RESOLVING THE LEDGER
This is one outlet's own report from Newsweek — the article as it was filed. Other outlets are covering the same event; open the full story to compare every source side by side.
See the full story · 11 sources
0 Share Newsweek is a Trust Project member See more of our trusted coverage when you search. Prefer Newsweek on Google to see more of our trusted coverage when you search. The final stretch of Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial erupted into one of its most heated battles Monday as defense attorney Kevin Reddington aggressively challenged prosecution psychiatrist Dr. Avram Mack over his assessment that Clancy was severely depressed — but not psychotic — when she killed her three children.
The courtroom confrontation came as prosecutors presented their final rebuttal witnesses and attempted to dismantle the defense’s central argument: that Clancy was experiencing postpartum psychosis, including a command hallucination, and therefore was not criminally responsible for the killings.
Mack returned to the stand Monday morning for cross-examination after testifying Friday that Clancy suffered from a major depressive disorder but that he found no evidence she was experiencing psychosis at the time of the killings. He also told jurors that psychosis, by itself, does not necessarily prevent a person from understanding right from wrong.
“There’s no reason why psychosis in and of itself inhibits a person from knowing right from wrong,” Mack testified.
That conclusion became a major target for Reddington.
Reddington repeatedly questioned Mack about his qualifications, his previous testimony in criminal cases and the methodology he used to evaluate Clancy.
At one point, Reddington confronted Mack with previous cases in which courts had criticized or rejected aspects of his testimony. The defense attorney cited decisions from Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Florida in an effort to convince jurors that Mack’s opinion should not be accepted at face value.
“I don’t agree with your conceptualization,” Mack responded when challenged over the defense attorney’s characterization of those cases.
The questioning then moved directly to postpartum psychosis.
Reddington pressed Mack over whether he understood the condition the defense says was responsible for Clancy’s actions, while also challenging the psychiatrist’s approach to the period following childbirth.
The exchange became so contentious that the judge at times intervened, while Mack frequently gave lengthy technical answers to Reddington’s pointed questions. Court observers noted that jurors appeared to be closely following the discussion, with several taking notes.
In one particularly tense moment, Reddington snapped, "What are you smiling for? This is not funny, sir," after Mack appeared to smile while answering questions about the psychological testing he performed on Clancy.
The defense also raised the possibility of confirmation bias, suggesting that a prosecution expert could unconsciously search for evidence supporting the state's theory.
“You are hoping to help them out?” Reddington asked.
Mack ultimately finished his testimony Monday morning.
But the battle over his conclusions did not end there.
One of the most striking revelations was that Mack and Dr. Kirk Heilbrun, another prosecution expert, interviewed Clancy during the same period but reached different psychiatric diagnoses.
Heilbrun testified that he diagnosed Clancy with bipolar II disorder, while Mack concluded that she had major depressive disorder and did not find evidence of psychosis.
Heilbrun said the two experts prepared their reports independently despite interviewing Clancy together.
That means the prosecution's own experts did not completely agree about what disorder Clancy had.
What they did agree on was the critical issue for prosecutors: neither accepted the defense's theory that Clancy was acutely psychotic when she killed her children.
The most explosive moment of the afternoon came after Heilbrun brought Clancy’s Catholic faith into his testimony.
Heilbrun discussed Clancy’s belief that she and her children could go to heaven together and then said he had asked her whether suicide was a “mortal sin.”
Reddington immediately objected and accused the prosecution of intentional misconduct. He ultimately sought a mistrial.
Judge William Sullivan rejected the request but sharply rebuked the religious discussion and ordered jurors to disregard it.
“The religion that the defendant was raised with is absolutely an inappropriate area of testimony,” Sullivan told the jury. “It is to be stricken. It is not to be considered.”
The judge then dismissed the jury for the day.
The extraordinary episode marked the second time in the trial that religion had become a flashpoint, adding another layer of tension as the case moves toward closing arguments.
Heilbrun, an expert for the prosecution, rejected the defense's interpretation that Clancy was following a psychotic command. Instead, he testified that Clancy was in the midst of a serious suicide attempt and believed her children would suffer if she died without them.
“She wanted kids to be with her so they wouldn't suffer when she was gone,” Heilbrun testified.
He also pointed to what he viewed as a revealing statement after Patrick Clancy returned home.
According to Heilbrun, Patrick asked Lindsay what she had done, and she responded that she had tried to kill herself. The psychologist suggested that response was inconsistent with someone immediately identifying the children’s deaths as the result of an external command.
Heilbrun testified that Clancy had shown severe depression, anxiety, insomnia and suicidal thoughts, but he distinguished those symptoms from acute psychosis.
He said Clancy was cooperative and showed no psychosis when discharged from McLean Hospital, although suicidal thoughts returned about a week later. He also testified that she had previously described intrusive thoughts without identifying them as an external voice.
Monday’s testimony sharpened what may ultimately be the jury’s most difficult decision.
The defense has presented experts who say Clancy was suffering from postpartum psycho...
AIPROPX is an independent multi-source news index — we track, compare, and connect coverage from across the web into one place you won't find anywhere else.