Lindsay Clancy’s lawyer addresses ‘horrific’ conspiracy theories about ex Patrick Clancy
Lindsay Clancy’s defence lawyer has condemned online conspiracy theories and speculation targeting her former husband, Patrick Clancy, stressing 'he's entitled to move on with his life'.
Kevin Reddington has hit out at online commenters who alleged that Patrick was involved in the deaths of his three children, calling the claims ‘horrific’.
The lawyer spoke out after Lindsay's triple murder trial ended in a mistrial last week, with the jury unable to reach a unanimous verdict.
“Stop with the speculation and horrific conspiracy allegations that he was involved with some massive conspiracy to kill his children,” Reddington said in an interview with CBS News.
Advert
“It’s horrific what this man has been going through, and he’s entitled to move on with his life.”
The comments came as Patrick’s own lawyer has threatened to take legal action against people spreading allegations accusing him of being involved in the January 2023 deaths of Cora, five, Dawson, three, and eight-month-old Callan.
Patrick was the first witness called during the trial, and jurors heard a recording of the 911 call he made to authorities after the horrifying discovery.
One of the jurors who deliberated in Clancy’s trial has spoken out about having to hear the audio in court.
“I will never be the same after that 911 call,” the juror said, describing the recording as a 'visceral, blood-curdling scream'.
The audio was not released to the press or the public.
Patrick himself also described the horror of finding his children in the basement after returning home on the day of the killings, after discovering Lindsay in the snow outside, as well as testifying about his former wife's deteriorating mental health.
'There will be consequences'
In a statement released on Tuesday, Patrick’s lawyer, Howard Cooper, accused ‘minor celebrities, so-called influencers and outright conspiracy theorists’ of promoting the damaging claims about his client.
“Enough is enough, this spread of blatant and baseless falsehoods must stop,” Cooper said.
He said Patrick and his family had been subjected to an ‘escalating and destructive defamation campaign’ which had resulted in threats to Patrick’s ‘reputation, livelihood, and life’.
Cooper stressed that ‘there will be consequences’ and said ‘every appropriate measure will be pursued to hold them accountable, including legally’. Law enforcement, he said, had been notified.
'Through hell and back'
Reddington, meanwhile, emphasised Patrick’s conduct during Lindsay’s mental health difficulties, pointing to his support for her before the killings and throughout the subsequent legal proceedings.
“The guy’s been through hell and back,” Reddington added.
As for any future trial, Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz has not decided whether Lindsay will face a second trial, and a status hearing is scheduled for 29 September.
Clancy remains in state custody at Tewksbury Hospital, where she has been held since February 2023.
Reddington told CBS Boston that she was 'sad', 'scared' and 'upset' following the mistrial.
What else have jurors said about the Lindsay Clancy trial so far?
In the US, once a trial is over, jurors are allowed to speak out about the case they were assigned to and what happened in their deliberations. So far, five jurors have opted to go public about what went on during the high-profile trial.
All but one agreed on a not guilty by insanity verdict
The foreperson, Roni Carlson, confirmed that they had all agreed to return a not guilty verdict, having not been swayed by the prosecution's case; however, one holdout juror refused to find Clancy not guilty by insanity, resulting in a mistrial being declared.
Deliberations filled with 'lots of crying'
Carlson, a retired fifth-grade teacher, admitted it was 'heartbreaking' to be unable to reach a unanimous verdict in the case, adding that the deliberations were filled with 'lots of crying' and 'lots of tears and then hugging'.
"I was so sad, so sad that we couldn't come up with a verdict for Lindsay. It was so heartbreaking," she said.
Holdout juror 'admitted he had reasonable doubt'
According to Carlson, the entire 12-person jury had agreed on a not guilty by insanity verdict, apart from one, who she said was male.
She told NBC he 'admitted he had reasonable doubt and I started filling out the forms, I was so excited'.
However, when she was partway through filling out the three verdict sheets, she claims he told the group: "But I'm still not going to say that she's not guilty by reason of insanity."
The holdout juror was a point of contention in the emotionally charged trial after Clancy's defence team attempted to lodge a last-minute appeal alleging the juror was 'biased' and not following the court's instructions on reasonable doubt. The appeal was unsuccessful.
Deliberations led to fights and shouting
The group deliberated for a total of nearly 40 hours, which resulted in a lot of yelling which could be heard through the walls, according to the three jurors interviewed by NBC.
"We weren't trying to figure out if she murdered the children. She did and she's admitted that," Carlson explained. "We're trying to figure out - did she know right from wrong at that time."
Holdout juror supposedly questioned toxicology reports
Another juror, who works for a government defence contractor, said the lone juror was questioning the meds Clancy was prescribed leading up to the deaths of her three children: "We had the toxicology reports. We could see exactly the amounts."
The juror added that nurses on the panel were discussing this but the holdout juror 'just completely disregarded the information that they gave'.
The lone juror in question has not spoken out.
"Everything proved that she loved her children"
The foreperson told NBC that they weren't convinced by the prosecution's case, saying that Clancy 'had to have snapped and not known what she was doing'.
Prosecutors were 'very, very harsh'
The third juror to go public, a chef at a senior centre, said she found the prosecutors to be 'very, very harsh'.
"They had no character witness in regard to Lindsay of being a bad mother," they added.
Holdout juror accused of being 'very arrogant'
Paula Devlin claimed the juror 'was very arrogant'. "He really did not take anything that anybody said," she added, with another juror, Kellie Farina, alleging that he 'would not interact with us'.
Anonymous juror says there was 'too much doubt' to reach a guilty verdict
A fourth juror, who opted to remain anonymous, spoke to WBZ-TV's Kristina Rex and said: "At the end of the day, there was so much doubt. The prosecution didn't have a figurative smoking gun.
"There was not a single moment throughout the presentation of that case where you could say 'Yup, 100% I'm certain she did it' or that she didn't do it. There was too much gray area."
There was 'no evidence' for why holdout juror was thinking the way he was
Nick Dargie, one of the three men on the jury, told ABC News' Aaron Katersky that the lone juror didn't provide anything to back up why he disagreed with the group.
"There was several times I would ask him to show us evidence or, you know, describe a witness testimony that helped to prove what he was saying, and ... he couldn't," he said. "There wasn't a single piece of evidence or witness testimony that he used to prove why he was thinking the way he was, which is why we ultimately sent in that note.
"Otherwise, like there's nothing wrong with somebody having a completely opposite opinion ... that would be a hung jury. That, like that, is our justice system."
The note is referring to what the jury sent the judge, leading to the mistrial.
Topics: Crime, True Crime, US News, Social Media
Jen Thomas