Lindsay Clancy‘s defense attorney called on President Donald Trump on Tuesday to pardon his client.
“I’d like to say that perhaps Donald Trump, who felt compelled to speak out on this case… Mr. President, I would hope you would consider this young lady, the type of person she is, what she’s been through and consider a pardon,” attorney Kevin Reddington said in an interview on “Good Morning America.”
Trump had weighed in on the mistrial on Friday, saying he had been following the case.
“It’s a shame,” he said, calling it “a horrible tragedy” and said he assumes that, after the hung jury, there will be another trial. “It’s a terrible situation.”
“Look, she did a horrible, horrible thing. Can’t be worse, but you’ll find out what the price to pay is,” Trump said, likely a mental institution or jail. “But I guess they gotta go through another trial. It’s too bad.”
NBC10 Boston courtroom insider Sue O’Connell sat down with three of the Lindsay Clancy trial’s jurors to talk extensively about the court proceedings that led to a mistrial in the case of the Duxbury mother charged with murder. They give their thoughts on the cases both sides presented and the holdout they say wouldn’t listen to the rest of the panel. Plus, what Clancy’s ex-husband had to say about online conspiracy theories pointing the finger at him, and analysis from chief legal analyst Michael Coyne.
Even if Trump were to consider a pardon of Clancy, the issue is moot. The president can only pardon those convicted or accused of a federal crime, not state or local crimes.
“It’s an attempt to grandstand and get the president involved and make it a political issue,” NBC10 Boston legal analyst Michael Coyne said. “It’s much more of a political maneuver than it is a legal maneuver.”
“Putting this out to Donald Trump is completely unheard of — especially because Donald Trump technically has no authority over state cases,” said Margo Lindauer, a law professor at the University of Vermont. “The fact that he is even creating this narrative that Donald Trump has some authority — whether it’s true or not — is going to convince people that he does.”
Reddington touched on several other issues related to the trial in his interview Tuesday with George Stephanopoulos.
He seemed to soften his stance on Plymouth County District Attorney Tim Cruz, calling his comments after the trial about “crushing” the prosecution “bravado.”
“That’s after the fact, emotions run high,” he said. “I’d just finished a 6-7 week trial. I think the defense was very strong. Perhaps I could have been more circumspect with Tim Cruz. Instead of saying I crushed him, I could’ve said ‘I did a good job.'”
In an exclusive interview with NBC10 Boston’s Sue O’Connell, three members of the jury spoke about the proceedings.
Reddington also said he’s willing to listen to Cruz if he wants to discuss some sort of a deal.
“I’m willing to listen to Tim. I’ve known Tim for 30 years. He’s a very hard charging prosecutor, conservative gentleman. I hope, however, after sitting through this trial and seeing the evidence that was presented from the government as well as the defense, that he would revisit that issue and hopefully we’d be able to work something out that would be acceptable to both sides.”
“Maybe there’s a just result for all involved that could be arrived at, but it’s not going to be arrived at if we continue the white-hot rhetoric that’s been involved in this case up to now,” Coyne said.
Reddington also spoke of Clancy’s character, calling her intelligent and hard working, and “a wonderful neighbor, friend, wife and mother… just an incredible person.”
He said he feels a strong bond with her because of the type of person she is.
Reddington also said he thinks the final 11-1 split among the jurors was in favor of not guilty by reason of insanity.
As for the single holdout juror, the defense attorney said he defends that person’s right to be a holdout, but he was upset that the juror acknowledged that he had reasonable doubt but refused to apply the law of reasonable doubt as presented by the judge.
“That’s not right and that’s why I was upset,” he said.
Days after a mistrial was declared in the Lindsay Clancy case, her ex-husband’s attorney put out a statement about the “spread of blatant and baseless falsehoods.”
Patrick Clancy’s lawyer issues new statement
Also on Tuesday morning, Patrick Clancy’s lawyer, Howard Cooper, issued a new statement on behalf of his client:
“Over the past months, Patrick Clancy and his family have been subjected to a relentless, escalating and destructive defamation campaign. This campaign of misinformation has been launched and promoted by minor celebrities, so-called influencers and outright conspiracy theorists who appear intent on boosting their own social media profiles and potential profit by publishing what they know to be outright falsehoods that Patrick was somehow involved in the death of his young children and other vile claims.”
“This campaign, now fueled by insatiable media coverage, remains at a fever pitch and has resulted in real life threats to his reputation, livelihood, and life. Patrick has no choice but to address this situation – with the clear goal of stopping injurious behavior, creating accountability for lies that are self-serving to the perpetrators, and being able to return his attention to what matters: preserving the memory of Cora, Dawson and Callan Clancy and supporting other women facing perinatal mental health challenges.”
“Enough is enough — this spread of blatant and baseless falsehoods must stop. Those responsible should understand that there will be consequences, and every appropriate measure will be pursued to hold them accountable, including legally. Law enforcement has been notified.”
Michael Coyne, NBC10 Boston’s chief legal analyst, said Patrick Clancy’s lawyer appears to be drawing a line.
“The fact is if you accuse someone of a crime, it’s slander per se if they can show that it’s not truthful. And it causes real damage,” Coyne said. “Obviously, he has already suffered a lot. This is perpetuating it and extending it.”
After seven days of deliberation, the end of the Lindsay Clancy murder trial seemed at hand, and then a last-ditch emergency stay threw court into chaos. Our team of reporters, legal experts and courtroom insiders explains how Friday’s mistrial played out, the reaction from the DA and defense attorney that came afterward, and of course, what’s next in criminal and civil courts for the Duxbury mother accused of murder in the deaths of her three children.
Stephanopoulos asked Reddington about that statement on “Good Morning America,” but Reddington didn’t answer it directly.
“My reaction to that is what I’ve said from very beginning. I represent Lindsay, but the bottom line is this couple, they were a family and they had the children — Cora, Dawson, Callan. And as a family they were very, very very happy. That summer of 2022 they were happy. It was the top of the world for them. And then she had postpartum depression that struck at the end of September into October.”
Reddington was also asked what he learned about postpartum depression as a result of this case.
“I’m horrified that women have to deal with postpartum,” he said. “People do not understand or know what they are doing, and it is real and it is frightening.”
The Lindsay Clancy case has put the spotlight on postpartum psychosis. The rare medical emergency took the life of Heather Martin’s sister shortly after she gave birth to her first child. Now, the maternal mental health navigator gives new moms postpartum support through Dartmouth Health Children’s, including by giving an added screening soon after babies are born.
What’s next in the Lindsay Clancy case?
The next step in the case is finding out if the district attorney’s office wants to retry the case. That could be difficult given the attention the first case received, NBC News legal analyst Misty Marris said Tuesday morning.
“If a second trial goes forward, both sides will have to be very leery of a stealth juror. That’s somebody who wants to be on the jury not because they think they can be fair and impartial but because they want to impact the outcome of the case,” Marris said.
Hundreds of thousands of videos about the Lindsay Clancy trial have also been posted on social media, and finding a jury that hasn’t commented on or consumed any of that content could prove difficult.
“Something that both sides will likely do is a deep dive on social media of everybody in that jury pool,” Marris said.
There are questions after Lindsay Clancy’s mistrial, including will there be a retrial and where will she be as she waits for that decision.
Clancy, a 36-year-old former labor and delivery nurse, never disputed that she killed her three children. But Reddington said she had a rare condition called postpartum psychosis when she strangled her kids — the youngest just 8 months old — then tried to take her own life in 2023. Prosecutors said Clancy knew what she was doing.
Friday’s mistrial, on the seventh day of deliberations, leaves the case unresolved. In the end, the decision seemed to surprise no one in the courtroom. Neither Clancy nor her family showed emotion as the judge announced the trial was ending without a resolution.
Cruz said Friday that there would not be an immediate decision about a second trial. He said public opinion would not be a factor.
“This was and has always been about getting justice for those three little babies,” he said. “This case is not about the healthcare system, or about how women are treated in it, or what diagnoses there are.”
If there is going to be a second trial, it sounds like Judge William Sullivan wants to move relatively quickly. He has scheduled a Sept. 29 pretrial hearing where all parties will discuss a potential retrial date and take up outstanding motions.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.