Lindsay Clancy’s latest attempt to have the murder charges against her thrown out has been rejected.
Judge William Sullivan denied Clancy’s motion on Wednesday for a finding of not guilty on the three murder indictments stemming from the January 2023 deaths of her children, Cora, Dawson and Callan Clancy. Defense attorney Kevin Reddington argued that prosecutors had failed to present enough evidence in two major areas: that Clancy was the person who killed the children and that she was criminally responsible for her actions at the time. Los Angeles was in attendance when Reddington vigorously argued his case orally on Sept. 29.
Sullivan disagreed with his argument.
Credit: Los Angeles MagazineOn the question of who killed the children, Sullivan pointed to the evidence presented at trial, including that Clancy was alone with the children after her husband, Patrick Clancy, left the house to pick up medication and takeout. When Patrick returned, he found his wife injured beneath an open bedroom window. After she told him the children were in the basement, he found all three with exercise bands wrapped around their necks.
Judge Sullivan stated in his motion that when viewed in the light most favorable to prosecutors, the evidence was sufficient for a rational fact finder to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Clancy committed the killings.
The bigger issue (and the one that dominated much of Clancy’s trial) was her mental state.
Sullivan noted that experts for both the prosecution and defense agreed Clancy was suffering from some form of serious mental illness at the time her children were killed. But having a mental illness does not automatically mean a defendant is not criminally responsible.
Prosecutors presented three experts who concluded Clancy still had the capacity to understand the criminality or wrongfulness of her actions and to conform her behavior to the law. Defense experts disagreed. Sullivan said weighing those conflicting opinions is the job of the fact finder (aka the jury), not something the court can resolve through a required finding of not guilty.
“The decision is to be left to the jury,” when experts disagree on a defendant’s sanity, Sullivan wrote, citing Massachusetts case law. Sullivan found prosecutors had presented sufficient evidence on both identity and criminal responsibility for the murder charges to remain intact.
“For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s Motion for Required Finding pursuant to Mass. R. Crim. P. 25(b)(2) is DENIED,” Sullivan wrote in the Oct. 1 order.
The decision comes less than a month after Clancy’s first trial ended in a mistrial when jurors were unable to reach a unanimous verdict. Chaos seemed to ensue between juror interviews, alleged juror doxing, and polarizing online commentary.
When Los Angeles reached out to Reddington for a comment, his advisor told us: “Thank you for reaching out. Mr. Reddington will not be making a statement about the Court’s decision on the motion for a required finding. As you know, the next hearing is on November 2. Thank you.”
Clancy is due back in court on Nov. 2 for a hearing. DA Tim Cruz has not announced whether his office plans to retry the case.
The post Judge Rejects Lindsay Clancy’s Bid to Toss Murder Charges After Mistrial appeared first on LAmag.
