E-Paper
Lindsay Clancy trial update: Legal expert explains how ‘mental illness’ defense can be overcome; ‘will have to prove…’
An expert criminal attorney said prosecutors must prove Lindsay Clancy understood and appreciated her actions' wrongfulness, not just knew they were wrong.
The criminal trial of Lindsay Clancy unfolding in Massachusetts has left both the public and legal experts equally fascinated.
Clancy, 35, fatally strangled her three children, 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson, and 8-month-old Callan, in January 2023. She has pleaded not guilty, citing her long history of diagnosed mental illness, including a voluntary hospitalization weeks before the killings. On Thursday, the Day 3 of the criminal trial in Plymouth Superior Court, the question of Lindsay Clancy's intent again took the centerstage.
While there is no doubt that Lindsay Clancy strangled her three children using an exercise band on that fateful day, the argument of the defense attorney, Kevin Redddington, centers on the intent of the crime. On Wednesday, Reddington revealed the prescribed psychiatric medications that Clancy was on leading up to January 2023. A personal diary of the medications that Lindsay Clancy maintained at the time was also presented to the jury.
The defense's argument, even since initial court proceedings started, has been clear: Lindsay Clancy was overprescribed high dosages of psychiatric medications and also had undiagnosed post-partum anxiety and bipolar disorder. Reddington argues that Lindsay Clancy was not in a position to distinguish between right and wrong when she committed the murders.
It has presented a big challenge for prosecutors to establish her guilt.
Legal Expert Explains How Prosecutions Can Break Down Mental Illness Defense
Criminal defense attorney Elyse Hershon, appearing on CNN Thursday, said that prosecutors face a "two-pronged" challenge when it comes to breaking down Andy Reddington's arguments. Hershon said that prosecutors will have to prove that Lindsay Clancy not only knew what she was doing was wrong but also understood the gravity of it.
“In Massachusetts, once a mental illness or mental health defense is raised for lack of criminal responsibility, the prosecution has to prove that they were criminally responsible and were not suffering mental illness,” Hershon told CNN.
“Lindsay knowing that what she’s doing is wrong is not enough for the prosecution to prove this beyond a reasonable doubt,” she added. “They would have to prove that she understood – not just know, but understood – and could appreciate the wrongfulness.”
Additionally, questions will be raised whether she was able to "function properly" at the time of the incident. But the prosecutors will be able to establish that, given Clancy was able to call and order takeout, she was able to converse with her husband, she was able to feed her kids chicken nuggets and green beans,” she said.
Day 2 of the trial featured a horrific 911 call that Lindsay Clancy's ex-husband, Patrick Clancy, made after discovering the scene of the crime. It also featured an extensive cross-examination of Patrick by Reddington.
Day 3, so far, has featured testimonies from first responders who attended to the scene on January 23. The trial is being presided over by Judge William Sullivan.
