Lindsay Clancy’s lawyer makes stark admission about potential second trial with jury deadlocked | News US

Lindsay Clancy’s defence lawyer has stated that his client would not be able to emotionally handle a second murder trial.

Clancy, 36, is on trial for the 2023 killings of her three children, Cora, five, Dawson, three, and Callan, eight months, in the basement of their home in Duxbury, Massachusetts.

Clancy does not dispute killing her children but has pleaded not guilty to murder, with her lawyers arguing she was in the throes of postpartum psychosis and taking powerful drugs to cope with depression at the time, leaving her not criminally responsible for her actions.

After more than five weeks in court, over 70 prosecution witnesses and 10 for the defence, the jury has yet to reach a unanimous verdict.

Deliberations began on Thursday last week after closing statements were made, but so far no decision has been made.

Yesterday, Judge William Sullivan ordered the jury — made up of nine women and three men — to go home after pausing the deliberation clock at 23 hours and officially declaring a deadlock.

‘My understanding is that you requested to be excused until tomorrow [Wednesday] at 9am. I just want to thank you for your hard work and commitment,’ the judge said.

Clancy’s lawyer Kevin Reddington argues Clancy was suffering from postpartum psychosis at the time of the murders, which is a rare mental illness that can follow childbirth.

Symptoms include insomnia, delusions, hallucinations, severe confusion, and dangerous thoughts regarding self-harm, suicide, or harming the infant. The condition is treated as a medical emergency.

Therefore, the defence state that Clancy could not distinguish right from wrong.

However, the prosecution claims she made a calculated decision to kill her children.

They also allege that Clancy deliberately sent her ex-husband and father of her children, Patrick Clancy, out on an errand at the time of the killings so that she was free to commit the crimes.

During the trial, Reddington — who has become somewhat of an internet celebrity over the past few weeks — has consistently told reporters that Clancy has found the experience harrowing.

Clancy has broken down in court multiple times, including wailing, ‘I can’t do this’ during testimony about the injuries her children suffered in their deaths.

The mother-of-three has also appeared vacant in court, often staring into space or holding her head in her hands.

When asked outside court on Tuesday about how Clancy is feeling, Reddington replied: ‘She had a flat affect, she’s sad.’

A flat affect is a total or near-total absence of outward emotional expression, even if the individual is feeling emotional from the inside.

Reddington also responded with an immediate ‘no’ when asked whether he thought Clancy could deal with another trial — a real possibility should the jury fail to reach a verdict.

Clancy, a former labour and delivery nurse in Massachusetts, pleaded not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility.

Reddington has argued that Clancy loved her children, but committed the murders — before attempting suicide — during a psychotic episode where she lost grip on reality.

Clancy also claims she heard a man’s voice on the night of the murders telling her to kill the children.

Defence expert Dr Phillip Resnick backed this up, telling the jury that Clancy was ‘frankly psychotic’ when she carried out the killings, having experienced a command hallucination.

This is an auditory verbal hallucination where a person hears a voice that instructs them to perform a specific action.

However, prosecutors have said Clancy strangled her children with exercise resistance bands because she was depressed and tired of living, and made a conscious choice to kill them before attempting suicide by self-harming and jumping from a second-storey window.

The suicide attempt left her paralysed from the waist down.

Reddington also brought Clancy’s attempts to seek help for her worsening mental health to the jury’s attention.

It was reported that Clancy checked herself into a psychiatric hospital, and was ‘begging for help.’

Susan Clancy, the mother of Patrick Clancy, testified that her former daughter-in-law was ‘struggling’ and that they were ‘all concerned’ about her welfare.

Clancy also called a suicide hotline and was prescribed a cocktail of medications in the months before the killings.

Reddington says that these powerful drugs, taken to cope with her depression at the time, left Clancy not criminally responsible for her actions.

However, Avram Mack, a psychiatrist who testified for the prosecution, disputes Clancy’s psychotic episode claim.

Mack — who has since resigned from his job after testifying — told jurors that he believed Clancy understood what she was doing to her children was wrong when she killed them.

Ultimately, the psychiatrist formed the opinion that Clancy was suffering from a major depressive episode.

He told jurors: ‘While depressed, her mental state was relatively stable.’

What are the possible outcomes of Lindsay Clancy’s trial?

The jury has five ways to decide Lindsay Clancy’s fate, as deliberations continue.

These are:

• not guilty
• not guilty by reason of insanity
• first-degree murder
• second-degree murder
• manslaughter

Although Clancy was charged with three counts of first-degree murder, the jury is being allowed to consider alternative charges of second-degree murder and manslaughter.

If they find Clancy guilty of first-degree murder, which requires ‘premeditation’ or ‘extreme atrocity or cruelty,’ according to Massachusetts state law, she would face life in prison without parole.

If convicted of second-degree murder, she would be eligible for parole.

For lesser manslaughter charges, Clancy could still face up to 20 years in prison for each count.

There is also the option of not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility, which is a complex outcome in itself.

This would mean a judge could confine her to a mental health facility.

There is also the not guilty verdict, in which Clancy would walk free. However, that is considered highly unlikely. 

If the jury returns with another note indicating they are deadlocked, the judge will likely consult the lawyers and read the ‘Tuey Rodriguez’ charge.

This is Massachusetts’ version of what is commonly called an Allen charge.

That instruction would encourage jurors to continue discussing the evidence and make every reasonable effort to reach a unanimous verdict. The judge would still remind them to not abandon an honestly held position simply because other jurors disagree.

If they tell the judge again that they cannot agree, that’s when the possibility of a hung jury and mistrial becomes even more serious.

Should a mistrial be declared, the case essentially goes back to the same status as before the trial.

Clancy would be charged with murder and would continue to be held at a psychiatric hospital awaiting a resolution of the case.

MORE: Man, 32, dies after ‘violent attack’ at London’s Liverpool Street Station

MORE: Trump’s ‘Lake America’ announcement gives new life to old map website

MORE: Pet donkey called HeeHaw shot dead after ‘running at police’