Lindsay Clancy trial: Jurors will be allowed to consider manslaughter, judge says

Judge William Sullivan told jurors that prosecutors would rest their case on Wednesday, with closing arguments likely to take place Thursday.

Gregory Saathoff, a senior psychiatrist for the FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit, took the stand on Tuesday afternoon as prosecution's final rebuttal witness. 

Saathoff picked apart Clancy's account of events during his testimony, comparing her description during two interviews with accounts from her ex-husband Patrick Clancy, as well as what she told others previously, noting several inconsistencies.

In his testimony, Saathoff raised concern that Patrick and Linsday Clancy had very different accounts of that afternoon, including Patrick Clancy saying that the kids were already eating chicken nuggets when he left the house the day of the killings, while Lindsay Clancy said she was preparing the chicken nuggets when she heard a voice telling her to kill her children.

Saathoff testified that he spent about 11 hours interviewing Clancy. He told jurors he has treated "thousands" of patients with psychosis throughout his career and testified that Clancy's description of the voice in her head commanding her to kill her children was "very unusual" compared to most descriptions of psychosis, in his opinion.

Saathoff testified that in his experience, it was unusual that Clancy claimed to have heard the voice only once in her head, compared to most patients with psychosis, who he said regularly experience auditory hallucinations. 

Saathoff also testified that, in his opinion, it was unusual Clancy claimed to have heard a constant voice -- rather than an intermittent one -- and that it abruptly ended once she killed her children. 

Saathoff testified that he has never seen a scenario when a patient reported a hallucination ending once the act demanded was complete. 

"Committing the act is not curative of the voice. I've not ever seen that," he told jurors. 

Saathoff also noted in his testimony that Clancy had told another psychiatrist the voice began as soon as Patrick Clancy left the house to run errands but told Saathoff that the voice began right after her phone call with Patrick – about a 20-minute gap.

Jurors have been sent home for the day. The charge conference is now scheduled for Wednesday, after the conclusion of evidence. 

Defense attorney Kevin Reddington questioned forensic psychologist Kirk Heilbrun, one of the prosecution's expert witnesses, about his lack of experience treating postpartum psychosis, attempting to cast doubt on Heilbrun's assessment that Lindsay Clancy was aware of her actions when she strangled her three children and attempted to take her own life.

Heilbrun testified that he has limited experience with postpartum psychosis -- having last treated a patient with the condition in 1982 -- before acknowledging he was paid more than $50,000 by prosecutors to appear as an expert witness in the case.

"How much money did you make on the case, doctor?" Reddington asked during cross examination.

"Well, it's not that simple, but I'm being paid at $300 an hour," Heilbrun told jurors, testifying that he had been paid approximately $54,000 "up to this point."

Reddington then accused Heilbrun of not reading the records in the case fully, suggesting that one of his answers was a "word salad," prompting prosecutors to object and the judge to instruct Reddington to move on with his questioning.

Reddington also pressed Heilbrun about his claim that Clancy was not serious about getting help.

"Did this woman not want to go to anybody that would help her, sir? Are you trying to tell the jury that she was avoiding help?" he asked.

"It was short-term and supportive, as opposed to something where in the field you might pick a cognitive behavioral therapist, which is empirically supported for things like anxiety and depression, and patience and things like that," Heilbrun said.

"Who makes that decision? Does a person like this make that decision, sir?" Reddington said as he stood behind Clancy's wheelchair.

An expert witness told jurors Tuesday that he believes Linsday Clancy likely "retained an awareness of the illegality of killing" her children and is "criminally responsible" for her actions.

Forensic psychologist Kirk Heilbrun told jurors he believed Clancy did not experience an episode of psychosis when she strangled her children on the evening of Jan. 24, 2023, but did think she believed the act would prevent her children from future suffering by killing them before attempting to take her own life.

Heilbrun, who interviewed Clancy several times after the killings and has reviewed her medical records and clinicians' notes, testified that in his opinion Clancy justified "killing the children out of love" because she wanted them to avoid the "suffering" of growing up without a mother.

"[S]he retained an awareness of the illegality of killing others, including killing her children," Heilbrun testified. "I'm not the decision maker here, but my clinical opinion is that she was criminally responsible on Jan. 24, [2023]."

Heilbrun testified that, in his opinion, Clancy's actions could be best understood "as a serious suicide attempt combined with altruistic filicide, killing her children out of love, rather than as a response to command hallucinations."

While Heilbrun acknowledged that there were, in his opinion, some signs Clancy experienced psychosis, he argued that evidence suggests Clancy was aware of her actions that night and was experiencing "peritraumatic dissociation."

Heilbrun also tried to cast doubt on the defense's psychosis argument by highlighting slight "inconsistencies" in Clancy's account of the events and the number of individual decisions she needed to make to kill the children over the course of what the prosecution argues was 20 minutes.

Heilbrun added that based on his interviews with Clancy, he believes the 36-year-old is "still grieving" her children.

"She's still in mourning for those kids, and she used language like, 'I have lost everything, and I don't want to be here,'" he said. "So, I would not think of Lindsay Clancy as someone who is really self-centered or oriented only to herself. She is grieving her children."

Prosecutors in the murder trial of Lindsay Clancy plan to rest their rebuttal case later Tuesday after calling two final witnesses to cast doubt on the claim that the Massachusetts mother was in the throes of psychosis when she killed her three children.

Jurors on Monday were sent home early after testimony from a prosecution expert about Clancy’s religion prompted defense attorney Kevin Reddington to unsuccessfully move for a mistrial.

The request for a mistrial stemmed from the testimony of forensic psychologist Kirk Heilbrun, who tried to cast doubt on the claim that Clancy was hallucinating when she killed her children. Instead, he testified that the Clancy committed “altruistic filicide” in which, he testified that, she believed she was helping her children avoid suffering by killing them before taking her own life.

Heilbrun testified that Clancy may have believed that "she and the children would be together in heaven with God" if she killed them before taking her own life.

"She was raised as a Catholic, and this, as I understand, Catholic conditions, that's not necessarily what happens. But when I ask her about that, when I said, ‘Isn't suicide a mortal sin?'" Heilbrun said before he was interrupted by the judge.

Defense attorney Kevin Reddington argued that the testimony was "intentional misconduct on the part of the prosecution" and mentioned another incident last week when Clancy’s former mother-in-law was asked if "you’re aware that murder is considered a mortal sin?"

Prosecutors denied that the testimony about Clancy’s faith was intentional, and Judge Sullivan denied the motion for a mistrial, instead opting to instruct jurors to ignore the testimony.