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 · 7 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 fate of Lindsay Clancy is now in the hands of the jury. After three days of deliberations, jurors have yet to reach a verdict in the closely watched murder trial .
Jurors began deliberating Thursday, August 27, after more than five weeks of testimony in Plymouth Superior Court. Deliberations are expected to resume Tuesday.
Clancy has pleaded not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility in the January 2023 deaths of her three children — 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson and 8-month-old Callan.
The 36-year-old former labor and delivery nurse's defense does not dispute that she caused the children's deaths. Instead, the central question is whether she was criminally responsible for her actions at the time.
Her attorneys argue that she was suffering from severe postpartum psychosis, along with other serious mental-health problems, and that she was experiencing a break from reality when she strangled her children with exercise bands before attempting to take her own life. The suicide attempt left her paralyzed.
Prosecutors have presented a very different picture. They acknowledge Clancy had significant mental-health problems, but argue that she nevertheless understood what she was doing and deliberately carried out the killings. Prosecutors have pointed to her actions before and during the killings as evidence of planning and control, including arranging for her husband to leave the home.
Technically, the jury has five substantive verdict choices for each child's death. A sixth possibility is that jurors cannot reach unanimous agreement, resulting in a hung jury and potentially a mistrial.
This is the outcome at the center of the defense case.
The jury could determine that Clancy was suffering from a mental disease or defect so severe that she was unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions or unable to conform her conduct to the law.
That would not necessarily mean Clancy walks out of court.
A finding of lack of criminal responsibility can result in commitment to a state psychiatric facility. Her confinement could potentially last for years, and her eventual release would depend on future evaluations and whether authorities determine she is no longer a danger to herself or others.
In other words, an insanity-based acquittal is not the same thing as being declared mentally healthy and immediately released.
A traditional acquittal is another possible outcome. For that to happen, jurors would have to conclude that prosecutors failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. That is different from finding Clancy not criminally responsible because of mental illness.
The defense has acknowledged that Clancy caused the children's deaths, however, making the central battle in the courtroom her mental state and criminal responsibility rather than whether she was physically responsible for what happened.
This would be the most severe criminal outcome.
If convicted of first-degree murder, Clancy would face a mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Jurors would have to reject the defense's argument that she lacked criminal responsibility and find that the legal requirements for first-degree murder were proven. The verdict would be considered separately for each child.
The jury could instead find Clancy guilty of second-degree murder.
That would mean jurors concluded she was criminally responsible for the killings but did not find the circumstances necessary for first-degree murder.
Second-degree murder carries a life sentence, but unlike first-degree murder, parole is potentially available after the applicable period.
Manslaughter is the least severe homicide conviction available to the jury.
A manslaughter verdict would mean jurors concluded Clancy was criminally responsible for the children's deaths but that the prosecution had not established the requirements for murder.
In Massachusetts, manslaughter carries a maximum sentence of 20 years for each conviction. A judge would determine the actual sentence and whether sentences would run concurrently or consecutively.
There is also the possibility that jurors simply cannot agree.
A criminal jury must reach a unanimous verdict. If the jurors remain deadlocked, the judge could ultimately declare a mistrial.
That would not be the same as an acquittal. Prosecutors could decide whether to try Clancy again.
For now, there is no indication that the jury is deadlocked. In fact, jurors have been working through an enormous amount of evidence: testimony from roughly 85 witnesses and hundreds of exhibits. During deliberations, they have also asked to review physical evidence, including Clancy's prescription medication bottles and the knife involved in her suicide attempt.
Clancy's attorney, Kevin Reddington, has repeatedly described his client as frightened and emotionally exhausted as the jury considers her fate.
On Friday, Reddington said Clancy was "nervous" and "very sad, scared," adding that she had felt that way since the killings. He also acknowledged that the prospect of a verdict — and potentially three life sentences — was terrifying.
On Monday, as deliberations resumed for a third day, Reddington said he felt "typical, nervous" about the outcome and said he believed everyone wanted the trial to be over. He also criticized media coverage of Clancy and the discussion of her reported symptoms.
Reddington has stopped short of predicting what the jury will do. On Friday, he said he was "never confident" because, ultimately, he could not know what the jurors would decide.
The trial has lasted roughly five weeks and featured more than 80 witnesses.
The defense's case has centered on Clancy's deteriorating mental health following the birth of Callan in May 2022. Her attorneys argued that she expe...
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.