Lindsay Clancy will appear in court for the first time since her mistrial. Here’s what you should know

GREG DERR/AFP/POOL/AFP via Getty Images

After her triple-murder case ended in a mistrial, Lindsay Clancy will appear in court Tuesday for a status conference that should signal how the controversial case will proceed following a month of uncertainty.

At the hearing, prosecutors and the defense are expected to address pending motions from Clancy’s attorney to stave off another trial, the defense’s attempt to obtain more information about the holdout juror and – if prosecutors decide to retry Clancy – the schedule for a new trial.

Judge William Sullivan declared a mistrial in the divisive case on September 4 after the jury sent several notes saying they were deadlocked and that a single juror was preventing the panel from unanimously finding Clancy not guilty by lack of criminal responsibility for killing her children.

At trial, Clancy admitted to killing her children – Cora, 5; Dawson, 3; and Callan, 8 months – but argued she was suffering from postpartum psychosis when she fatally strangled them and then attempted suicide in January 2023.

Still, interest in the case has yet to dissipate: The weeks since the trial ended have been filled with revelatory interviews with several jurors about their deliberations, a heartbreaking “60 Minutes” interview with the father of the three victims and fervid online debates about the complicated case.

Prosecutors have not announced whether they will retry Clancy, but experts said both sides are likely considering whether another jury would reach the same conclusion, largely siding with the defense. At least one of Clancy’s jurors believes they would.

“If they tried the trial again the way they did, nine times out of ten, I think a jury would come back with not guilty by reason of insanity,” juror Nick Dargie told ABC News. “No doubt in my mind.”

But the thought of enduring another weekslong trial full of heartbreaking and graphic testimony is daunting for some, including Clancy’s supporters – who believe she was victimized by a healthcare system that often overlooks maternal mental health – and her former husband, who became the subject of rampant online conspiracy theories.

“The prospect of reliving this tragedy through another trial is extraordinarily painful – for Patrick, for his family, and for all of us,” an attorney for Patrick Clancy said in a statement earlier this month.

Greg Derr/The Patriot Ledger/AP

Plymouth County District Attorney Tim Cruz struck a defiant tone when the judge declared a mistrial, insisting the first-degree murder charges were “warranted and appropriate.”

“In the end, I bring it all back to the child victims in this case – Cora, Dawson, and Callan,” Cruz said outside the courthouse as he was heckled by Clancy supporters. “This was and has always been about getting justice for those three little babies.”

The parties are expected to address the potential of a retrial at the status conference Tuesday. Sullivan may schedule a new trial date.

The attorneys could also offer a glimpse into any plea negotiations that may be happening behind the scenes. Clancy’s defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, has indicated he is open to working with prosecutors to avert a second trial, though he told CNN’s Anderson Cooper he would never agree to a deal in which his client would serve any jail time.

Legal experts and Massachusetts lawyers have expressed skepticism an agreement could be reached, citing the difficulty the parties would have in finding common ground and the various factors Cruz must weigh as he considers a retrial.

Clancy’s legal team has also filed motions seeking to resolve the case without a second trial, including one which asks the judge to dismiss the charges altogether, arguing a retrial would violate her rights protecting her from double jeopardy.

In the filing, Clancy’s defense attorneys argued Sullivan improperly declined their repeated requests to question the holdout juror or the jury foreperson and declared a mistrial without “manifest necessity” – a high legal burden that means all other options to reach a verdict were exhausted.

“Respectfully, the Court’s rejection of the multiple requests for judicial inquiry constitutes legal error which led, inexorably, to the mistrial being declared without manifest necessity,” the defense team wrote.

Clancy’s defense attorneys criticized Sullivan’s “well-intentioned” but “limited” questioning of the jurors , whom he called to the bench one-by-one on the sixth day of deliberations and asked under oath if they could apply the law as instructed.

“The Court should have instead probed the foreperson’s specific complaint in order to make a reasoned decision as to how best to proceed,” Clancy’s defense wrote.

Greg Derr/Pool/AFP/Getty Images

Lindsay Clancy’s attorney says he’s open to a plea deal, but there’s no easy path

Reddington filed a separate motion asking the judge to enter a finding of not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility, arguing the Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office did not present sufficient evidence that Clancy is criminally responsible for her actions.

“The Commonwealth had to prove that a woman all six experts agreed was mentally ill nonetheless kept the capacity the law demands. It did not,” he wrote in the motion, referring to a slate of mental health experts who testified for the prosecution and the defense.

Sullivan denied two similar motions – which are routine in criminal proceedings – during the course of the trial.

At the status conference Tuesday, the parties are also expected to address the defense’s motion asking the judge to further investigate the lone holdout juror by obtaining some of his cellphone records and questioning him.

Several jurors have spoken to reporters since the trial ended about the holdout, with some alleging he did not adequately engage with the rest of the panel and scrolled on his phone during deliberations. The jury foreperson told NBC10 Boston the lone juror refused to find Clancy not guilty even though he acknowledged he had reasonable doubt, a violation of the law.

The holdout, however, said in a statement this month his position was misrepresented by some of his fellow jurors who spoke to the press, standing by his belief that the evidence showed Clancy was guilty.

Greg Derr/Pool The Patriot Ledger/AP

The defense’s motion – which did not identify the lone juror by name – requested the holdout’s cellphone records during the time spent in the deliberation room, his juror questionnaire, and certain background information related to his responses on the questionnaire about his experience with the law.

Reddington wrote the judge should then question the holdout about his responses during the jury selection process, some of his other sworn statements and “the use of a mobile telephone or receipt of outside information during deliberations.” The questioning would be limited, the motion said, and not delve into the content of deliberations.

The defense attorney suggested Sullivan could also ask Juror 10 about the holdout’s cellphone use. That juror, Dargie, previously told ABC News the holdout juror “wouldn’t engage” and would spend time “scrolling on his phone” during deliberations.

2 weeks after the end of Lindsay Clancy’s trial, the holdout juror comes forward and Patrick Clancy speaks out

The defense also requested the court preserve other information, such as the surveillance footage from the hallway outside the deliberation room.

The holdout’s attorney criticized Reddington’s “disgusting” motion, saying in a statement it amounts to an attack on the juror and the US Constitution.

“If the new normal is that jurors are going to face brutal reprisals for disagreeing with a defense attorney, you can kiss the Sixth Amendment goodbye,” attorney Edward Paltzik wrote on X.

GREG DERR/AFP/POOL/AFP via Getty Images

在她的三重谋杀案因审判无效而告终后，林赛·克兰西将于周二出庭参加状态会议，此次会议应该会表明这起备受争议的案件在经历了一个月的不确定性后将如何继续进行。

在听证会上，检方和辩方预计将讨论克兰西的律师提出的阻止再次审判的待决动议、辩方试图获取更多关于拒绝陪审员的信息，以及——如果检方决定重新审判克兰西——新审判的日程安排。

9 月 4 日，法官威廉·沙利文宣布这起引发争议的案件审判无效。此前，陪审团多次发纸条表示，他们意见不一，一名陪审员阻止了陪审团一致裁定克兰西因缺乏刑事责任而无罪，从而导致她杀害了自己的孩子。

在审判中，克兰西承认杀害了自己的孩子——5岁的科拉、3岁的道森和8个月大的卡兰——但她辩称，她在2023年1月勒死他们并试图自杀时，患有产后精神病。

尽管如此，人们对这起案件的兴趣依然不减：自审判结束以来的几周里，媒体对几位陪审员进行了揭露他们审议过程的采访，《60分钟》节目对三名受害者的父亲进行了令人心碎的采访，网上也就这起复杂的案件展开了激烈的辩论。

检方尚未宣布是否会重审克兰西一案，但专家表示，控辩双方可能都在考虑另一组陪审团是否会得出相同的结论，即大多支持辩方的观点。至少有一位克兰西案的陪审员认为他们会得出同样的结论。

“如果他们以同样的方式再次审判，我认为十有八九陪审团会以精神错乱为由判被告无罪，”陪审员尼克·达吉告诉美国广播公司新闻网。“我对此毫不怀疑。”

但想到还要经历长达数周的审判，听着令人心碎和触目惊心的证词，一些人感到畏惧，其中包括克兰西的支持者——他们认为她是医疗保健系统经常忽视孕产妇心理健康的受害者——以及她的前夫，他成为了网上猖獗的阴谋论的对象。

“再次经历这场悲剧，通过另一次审判重温这段痛苦的经历，对帕特里克、他的家人以及我们所有人来说都极其痛苦，”帕特里克·克兰西的律师在本月初的一份声明中表示。

格雷格·德尔/《爱国者纪事报》/美联社

当法官宣布审判无效时，普利茅斯县地方检察官蒂姆·克鲁兹态度强硬，坚称一级谋杀指控“合理且适当”。

“归根结底，我还是要把一切都归结于这起案件中的三个受害儿童——科拉、道森和卡兰，”克鲁兹在法院外说道，当时他正遭到克兰西支持者的嘲讽。“这件事的最终目的始终都是为了给这三个小生命伸张正义。”

预计双方将在周二的庭前会议上讨论重审的可能性。沙利文法官可能会安排新的庭审日期。

律师们或许还能透露一些幕后可能进行的认罪协商情况。克兰西的辩护律师凯文·雷丁顿表示，他愿意与检方合作以避免第二次审判，但他告诉CNN的安德森·库珀，他绝不会同意任何会让他的当事人入狱服刑的协议。

法律专家和马萨诸塞州的律师对能否达成协议表示怀疑，他们指出双方很难找到共同点，而且克鲁兹在考虑是否重审时必须权衡各种因素。

克兰西的法律团队也提交了动议，寻求在不进行第二次审判的情况下解决此案，其中一项动议要求法官完全驳回指控，理由是重审将侵犯她免受双重危险的权利。

在提交的文件中，克兰西的辩护律师辩称，沙利文法官不当拒绝了他们多次提出的询问坚持己见的陪审员或陪审团主席的请求，并在没有“明显必要性”的情况下宣布审判无效——这是一个很高的法律标准，意味着所有其他达成判决的选项都已用尽。

辩方律师写道：“恕我直言，法院驳回多项司法调查请求构成法律错误，这必然导致在没有明显必要的情况下宣布审判无效。”

克兰西的辩护律师批评沙利文对陪审员的提问“出于好意”，但“有局限性”。在审议的第六天，沙利文将陪审员一个个叫到法官席上，并要求他们宣誓后才能按照指示适用法律。

克兰西的辩护律师写道：“法院本应深入调查陪审团主席的具体投诉，以便就如何最好地进行审理做出合理的决定。”

Greg Derr/Pool/AFP/Getty Images

林赛·克兰西的律师表示，他愿意接受认罪协议，但这条路并不平坦。

雷丁顿另行提交了一份动议，请求法官以缺乏刑事责任能力为由，裁定克兰西无罪。雷丁顿辩称，普利茅斯县地方检察官办公室没有提供足够的证据证明克兰西应对其行为承担刑事责任。

“联邦政府必须证明，尽管六位专家一致认为该女子患有精神疾病，但她仍然具备法律要求的民事行为能力。然而，联邦政府并没有做到这一点。”他在动议中写道，他指的是为控辩双方作证的精神健康专家。

在审判过程中，沙利文驳回了两项类似的动议——这在刑事诉讼中是例行程序。

在周二的进度会议上，双方预计还将讨论辩方提出的动议，该动议要求法官进一步调查唯一一名拒绝投票的陪审员，获取他的一些手机记录并对其进行讯问。

审判结束后，多名陪审员接受了记者采访，谈及那位拒不表态的陪审员。一些陪审员声称，该陪审员没有与其他陪审员充分沟通，并在审议期间一直低头玩手机。陪审团主席告诉NBC10波士顿电视台，这位拒不判克兰西无罪的陪审员虽然承认自己存在合理怀疑，但这违反了法律。

然而，这位持反对意见的陪审员本月发表声明称，他的立场被一些向媒体发表讲话的陪审员歪曲了，他仍然坚持认为证据表明克兰西有罪。

格雷格·德尔/《爱国者纪事报》/美联社

辩方动议（没有指明唯一一名陪审员的姓名）要求提供该名拒绝投票的陪审员在审议室期间的手机记录、他的陪审员问卷以及与他在问卷中关于其法律经验的回答相关的某些背景信息。

雷丁顿在动议中写道，法官随后应该就陪审团遴选过程中该名拒绝投票的陪审员的回答、他之前的一些宣誓证词以及“在审议期间使用手机或接收外部信息”的情况进行质询。动议称，质询应有限制，不得深入探讨审议内容。

辩方律师建议苏利文法官也可以询问10号陪审员关于那位拒不表态的陪审员使用手机的情况。这位名叫达吉的陪审员此前告诉美国广播公司新闻网，那位拒不表态的陪审员“不参与讨论”，在审议期间会花时间“刷手机”。

林赛·克兰西案审判结束两周后，那位坚持己见的陪审员站了出来，帕特里克·克兰西也发表了讲话。

辩方还请求法庭保存其他信息，例如审议室外走廊的监控录像。

拒绝投票的陪审员的律师批评雷丁顿的动议“令人作呕”，并在声明中表示，这相当于对陪审员和美国宪法的攻击。

“如果陪审员因与辩护律师意见不合而面临残酷报复成为新常态，那么第六修正案就真的完了，”律师爱德华·帕尔齐克在 X 上写道。