindsay, moved across state lines to New York City and married Rachel Danis, an infertility specialist, earlier this year.

He later took the stand as the prosecution’s first witness when the trial began in July.

After nearly six weeks of grueling testimony, the trial ended in a dramatic deadlock Friday, with the judge declaring a mistrial after the 12 jurors failed to reach a unanimous verdict.

But while the case hinged almost entirely on Lindsay’s state of mind, online sleuths spent weeks building their own theories, fixating on everything from Patrick’s movements to the shoes he wore on the night his children died.

Reddington, 75, hit back at the wild rumors surrounding Patrick and attacks on his character. 

He instead hailed Patrick for standing by his former wife through her mental health spiral, emotional trial and legal battles against the providers they blame for failing to properly diagnose her and pumping her with medication. 

‘Patrick was a man who stood by his wife through all of this difficulty, of the medical issues, the psychiatric issues, the pharmaceutical issues,’ Reddington said, according to CBS Mornings.

‘The fact that he’s moving on with his life and still standing by Lindsay as far as the legal issues tells the tale,’ he added.

The former labor and delivery nurse admitted to killing her children but pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, hoping to be committed to a state mental health facility rather than sent to prison. 

Reddington argued that she was suffering from postpartum psychosis and the effects of being heavily medicated by doctors. 

Prosecutors, however, argued that she deliberately killed her children as part of a plan that involved sending Patrick out on errands while she strangled the children in the basement before attempting to take her own life. 

The evidence, however, flatly contradicted the theories, with surveillance footage and phone records showing Patrick was nowhere near the house when his children were killed. 

Patrick’s lawyer Howard Cooper also hit back at the online firestorm, vowing legal action against ‘conspiracy theorists’ spreading ‘misinformation’ about his client in a pointed statement Tuesday, according to ABC 7 News. 

Cooper said Patrick and his family have endured a ‘relentless, escalating and destructive defamation campaign’ in recent months.

‘Enough is enough – this spread of blatant and baseless falsehoods must stop,’ Cooper said, according to the outlet.

‘Those responsible should understand that there will be consequences, and every appropriate measure will be pursued to hold them accountable, including legally. Law enforcement has been notified,’ he added.

He accused ‘minor celebrities, so-called influencers and outright conspiracy theorists’ of fueling a relentless campaign of ‘misinformation’ seemingly designed to boost their own social media profiles.

Cooper further claimed that those behind the social media posts also appear to be seeking a ‘potential profit’ while publishing what they ‘know to be outright falsehoods’ about his client. 

He said the ‘insatiable media coverage remains at a fever pitch,’ resulting in damage to Patrick’s ‘reputation, livelihood and life,’ according to the statement. 

‘Patrick has no choice but to address this situation with the clear goal of stopping injurious behavior, creating accountability for lies that are self-serving to the perpetrators, and being able to return his attention to what matters: preserving the memory of Cora, Dawson and Callan Clancy and supporting other women facing perinatal mental health challenges,’ Cooper said. 

Meanwhile, three women who were jurors in the Clancy trial have spoken out for the first time since the case was ruled a mistrial.

Speaking to NBC10 Boston, the three women detailed the heated arguments they had with the lone holdout juror who refused to acquit Lindsay. 

One of the women, known only as juror two, told the outlet: ‘He, I think got up to the cart [with the exhibits] once and then went back to his seat. He would not interact with us and try to understand. We read to him the definition of reasonable doubt.’

‘He said one day “why don’t we have the judge read it again?”, and we were like no we have it in front of us,’ the juror added.

Another woman, the jury’s foreperson, told the outlet: ‘He had reasonable doubt. He admitted he had reasonable doubt. 

‘I started filling out the forms, I was so excited. There were three forms I had to fill out, and then he said “but I’m still not going to say she’s not guilty.”‘

The trio said their clashes with the man became so heated that alternate jurors could hear them through the wall. 

Reddington told CBS Mornings on Wednesday that revelations from jurors who have spoken out since the mistrial prompted him to seek to have the entire case against Lindsay thrown out at a September 29 hearing.

He claimed that the jurors’ disclosures about what happened behind closed doors during deliberations mean double jeopardy now prevents a retrial. 

‘It will be a motion to dismiss based on what’s called double jeopardy grounds, because there’s no… manifest necessity,’ Reddington said, according to the outlet.

‘You have to have a manifest necessity to declare a mistrial for obvious reasons – the invested time that the jurors put into it, the court, the staff, the defendant, the prosecution, everybody,’ he added.

Reddington claimed that the judge let a preventable problem spiral into a mistrial, arguing that he should have questioned the juror over his alleged refusal to follow the reasonable-doubt standard and replaced him if necessary.