Lindsay Clancy trial live as rebuttal witnesses testify
Prosecutors in the Lindsay Clancy trial live coverage on Monday, Day 19, are calling rebuttal witnesses after the defense rested Friday. Forensic psychiatrist Dr. Avram Mack is back on the stand, arguing Clancy knew right from wrong when she killed her three children in Duxbury in 2023. Closings could come as early as Tuesday. Follow this true crime and unsolved mysteries case as the jury nears deliberations.
Key Takeaways
- Monday is Day 19 of testimony in Plymouth, Massachusetts; prosecutors are expected to call three rebuttal witnesses, beginning with Dr. Avram Mack.
- Defense attorney Kevin Reddington rested Friday after Dr. Phillip Resnick told jurors Clancy had postpartum psychosis and should not be held criminally responsible.
- Mack testified Clancy had major depressive disorder, not psychosis, and could appreciate that her actions were wrong.
- Closing arguments could come as early as Tuesday. A conviction carries life without parole; a not-guilty verdict would send Clancy to a state psychiatric hospital.
Who is on the stand in the Lindsay Clancy trial live?
Judge William Sullivan ended Friday with Mack still under cross-examination. Court resumes with that questioning Monday, according to NBC Boston.
The prosecution is expected to call more rebuttal experts after Mack. NBC Boston reports prosecutors plan a total of three rebuttal witnesses before closing arguments.
Clancy, 36, does not deny she strangled 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson, and 8-month-old Callan on Jan. 24, 2023, after sending her then-husband Patrick out. Boston.com and The Boston Globe report she sent him for medication and takeout, then slashed her neck and wrists and jumped from a second-story window. She is paralyzed from the waist down and appears in court in a wheelchair.
What did the dueling psychiatrists tell the jury?
Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist with expertise in postpartum conditions, evaluated Clancy four months after the killings. He said she was experiencing command hallucinations — a man's voice telling her to kill the children and herself — and a "delusion of influence," as if she were a puppet.
He diagnosed bipolar disorder with major depression and called the killings "altruistic filicide," a murder he said is committed out of love rather than hostility. He testified she should not be held criminally responsible.
Mack disputed that picture. He said Clancy suffered a major depressive episode, found no mania or hypomania to support bipolar disorder or psychosis before the killings, and concluded she knew her actions were wrong. He cited her driving her daughter to the doctor hours earlier and following the rules of the road as evidence of "normal thinking" and an ability to plan.
Mack said Clancy told him her last words to the children were "Go to God." He described severe mental illness as a continuation of months of depression, suggesting she could still control impulses and distinguish right from wrong.
He said he had not considered postpartum conditions, citing guidelines that limit the postpartum period to four weeks after birth. Clancy's third child was born in May 2022. Other experts reject that four-week cutoff, with some saying the timeframe can extend a year or more.
What comes next, and what is at stake?
Massachusetts requires the defense to show Clancy could not appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions to a moral certainty, or could not conform her conduct to the law. Reddington has argued providers failed to diagnose and treat her after she sought help in September 2022, and that medications may have worsened her symptoms. She and Patrick Clancy have filed medical malpractice lawsuits against her providers.
On cross-examination, Reddington challenged Mack's limited experience treating postpartum patients. Mack described himself as a generalist focused on adolescent mental health and addiction.
If convicted, Clancy faces a mandatory sentence of life in prison without parole. If found not guilty, she would be committed to a state psychiatric hospital, with periodic evaluations and possible release if authorities conclude she is not a threat. The Boston Globe reports jurors could begin deliberating this week.