Lindsay Clancy retrial expected, but details remain uncertain

Lindsay Clancy returned to court Monday morning for a hearing that could help determine the future of her criminal case following a September mistrial, when jurors failed to reach a unanimous verdict.

During the hearing, prosecutors indicated they intend to retry Clancy, although questions remain about how the case will proceed.

"This will be a retrial, as to what that looks like will depend," Plymouth County Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Sprague said. "We're not at that point yet."

Attorneys in Lindsay Clancy case argue several motions in Monday's hearing

Judge William Sullivan scheduled the hearing to consider three motions: two from the defense seeking access to preserved records and dismissal of the case, and one from prosecutors requesting a gag order restricting "prejudicial extrajudicial statements." However, the possibility of a retrial remained a central question throughout the proceedings.

What we know:

Clancy's attorneys continued to push for the charges to be dismissed on double jeopardy grounds. They also sought an inquiry into the lone holdout juror, accusing him of failing to follow the law and properly apply the court's instructions during deliberations.

RELATED: Lindsay Clancy murder trial ends in mistrial after jury deadlocked

"It is clear he did not refuse to deliberate, he refused to agree," the prosecution team said in argument against the inquiry regarding the holdout juror. 

Tensions escalated when defense attorney Kevin Reddington identified the holdout juror by name in open court for the first time, drawing an immediate rebuke from Sullivan. The exchange marked the first of several contentious moments between the attorney and the judge.

The hearing also revisited arguments from September concerning the defense's request to review normally confidential jury records and question the holdout juror about his truthfulness during jury selection and his cellphone use.

Heather O'Connor, an attorney representing the holdout juror, addressed the court in defense of her client, sharply criticizing Clancy's legal team for singling him out. She urged Sullivan to deny the defense's motion seeking access to confidential jury records.

Sullivan did not issue rulings on the pending motions Monday. Instead, he turned his attention to the possibility of a new trial, asking prosecutors whether they had decided how to proceed.

What's next:

Both sides are expected to reconvene on Nov. 16 for a status hearing and possible trial assignment. 

The case against Lindsay Clancy

Dig deeper:

In the September hearing, Clancy's attorney, Kevin Reddington, took a different approach, saying there was a "total and complete lack of evidence" presented at the trial to prove that she killed the children. Reddington cited the admission of culpability while maintaining a lack of criminal responsibility, legally necessary for her defense. 

RELATED: Lindsay Clancy holdout juror speaks out for the first time

The other side:

Plymouth County Assistant District Attorney Shanan Buckingham pushed back, arguing that mental illness does not automatically eliminate criminal responsibility.

"People can still have criminal responsibility despite a mental illness," Buckingham said. "Defense can argue she was psychotic, but that doesn’t mean the Commonwealth hasn’t proved otherwise."

The backstory:

Clancy, 36, was arrested and charged with strangling her children; Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months, with exercise bands in the basement of their Duxbury home in January 2023. She then tried to cut herself and jumped from a second story window in an attempt to kill herself, leaving her paralyzed. 

Clancy’s attorney, Kevin Reddington, argued during the first trial that Clancy was suffering from postpartum psychosis and did not understand her actions were wrong. Several jurors have since said in televised interviews that, aside from the lone holdout, they were prepared to find her not guilty by reason of insanity.