Full Breakdown
Lindsay Clancy Judge Denies Motion to Find Not Guilty After Mistrial
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event
Judge William Sullivan rejected the defense’s Rule 25 motion seeking a judicial finding of not guilty for Lindsay Clancy, the 36-year-old former labor-and-delivery nurse charged with murdering her three children. In his written order, Sullivan concluded that prosecutors had presented enough physical and circumstantial evidence for a rational juror to find Clancy guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. He scheduled a November 2 hearing to address remaining motions, including a possible retrial date and an inquiry into the lone holdout juror.
Background & Context
On January 24, 2023 Clancy allegedly strangled her children—Cora, 5; Dawson, 3; and Callan, 8 months—with exercise bands in the basement of their Duxbury home, then attempted suicide, leaving her paralyzed. The trial in Plymouth Superior Court ended on September 4, 2026 with a deadlocked jury: eleven jurors favored a not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity verdict, while one juror, Michael Desronvil, voted for conviction, prompting the mistrial.
Data & Statistics
- Jury split: 11-1 in favor of a not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity verdict.
- Potential sentence if convicted of first-degree murder: life imprisonment.
- If found not guilty by reason of insanity, Clancy would be committed to a state psychiatric hospital with periodic court review.
Official Statements & Responses
- Judge Sullivan wrote that “there was evidence introduced, both physical and circumstantial, that would permit a rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of the charge of murder.”
- Assistant District Attorney Shanan Buckingham called the defense’s new argument “laughable” and said the record “is voluminous as to the information supporting the fact that she did this.”
- Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz declined to indicate whether the Commonwealth will seek a retrial, noting the office is still reviewing the case.
Criticism & Opposition
- Defense attorney Kevin Reddington argued that prosecutors failed to prove Clancy killed the children, asking repeatedly, “Where’s the evidence that she did this?”
- Prosecutors dismissed Reddington’s shift from an insanity defense to a direct evidentiary challenge as “laughable.”
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
Sources differ on the weight of Clancy’s postpartum psychosis. Some experts testified she was incapable of appreciating wrongdoing, while prosecutors point to testimony that she planned the killings and understood their wrongfulness. No forensic report in the public record definitively resolves whether her mental state negated criminal intent.
Verbatim Quotes
- “This entire case is based on speculation,” — Kevin Reddington
- “For the first time, the defendant is arguing that there is no evidence she did this,” — Shanan Buckingham
- “was sufficient to satisfy any rational trier of fact beyond a reasonable doubt,” Sullivan wrote.” — William Sullivan
- “Mental illness alone does not preclude a finding of criminal responsibility beyond a reasonable doubt,” — William Sullivan
What’s Next
The November 2 status hearing will consider motions on double jeopardy, the holdout juror’s conduct, and a possible gag order. Prosecutors will decide whether to pursue a new first-degree murder trial, seek lesser charges, negotiate a plea, or drop the case. The outcome will determine whether Clancy faces a life sentence, psychiatric commitment, or another courtroom proceeding.