Share
News

Lindsay Clancy Smiles as Judge Makes Decision on Motion to Dismiss Charges

Share

The woman charged with murder in the strangling deaths of her three children found something to smile about in court on Tuesday.

Lindsay Clancy, whose case has become a cause celebre among radical feminists, managed a courtroom grin at Judge William Sullivan’s announcement that he would wait at least a month before ruling on Clancy’s attorney’s motion to dismiss the charges against her, the New York Post reported.

It was a long-shot motion, but from news reports about the case, Clancy attorney Kevin Reddington was on a tear throughout Tuesday’s hearing.

At one point, according to the New York Post, he argued there was a “total and complete lack of evidence” that Clancy had actually committed the crime which took place in January 2023, when her three children were strangled in the basement of their home in Duxbury, Massachusetts.

That declaration likely came as news to everyone else in the courtroom, as well as the millions who have followed the high-profile case.

Will the judge dismiss the charges against Lindsay Clancy?

Clancy’s defense throughout her trial — the defense that Reddington himself argued with considerable drama — was not that she didn’t kill the children. It was that she wasn’t responsible for the killings because she had committed them while afflicted by postpartum psychosis.

In other words, no one during the trial — including Reddington — disputed that Clancy was the physical agent of her three children’s deaths. The only legal question was whether she was legally responsible for “murder.”

Clancy also attempted suicide after the killings and ended up in a wheelchair.

Related:
Suspect in Fatal College Football Stabbing ID'd as Foreign National Who Overstayed Visa

During her trial, witnesses who spoke to Clancy when she was hospitalized at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston said she told them a “male voice” had ordered her to kill her children and that she obeyed it.

Reddington also denied being the cause of “persecution” of the lone juror who wanted to convict Clancy of murder during her first trial, which ended when a mistrial was declared on Sept. 4.

Reddington, who had excoriated the juror in court while deliberations were ongoing and filed a motion seeking an investigation of the man after the mistrial, claimed his actions were only in response to comments by others.

He included President Donald Trump and South Carolina Rep. Nancy Mace among those to whom he was responding.

Reddington — who at one point after the mistrial suggested Trump consider pardoning Clancy — might also be already playing to a future jury. If the Clancy case does go to trial again, potential jurors might be hearing him linking pro-conviction forces to two Republicans who are unpopular in deeply Democratic Massachusetts.

Choose The Western Journal as your preferred source on Google and never miss reporting that defends truth, protects freedom, and advances Western civilization

Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.

Truth and Accuracy

Submit a Correction →



We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

Joe has spent more than 30 years as a reporter, copy editor and metro desk editor in newsrooms in Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Florida. He's been with Liftable Media since 2015.
Joe has spent more than 30 years as a reporter, copy editor and metro editor in newsrooms in Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Florida. He's been with Liftable Media since 2015. Largely a product of Catholic schools, who discovered Ayn Rand in college, Joe is a lifelong newspaperman who learned enough about the trade to be skeptical of every word ever written. He was also lucky enough to have a job that didn't need a printing press to do it.
Birthplace
Philadelphia
Nationality
American




Share
Tags:
, , , , ,

Conversation