Defense Says Lindsay Clancy Will Admit to Killings if Judge Splits Trial in Two
Lawyers for the Duxbury woman accused of killing her three children have asked a judge to reconsider his refusal to hold a two-part trial, saying she is willing to acknowledge her role in the deaths.
By Ishani Kapalli ·
Attorneys for Lindsay Clancy, the Duxbury woman charged in the deaths of her three children, have asked a Plymouth Superior Court judge to revisit his decision against dividing her upcoming murder trial into two phases. The defense says Clancy is prepared to admit she killed the children if the judge agrees.
Judge William Sullivan rejected the request on March 30. Clancy's lawyer, Kevin Reddington, intends to argue that she was legally insane at the time. Under his proposal, the first phase would have focused on whether prosecutors could prove Clancy killed the children, and the second on whether she was sane when it happened.
In his ruling, Sullivan wrote that questions of Clancy's guilt and her criminal responsibility overlap and should be heard together. A single trial, he said, "will be the most efficient and least confusing way to present this case to a jury."
Three days later, the defense filed a motion asking him to reconsider, according to court records. The motion, dated April 2, says Clancy is "willing to stipulate formally" to her part in the deaths and describes her state of mind at the time as the "only live issue" before the court.
The filing acknowledges that the government has a right to "prove its case." But it argues that when a stipulation is offered, requiring a full trial on culpability rather than criminal responsibility amounts to "elevating form over substance."
Prosecutors filed a memorandum the same day opposing the request. They said they would not agree to stipulate to any facts in the case. On April 3, the defense clarified that Clancy would be admitting to the killings voluntarily, not reaching an agreement with the Commonwealth.
Prosecutors argued that the court had already accepted that evidence of deliberate premeditation, or of extreme atrocity or cruelty, can properly be weighed on the question of criminal responsibility. "The Commonwealth has a right to present this evidence in a manner of its choosing as long as it comports with the rules of evidence," they wrote.
As of Tuesday, Sullivan had not ruled on the motion. Reddington told Boston.com he hopes the judge will reconsider but is not optimistic the result will change. If the request is denied again, he said, the defense will continue to pursue an insanity plea. The trial is scheduled to begin July 20.
Prosecutors allege that Clancy strangled her children, 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson and 8-month-old Callan, at their Duxbury home on Jan. 24, 2023. They say she then tried to take her own life, an attempt that left her paralyzed.
Clancy has said she experienced auditory hallucinations in the weeks before the killings. Earlier this year, she filed a civil malpractice lawsuit against her mental health care providers. It accuses them of failing to diagnose her bipolar disorder and of prescribing medications that triggered a psychotic break.
Source: Boston.com
