LINDSAY CLANCY SPEAKS IN COURT FOR FIRST TIME SINCE MISTRIAL AS LAWYER SEEKS TO HAVE CASE DISMISSED

PLYMOUTH, MASSACHUSETTS — Lindsay Clancy returned to court Tuesday for the first time since her murder trial ended in a mistrial, as her defense team made a new argument seeking to prevent the case from going to trial again.

Clancy, 36, appeared before Plymouth Superior Court Judge William Sullivan on September 29 during a status hearing concerning the next steps in the case.

At the beginning of the hearing, Judge Sullivan greeted Clancy, who responded simply:

“Good morning.”

It was her first time speaking in court since the five-week trial ended without a verdict earlier this month.

JURY COULD NOT REACH A UNANIMOUS VERDICT

Clancy is charged with the murders of her three children — Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months — who died at the family’s home in Duxbury, Massachusetts, on January 24, 2023.

Clancy has pleaded not guilty and has maintained that she was not criminally responsible because she was suffering from postpartum psychosis at the time.

The prosecution and defense presented their cases during a trial that lasted approximately five weeks.

The jury then deliberated for seven days but could not reach the unanimous verdict required under Massachusetts law.

Judge Sullivan declared a mistrial on September 4.

Several jurors later said the panel was divided, with 11 jurors reportedly favoring a finding that Clancy was not guilty by reason of insanity and one juror refusing to join them.

DEFENSE NOW ARGUES THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE

During Tuesday’s hearing, defense attorney Kevin Reddington took a noticeably different approach from the one emphasized during the original trial.

Rather than focusing primarily on whether Clancy was legally responsible because of her mental state, Reddington argued that prosecutors had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Clancy committed the killings.

He questioned the police investigation and argued that investigators had immediately focused on Clancy without sufficiently establishing the evidence connecting her to the deaths.

“This entire case is based on speculation,” Reddington argued.

He also questioned why there was no recorded admission from Clancy acknowledging that she had killed her children.

The defense is asking Judge Sullivan to find Clancy not guilty, which would prevent the case from proceeding to another trial.

The judge did not immediately rule on that request.

PROSECUTORS STRONGLY REJECT THE NEW ARGUMENT

Assistant District Attorney Shanan Buckingham pushed back forcefully against the defense’s new position.

She described the argument that there was insufficient evidence as “laughable” and said it was being raised only after the defense had spent the original trial arguing that Clancy was not criminally responsible because of postpartum psychosis.

Prosecutors maintain that the trial record contains substantial evidence supporting their case.

They argued that Clancy deliberately killed her children and understood that what she was doing was wrong.

According to prosecutors, Clancy had decided to end her own life and had also decided that her children would die because she believed nobody could care for them as she could.

The prosecution also pointed to evidence presented during the original trial, including DNA evidence involving the exercise bands allegedly used in the killings and statements attributed to Clancy about hearing a voice telling her to kill her children.

THE ORIGINAL DEFENSE FOCUSED ON POSTPARTUM PSYCHOSIS

During the first trial, Clancy’s lawyers did not dispute that she had killed her three children.

Instead, their central argument was that she was suffering from postpartum psychosis and other serious mental-health problems and therefore did not understand the wrongfulness of her actions.

Prosecutors disputed that interpretation.

They argued that Clancy knew what she was doing and was capable of understanding the difference between right and wrong.

The jury ultimately failed to reach a unanimous decision on that question, leading to the mistrial.

CLANCY SURVIVED A SUICIDE ATTEMPT

After the children were killed, Clancy attempted to take her own life by cutting herself and jumping from a second-story window.

She survived but suffered injuries that left her paralyzed from the waist down and now uses a wheelchair.

She remains in custody at Tewksbury Hospital, a state psychiatric facility in Massachusetts.

PROSECUTORS HAVE NOT DECIDED WHETHER TO RETRY HER

Despite Tuesday’s hearing, there is still no final decision on whether Clancy will face another trial.

Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz said his office is continuing to review the case.

“We’re doing a very thorough review right now,” Cruz told reporters outside court, adding that prosecutors would continue working toward what they believe is in the interests of justice and the three children.

A new trial date was not set.

Prosecutors could potentially seek another trial on the existing murder charges, pursue lesser charges or ultimately decide not to retry the case.

NEXT COURT HEARING SET FOR NOVEMBER

Judge Sullivan scheduled the next hearing for November 2.

Among the issues expected to be addressed are the defense’s request to dismiss the case and its request for an inquiry into the juror whose disagreement resulted in the deadlocked verdict.

Prosecutors have also asked the court to restrict public statements by lawyers involved in the case, arguing that the intense attention surrounding the trial could affect future proceedings.

For now, the case remains unresolved.

Three children — Cora, Dawson and Callan — died in January 2023.

More than three years later, their mother has still not been convicted or acquitted.

The first trial ended without a verdict, prosecutors have not announced whether they will try the case again, and the judge has yet to rule on the defense’s latest attempt to have the charges dismissed.

The next major development is expected when the case returns to court on November 2, 2026.