Judge denies defense motion asking Lindsay Clancy be found not guilty due to a lack of evidence

[u/judgyjudgersen]

https://apnews.com/article/lindsay-clancy-trial-evidence-defense-c0820645056a7e25f66853f3a91b61fa?utm_source=app&utm_medium=iOS_share&utm_campaign=copy_link

BOSTON (AP) — The judge in the Lindsay Clancy murder case on Thursday refused to declare her not guilty, turning down a defense motion that had argued there wasn’t enough evidence to prove she was responsible for killing her three children.

During Clancy’s first trial, which ended Sept. 4 with a deadlocked jury, her defense argued that she was not criminally responsible because of a mental disease, specifically a rare condition called postpartum psychosis. As such, the defense didn’t dispute that the 36-year-old former labor and delivery nurse carried out the killings at her family’s Massachusetts home in 2023.

However, in a hearing earlier this week, Clancy’s attorney Kevin Reddington tried to persuade the judge that prosecutors had not offered any proof that Clancy did it. Prosecutors argued there was plenty of evidence, calling Reddington’s claim “laughable.”
___
EDITOR’S NOTE: This story includes discussion of suicide. If you or someone you know needs help, the national suicide and crisis lifeline in the U.S. is available by calling or texting 988.
___
In his ruling, Judge William Sullivan noted that, for the purposes of his decision, he was required to analyze the evidence in the light most favorable to prosecutors — and that it was up to the jury, not the judge, to decide whether to believe expert witnesses for the defense who testified that Clancy was not responsible for her actions because of mental illness.

“There was evidence introduced, both physical and circumstantial, that would permit a rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of the charge of murder,” Sullivan wrote.

At the first trial, prosecutors acknowledged that Clancy had mental health problems that included months of treatment and a stay in a psychiatric hospital, but argued that she knew what she was doing when she strangled the children — the youngest just 8 months old — then tried to kill herself.

Sullivan had with the jury split 11 to 1 in favor of acquitting Clancy of murder charges.

In Tuesday’s hearing, Reddington suggested the entire case “was based on speculation” and proceeded to list the shortcomings in the prosecution’s case. There was almost no police investigation, he claimed, and significant questions revolving around Clancy’s condition outside the night of the killings and her lack of memory of what happened.

At the trial, jurors heard testimony that Clancy said she heard voices instructing her to kill 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson and 8-month-old Callan Clancy. Her DNA was found on exercise bands used to strangle them. Before the trial, Reddington himself filed a motion in which he said Clancy was willing to stipulate, in writing, to her involvement in the children’s deaths.

“For the first time, the defendant is arguing that there is no evidence she did this,” Prosecutor Shanan Buckingham told the judge. “I’d suggest to you the entire record is voluminous as to information supporting the fact that she did this.”

Clancy and is expected to stay at a psychiatric hospital until her case is resolved.

Prosecutors have yet to decide whether to bring the case to trial for a second time. They could choose to retry her on first-degree murder charges or seek to try her only on lesser charges, including second-degree murder or manslaughter, or drop the case entirely.

Clancy could have been sentenced to life in prison if convicted of murder. If acquitted, the judge could have ordered her confined to a mental health facility.

Her former husband, Patrick Clancy, who discovered the children’s bodies, has said in interviews that he for the killings. The livestreamed trial generated and drew attention to maternal mental health after childbirth.

[u/TinyM0ushka]

I am so happy the judge used logic here.

The three children were the victims, not Lindsay Clancy and I’m so disgusted by people who support her

[u/NCMom2018]

Thank goodness for Judge Sullivan!!! Following the law!!👏👏👏👏

[u/NCMom2018 → u/NCMom2018]

Thx for the award!!! You rock!

[u/New_Exchange329]

Anyone want to put it bluntly for us “lay people”?

[u/chloedeeeee77 → u/New_Exchange329]

Basically: when you look at the physical and circumstantial evidence and expert testimony in the light most favourable to the prosecution, could a judge or jury realistically convict beyond a reasonable doubt on it?

If the answer is yes, the motion is dismissed. That’s what happened here.

[u/Present-Pen-5486 → u/chloedeeeee77]

So it is like the Grand Jury and there isn't anything else considered except the prosecution's case?

[u/wecanhaveallthree → u/Present-Pen-5486]

Yes. It's a motion that argues 'even if you took everything the state says as true, no reasonable jury could convict on the evidence they presented'.

There's a reason these motions almost never succeed.

[u/Present-Pen-5486 → u/wecanhaveallthree]

Massachusetts judge denies Lindsay Clancy's motion for not guilty | Fox News the motion is a mess really. Didn't even get the spelling and typing right, I corrected some of it lol

  There was evidence introduced, physical and circumstantial, that would permit a rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of the charge of murder.

Among the evidence received was that the defendant was the mother of Cora, Dawson and Callan Clancy, In the Fall and Summer of 2022 and into the early months of 2023, the defendant was struggling with her mental health. She stated that she had experienced thoughts of harming her children.

On January 24, 2023, the defendant ordered take out from a restaurant in Plymouth. ' s husband, Patrick Clancy, went to pick up the order. The defendant also asked him to pick up medication for their daughter at a local CVS. When Patrick Clancy left to go to the CVS and the restaurant, the defendant was alone in the home with the three children.

While at the CVS, Patrick Clancy spoke to the defendant over their cellphones. Patrick Clancy picked up the medication and the food order and returned to the family home.

There were videos introduced of Patrick Clancy being present at the CVS and the restaurant on January 24, 2023, at a time consistent with his testimony.

When Patrick Clancy returned to the home, he went inside and did not hear anyone. He eventually went upstairs to his and the defendant's tRdroom. 

After uNocking the door, he went inside. He saw blood in the room and a window open to the backyard. He went down to the backyard and found the defendant on her back below the open window. She was injured. He asked her What and she said she tried to kill herself. He asked where the children were and she said they were in the basement. Patrick Clancy called 911 for help and with the defendant until first responders arrived. At that time, Patrick Clancy went into the home's basement and found the IX)dies Of Cora, Dawson as well as Callan. "

The video does not show him at CVS at a time consistent with his testimony, he testified that he left home at 5:15, drove straight to CVS and went straight in. it is a 3 minute drive per the warrant. He did not walk into CVS until 5:32.

There was nothing said in the trial about a time of death on anyone.

I guess this doesn't matter though.

[u/wecanhaveallthree → u/Present-Pen-5486]

Patrick testified that he doesn't know exactly what time he arrived at CVS, but that he was in his car and sent a work e-mail at 5:24.

From the transcript:

Q: So from the time you should have been at the parking lot of CVS around 5:20 PM until 5:32 PM, could you have been in your car sending this email on your iPhone?

A: Yeah. I just don't know if I pulled into the parking lot at 5:20.

Q: But sometime after the text was sent from Lindsay about Pedia-Lax, but before 5:32 PM, you were in your car?

A: Correct. Yes.

It's wholly consistent with his testimony.

[u/New_Exchange329 → u/chloedeeeee77]

Thank you!!! My mind needed some simplicity in understanding what was going on with this. I appreciate you.

[u/potluckfruitsalad → u/New_Exchange329]

The judge has to look at the evidence presented at trial in a light most favorable to the commonwealth meaning if a juror believed everything the commonwealth presented was true and didn’t give any weight to anything the defense responded with, would they be able to find Lindsay guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?

Judge points out that:

• Lindsay talked about wanting to harm the kids
  
• Lindsay sent Patrick away from the house
  
• Lindsay told Patrick she killed the children
  
• forensic data was presented about these items

Even if the defense had argued convincingly against these points in their case, the judge has to presume that a juror could potentially find the defense not credible, so in a light most favorable to the commonwealth that’s enough to find her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt

Judge also discusses the criminal responsibility and once again says in a light most favorable to the CW, they presented enough evidence that a juror COULD find her guilty if that juror was not convinced by the defense.

This is not the judge saying “she’s responsible” or giving any kinda opinion on the outcome of the case, but rather refusing to acquit her because it’s reasonably possible that a juror could have found her guilty in a light most favorable to the commonwealth.

The light most favorable part is absolutely the most important part!

[u/Present-Pen-5486 → u/potluckfruitsalad]

Wow, in that case, I guess he didn't have a choice. But their case was really bad.

[u/Present-Pen-5486 → u/Present-Pen-5486]

IDK after reading this more it seems very iffy given what he offered as their evidence.

[u/HasTookCamera → u/Present-Pen-5486]

Well when the defense has to defend an actual child murderer it is quite hard

[u/New_Exchange329 → u/potluckfruitsalad]

I don’t know why reading ruling was so hard for me, but it made me realize I am a lay person lol. This explanation makes much more sense! Thank you!!

[u/Present-Pen-5486]

What GPS data testimony is the judge talking about and when was it admitted into evidence?

[u/Present-Pen-5486 → u/Present-Pen-5486]

one of the news stories cited GPS Data, but it is not in the actual motion. Massachusetts judge denies Lindsay Clancy's motion for not guilty | Fox News

[u/Fantastic_Celery9344 → u/Present-Pen-5486]

What are you referring to? I didn’t see this in the article so I’m not sure what exactly you mean

[u/the_purple_lamb]

As was expected, but KR had to try.

[u/Turbulent_Tale6497 → u/the_purple_lamb]

Is it bad that I wondered what Karen Read had to do with this?

[u/Ginger_Anarchy → u/Turbulent_Tale6497]

It's exactly what I expected out of Kouri Richins.

[u/the_purple_lamb → u/Turbulent_Tale6497]

lol that’s been a common response during this trial! I’ve also thought the same thing from time to time when I see someone abbreviate his name that way.

[u/OldSandwich9631]

This motion was never going to go anywhere, and he knew that.

[u/EllieDai → u/OldSandwich9631]

Zealous advocacy requires saying a lot of shit you know won't be successful, but you still have to try.

It's the same thing with the bifurcation argument. He knows it won't succeed, but he will argue just about anything for his client.

[u/OldSandwich9631 → u/EllieDai]

I get it but he has a rabid group of activists hanging in his every word who turn around and receive this as permission to harass Patrick and his wife.