Lindsay Clancy’s legal future remains uncertain as prosecutors have yet to disclose which charges she could face if she is retried.
The 36-year-old former nurse appeared in a Massachusetts courtroom Monday as attorneys argued over motions seeking to dismiss the case, investigate the juror who prevented a unanimous verdict and impose a gag order on lawyers involved in the proceedings.
Prosecutors have not said whether they will pursue another first-degree murder trial after Clancy’s initial trial ended in a hung jury in September. The jury reportedly voted 11-1 for acquittal.
Clancy faces three first-degree murder charges in connection with the January 2023 deaths of her children: five-year-old Cora, three-year-old Dawson and eight-month-old Callan.
She acknowledged strangling the children but pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, arguing that she was experiencing severe postpartum psychosis and had been overmedicated by doctors.
Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Sprague said Monday that the state was “not at that point yet” in determining the charges for any retrial. She said prosecutors wanted the judge to rule first on the defense motion seeking dismissal.
Defense attorney Kevin Reddington criticized the district attorney’s office for not deciding on the charges and demanded a speedy trial if Judge William Sullivan rejects the request to dismiss the case.
“Why do we not know if the next trial is going to be murder in the first degree or a lesser charge or no charge?” he asked.
Lindsay Clancy appeared in court Monday as lawyers argued over dismissing the case, investigating the holdout juror and imposing a gag order
Clancy faces three first-degree murder charges in the January 2023 deaths of her children, five-year-old Cora, three-year-old Dawson and eight-month-old Callan
Reddington described Sullivan’s impending retirement as “the elephant in the room” and again called for a speedy trial if the judge refuses to dismiss the case.
“I want a trial, I want it with you, and I want it this spring,” he said. “I am not going to have this woman incarcerated for the next year or two or three.”
Sullivan scheduled Clancy’s next hearing for November 16 at 9 a.m. ET. He is expected to rule on the motions and select a March date for a possible retrial.
Monday’s hearing also featured a tense exchange between Sullivan and Reddington over the juror who held out against a guilty verdict, Michael Desronvil.
“I’m going to stop you right there,” Sullivan said after Reddington referred to Desronvil by name.
“No, you’re not going to stop me,” Reddington replied.
Sullivan then warned that he could end the hearing.
“There’s no need to bring out that juror’s name,” the judge said.
Reddington argued that Desronvil had received “more facetime than I do” after speaking with the media.
Clancy’s attorney Martin Weinberg, who previously represented Karen Read, also maintained that the case should be dismissed because the jury was not impartial.
Defense attorney Kevin Reddington and Judge William Sullivan clashed over arguments involving the holdout juror
Weinberg argued that the decision to declare a mistrial was made “in the heat of the moment.”
MORE ON THIS: Florida Learjet Crash Copilot Was 20-Year-Old Who Flew Before Driving
“We contend, based on these jury notes, that not all 12 jurors were following your instructions,” Weinberg said.
Prosecutors and an attorney representing Desronvil urged the judge to reject the motion. They accused the defense of targeting the juror simply because he did not reach the verdict they wanted.
The hearing took place as Clancy’s civil attorneys said they believe she would take her own life if given the opportunity.
“She doesn’t want to be here. She wants to be with her children, and if given the opportunity, I have no doubt in my mind at all that she would take her own life,” attorney Rosemary Scapicchio told CBS News.
Scapicchio said Clancy thinks constantly about the fact that her children are gone and suffers from “horrible dreams.”
“She walks around all day with that right here in her face, every single solitary day, and then she sleeps and has horrible dreams about this,” Scapicchio said.
Clancy’s trial unraveled after a single juror refused to change his vote. Her attorneys subsequently sought to overturn the mistrial, arguing that the juror had expressed “reasonable doubt.”
Prosecutors and an attorney for Desronvil urged the judge to reject the motion, accusing the defense of targeting the juror because he did not reach the desired conclusion
Desronvil has denied having reasonable doubt. In a filing this week, prosecutors argued that the Supreme Court has previously rejected attempts to use “post-trial juror revelations about their deliberations” to influence the analysis.
Separately, Clancy’s former husband, Patrick, is pursuing a wrongful-death lawsuit against her former doctors. His attorneys argued last week that the deaths of the children could have been prevented.
Patrick’s attorney, Howard Cooper, said he believes Lindsay will be able to testify once issues involving her Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination are resolved.
He claimed she would say that her doctors knew she had thoughts about harming her children but failed to intervene.
“You know who hasn’t testified yet, Your Honor? Lindsay Clancy,” Cooper said in court this week. “We allege in our complaint that she is going to confirm that she told these defendants that she had homicidal ideation.”
“We believe that Lindsay Clancy, once her Fifth Amendment issues are resolved, one way or the other, will testify that she told these defendants explicitly that she had homicidal ideation, that she was worried about something awful happening to her kids.”
Reddington has rejected those claims.
“It has come to my attention that counsel for Patrick Clancy represented to the court in his civil case that my client, Lindsay Clancy, will testify about statements she made to her healthcare providers,” he told CBS Boston.
“Lindsay Clancy never told any of her healthcare providers that she harbored homicidal ideation toward her children,” he added.
“She never indicated that she intended to testify in Mr Clancy’s lawsuit, and no one acting for her ever represented that she would. Mr Clancy’s counsel does not speak for Lindsay Clancy.”
Patrick’s lawsuit names several medical providers who testified during the closely watched criminal trial, including Dr Jennifer Tufts and nurse Rebecca Jollotta. It accuses them of failing to provide appropriate treatment, which “resulted in tragedy, namely, allegations that Lindsay took the lives of her children.”
“If Defendants had not acted negligently, and rather had provided adequate care, it is more likely than not that Patrick and Lindsay’s children would still be alive today,” the lawsuit states.
Tufts and Jollotta, along with the other medical providers named in the lawsuit, South Shore Health System and Aster Mental Health, have denied the allegations and filed motions seeking dismissal.
This is a breaking news story…
