Lindsay Clancy appeared in court again on Tuesday, where her lawyers sought to prevent a retrial by asking that she be found not guilty of murder. Clancy, 36, from Massachusetts, is charged with the murder of her three children in 2023.
Judge William Sullivan of Plymouth, Massachusetts, addressed the issue on 4 September after declaring a mistrial. The mistrial occurred because one juror prevented the 12-person jury from reaching a unanimous decision on whether to convict Clancy or acquit her on the grounds of insanity. The office of District Attorney Timothy Cruz has remained silent on whether it plans to retry Clancy.
Clancy faced charges of first-degree murder, for which the penalty is life imprisonment. No one at her trial disputed that on 24 January 2023 she had strangled her three children with exercise bands in the basement of her home in the Boston suburb of Duxbury. She then cut herself with a knife and jumped from a window on the second floor in an attempt to take her own life, leaving her paralysed.
Defence attorney Kevin Reddington had sought to persuade the jury that she did not understand that her actions were wrong. He argued that she was in a postpartum psychotic state when she killed Cora, a five-year-old, Dawson, a three-year-old, and eight-month-old Callan. At the hearing on Tuesday, Reddington told Judge Sullivan that there was a 'complete and total lack of evidence' that she had killed the children and that she knew it was wrong to do so. He also stated that laypeople find it difficult to understand the concept of someone admitting guilt while simultaneously claiming they are not criminally responsible. He added that many in the public call Clancy a 'demon' and demand her execution, which, he said, comes from politicians, down from President Trump.
Several jurors stated in television interviews that, had it not been for one juror who refused to agree, they would have been willing to declare her not guilty by reason of insanity, which in Massachusetts is referred to as a lack of criminal responsibility. If she were acquitted on this basis, she would be committed to a state psychiatric hospital for assessment, and her stay would be subject to regular judicial review.
Prosecutors have several options, including reaching a plea agreement with Clancy or retrying her on a lesser charge of second-degree murder. The charge of second-degree murder would give her the option to waive a jury trial and have the case decided by a judge.
Clancy's lawyers have filed several motions seeking to prevent a retrial. They have asked Sullivan to declare her not guilty and bar a retrial, on the grounds that there was no reason for the mistrial and that it would violate her right not to be tried twice for the same offence, known as double jeopardy. They argued that the jurors in the notes provided to the judge were clear that the juror who refused had rejected applying the court's instructions on how to determine whether the prosecution had proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. In their view, that juror should have been dismissed, rather than having a retrial ordered. Sullivan said he would address the issue and a number of other motions at a hearing on 2 November.
The attorney for the juror who refused, Edward Paltzik, told Fox News in an interview on Monday that his client, Michael Desron, 'had no doubts' and 'strictly adhered to the standard of reasonable doubt'.
