An attorney for Lindsay Clancy argued in court on Sept. 29 that there is “no evidence” that she murdered her children. Clancy had previously admitted to multiple witnesses that she did, and sought to be acquitted on the grounds she was suffering from “postpartum psychosis.”
Attorney Kevin Reddington told the court his client seemed to have false memories of the event, and any admissions she made were “uncorroborated.”
The claim was made as he argued in favor of a motion asking the judge to issue a procedural “required finding of not guilty,” and throw the charges out because the state had not proved its case.
“Where is the evidence that she did this?” Reddington began.
He proceeded to attack the police investigation, saying there was no DNA evidence tying his client to the murders, and arguing that blood evidence didn’t seem to match the prosecution’s theory of the case.
Clancy allegedly made multiple statements that she strangled her three children in January 2023 before slitting her wrists and throat, and jumping out of a second-story window. The fall left her paralyzed from the waist down.
“She then is on the ground,” Reddington continued. “She has no shoes on. Why does she not have shoes on? It’s 30-something degrees outside. There’s snow. It’s the winter. She has no shoes. She’s wearing black socks. Where’s the blood on the black socks?”
He ended by saying his client was “clearly and unequivocally” suffering from postpartum psychosis and therefore not criminally responsible.
Prosecutor Jennifer Sprague rebutted the defense attorney, arguing that the record was “voluminous” with evidence that Clancy killed the children, largely based on statements she made to multiple witnesses, including the children’s father.
She also pointed out that Clancy’s DNA was, in fact, found on the exercise bands used to strangle the children. She also resisted Reddington’s claim that the state could not produce a motive for the killings.
“She had succumbed to the idea that she didn’t want to be here anymore, and that she was going to commit suicide, and that she was going to take those kids with her because no one could care for them like she could,“ Sprague told the court.
Judge William Sullivan said he wouldn’t immediately rule on Reddington’s request that he throw out the case for procedural reasons. Arguments for another, separate motion to dismiss will be heard on Nov. 2.
That’s also when the parties will settle on a date for Clancy’s second trial. Her first trial ended with a hung jury, forcing Judge Sullivan to declare a mistrial on Sep. 4. It later emerged that the jury was leaning 11–1 to find her “not guilty by reason of insanity.”
The court was expected to set a date at Tuesday’s hearing, and the judge pushed both sides to decide on one.
“Why don’t we just pick a trial date and that that will get this case moving,” Sullivan said. “The discussion three weeks ago was ‘Let’s try this thing in a week,’ right? And now no one wants to pick a trial date.”
Prosecutors said it was too soon to pick one, since there were so many motions and possible appeals still pending; the defense agreed.
Reddington added that he couldn’t do a new trial till at least June of next year.
The judge also punted on deciding a series of other motions related to the lone holdout juror from the first trial. Reddington has asked the court to investigate that juror.
Defense attorney Martin Weinberg on Tuesday asked the court for access to juror notes and questionnaires, along with sidebar discussions—with juror names redacted.
Sprague said that would be “a travesty,” and would have a chilling effect on any potential jury pool for a second trial.
Meanwhile, the prosecution has asked the judge to bar attorneys from making “prejudicial, extrajudicial statements” outside the court. That comes after Reddington made disparaging remarks about the holdout juror after the mistrial was declared.
Arguments on that motion are also delayed to Nov. 2.
Friends Read Free
Copy
Facebook
Tweet
