# Lindsay Clancy...child murderer or victim? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 19, 2026, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205 "2026-09-19T16:26:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2026, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/101 "2026-09-20T20:23:03Z")
> [@GreysonCarlisle](#): > > A lot of times, it’s having the kids that triggers it. Granted. But my specific question was whether we have evidence either way whether she had any pre-pregnancy mental health conditions. ---
**Author:** ![GreysonCarlisle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@GreysonCarlisle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreysonCarlisle)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2026, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/102 "2026-09-20T21:10:46Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > Granted. But my specific question was whether we have evidence either way whether she had any pre-pregnancy mental health conditions. Apologies. I didn’t answer your question as well as I’d intended. It’s possible that Lindsay had issues, but much like my friend, they might not have been anything so outside the norm that they screamed mental illness. Her closest would have noticed, but it probably wouldn’t have been written down anywhere. > [@DSeid](#): > > Just to be pedantic - not quite a recognized label. Could be bipolar type I with psychotic features, or schizoaffective bipolar type? The difference is the timing of the delusional episodes in relation to the mood episodes. > > Not that it matters. Tragic. And point intended to be illustrated made. Not sure. All I know is what her daughter told me. The facility couldn’t tell me, I’m sure, and I haven’t broached the subject with my friend. We just talk. ---
**Author:** ![ASL\_v2.0](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asl_v2.0/32/3525_2.png) [@ASL\_v2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ASL_v2.0)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2026, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/103 "2026-09-20T22:36:07Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > If anyone is to be put on trial, it should be the sickies spreading bullshit rumors about her ex-husband on social media. I share your disgust, but for me the people who really ought to be in prison are the talking heads who are acting like no one has ever been found not guilty be reason of insanity before, and if Clancy is acquitted on that basis it will be like the “wokes” invented some kind of “get out of jail free card” that will destroy the country. Such people (the talking heads) are both a symbol and a cause of the rot that is _really_ destroying our country from within. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2026, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/104 "2026-09-20T23:41:56Z")
> [@filmore](#): > > What would happen to her if she went to this kind of facility? She doesn’t need therapy or meds. She’s not mentally ill in a way that needs treatment. She currently is in such a facility and is like to remain there in any case for a significant period of time. Why would anyone imagine she doesn’t need treatment? Or doesn’t present a clear suicide risk? Gift link to a NYT article: [https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/05/us/lindsay-clancy-psychiatric-hospital.html?unlocked\_article\_code=1.ClE.Z5r8.vkXvpMgF0w9w&smid=nytcore-ios-share](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/05/us/lindsay-clancy-psychiatric-hospital.html?unlocked_article_code=1.ClE.Z5r8.vkXvpMgF0w9w&smid=nytcore-ios-share) > Whatever happens next in the murder case against Lindsay Clancy after a Massachusetts jury failed on Friday to reach a verdict, it is certain that she will remain institutionalized for many months, if not years. > > Even if she is not ultimately convicted, medical and legal experts have said that her future will be one of confinement. … > > … If Ms. Clancy is ultimately found not responsible for the crimes, experts say she may be sent to a high-security forensic psychiatric hospital — a center to treat people who have stood criminal trial — for long-term mental health care. > > Several psychiatrists said that for many women, symptoms of postpartum psychosis are treated and resolved within a year. But even if she is found not guilty because of that diagnosis, Ms. Clancy will most likely be treated for other ongoing issues, such as suicidal thoughts and a [potential diagnosis of bipolar disorder](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/18/us/lindsay-clancy-murder-trial-mother-in-law.html), which can be a risk factor for postpartum psychosis. … > > … In many states, including Massachusetts, people who are found not guilty by reason of insanity often spend more time hospitalized than they would have in prison, said Dr. Renée Sorrentino, a forensic psychiatrist who is licensed in Massachusetts. > > In Massachusetts, she said, Ms. Clancy would be reviewed for discharge on an annual basis. Doctors could recommend that she be discharged from the hospital if they believed that her symptoms had improved and if they determined that she was not a danger to others. > > The Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office would then be notified. If it disagreed with the medical team’s assessment, it could obtain its own experts or argue in court that Ms. Clancy should remain hospitalized. A judge would then decide whether she could be released, Dr. Sorrentino said. … I’d place my nickel down on her never leaving. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2026, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/105 "2026-09-29T22:54:57Z")
A defense 180. > **[Lindsay Clancy's attorney says there's no evidence she killed her children in...](https://abcnews.com/GMA/News/lindsay-clancy-return-court-1st-time-mistrial/story?id=136841854)** > > A judge declared a mistrial in the case three weeks ago. Did the butler do it? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2026, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/106 "2026-09-29T23:05:42Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > A defense 180. So, it is no longer a psychotic break? I am confused. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2026, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/107 "2026-09-29T23:10:14Z")
“There is no evidence that she admitted she did this.” What bizarre phrasing. I assume her previous defense strategy can’t be used against her in the new trial? ---
**Author:** ![ASL\_v2.0](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asl_v2.0/32/3525_2.png) [@ASL\_v2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ASL_v2.0)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2026, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/108 "2026-09-29T23:29:25Z")
If I were to hazard a guess, they are trying to push for outright acquittal, possibly by direction of the judge, seeing as the prosecutor failed to get a verdict. I mean, why settle for decades in a state-run mental facility without at least pushing for acquittal? My sense is that the state, by contrast, will be arguing that it’s already been stipulated she did the deed, and so now it’s just a question of whether she was legal sane or not. The defense, by contrast, is saying “Nuh’uh, we didn’t stipulate no such thing. It’s up to you to prove every element of the charge to the satisfaction of a jury, and you didn’t.” You can’t get what you don’t ask for. ETA: I’m always reminded of this as one of The Simpsons’ best legal moments: > **[4.2K views · 91 reactions | "And I contend that those tourists were...](https://www.facebook.com/NothingButSimpsonsClips/videos/516203978745875/)** > > "And I contend that those tourists were decapitated \*before\* they entered the Krustyland House of Knives." > > (S6, E22: "Round Springfield") I just don’t mean as a matter of comedy, but as a matter of stone-faced cold-blooded legal advocacy (whether it will play well in front of a jury is another matter, _but first it’s got to get to a jury_). Referring specifically to the line “I contend those tourists were decapitated _before_ they entered the KrustyLand House of Knives” ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2026, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/109 "2026-09-29T23:37:53Z")
Gotcha. And the prosecution, I assume, will argue that they didn’t present the evidence because of the stipulation. ---
**Author:** ![ASL\_v2.0](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asl_v2.0/32/3525_2.png) [@ASL\_v2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ASL_v2.0)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2026, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/110 "2026-09-29T23:38:52Z")
The prosecution seems to be arguing “Are you kissing? There’s all kinds of evidence she did it, stipulation or no.” ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2026, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/111 "2026-09-29T23:56:53Z")
Not a lawyer but it does seem to me that “not contesting” is not legally the same as “admitting” … the first a no comment, the second a positive affirmation. And that saying there is evidence but you didn’t bother presenting it (because you didn’t feel it was necessary given the not contesting) is possibly not enough. I don’t this necessarily means that the defense approach would change in a retrial, more a possible legal gotcha to see how it flies. ---
**Author:** ![filmore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7993a0/32.png) [@filmore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/filmore)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2026, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/112 "2026-09-30T00:09:08Z")
The verdicts of guilty or not guilty are statements about whether or not the prosecution proved their case or not. It’s _not_ a statement about whether or not the person did it. The state has the obligation to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. If they didn’t provide enough evidence for the jury to agree with that, then they lose the case. Keep in mind that a defendant is found not guilty if the state didn’t prove their case. They are _not_ found innocent. Innocent would mean they didn’t do it, but that’s not what the case is about. The case is about whether or not the prosecution proved that the defendant did it. If the prosecution is sloppy and didn’t connection enough dots to remove sufficient doubt, then they will lose the case. The defendant doesn’t have to contest anything the prosecution says. If the prosecution says the defendant parachuted onto the roof of the house of their victim, the defendant doesn’t have to refute that. It’s up to the prosecution to prove it with things like evidence and testimony. The fact that a defendant doesn’t contest statements from the prosecution is not proof of guilt or that the defendant agrees with the statements. ---
**Author:** ![ASL\_v2.0](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asl_v2.0/32/3525_2.png) [@ASL\_v2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ASL_v2.0)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2026, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/113 "2026-09-30T00:23:10Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > And that saying there is evidence but you didn’t bother presenting it (because you didn’t feel it was necessary given the not contesting) is possibly not enough. I wouldn’t go that far. Do we know that they didn’t present evidence she committed the actus reus at trial? ---
**Author:** ![ASL\_v2.0](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asl_v2.0/32/3525_2.png) [@ASL\_v2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ASL_v2.0)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2026, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/114 "2026-09-30T00:31:46Z")
> [@ASL\_v2.0](#): > > The prosecution seems to be arguing “Are you kissing? There’s all kinds of evidence she did it, stipulation or no.” I just want to go on record to say that what I meant to say was “Are you kidding?” I suspect there is no love lost between prosecution and defense. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2026, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/115 "2026-09-30T00:51:19Z")
The first case ended in mistrial. No verdict either way. What if anything of the pre-trial motions of the first trial are binding on the second? What, if anything, is estopped in the second based on testimony or proceedings in the first? Do they start out the next trial totally green field _ab initio_ again with fresh rounds of discovery as if the first had never occurred? _If_ this is truly an end-to-end do-over with no legally binding lingering effects from the first trial or its prep, then the defendant can say their earlier stipulations that amounted to a confession are now void. Poof! no confession; the prosecution now has to prove the doing of the deed. But I don’t know if my _if_ is true. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2026, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/116 "2026-09-30T01:45:40Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > And that saying there is evidence but you didn’t bother presenting it (because you didn’t feel it was necessary given the not contesting) is possibly not enough. Quickly reading the cites from the wiki, Clancy’s defense attorney made a motion for a bifurcated trial, where the first part would be “Did she do it?” and the second part would be “Was she responsible for doing it,” i.e. a criminal insanity defense. News coverage quotes the attorney as saying a single phase trial would require her to concede to the killings in order to raise the criminal insanity defense, which would violate her 5th amendment rights. The judge denied this motion, so the defense proceeded with the criminal insanity defense. Because that involves stipulating to the killings (I think this is stronger than simply not contesting them), the prosecution would not have needed to present evidence of the killings themselves – say, if there was latex residue under her fingernails – if it wasn’t relevant to proving her state of mind. For the defense to now say “They didn’t present evidence of that Clancy even committed the killings” seems bogus. Under different conditions, the prosecution would have been different. Of course, the prosecution is going to say that they _did_ present such evidence, but to me that’s beside the point. That’s not to say the defense attorney is doing anything wrong by giving this argument the ol’ college try, but if I (a total layman) can see the logic problem, I assume a judge would throw out such a motion to dismiss in short order. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2026, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/117 "2026-09-30T01:58:40Z")
From what I learned during various Trump litigation, a lawyer will often make a motion, even if they don’t believe it’ll be successful, just to make sure it’s a point that can be appealed at a later date. If they didn’t try, they can’t appeal on that same point later. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2026, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/118 "2026-09-30T02:50:36Z")
The YouTube channel LegalEagle has an interesting video about how the mistrial works (and the odd one person who refused to convict). 30 minutes: [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/Jdv2ujuvC5U/maxresdefault.jpg "The Holdout Juror") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jdv2ujuvC5U) ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2026, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/119 "2026-09-30T03:09:32Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > (and the odd one person who refused to convict) I wrote that backwards. The one who did want to convict. Sorry (I knew better, just wrote it wrong). ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2026, 10:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205/120 "2026-09-30T10:51:10Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > For the defense to now say “They didn’t present evidence of that Clancy even committed the killings” seems bogus. Under different conditions, the prosecution would have been different. I agree as to your logic. But attorneys often say one thing to the press, and something rather different to the court in the form of their filings. And this comment was to the press, not the Court. Why the difference? Because in notorious cases there’s always two trials going on: one in the courtroom and one in the court of public opinion. And the jury comes from that public. A little priming can work wonders, despite all the _voir dire_ assurances that nobody empaneled has ever even heard of this sensational case. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lindsay-clancy-child-murderer-or-victim/1033205.md?page=7)