Balanced News from the Left, Center and Right (Left, Center, and Right-leaning perspectives)

Lindsay Clancy, 36, faces three counts of first-degree murder and life in prison without parole for strangling her three children – Cora, 5; Dawson, 3; and Callen, 8 – to death in 2023. Clancy pleaded not guilty by reason of postpartum insanity.

The Details: Judge William Sullivan declared the mistrial on Friday afternoon, saying, "I understood how hard everybody worked in this case. I understood that you all gave everything you could and probably more than you thought you could."

The jury foreperson reportedly stated to Sullivan on Thursday that one juror was "rufus[ing to] listen to the law" that defines "reasonable doubt." The jury then reported on Friday morning that the deadlock remained, writing, "It is with a heavy heart that we report we are unable to come to a unanimous decision and will not be able to." The defense followed with a request for the outlying juror's removal and filed an emergency motion to stay the verdict, which Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) Associate Justice Dalila Argaez Wendlandt denied.

Key Defense Arguments: Defense Attorney Kevin Reddington argued that Clancy was undertreated and overmedicated when she carried out the murders – factors that denoted her legal inculpability. He called Clancy a "fantastic, wonderful individual." He claimed that during the trial – which has given voice to about 70 out of 200 witnesses since it began on July 27th – "nobody had anything bad to say about her except for the two prosecutors and apparently [Plymouth County District Attorney] Tim Cruz."

Criticizing the outlying juror, he said, "She deserved that acquittal that she should have had." He also told Sullivan that his method of reviewing "reasonable doubt" with the jurors was "soft." Forensic psychiatrist and filicide expert Dr. Phillip Resnick said Clancy believed she was doing what was best for her children.

Key Prosecution Arguments: Prosecuting Attorneys Jennifer Sprague and Shanan Buckingham argued instead that Clancy, who sent her husband to pick up food before carrying out the murders, acted with "deliberate, premeditated, and extreme atrocity and cruelty." Forensic psychologist Kirk Heilbrun partially agreed with Resnick's assessment in saying Clancy's actions aligned with "altruistic filicide," but he said that such an alignment supplants the postpartum psychosis argument.

RELATED: Does Lindsay Clancy Deserve Sympathy for Her Mental Health and Actions? | AllSides

What's Next: Reddington requested that Sullivan consider a not-guilty ruling due to insufficient evidence, and a hearing is now set for September 29th. If denied, Cruz will be tasked with deciding whether to establish a retrial. Cruz said on Friday, "We're here at this courthouse today because those children are not."

How The Media Covered It: This case has garnered extreme national polarization alternative to the traditional left-to-right political scale, and it's erupted deep questions about psychiatric care, mental health precedents, criminal culpability, and nuances in court proceedings. Read more about the culture of this case.

Written by the AllSides staff (of humans). Learn more. Support our mission. Suggest an improvement to this summary.