Lindsay Clancy trial: Jury being sent home for weekend

The jury has been sent home for the day as the evidentiary portion of the trial concluded. The judge is holding a charge conference, which is set for 2:30 p.m., to hash out how the jury should be instructed on the law in the case. Closing arguments will begin Thursday morning.

Prosecutors in the murder trial of Lindsay Clancy have rested their rebuttal case.

The evidentiary portion of the trial has now concluded after 21 days of testimony. Jurors heard from a total of 84 witnesses.

Defense attorney Kevin Reddington concluded his lengthy cross-examination of the final state witness by quoting the prosecution’s opening statement. 

When asked about the accuracy of the claims, Gregory Saathoff -- a senior psychiatrist for the FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit -- responded that the lengthy quote from prosecutor Shanan Buckingham "really minimizes what [Clancy] was going through."

"Would you agree, sir, based on your investigation…that in fact, on January 24th of 2023, Lindsey made a calculated decision. She was a woman who no longer liked the life she thought she wanted. It was getting harder and harder for her to control, and when she saw the opportunity to escape, she made the selfish choice to take it and to take Cora, Dawson, and Callan first before attempting to take her own life," Reddington asked in his cross-examination.

"She chose to manipulate her providers, seek out a quick and easy fix when she was feeling depressed and anxious, and when she didn't get what she expected, she chose the alternate route. She would seek a different doctor. She would change medications after days. She disengaged from treatment that she didn't like the plan, and after only four months in treatment, she made a choice-a deliberate and intentional decision that she did not want to try anymore. And because no one could take care of her kids the way she wanted them to, she had to take them with her too. Would you agree that the evidence, in your opinion, supports that contention, sir?" Reddington questioned. 

"Well, there's a lot in that," Saathoff testified.

"Do you agree that it would support your contention, sir, or it would not?" Reddington asked. 

"I think that statement that you read really minimizes what she was going through," Saathoff testified.

As the prosecution in the murder trial of Lindsay Clancy nears the end of its rebuttal case, defense attorney Kevin Reddington is questioning the final prosecution witness, Gregory Saathoff, a senior psychiatrist with the FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit, over his assessment that the Massachusetts mother was not experiencing postpartum psychosis.

Reddington used his cross-examination to not only attempt to poke holes in the assessment conducted by Saathoff after Clancy killed her children, but also highlight some of the challenges he says Clancy faced seeking medical care before the events transpired.

“She was complaining, not just to her physicians, but she was complaining to people in her community that she was having intrusive thoughts, dark thoughts, suicidal thoughts, and homicidal ideation. She said that, correct?” Reddington said.

“The homicidal ideation, as I understand, was just voiced to her husband and her mother,” Saathoff testified.

“Just voiced. Is that what you just said? Just voiced. Is that like talking about the Red Sox? She's talking about homicidal ideation of her children,” Reddington shot back, prompting an objection.

While Saathoff testified that he treated thousands of people with psychosis over the course of his career, he acknowledged he only treated two women with postpartum psychosis. He also testified that memories fade over time, and that he interviewed Clancy three years after the killings.

Reddington also sought to highlight that Clancy was turned away two times from a suicide hotline, which redirected her to her medical provider without recommending hospitalization.

“What kind of a devastating effect would that have on a person who's ready to kill themselves that's called the Aspire Hotline twice and has been turned away?” Reddington asked.

“It could have a very serious effect,” Saathoff testified.

Lindsay Clancy had the "capacity to appreciate right from wrong" when she strangled her three children, according to the testimony of Gregory Saathoff, the longtime forensic psychiatrist testifying as a prosecution expert.

"My opinion is that she did have the capacity to appreciate right from wrong," Saathoff testified. "It is my opinion, within a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that Ms. Clancy was criminally responsible."

Saathoff noted that, in his opinion, the killings required "significant" planning and that her actions earlier that day suggested she was able "to conform right to the type of behavior that a concerned mother would engage in."

While Clancy says she heard a voice in her head commanding her to kill her children, Saathoff testified that the voice did not tell Clancy the specifics about how to kill the children and what to use, suggesting she "had control of the sequence of what she was doing throughout," based on the 11 hours he spent interviewing her.

Saathoff also testified that, in his opinion, even if Clancy was experiencing postpartum psychosis, she could have differentiated between right and wrong or pushed back on the voice she reported.

"Command hallucinations, when they occur, do not propel an individual to automatically obey them. And in fact, many people will engage in behaviors to stop them," he told the court.