SOURCE :- THE AGE NEWS
Lindsay Clancy’s lawyer has argued that there wasn’t enough evidence to prove she killed her three children, a striking turn after a lengthy trial that focused more on her mental state than on whether she took their lives.
“This entire case is based on speculation,” attorney Kevin Reddington said on Tuesday (US time) during the first hearing since Clancy’s initial trial ended on September 4 with a deadlocked jury. They were split 11 to 1 in her favour.
During the trial, Reddington didn’t dispute that Clancy killed the children at the family’s home in 2023. Instead, the defence sought to persuade the jury that the 36-year-old former labor and delivery nurse was not criminally responsible because of mental disease, a rare condition called postpartum psychosis.
But on Tuesday, Reddington sought to persuade Judge William Sullivan – the same judge who presided over the first trial – to acquit her.
There is, Reddington contended, not enough evidence “that this woman killed those children”. He pointed to matters ranging from her condition when she was found, badly injured and bleeding, in the yard outside her home to her lack of memory of what happened when she woke up in a hospital. At the first trial, her now ex-husband and first responders testified that she tried to kill herself immediately after killing the children.
“Where is the admission? Where does she say that she did this?” Reddington asked, going on to recap his arguments that she also was psychotic and delusional at the time of the children’s deaths.
Prosecutor Shanan Buckingham called his argument “laughable”, pointing to various evidence raised during the trial. In court papers filed on Monday, prosecutors recapped their arguments that there was enough evidence to convict Clancy.
The prosecution maintains that Clancy, a 36-year-old former labor and delivery nurse, strangled the children with exercise bands then used multiple methods to try to end her life, and that she knew what she was doing was wrong. She remains paralysed from the waist down.
The judge didn’t immediately decide, and no trial date was set.
Prosecutors have yet to decide whether to retry Clancy, Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz said after the hearing. They could choose to retry her on first-degree murder charges or seek to try her only on lesser charges, including second-degree murder or manslaughter, or drop the case entirely.
“We are going to do what we can for the children,” Cruz told reporters outside the court. “That is what this case is about.”
Clancy’s lawyers have also asked the judge to dismiss the criminal case. Among other things, they have argued that the judge should have ousted the one juror who favoured a murder conviction after the jury foreperson complained he was refusing to listen to the law on reasonable doubt.
The juror, Michael Desronvil, has said through his lawyer that he had no doubts about his stance. Desronvil told Fox News’ Hannity in a brief video statement on Monday that “the whole focus has been on me, but we want to reel everything back and put the focus on the three angels”, meaning the children.
The defence has also asked the judge to investigate the juror’s truthfulness on a questionnaire that prospective jurors filled out before the trial began, his truthfulness when jurors were questioned by the judge a day before the trial ended and also whether he broke court rules by using a cellphone during deliberations.
The livestreamed trial generated intense public interest and drew attention to maternal mental health after childbirth. About a dozen Clancy supporters, most dressed in pink, stood outside court Tuesday waiting for her to arrive.
Clancy remains charged with murder and is expected to stay at a psychiatric hospital until her case is resolved.
Clancy could have been sentenced to life in prison if convicted of murder. If acquitted, the judge could have ordered her confined to a mental health facility.
AP
Support is available from Beyond Blue on 1300 22 4636, Lifeline on 13 11 14 and Kids Helpline 1800 55 1800.
Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on what’s making headlines around the world. Sign up for our weekly What in the World newsletter.
