A Massachusetts judge has denied a motion by Lindsay Clancy to be found not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility, clearing the path for a potential second trial.
In a ruling on Thursday, Judge William Sullivan stated that the evidence presented was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find Clancy guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on both the identity of the perpetrator and her criminal responsibility for the deaths of her three children. The ruling follows a mistrial declared earlier this month when the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict after a six-week trial.
Clancy, a 36-year-old former nurse, was charged with three counts of first-degree murder for allegedly strangling her children—Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months—inside their Duxbury home on January 24, 2023. The prosecution alleges she committed the murders after sending her husband on errands. Clancy then reportedly attempted suicide, sustaining injuries that left her paralyzed from the waist down.
During the recent hearing, Clancy's attorney, Kevin Reddington, argued that the prosecution's case lacked sufficient evidence to prove Clancy committed the crimes and that she was not criminally responsible due to severe postpartum depression and psychosis. Reddington claimed the investigation was flawed, questioning the timeline of events and the absence of direct evidence linking Clancy to the killings, such as blood on her socks after her suicide attempt. He also suggested Clancy had no memory of the events upon waking from a coma.
Prosecutor Shanan Buckingham dismissed these claims as "laughable," noting it was the first time the defense had raised such arguments. She contended that individuals with mental illness can still be held criminally responsible for their actions.
The defense's motion for a required finding of not guilty was based on the assertion that the state failed to prove Clancy was suffering from a mental defect or disease at the time of the killings, and that she could not control her actions or conform to the law despite any mental illness.
Several other motions remain pending, including arguments regarding the defense's request to investigate the lone holdout juror from the mistrial, a motion to dismiss the case on double jeopardy grounds, and a state motion requesting a gag order on Reddington. These matters are scheduled to be addressed at a follow-up hearing on November 2.
No new trial date has been set, with both sides requesting a delay. Clancy's defense attorney indicated he would not be available for a retrial until June. The prosecution has not yet confirmed whether it will pursue a retrial or what charges it might bring.
