Speaking to reporters outside the courthouse following today's hearing, Lindsay Clancy's civil attorney Andrew Meyer issued a sharp warning about how hospitals treat postpartum mental health crises.
When asked by Fox News Digital whether there is a "public danger” that hospitals are still treating people in these situations, Meyer asserted that the danger stems from a lack of proper treatment and adequate follow-up for severe conditions.
"I think there's a public danger when we don't have a proper response to women who have postpartum depression, ultimately psychosis," Meyer said.
"And when they're simply given medication to treat the problem and there's no follow up, they're treated over some type of, it was a Zoom-type of treatment. And there wasn't, it wasn't taken seriously. There were no, there was not adequate communication between the doctors."
“The various people who were basically writing her off, telling her to go about her way and when in fact, she was a danger,” he added. “She was screaming for help for months and she wasn't getting it. And that's what leads to this kind of tragedy. It never should have happened. This entire matter could have been avoided. All the lives that have been tragically affected by these failures are going to be addressed.”
Following Tuesday's hearing, District Attorney Tim Cruz spoke to reporters in a press gaggle as he was leaving court.
He addressed questions about when a decision on a potential retrial would be finalized.
Pointing to the extensive nature of the court proceedings, Cruz noted that his office is taking the necessary time to carefully review the entire file.
Pressed on whether the prosecution intends to move forward on first-degree or second-degree murder charges in a potential retrial, Cruz made clear that no formal decisions have been made.
"We're doing that due diligence. We're going to continue to do that, and we're going to do what we can for the children. And that's what this case is about. But it's about those children and making sure they get justice."
Tensions ran high in court today during the latest hearing for Lindsay Clancy as defense counsel and prosecutors traded sharp blows over the strength of the state's case.
Defense attorney Kevin Reddington argued that prosecutors simply haven’t produced enough evidence to prove his client killed her children. Prosecutors quickly fired back, publicly dismissing Reddington’s assertion as a “laughable theory”.
Despite the exchanges inside the courtroom, major rulings remain on hold.
Judge William Sullivan indicated that no substantial decisions are expected until at least November 2, leaving several key motions unresolved for the coming weeks.
Planning for a potential retrial also appears to be stalled. Both the prosecution and Reddington acknowledged that they are not yet ready to engage in formal discussions regarding a new trial date.
Reddington noted that he is unavailable to take the case to trial again until next June, though Judge Sullivan made it clear he has no intention of needlessly kicking the case down the road.
Outside of the core trial logistics, new legal representations have emerged. The holdout juror from the previous proceedings has officially retained new local counsel, bringing attorney Heather O’Connor on board, she announced in a press conference after the hearing.
Meanwhile, District Attorney Tim Cruz chose not to hold a formal press conference following the session.
While walking past the media area outside the courthouse, Cruz fielded a handful of brief questions from reporters and directly denied a claim from a heckler who accused him of hating women.
{{#rendered}}Lindsay Clancy’s defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, launched a direct challenge against the prosecution's case in court, arguing that the Commonwealth has failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.
Reddington submitted a motion for a required finding of not guilty (Massachusetts' equivalent of a directed verdict), insisting the prosecution's evidence falls far short of establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Addressing the bench, Reddington emphasized that the court must apply the established Commonwealth v. Latimore standard—rooted in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court precedent Jackson v. Virginia.
"I submit to the court that a motion for required finding of not guilty should have been entered on the total and complete lack of evidence to indicate to a rational juror. It is not enough for the court to find that there was 'some record evidence'—which is always what the government argues."
Reddington added that he is not available until June as attorneys and the judge work to see when a potential retrial could be held.
Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Sprague pushed back strongly against unsealing deadlock notes from the jury, warning the court that exposing sensitive deliberative communications would set a dangerous precedent.
"If we go further to make public notes sent by the jury... it just all would pile on to have this repeated chilling effect that would harm irreparably our judicial system," Sprague argued, emphasizing that future jurors might hesitate to communicate with the judge if they fear their private discussions will be broadcast to the public.
Friction boiled over in court as defense attorney Kevin Reddington pushed back against claims that his team targeted a holdout juror, telling Judge Sullivan he was "sick of being accused of persecuting the juror" before declining to address the pending motion on jury notes.
The tense atmosphere gave way to a brief moment of levity as the court turned to trial scheduling. When Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Sprague argued against setting a trial date until all outstanding motions are resolved, Reddington surprisingly sided with the prosecution.
"Believe it or not, I agree with her," Reddington told the bench, noting that a prematurely selected trial date would likely get pushed.Judge Sullivan, however, expressed impatience with the delays, urging both sides to establish a firm timeline to get the case moving and pointing out that prior discussions suggested a swift trial. Sprague quickly clarified the state's stance, noting that rapid timing "was not the Commonwealth's position."
{{#rendered}}As prosecution took to the stand, Plymouth County Assistant District Attorney Shanan Buckingham opened with a focus on the core legal standard for the "not guilty by reason of insanity defense" under Massachusetts law.
"She was getting treatment, she was on medication - went to hospitals, but commonwealth doesn’t have to rely on that to say she was in fact criminally responsible," she said.
She went on to say, "People can still have criminal responsibility despite a mental illness. Defense can argue she was psychotic, but that doesn’t mean the Commonwealth hasn’t proved otherwise."
Lindsay Clancy looks away from her defense attorney Kevin Reddington as he says “She died in the hospital, there were massive transfusions," he said at the stand. He referenced her time in the hospital. Reddington also called out government rubuttal witnesses that took to the stand during her trial last month.
“Not one of those rebuttal doctors were qualified to get on that witness stand and tell that jury of their opinion on her mental state,” he said.
Judge William Sullivan scheduled a hearing for Nov. 2 for Clancy lawyer Kevin Reddington’s motion calling for an inquiry into the lone holdout juror, Michael Desronvil.
{{#rendered}}Michael Desronvil, the lone holdout juror who caused a mistrial in the Lindsay Clancy murder case, has spoken publicly for the first time in a video statement on Fox News’ Hannity."I know the whole focus has been on me, but we want to reel everything back and put the focus on the three angels," Desronvil said, referring to Clancy’s deceased children, Cora, Dawson, and Callan.
With Clancy back in court today, prosecutors are expected to announce plans for a retrial, while the defense fights to dismiss the charges entirely.
A few “Justice for Lindsay” supporters in pink T-shirts were seen outside the Plymouth Superior Court Tuesday morning as Clancy returns to court for the first time since her mistrial.
Dozens of people were seen waiting outside ahead of the hearing, where the judge is expected to hear several motions in a key hearing ahead of a possible retrial.
Prosecutors filed a motion asking the judge to enforce a gag order in the case. A war of words has erupted since the mistrial, with Clancy’s attorney, Kevin Reddington, trading fiery barbs with Edward Paltzik, the lawyer for the lone holdout juror in the mistrial, Michael Desronvil.
In their motion for the gag order, prosecutors wrote: “counsel for the defendant has engaged in substantial publicity pre-trial, during trial, and post trial that has inevitably tainted any further venire with inflammatory statements about the prosecution of the case, the facts of the case, opinions about the evidence presented as well as evidence of not presented during the trial, and jury deliberations. Restraints on any further extrajudicial statements are necessary in this case to protect the integrity and fairness of the judicial system.“
Prosecutors said they want to “prevent any further pollution of any potential jury venire as well as subsequent witness testimony.”
Read the filing here.
{{#rendered}}The Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office filed a motion asking the judge to deny Clancy’s renewed motion for a required finding of not guilty.
Clancy’s claim that she was in a state of psychosis at the time she killed her three children is not supported by the evidence, prosecutors wrote.
“Despite claims by the defense, this Court should be evaluating the sufficiency of the evidence based solely on the evidence presented at trial and not consider any alleged information regarding jury deliberations nor the potential collateral issues regarding the outcome of what would happen to the defendant should to Court consider a required finding of not guilty by lack of criminal responsibility.”
Read the filing here.
Coverage for this event has ended.