Latest / Two Ts In A Pod with Teddi Mellencamp and Tamra Judge / Legally Brunette: The Lindsay Clancy Case

Transcript

Legally Brunette: The Lindsay Clancy Case · Two Ts In A Pod with Teddi Mellencamp and Tamra Judge

0:01
Speaker 1: Hi, guys, Welcome to Legally Brunette. I'll be your host today,
0:04
Speaker 1: Emily Simpson with Shane. Okay, we are back from the Bahamas.
0:08
Speaker 1: So the last time that we had released some episodes,
0:11
Speaker 1: we were in the Bahamas. We are home now, and
0:14
Speaker 1: I will tell you I am excited to get into
0:16
Speaker 1: this case today because in the history of Legally Brunette,
0:19
Speaker 1: which has been about a year and a half, I
0:22
Speaker 1: have never gotten so many DMS about a case then
0:28
Speaker 1: I did about this one. So we are going to
0:31
Speaker 1: talk about the Lindsay Clancy case and trial. I have
0:36
Speaker 1: never been blown up by so many dms. I mean,
0:38
Speaker 1: it's just so many. So sometimes I feel like I
0:43
Speaker 1: don't know. Maybe I shouldn't talk about it because everybody
0:45
Speaker 1: else is talking about it.
0:46
Speaker 2: But I don't know.
0:47
Speaker 1: We're going to talk about it. In January twenty twenty three,
0:50
Speaker 1: Lindsay Clancy, who is a labor and delivery nurse from Duxbury, Massachusetts,
0:55
Speaker 1: allegedly strangled her three young children. Cora was five, Dalsam
0:59
Speaker 1: was three, and baby Callan was just eight months. This
1:02
Speaker 1: is before she jumped from a second story window. The
1:06
Speaker 1: jump left her paralyzed from the chest down. Her husband, Patrick,
1:10
Speaker 1: was supposedly out getting food when the incident occurred. Lindsay
1:14
Speaker 1: was charged with three counts of murder. Her defense centered
1:17
Speaker 1: on severe postpartum psychosis and postpartum depression, arguing that she
1:22
Speaker 1: was over medicated with psychotropic drugs prescribed by her medical
1:27
Speaker 1: providers and was not in control of her actions. Her
1:30
Speaker 1: legal team also filed a civil suit against her doctors.
1:34
Speaker 1: Throughout her criminal trial, which is currently ongoing, many people
1:38
Speaker 1: are questioning whether or not Lindsay committed these murders in
1:41
Speaker 1: the first place. She has pleaded not guilty to the
1:44
Speaker 1: murder charges, and her defense is arguing a lack of
1:47
Speaker 1: criminal responsibility due to severe postpartum psychosis. It is very
1:53
Speaker 1: important that we note that Patrick, who is the father
1:57
Speaker 1: of these children and the ex husband father Clancy Yes,
2:01
Speaker 1: has not been charged in connection to any of the
2:03
Speaker 1: murders of his three children. Lindsey conceded to killing the children,
2:08
Speaker 1: and we will clearly state when something is a theory
2:10
Speaker 1: or fact throughout this episode. So there are lots of
2:14
Speaker 1: theories now based upon the trial. People are enthralled by
2:18
Speaker 1: the trial and so they're watching They're watching the testimony,
2:21
Speaker 1: they're watching the cross examinations, they're pulling information from it,
2:26
Speaker 1: they're analysts.
2:27
Speaker 2: Doing their own justice and investigations.
2:29
Speaker 1: Everyone.
2:30
Speaker 2: Okay, we talked about this a little bit the other
2:32
Speaker 2: day because I had not No one's blown up my
2:36
Speaker 2: DMS about Clancy.
2:38
Speaker 1: I don't think people even know you have an Instagram.
2:40
Speaker 1: You're not very active on it.
2:41
Speaker 2: So what that said, I think it was best when
2:44
Speaker 2: I learned the basic order of events because it was
2:47
Speaker 2: a little because there's no trial as to whether murder
2:50
Speaker 2: was committed, right, so we need to go back and
2:54
Speaker 2: talk about what what the homicide was, and then and
3:00
Speaker 2: what was stipulated to and then where we're at today.
3:03
Speaker 1: Right, Yes, well she has stipulated to killing the children.
3:07
Speaker 2: She plied guilty.
3:08
Speaker 1: In other words, yes, but what she's the trial is
3:12
Speaker 1: deciding whether she is guilty of premeditated murder, meaning she
3:16
Speaker 1: had clearer mind, she planned it out, it was meticulous.
3:19
Speaker 1: That's what the prosecution is alleging, or what the defense
3:22
Speaker 1: is alleging, is that she was in such a state
3:25
Speaker 1: of postpartum psychosis that she was not aware of what
3:29
Speaker 1: she was doing. Right, So that is what is being
3:32
Speaker 1: decided to say.
3:33
Speaker 2: Whether she should be held accountable for her actions or not.
3:38
Speaker 2: So we're past the who did it, at least in
3:41
Speaker 2: the in the justice system, at least in this paste. Yeah,
3:44
Speaker 2: we're pasting.
3:45
Speaker 1: All right. Let's go through a timeline so we can
3:47
Speaker 1: establish the facts of that evening, all right, all right,
3:52
Speaker 1: So we started in early evening, five fifteen pm. Patrick
3:55
Speaker 1: Clancy leaves a fan. This is according to Patrick Clancy.
3:57
Speaker 1: This is his timeline.
3:58
Speaker 2: So this makes according to the person that the public
4:01
Speaker 2: finds to be guilty.
4:03
Speaker 1: Well. Patrick Clancy leaves the family's home in Duxbury, Massachusetts
4:08
Speaker 1: to pick up takeout food per Lindsay's request. Lindsay is
4:12
Speaker 1: home alone with her three children, cor five, Dlson three,
4:14
Speaker 1: and baby Callen, who is eight months. During his absence,
4:18
Speaker 1: Lindsay allegedly uses resistant resistance bands to strangle all three
4:23
Speaker 1: children in the home. She also allegedly crushed up her
4:27
Speaker 1: prescription pills and consumed them, then cut superficial wounds on
4:31
Speaker 1: her wrists and throw it before jumping out of their
4:33
Speaker 1: bedroom window, which was two stories up. According to this timeline,
4:37
Speaker 1: Patrick returns home at six h nine pm and finds
4:40
Speaker 1: Lindsay outside on the ground, injured from her fall and
4:43
Speaker 1: bleeding from her wounds. She allegedly tells him this is
4:47
Speaker 1: according to him, of course, that the children are located
4:50
Speaker 1: in the basement, and it takes him a few minutes
4:52
Speaker 1: to call nine to one one because he claims that
4:55
Speaker 1: his phone had trouble connecting to Wi Fi. That's a
5:00
Speaker 1: something that has a lot of debate and discussion online
5:03
Speaker 1: as well.
5:03
Speaker 2: How is he need to be on Wi Fi to
5:04
Speaker 2: make a phone call? I'm guessing so far it just
5:07
Speaker 2: sounds like an explanation as to his delayed phone call.
5:10
Speaker 1: Yeah, police and paramedics arrive and all three children are
5:13
Speaker 1: transported to nearby hospitals. Cora and Dawson are both pronounced dead.
5:19
Speaker 1: Baby Callen is placed on life support and survives initially
5:22
Speaker 1: for several days before dying from his injuries, making it
5:25
Speaker 1: three homicide counts. Lindsay is transported to a hospital. The
5:29
Speaker 1: fall left her with severe spinal injuries, rendering her paralyzed
5:33
Speaker 1: from the chest down. She also had injuries on her
5:36
Speaker 1: throat because allegedly she tried to cut her throat, so
5:39
Speaker 1: there was like, you know, a line, she had injuries
5:41
Speaker 1: on her throat. That's another issue we'll get into later,
5:45
Speaker 1: was how well she could communicate because of her injuries.
5:49
Speaker 2: I'm guessing we're not going to solve the crime today.
5:51
Speaker 1: I don't think we're going to solve it, but we're
5:53
Speaker 1: we're going to get into We're going to get into it.
5:55
Speaker 1: Then January twenty fifth and forward, Duxbury police and prosecutors
5:59
Speaker 1: begin building the case and Lindsay is charged with three
6:02
Speaker 1: counts of murder plus two counts of attempted murder. Let's
6:06
Speaker 1: talk about the trial, so we'll get into the trial.
6:09
Speaker 2: So far, in this timeline of events, it's just she
6:14
Speaker 2: nine one one is reported or it's reported to nine
6:18
Speaker 2: one one that she's fallen out of a building and
6:20
Speaker 2: there's three kids potentially dead at this point, right.
6:23
Speaker 1: No, he doesn't know that the children are dead when
6:25
Speaker 1: when he calls the nine to one one.
6:26
Speaker 2: Initially, okay, so so far he's only called nine one
6:29
Speaker 2: one because she supposedly fell out of the window or
6:32
Speaker 2: jumped out of the window. But this is yeah, this
6:36
Speaker 2: is just all him then, Yes, I mean when someone
6:40
Speaker 2: comes falls out of a window other than the fact
6:44
Speaker 2: that the window itself, but the falling, like it doesn't
6:47
Speaker 2: matter whether you pushed them or whether they jumped, right,
6:49
Speaker 2: it's gonna look the same. So they I don't know,
6:52
Speaker 2: so they have to just go out. They're just going
6:54
Speaker 2: to go off of his word that she I mean,
6:55
Speaker 2: if I fell out of the window. Think about this,
7:00
Speaker 2: A spouse has fallen out the window. Someone comes home
7:02
Speaker 2: from CBS or wherever he went and he finds her
7:04
Speaker 2: falling out the one and he calls the place and
7:05
Speaker 2: he says, she jumped out the window. They're just going
7:07
Speaker 2: to believe that, well she Well.
7:09
Speaker 1: That's the point is that she was experiencing a lot
7:12
Speaker 1: of postpartum issues, and she had been on a lot
7:15
Speaker 1: of drugs and medications, and she had been journaling, and
7:18
Speaker 1: she had had suicidal ideations and so, and he was
7:22
Speaker 1: aware of this, and he knew that she was struggling.
7:24
Speaker 1: So it's not far fetched to think that he comes
7:27
Speaker 1: home and he finds her outside and the windows open,
7:29
Speaker 1: and he thinks she tried to kill herself.
7:31
Speaker 2: And sorry to interrupt your you know, telling you the facts,
7:35
Speaker 2: but it just seems like like if if she had
7:38
Speaker 2: a gunshot wound and he goes, oh, yeah, she shot herself,
7:41
Speaker 2: they he'd be a person of interest. They'd be like,
7:42
Speaker 2: did she so then why is jumping out the window
7:45
Speaker 2: not different. That's all. Well, I think that's all I
7:48
Speaker 2: would say, Okay, that's yours. It was just a thought.
7:50
Speaker 1: Yeah.
7:51
Speaker 2: Well, also the jumping out the window.
7:53
Speaker 1: As far as suicide, she's a nurse, so it makes
7:56
Speaker 1: me feel as if if she legitimately, this is just
7:58
Speaker 1: my story.
7:59
Speaker 2: Window is not very high.
8:00
Speaker 1: It's not that's why she didn't die, but she severely
8:03
Speaker 1: injured herself.
8:04
Speaker 2: Well, you could still die.
8:05
Speaker 1: But I'm just saying, I guess my point is knowing
8:07
Speaker 1: that she's a labor and delivery nurse, so she's well
8:09
Speaker 1: aware with medical things. I'm just saying, this is just
8:14
Speaker 1: my theory. This is just me alone. My opinion would be,
8:17
Speaker 1: if you legitimately wanted to commit suicide, why would you
8:23
Speaker 1: not do it in some other way?
8:26
Speaker 2: Get drugs and or she.
8:28
Speaker 1: Has access to lots of and she's prescribed lots why
8:33
Speaker 1: would you.
8:33
Speaker 2: Jim accessories and then jump out a window? Well that
8:36
Speaker 2: two story windows?
8:36
Speaker 1: Well the bands were used on the children.
8:39
Speaker 2: Yeah yeah, yeah, to commit homicide, that's gim accessories, right.
8:42
Speaker 1: Remember that Lindsay Clancy has pleaded not guilty, but her
8:45
Speaker 1: defense is the lack of criminal responsibility due to insanity.
8:49
Speaker 1: So that's what we have to remember, and it's an
8:51
Speaker 1: affirmative defense. And an affirmative defense is a legal response
8:54
Speaker 1: where a defendant admits to the basic acts alleged by
8:57
Speaker 1: the plane of her prosecutor, but introduces a new facts
9:00
Speaker 1: or arguments to show that they should not be held
9:02
Speaker 1: legally responsible.
9:03
Speaker 2: An example that could be, yes, I did kill him,
9:06
Speaker 2: but here's evidence to show it with self defense, right,
9:08
Speaker 2: so you're not denying the act of killing, but you
9:11
Speaker 2: had a reason to do it.
9:20
Speaker 1: What is the prosecution's job in this trial? So the
9:23
Speaker 1: prosecution needs to prove that Lindsay Clancy, beyond a reasonable doubt,
9:27
Speaker 1: murdered her three children. If they can't prove this, the
9:30
Speaker 1: defense will not need to argue the affirmative defense of
9:33
Speaker 1: insanity in the first place. If the prosecution fails to
9:35
Speaker 1: prove Lindsay committed the murders, she can be acquitted altogether.
9:40
Speaker 1: So the prosecution, the burden is on them to prove
9:43
Speaker 1: that she premeditated and with forethought and planning killed.
9:50
Speaker 2: Well, that's what they're going for because they want to
9:51
Speaker 2: go for first degree, all right, And day.
9:54
Speaker 1: One of the trial, we're going to talk about the
9:55
Speaker 1: opening statements prosecutors frame the case around deliberate planning, pointing
10:00
Speaker 1: to data from Lindsay's Apple watch that showed she was
10:03
Speaker 1: performing routine tasks around the home that day, location searches
10:07
Speaker 1: on Apple maps time to estimate Patrick's errands, and text
10:11
Speaker 1: messages sent that day that suggested clear rational thinking. The
10:15
Speaker 1: defense paints a different picture, a woman consumed by postpartum psychosis,
10:20
Speaker 1: prescribed thirteen psychiatric medications over three months, who reached out
10:25
Speaker 1: repeatedly for help from a healthcare system that failed her.
10:29
Speaker 1: All right, those are your opening statements, and those are
10:31
Speaker 1: the different positions on each side. Right. Then you get
10:35
Speaker 1: to day two, and this is when Patrick Clancy testifies,
10:37
Speaker 1: and I think everyone was just enthralled by this case
10:41
Speaker 1: in the first First of all, let's talk about the
10:43
Speaker 1: fact that this case is the same is the same
10:47
Speaker 1: jurisdiction that was Karen Reid. So you're talking about the
10:50
Speaker 1: same police department, you're talking about the same area, you're
10:52
Speaker 1: talking about, same jurisdiction, you're talking about the same courthouse.
10:55
Speaker 2: Karen Reid was the she ran over her The story
11:01
Speaker 2: the one of the possibilities she ran, She backed up
11:04
Speaker 2: and ran over her boyfriend. Police officer John O'Keeffe, and
11:07
Speaker 2: then that's how he died. And the other option, or
11:09
Speaker 2: the other story is, did he go inside the house
11:12
Speaker 2: where the party was and something happened. All the policemen
11:15
Speaker 2: killed him and then threw him out in the snow
11:17
Speaker 2: and then drop some tail light fragments everywhere.
11:19
Speaker 1: Right, I mean, that's a very brief snopses of it.
11:22
Speaker 2: But and then the dog went missing or was the
11:24
Speaker 2: dog sold in the black market or something?
11:26
Speaker 1: Yeah, the dog was rehome, rehome. The house was never searched.
11:30
Speaker 2: They wiped the memory of the dog.
11:32
Speaker 1: Yes, there was no you know, ring footage on anyone's you.
11:36
Speaker 2: Know everything short of the house burning down.
11:39
Speaker 1: Yeah.
11:41
Speaker 2: But this trial the same shady police department.
11:44
Speaker 1: It's the same. Yes, But this trial reminds me very
11:46
Speaker 1: much of Karen Read. I feel like it has the
11:48
Speaker 1: same sentiment and the same overall tone because when you
11:52
Speaker 1: think about it, people were enthralled by the Karen Reid
11:55
Speaker 1: case because at the end of the day, you can't
11:57
Speaker 1: really ever decipher what happened. And I don't think Karen Read,
12:01
Speaker 1: even though I think the jury was correct, I would
12:03
Speaker 1: have acquitted her too. There was not enough evidence that
12:06
Speaker 1: she was the one that backed over him.
12:08
Speaker 2: You thought she was in the very beginning. You were
12:11
Speaker 2: very hard on her.
12:12
Speaker 1: No, it wasn't that was you. Yeah, that was you.
12:16
Speaker 2: I remember someone.
12:17
Speaker 1: Because when you when you lay out the brief facts
12:19
Speaker 1: of that they went drinking, they went to a bar,
12:21
Speaker 1: she was under the influence of alcohol. She dropped him
12:24
Speaker 1: off at this house, and then they find him in
12:27
Speaker 1: the yard with injuries. It looks like she ran over
12:30
Speaker 1: him and was unaware because she was drunk. But then
12:33
Speaker 1: when you start to dig into the behavior of the
12:36
Speaker 1: cop set, evening the fact that you know, there's a
12:38
Speaker 1: lot of evidence that it just became more interesting and
12:41
Speaker 1: more interesting, and more.
12:43
Speaker 2: Facts that came out, and more evidence led to more questions.
12:46
Speaker 2: It's all led more evidence and more questions.
12:48
Speaker 1: And I feel like this trial is the same way.
12:51
Speaker 1: I mean, now you've got Patrick Clancy, the father, testifying
12:55
Speaker 1: on day one, and everyone is just you know, glued
12:59
Speaker 1: to the TV listening to his testimony, picking apart everything
13:03
Speaker 1: he says, picking apart his timeline.
13:05
Speaker 2: Yeah, and you know, coming up with.
13:08
Speaker 1: Alternative theories and judging everything, and it just every time
13:14
Speaker 1: this case has talked about to me, it's not it's
13:17
Speaker 1: not deciding anything or I'm coming to a conclusion. It
13:21
Speaker 1: just leads to more questions, which reminds me of the
13:23
Speaker 1: Karen Reid case, where it was just like every piece
13:25
Speaker 1: of evidence and every time someone testified, it just opened
13:29
Speaker 1: up more questions because.
13:31
Speaker 2: It was kind of the case or Karen read It
13:32
Speaker 2: was kind of like, what evidence is it that she
13:35
Speaker 2: hit him? Well, there's tail lights there where or tail
13:37
Speaker 2: a fragments. They were like, oh great, yeah, but they
13:40
Speaker 2: weren't found the day of they were there. They masually
13:42
Speaker 2: appeared like the next.
13:43
Speaker 1: Day, right, and they were like forty It was like
13:45
Speaker 1: special the.
13:46
Speaker 2: Hammer something like, Well, now I have more questions. I
13:48
Speaker 2: was like, well, what are the police officers inside? Say, well,
13:51
Speaker 2: they deleted the ring footage and they got rid of
13:53
Speaker 2: the dog. And it's like, well, there's more questions.
13:55
Speaker 1: Well, and they never investigated inside.
13:57
Speaker 2: That's right, ever, that's right, all right.
14:00
Speaker 1: So Patrick Clancy testifies on day two. Patrick told the
14:03
Speaker 1: court he was gone for roughly fifty five minutes. When
14:06
Speaker 1: he came home, the house was quiet. He forced open
14:09
Speaker 1: a locked bedroom door. This is their bedroom upstairs, found blood,
14:13
Speaker 1: then discovered Lindsay outside the house. His nine one one
14:16
Speaker 1: call was played in court and it captured the moment
14:19
Speaker 1: he found Lindsey and then his children unconscious in the basement.
14:24
Speaker 1: Day three, the first responders take the stand, so the
14:27
Speaker 1: Duxbury Police and paramedics walked the jury through their arrival
14:30
Speaker 1: at the scene. Prosecutors introduced physical evidence recovered from the basement,
14:35
Speaker 1: including the resistance bands used to strangle the children and
14:39
Speaker 1: kitchen knives found in the master bedroom. Day four, the
14:43
Speaker 1: jury visits the home. I don't know if you knew that,
14:44
Speaker 1: but they all got in a bus and they took
14:46
Speaker 1: a field trip to the home scene, to the crime scene. Yeah.
14:51
Speaker 1: Jurors traveled to the Clancy family's former residence where a
14:54
Speaker 1: court sanctioned walk through where they were directed to examine
14:58
Speaker 1: the homes layout, the window, the window that Lindsay had
15:01
Speaker 1: jumped from, and the general spatial context of where events unfolded.
15:05
Speaker 1: You know, I get that that makes sense because they
15:07
Speaker 1: also will show you know, they'll show something up on
15:10
Speaker 1: the screen for the jury that'll show the layout of
15:12
Speaker 1: the house and like where the basic cause test.
15:14
Speaker 2: Does it make sense that she would go this way
15:16
Speaker 2: and walk up this way and the time it takes
15:18
Speaker 2: and can you carry I don't know the kids or
15:20
Speaker 2: whatever the case was. That's different than just push like
15:23
Speaker 2: they don't need to go to Angels Landing in Zion, Utah. Right,
15:27
Speaker 2: so here's a cleft. She fell down.
15:29
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean I would want to if I was
15:31
Speaker 1: on the jury, I would want to go.
15:32
Speaker 2: But I'll take you there for your birthday.
15:34
Speaker 1: I'm sure you would love to thank you.
15:36
Speaker 2: Yes, stay.
15:38
Speaker 1: Police crime scene analysts testified about blood splatter, fingerprints, and
15:43
Speaker 1: data recovered from Lindsay's iPhone and Apple Watch. Among the
15:46
Speaker 1: findings where Internet searches timing travel to nearby restaurants and pharmacies,
15:52
Speaker 1: which prosecutors argued were used to calculate how long Patrick
15:56
Speaker 1: would be away. All right, Day six was to somebody
16:00
Speaker 1: about DNA, and the family nanny testified, so the defense
16:04
Speaker 1: stipulated to DNA findings from the resistance bands and scene swabs,
16:08
Speaker 1: avoiding a lengthy forensic presentation. The family's nanny, Elaine Rossi,
16:13
Speaker 1: then spoke warmly about Lindsay as a mother. She was
16:16
Speaker 1: a wonderful mom. I observed a wonderful mom who loved
16:19
Speaker 1: her kids. You know, I watched the nanny testify, and
16:22
Speaker 1: then sometimes it's like what's the point of the nanny
16:24
Speaker 1: testifying testified for the.
16:26
Speaker 2: Defense, character defense or a witness.
16:28
Speaker 1: Well, for me, I think that the whole point of
16:32
Speaker 1: her testifying was that when you're talking about what a
16:36
Speaker 1: loving mother she was and how involved she was in
16:38
Speaker 1: her kids' lives and how much she loved them, that
16:41
Speaker 1: helps the defense because then you're establishing that it was
16:45
Speaker 1: an episode of psychosis.
16:47
Speaker 2: Oh, not so much that she didn't do it because
16:49
Speaker 2: they were not on the We're not trying that issue, right,
16:52
Speaker 2: We're just trying what her mental state was.
16:54
Speaker 1: Right. So, if you are establishing that she loved her
16:58
Speaker 1: children and that she loved to being a mother and
17:01
Speaker 1: that she was, you know, doing everything possible to take
17:04
Speaker 1: care of her children, then for her to be in
17:09
Speaker 1: a mind state where she will murder all three children,
17:12
Speaker 1: that's not normal for her, and therefore she must have
17:16
Speaker 1: been in some altered state to do something like that
17:20
Speaker 1: to her children. Yeah, it's not that someone's testifying that she,
17:24
Speaker 1: you know, was so overwhelmed by her kids she wish
17:26
Speaker 1: that they never existed, and that you know, she was
17:29
Speaker 1: going out at night.
17:30
Speaker 2: And we're arguing intent or not, right, Well, we're arguing her.
17:34
Speaker 1: State of mind. So I think that the defense was
17:36
Speaker 1: using that nanny to testify was very smart to establish
17:40
Speaker 1: how how much she was a good mother.
17:44
Speaker 2: And to go back on the intent. I can defend
17:46
Speaker 2: myself a little bit or arguing intent, because if she
17:49
Speaker 2: did have this psychosis event or whatever, then she wouldn't
17:52
Speaker 2: have the ability to form intent. Would it would just
17:54
Speaker 2: come upon her immediately and then she would just act.
17:57
Speaker 1: Right, all right. Day seven was Lindsay's medication history, so
18:01
Speaker 1: forensic toxicologist doctor Justin Bauer testified on the drug levels
18:05
Speaker 1: in Lindsay's blood at the time of the incident. The
18:08
Speaker 1: defense emphasized the sheer volume of her prescriptions, there were
18:11
Speaker 1: thirteen different psychiatric medications in three months, and their cumulative
18:15
Speaker 1: effect on her mental state. Day eight of the trial
18:18
Speaker 1: was the autopsy reports. As officials detailed the cause of
18:21
Speaker 1: each child's death, Lindsay broke down and wept openly in court.
18:25
Speaker 1: Excerpts from her diary were also read aloud. In what
18:28
Speaker 1: she wrote desperately about needing a mental break, you know,
18:31
Speaker 1: when she was crying. I did read an article about
18:34
Speaker 1: how when she was crying in court, she was weeping
18:37
Speaker 1: like she was making a lot of noise when they
18:39
Speaker 1: were talking about the when they were showing the autopsy
18:42
Speaker 1: and talking about the detailed autopsy of the children's death.
18:46
Speaker 1: You know, the prosecution got really upset by that and
18:48
Speaker 1: basically said something like you need to shut her up
18:50
Speaker 1: or something. And I think there was like a tiff
18:52
Speaker 1: between the defense attorney and the prosecution. And obviously the
18:55
Speaker 1: prosecutor doesn't want sympathy, right, They don't want the jury
18:59
Speaker 1: to see her in that state or weeping because they
19:03
Speaker 1: don't want to feel a level of sympathy for this one.
19:05
Speaker 2: No expressions of love in this courtroom.
19:07
Speaker 1: Right day nine, mental health experts testify. Doctor Eliah Goodheart
19:12
Speaker 1: testified that she had assessed Lindsay as low risk for
19:16
Speaker 1: self harm or violence before discharging her following a voluntary
19:20
Speaker 1: five day impatient stay. I also think she I believe
19:24
Speaker 1: I read that she also came out early, like she
19:26
Speaker 1: only stayed four days. It was supposed to be five days.
19:28
Speaker 1: But I think she did leave that early, like, I
19:30
Speaker 1: think she convince them that she was feeling better and
19:33
Speaker 1: was okay to leave. Under cross examination, Lindsay's attorney asked
19:37
Speaker 1: how many patients she had treated for postpartum psychosis, and
19:41
Speaker 1: doctor Goodheart's answer was none. A lot of people watching
19:47
Speaker 1: this trial love Lindsay Clancy's attorney. I mean he's doing
19:52
Speaker 1: it pro bono. I believe he probably reached out to her.
19:55
Speaker 1: I don't know in some way we you're not really
19:58
Speaker 1: allowed to do that, but had to have been some
20:01
Speaker 1: type of.
20:02
Speaker 2: Is a pro bono ambulance chaser?
20:04
Speaker 1: Yeah, Well he's many, many years of experience being a
20:08
Speaker 1: trial attorney.
20:09
Speaker 2: Well maybe a pro bono might be different rules in
20:12
Speaker 2: defense criminals.
20:14
Speaker 1: But the internet loves him, and so I love Alan Jackson.
20:18
Speaker 1: But I don't know. If I get in some kind
20:20
Speaker 1: of trouble, I might.
20:20
Speaker 2: Well, if you're in Boston and you come across the
20:23
Speaker 2: police department and evidence miraculously disappears or or or uppeers
20:30
Speaker 2: or appears, and tailite fragments appear, call what's his name?
20:35
Speaker 1: Reddington?
20:35
Speaker 2: Writington? Yeah, better call Redington.
20:39
Speaker 1: Day ten is Lindsay's own words after the incident. So
20:42
Speaker 1: a forensic psychiatrist from Brigham and Women's Hospital describing evaluating
20:46
Speaker 1: Lindsay two days after the killings while she was intubated,
20:49
Speaker 1: intubated and newly paralyzed, unable to speak. Lindsay was asked
20:53
Speaker 1: in writing how she was feeling. She wrote one word horrified.
20:57
Speaker 1: So while she was in the hospital, she was communicating
21:00
Speaker 1: by writing things down. This is another thing we'll talk
21:02
Speaker 1: about a little bit later, because obviously, her husband, Patrick Clancy,
21:06
Speaker 1: claims that when he found her, he asked her where
21:08
Speaker 1: the children were. She said in the basement. However, testimony
21:14
Speaker 1: that came later was establishing that she was unable to
21:17
Speaker 1: speak because her throat had been cut. So this is
21:22
Speaker 1: why all these theories are coming out, because it's like,
21:25
Speaker 1: was she able to tell him that the children were
21:27
Speaker 1: in the basement or did he just know the children
21:29
Speaker 1: were in the basement.
21:30
Speaker 2: I don't know, but I can't. I can't hear in
21:32
Speaker 2: the basement without thinking of Pete Herman's bike in the basement. Wow,
21:38
Speaker 2: you know that was big adventure.
21:40
Speaker 1: Well, I think I saw it once. Clearly you've seen
21:43
Speaker 1: it many times.
21:44
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, I've probably seen it once this week. Well,
21:46
Speaker 2: is in the basement, that's where it? Well, the fake
21:51
Speaker 2: fortune teller tells him that his bike that he's in
21:54
Speaker 2: search of is at the Alamo in the basement. Okay,
22:00
Speaker 2: the Alma has no basement, right, that's well, it's Okay,
22:03
Speaker 2: I know what we're watching this weekend.
22:04
Speaker 1: Okay great. Doctor Jennifer Tuffs was one of Lindsay's psychiatrists
22:08
Speaker 1: who also testified. Doctor Tuffs denied her notes, which clearly
22:12
Speaker 1: stated that Lindsay had pressured speech. She said she didn't
22:17
Speaker 1: care what her note said and denies Lindsay ever having
22:20
Speaker 1: pressured speech. Well, the importance of pressured speech is a rapid, urgent,
22:25
Speaker 1: and continuous speaking pattern where a person feels an intense,
22:29
Speaker 1: uncontrollable drive to talk. It can be tied to mania
22:33
Speaker 1: and bipolar disorder, or appear in acute episodes of schizophrenia
22:37
Speaker 1: or psychosis. Is called it's called pressured speech. So she
22:41
Speaker 1: had written in her notes that Lindsay was suffering from
22:43
Speaker 1: pressured speech. I have pressured speech. I know, I know,
22:48
Speaker 1: I know where you're going. I got it, I got
22:50
Speaker 1: it very I can't help but say something I know.
22:54
Speaker 1: But apparently it's also.
22:58
Speaker 2: Well, now I know exactly the qualification for a housewife pressured,
23:02
Speaker 2: one that suffers from pressured speech. They just can't keep
23:05
Speaker 2: their mouth shut.
23:06
Speaker 1: Yeah, but it's more than just that. It's rapid, urgent
23:10
Speaker 1: and continuous and a person feels an intense uncontrollable drive
23:15
Speaker 1: to talk.
23:15
Speaker 2: I mean, yes, that's what we're talking about, all right.
23:18
Speaker 1: Anyway, the point is is that she claims that she
23:22
Speaker 1: didn't state that Lindsay had pressured speech, even though in
23:25
Speaker 1: her notes she wrote that. But then on on the
23:28
Speaker 1: stand she was testifying that that's not what she meant.
23:30
Speaker 1: She meant that she didn't. So there was like a
23:33
Speaker 1: little exchange between her and the defense attorney and she said,
23:37
Speaker 1: you know, I don't care what I wrote. I'm telling
23:39
Speaker 1: you that I didn't believe that she was suffering from that.
23:42
Speaker 1: But there's also civil lawsuits out there against these doctors.
23:45
Speaker 2: Really unrelated cases. No too regards case. Yeah, okay, yeah,
23:52
Speaker 2: all right.
23:52
Speaker 1: Day eleven there were some more final witnesses. Digital forensic
23:55
Speaker 1: investigators returned to detailed timestamped activity on Lindsay's with prosecutors
24:01
Speaker 1: arguing the data showed that she acted during a period
24:04
Speaker 1: of clear situational awareness. Maternal mental health specialists called by
24:09
Speaker 1: the defense countered that postpartum psychosis doesn't erase the ability
24:13
Speaker 1: to perform routine tasks. A person in a psychotic break
24:17
Speaker 1: can still function mechanically while being wholly disconnected from moral
24:22
Speaker 1: judgment or reality, because obviously the prosecution is saying, well,
24:25
Speaker 1: she sent him out on purpose, right, So she's not
24:29
Speaker 1: in a state of psychosis if she's planning these things,
24:31
Speaker 1: if she sent him out right exactly. But let's say
24:36
Speaker 1: she for purposes of this conversation. Let's say that she did.
24:39
Speaker 1: So the prosecution.
24:41
Speaker 2: Where did he go again?
24:43
Speaker 1: He went to CBS and then he went to pick
24:45
Speaker 1: up takeout. So I'm saying the prosecution is arguing that
24:49
Speaker 1: she's not in a state of psychosis because she's meticulously
24:52
Speaker 1: planning that she's asking him to go pick up these things,
24:55
Speaker 1: she's ordering takeout for him to pick up, because she's
24:58
Speaker 1: not in a state of psychosis. That she's thinking clearly
25:01
Speaker 1: and she wants him out of the house. So that's
25:03
Speaker 1: their argument. The defense is rebutting that by saying, you
25:06
Speaker 1: can still be in a state of psychosis and still
25:11
Speaker 1: still do routine things, all right. So let's get into
25:15
Speaker 1: some of the questions that the public is out there asking.
25:19
Speaker 1: So we already talked about a little bit that we're
25:21
Speaker 1: dealing with the same police department from the Karen Reid case.
25:24
Speaker 1: So both Lindsay Clancy and Karen Reid's investigations utilize the
25:27
Speaker 1: Massachusetts State Police as the state level investigative agency. However,
25:32
Speaker 1: Karen Read's case involved the local Canton Police Department, while
25:36
Speaker 1: Lindsay Clancy's case involved the local Duxbury Police Department and
25:39
Speaker 1: local first responders. All right, so let's get to some
25:43
Speaker 1: of the evidence that is really not adding up that
25:45
Speaker 1: everybody is talking about in analyte All right, So, Lindsay's
25:51
Speaker 1: body temperature on arrival was eighty two point one degrees.
25:54
Speaker 1: Some would argue that this suggests she was outside far
25:57
Speaker 1: longer than Patrick's timeline implies. Okay, let's remember talk about
26:00
Speaker 1: Patrick's timeline. According to his timeline, Lindsey would have had
26:05
Speaker 1: to have crushed up her pills, ingested them, strangled her
26:08
Speaker 1: three children, slit her own throat and wrists, and jump
26:11
Speaker 1: out of the window in less than fifty four minutes.
26:14
Speaker 2: Totally possible, right.
26:16
Speaker 1: However, that means that her body would have been outside
26:19
Speaker 1: in the snow for only like forty minutes or something.
26:23
Speaker 1: So according to that timeline, is that period of time
26:26
Speaker 1: enough time for her body temperature to drop to eighty.
26:29
Speaker 2: Two I don't know, because how cold was it outside?
26:32
Speaker 2: That would be why I first thought.
26:33
Speaker 1: I don't know. But here's another thought that I had,
26:35
Speaker 1: because John O'Keefe was outside in this yard for I
26:38
Speaker 1: don't know many many hours. He was found at five
26:41
Speaker 1: o'clock in the morning, and his body temperature was eighty
26:44
Speaker 1: two degrees when it was found.
26:46
Speaker 2: So yeah, but that doesn't mean a whole lot to me,
26:48
Speaker 2: because so let's because I don't know how body temperatures work.
26:52
Speaker 2: If if you know, if if her body or his
26:58
Speaker 2: body in the other case, is in the cold snow,
27:02
Speaker 2: and let's say it's snowy, So let's say it's thirty
27:05
Speaker 2: degrees right below freezing, how long does it take for
27:08
Speaker 2: a body to go to eighty two degrees? And then
27:11
Speaker 2: my question is how long would it stay at eighty
27:13
Speaker 2: two degrees? Because what if it can get to eighty
27:16
Speaker 2: two degrees really quickly after you know, well, she wasn't
27:19
Speaker 2: dead actually really quickly at eighty two degrees, and then
27:22
Speaker 2: it stays there for hours. The body's able to maintain
27:25
Speaker 2: some heat until you die, and then it might drop
27:27
Speaker 2: even further. So I don't know how a body works.
27:30
Speaker 1: So your question is, is eighty two degrees just the
27:32
Speaker 1: degree that a body drops to in the snow and
27:34
Speaker 1: then does it stay there and remain at eighty two degrees?
27:36
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm not saying that's that's what happens. I'm saying,
27:40
Speaker 2: how does a body work with temperature dropping?
27:42
Speaker 1: All right, let's talk about the nine one one call
27:44
Speaker 1: and the Wi Fi so Patrick testified that he had
27:47
Speaker 1: trouble placing the nine one one call due to Wi
27:49
Speaker 1: Fi issues. This caused significant confusion online, as emergency calls
27:54
Speaker 1: are designed to route through any available signal, regardless of
27:57
Speaker 1: Wi Fi status. A cell phone with power or can
28:00
Speaker 1: dial nine one one without data or Wi Fi. Law
28:04
Speaker 1: enforcement or dispatch professionals have not formally addressed this claim.
28:08
Speaker 2: You know, that's right, you can make an emergency call
28:11
Speaker 2: on your phone even if you don't have service. But
28:15
Speaker 2: does anyone do you know how to do that? Emily?
28:18
Speaker 1: Well, I do it by accident all the time.
28:20
Speaker 2: That's not my question.
28:20
Speaker 1: Do you know how to do it? I think it's
28:22
Speaker 1: you double click or something, so you do.
28:24
Speaker 2: Know how, or you could figure it out. But if
28:26
Speaker 2: you're panicky, if I'm if I'm no, I couldn't you
28:29
Speaker 2: find me? Having fallen out a window and I'm on
28:32
Speaker 2: the on the sidewalk and I'm panicking, Well after you're
28:35
Speaker 2: fake panicking?
28:36
Speaker 1: Okay?
28:36
Speaker 2: Would you be able to note how I mean? Would
28:38
Speaker 2: you be able to call nine one in all seriousness?
28:40
Speaker 2: Would you be able to stay calm and figure out? Oh,
28:42
Speaker 2: I need a double tap in this net?
28:44
Speaker 1: But you're saying call nine one one, meaning I don't
28:46
Speaker 1: have a Wi Fi signal, so I have to do
28:47
Speaker 1: it like so I can't just dial nine one one
28:50
Speaker 1: and hit send. I have to do like the double tap, yeah,
28:52
Speaker 1: or whatever it is. I only know how to accidentally
28:55
Speaker 1: call nine one why you can, But I don't know
28:58
Speaker 1: how to actually sure panic and she if.
29:02
Speaker 2: He's panicky or you know, emotional, I don't know that
29:06
Speaker 2: he would figure that out or that would come to mind.
29:10
Speaker 1: All right. Another issue that has come up that a
29:13
Speaker 1: lot of people are talking about and trying to figure
29:15
Speaker 1: out is the five twenty four pm email. So let's
29:18
Speaker 1: remember his timeline. According to Patrick, he left the house
29:22
Speaker 1: at five fifteen, right, okay, and then after that he
29:24
Speaker 1: was picking up takeout. If it was sent from his phone,
29:29
Speaker 1: his existing timeline holds true because he claims that he
29:33
Speaker 1: left the house at five point fifteen, so he could
29:36
Speaker 1: have sent an email from his phone.
29:37
Speaker 2: Correct correct, if sent from.
29:41
Speaker 1: A laptop, it would mean he was still home at
29:43
Speaker 1: this time and did not leave at five fifteen pm.
29:47
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, because apparently this guy's got Wi Fi issues,
29:50
Speaker 2: so he's not like hot spotting his phone and his
29:53
Speaker 2: laptop at CBS or takeout or where he is.
29:56
Speaker 1: So Patrick said twice on the stand that he sent
29:58
Speaker 1: the email from his laptop, but when he was presented
30:01
Speaker 1: with the timeline, he said it could have been sent
30:04
Speaker 1: from his phone. A lot of people also analyzed his
30:09
Speaker 1: demeanor when he was asked about the five twenty four
30:11
Speaker 1: pm email that was sent. A lot of people said
30:15
Speaker 1: he looked like he was surprised or scared or that
30:17
Speaker 1: was like an oh shit moment or something. They really
30:19
Speaker 1: analyzed his body language. Yes, yeah, and I mean he
30:23
Speaker 1: does look like a little surprised by it. So I
30:26
Speaker 1: guess he was claiming, like definitively before that his email
30:30
Speaker 1: was sent at five to twenty four, But then when
30:32
Speaker 1: he was presented with the evidence that he originally said
30:35
Speaker 1: that he left the house at five point fifteen, then
30:37
Speaker 1: he thinks in his mind, oh crap, that means I
30:39
Speaker 1: couldn't have sent it, otherwise I would have been home
30:42
Speaker 1: at five twenty four, Like, can I.
30:43
Speaker 2: Change my answer? I left at twenty four and I
30:46
Speaker 2: sent the emails right at five twenty four.
30:48
Speaker 1: All right. Another a lot of questions that people has
30:52
Speaker 1: is how Patrick found the children. First responders in hospital
30:55
Speaker 1: staff testified that Lindsay was largely unresponsive, non verbal, and
31:00
Speaker 1: when they treated her following her fall. This is factual
31:03
Speaker 1: and corroborated by multiple witnesses largely unresponsive, non verbal, and sedated. However,
31:11
Speaker 1: Patrick testified that he ran directly to the basement after
31:14
Speaker 1: paramedics arrived because Lindsay told him that she had killed
31:18
Speaker 1: the kids and that their bodies were down in the basement.
31:22
Speaker 1: When Patrick found the kids, he yelled, she killed the
31:25
Speaker 1: fucking kids. Many people question why he immediately accepted their
31:29
Speaker 1: deaths rather than try to resuscitate the children or be
31:32
Speaker 1: in denial upon finding them.
31:34
Speaker 2: Now, if you found me, if you came home, yeah,
31:37
Speaker 2: after takeout, and you found me on the sidewalk that
31:39
Speaker 2: I jumped out the window, be honest, would your thoughts
31:44
Speaker 2: be where are the kids?
31:47
Speaker 1: Yeah?
31:47
Speaker 2: That would be one of your initial call.
31:48
Speaker 1: Yeah, but you have to add the other facts in there.
31:52
Speaker 2: I'm paralyzed, dying on the sidewalk and you're saying where
31:55
Speaker 2: the kids?
31:56
Speaker 1: Well, I would say, are you okay? And then I
31:59
Speaker 1: would say where are the kids?
32:00
Speaker 2: Did you give them dinner or what?
32:03
Speaker 1: Did you at least feed them first before you jumped
32:05
Speaker 1: out the window?
32:06
Speaker 2: You left me to make dinner?
32:08
Speaker 1: Dad? Are you no? But you also but him asking
32:11
Speaker 1: where the kids are? He's asking because he knows that
32:14
Speaker 1: she's the postcards issues.
32:15
Speaker 2: Okay, So that's not out of line if he asked
32:17
Speaker 2: where the kids are?
32:18
Speaker 1: Right? I think that's reasonable in this situation, based upon
32:22
Speaker 1: her mental health.
32:24
Speaker 2: Her and if Emily Simpson says something's reasonable, you can
32:27
Speaker 2: assure it's reasonable.
32:28
Speaker 1: All right. Also, people were analyzing the fact that he
32:31
Speaker 1: said she killed the kids. People don't like that.
32:34
Speaker 2: I would never refer why I don't. I wouldn't refer
32:37
Speaker 2: to my kids that way. That's kind of a right.
32:39
Speaker 1: So I think a lot of people had a problem
32:40
Speaker 1: with him saying it that way instead of saying like
32:43
Speaker 1: she effing killed the kids?
32:44
Speaker 2: Right?
32:45
Speaker 1: No, I agree he put he put it like the
32:48
Speaker 1: effing kids, And so people are like, why would if
32:50
Speaker 1: you're the dad and you're.
32:51
Speaker 2: Upset, like why saying she killed those stupid kids? Like Oh,
32:55
Speaker 2: but if you said, yeah, she stupidly killed the kids
32:58
Speaker 2: or something, right, But then and.
33:00
Speaker 1: Again, we talked about this before. When you know, I
33:02
Speaker 1: think especially when we talk about like the Idaho murders
33:04
Speaker 1: and them not calling the police in eight hours, and
33:06
Speaker 1: then we always say, well, you can't you know, you
33:08
Speaker 1: can't analyze or or pick apart the way someone reacts
33:12
Speaker 1: when they're when they're in that situation, and its.
33:14
Speaker 2: Supposed to be a reasonable person. When you see like
33:16
Speaker 2: a bloody scene, you come home and there's someone firing
33:19
Speaker 2: guns at you, and you're reasonable.
33:21
Speaker 1: It's really easy to stand back and say, why did
33:23
Speaker 1: he say it like that?
33:24
Speaker 2: We're on our couch, eat and potato chips, gone, I
33:26
Speaker 2: would have said this, right, I should.
33:28
Speaker 1: Do this exactly. But then again we don't know what
33:31
Speaker 1: we would do or say, and so.
33:33
Speaker 2: You know, you probably put ten reasonable people in the
33:35
Speaker 2: same situation. That's scary, and everyone's an act differently exactly.
33:40
Speaker 1: Just some additional medical context. Lindsay's thyroid was crushed, which
33:44
Speaker 1: many medical professionals attribute to strangulation rather than the fall
33:48
Speaker 1: or the knife wound. Yeah, this is significant because it
33:51
Speaker 1: may explain why she was physically unable to speak, which
33:54
Speaker 1: creates holes and Patrick's testimony.
33:57
Speaker 2: So is she unable to say that kids are in
33:59
Speaker 2: the basement?
34:00
Speaker 1: That's the point is people are saying, if it's corroborated
34:02
Speaker 1: later at the hospital, that many doctors are saying that
34:05
Speaker 1: she was unable to speak because she was sedated and
34:07
Speaker 1: her thyroid was crushed.
34:08
Speaker 2: Right, And these aren't people trying to have, you know,
34:10
Speaker 2: record a podcast. Whether' just asking basic questions, right.
34:13
Speaker 1: So I'm saying, if all these people were saying she's
34:15
Speaker 1: unable to speak, why was she able to tell Patrick
34:17
Speaker 1: that the kids were in the basement? All right? Also,
34:20
Speaker 1: let's talk about the DNA on the murder weapons. So
34:22
Speaker 1: initial claims that Lindsay's DNA were absent from the resistance bands.
34:26
Speaker 2: Because resistance bands were they I.
34:28
Speaker 1: Believe they were hers because I think.
34:29
Speaker 2: She worked out like us. She doesn't have any DNA
34:32
Speaker 2: on them.
34:33
Speaker 1: Her DNA was identified on one of the three bands
34:35
Speaker 1: with a likelihood ratio of only eleven, and I guess
34:38
Speaker 1: in forensics statistics, a likelihood ratio of eleven is generally
34:42
Speaker 1: classified as weak to moderate support for the inclusion of
34:45
Speaker 1: the suspect. So basically, you've got three brands. You've got
34:49
Speaker 1: three exercise bands and her very little DNA shows up
34:53
Speaker 1: on one of them.
34:54
Speaker 2: Is it like skin cells?
34:55
Speaker 1: Yeah, it would be from holding it, right, would.
34:57
Speaker 2: Think so, Especially with the band it's always kind of
34:59
Speaker 2: ten kind of friction on your hands fingers.
35:02
Speaker 1: By contrast, other contributors produced likelihood ratios and the trillions
35:06
Speaker 1: and what's after trillion? Do you know what's after trillion?
35:10
Speaker 2: Yeah? Quadrillion? Are you shot quatillion? Then sext alien that's septillianctlion.
35:16
Speaker 1: Patrick's ratio came in at one hundred and ten thousand,
35:19
Speaker 1: which means he contributed a lot more DNA to the
35:22
Speaker 1: bands than she did. The DNA analysts fit.
35:25
Speaker 2: Does he use resistance fan?
35:28
Speaker 1: I don't know. I mean he's he had a suit on.
35:31
Speaker 1: I can't tell like how muscular he is, but I
35:33
Speaker 1: mean he's not overweight. The DNA analyst noted that individuals
35:38
Speaker 1: definitively ruled out as contributors can still produce ratios between
35:42
Speaker 1: zero to one thousand and making eleven, which is Lindsay's contribution,
35:47
Speaker 1: a notably weak result. The analysts also testified that because
35:51
Speaker 1: the children share DNA with their mother, false conclusions are
35:54
Speaker 1: a real possibility. So whether Lindsay's DNA can be confidently
35:59
Speaker 1: said to be on the bands is not a straightforward yes.
36:04
Speaker 1: And her fingerprints were not found on the bands, that
36:06
Speaker 1: is it confirmed.
36:07
Speaker 2: So no smoking gun and questionable evidence.
36:11
Speaker 1: Well, okay for one thing, even if her DNA was
36:15
Speaker 1: found on the bands, that doesn't care. The band uses
36:18
Speaker 1: the bands to work out, so obviously she touches them
36:20
Speaker 1: and picks them up and uses them.
36:22
Speaker 2: So it's like there is DNA all over the car.
36:25
Speaker 2: It's like, well, yeah, she did. It's her car, like
36:27
Speaker 2: she drives it. But it does further add because if
36:30
Speaker 2: you don't, it's like if you found her DNA all
36:33
Speaker 2: over it, yes, you can make the argument that, well,
36:36
Speaker 2: it's her products, so she uses it all the time,
36:38
Speaker 2: so this DNA on it. But the reverse is true.
36:42
Speaker 2: If there's no DNA on it, then you could make
36:44
Speaker 2: an argument. So you still have to find an answer
36:46
Speaker 2: one way or not.
36:48
Speaker 1: All right, let's talk about the knife wound. So Lindsay
36:50
Speaker 1: is right handed, yet the deepest point of the neck
36:52
Speaker 1: wound was on her right side. Some speculate that a
36:56
Speaker 1: right handed person slicing their own neck would naturally start
36:59
Speaker 1: from the left and draft right. Court documents appear to
37:02
Speaker 1: suggest that the wound began on the right side, though
37:05
Speaker 1: this remains unconfirmed. And in addition, Lindsay's profession as a
37:09
Speaker 1: nurse led many to believe she would know exactly where
37:11
Speaker 1: to cut herself in order to make her wounds fatal.
37:14
Speaker 1: Yet these wounds were not. So I don't know what
37:16
Speaker 1: do you think about that? But again, she's a nurse.
37:19
Speaker 1: She's a labor and delivery nurse, so she's very well
37:21
Speaker 1: versed in medical things. But again, I just don't feel
37:25
Speaker 1: like someone that's a nurse that has access to drugs
37:29
Speaker 1: and also is prescribed and has old medications laying around
37:33
Speaker 1: and thirteen new medications would choose violence as a way
37:38
Speaker 1: to end their own life. I just feel like there's
37:40
Speaker 1: such a if you really wanted to commit suicide, why
37:43
Speaker 1: not just od?
37:45
Speaker 2: Yeah?
37:45
Speaker 1: But why not just lay down in the bed? Why
37:48
Speaker 1: is it so violent? If someone was going to commit suicide,
37:52
Speaker 1: you could do it in a way where you're mixing
37:54
Speaker 1: a cocktail of drugs that just puts you to sleep
37:56
Speaker 1: and takes you out. I mean, she would know how
37:58
Speaker 1: to do that. But again, that makes me think that
38:01
Speaker 1: if she did murder her three children, that she was
38:03
Speaker 1: in a state of psychosis, because for someone to do
38:07
Speaker 1: such violent things to themself would mean to me that
38:13
Speaker 1: she wasn't in a right state of mind.
38:15
Speaker 2: I those are fair thoughts. I just say that that's
38:18
Speaker 2: not enough to say whether she was in a state
38:20
Speaker 2: or night for me.
38:28
Speaker 1: All right, So let's talk about the Apple watch theory
38:30
Speaker 1: because I saw this a lot a lot of people
38:32
Speaker 1: talking about the Apple Watch. So one theory circulating online
38:36
Speaker 1: is suggesting that Patrick may have used Lindsay's Apple Watch,
38:39
Speaker 1: which is paired to her phone, to answer his call
38:42
Speaker 1: that he made while he was out, making it appear
38:44
Speaker 1: as though she had responded.
38:47
Speaker 2: The theory is, wait, okay, a phone call was made
38:50
Speaker 2: while he was out from his phone to her watch,
38:55
Speaker 2: well to her to her and and the theory is
38:59
Speaker 2: he had the watch and therefore he answered the call
39:03
Speaker 2: to create an alibi or something.
39:05
Speaker 1: Yes, Well, the theory is is that what? So, while
39:07
Speaker 1: he's at CBS, he claims he made a call to
39:10
Speaker 1: ask her about getting a generic brand of Pedia light
39:14
Speaker 1: or something like that.
39:15
Speaker 2: Got it.
39:16
Speaker 1: He claims he only talks to her for like fourteen seconds,
39:19
Speaker 1: and that she said to get the generic brand and
39:21
Speaker 1: that she sounded like she was busy, and he thought
39:23
Speaker 1: maybe she was giving the kids baths. So I think
39:26
Speaker 1: the theory is online that if we're trying to make
39:29
Speaker 1: it that Patrick is really the culprit and allegedly murdered
39:33
Speaker 1: his own children and is framing her, then he's calling
39:39
Speaker 1: her to her Apple watch, calling her watch.
39:43
Speaker 2: And then he answered the watch is what is what
39:46
Speaker 2: a possible theory is? I guess? But then wouldn't that
39:49
Speaker 2: means he If we go with that, that means he
39:51
Speaker 2: had the watch with him, right, so he called he
39:53
Speaker 2: used the phone to call the watch. But then wouldn't
39:56
Speaker 2: they know where the watch was, like tracking it or
40:00
Speaker 2: is that not trackable traceable?
40:01
Speaker 1: I don't know, but they didn't. They did not, So
40:04
Speaker 1: law enforcement did not originally seize the Apple Watch. I
40:07
Speaker 1: know it was found later in a drawer like put away.
40:10
Speaker 1: So that's why a lot of people are speculating that
40:12
Speaker 1: maybe he had had the Apple Watch and used it
40:15
Speaker 1: to answer to make it look like she was still
40:18
Speaker 1: at home and not incapacitated at that time. I guess
40:21
Speaker 1: the theory would be if Lindsay was already outside and
40:24
Speaker 1: incapacitated before he left, that he wore or held her
40:28
Speaker 1: watch during the outing, then returned it to her drawer
40:30
Speaker 1: in their room. Proponents note that he works in tech
40:33
Speaker 1: and would understand how the device pairing works. This is
40:36
Speaker 1: all speculative. This is basically saying, it's just creating the
40:40
Speaker 1: idea that if she was dead before he left, then
40:43
Speaker 1: that looks bad. Also, but this is strange. This is
40:47
Speaker 1: I think for me, this is the strangest thing. So
40:49
Speaker 1: it's Patrick's outfit changes. So footage from the restaurant and
40:53
Speaker 1: CVS appeared to show Patrick in different outfits in CVS.
40:57
Speaker 1: So again, I remember the timeline. He claims he left
41:00
Speaker 1: the house at five fifteen. CVS is only three minutes away,
41:03
Speaker 1: So if he leaves at five fifteen, then he ends
41:05
Speaker 1: up at CBS at nine twenty or something. Remember again,
41:09
Speaker 1: he sent an email at five twenty four, but we
41:12
Speaker 1: think it comes from his laptop, and he claimed it
41:15
Speaker 1: was from a cell phone. Anyway, that's the whole other
41:18
Speaker 1: issue that we were talking about. However, there's footage from
41:22
Speaker 1: CBS that shows that while he's in CBS, it looks
41:26
Speaker 1: like he's wearing boots, a black half zip sweater, and
41:29
Speaker 1: a white undershirt. But in the restaurant. So when they
41:32
Speaker 1: pick him up on footage in the restaurant, which is
41:34
Speaker 1: where he goes after CVS, it seems like he's wearing sneakers,
41:38
Speaker 1: a full zip of sweater, and a great undershirt. So
41:41
Speaker 1: why is he changing his outfit?
41:43
Speaker 2: Well, did he walk in with a bag of clothes
41:45
Speaker 2: or something? Did he walk in with anything in his hand?
41:48
Speaker 1: No, but maybe he had closed in his car. I
41:50
Speaker 1: don't know what would the theory be if we're theorizing.
41:53
Speaker 2: Here get rid of bloody evidence or whatever. But that
41:57
Speaker 2: is weird, Like why change your clothes?
42:00
Speaker 1: It looks clearly to me like he has completely different
42:02
Speaker 1: shoes on.
42:05
Speaker 2: And so that's official, like he has different shoes.
42:07
Speaker 1: That's not Yeah, no, I mean you look at it
42:11
Speaker 1: with your own eyes. I mean he walks in in
42:13
Speaker 1: this like in boots, and he comes out and dressing rooms.
42:19
Speaker 1: They have restrooms though, that's true.
42:20
Speaker 2: They have restrooms, you know at CBS stands for I remember, oh.
42:24
Speaker 1: You always asked me this, and you never consumer value
42:28
Speaker 1: superstore store superstore.
42:31
Speaker 2: Oh okay, ahead of yourself, all.
42:32
Speaker 1: Right, consumer value store.
42:34
Speaker 2: That's right?
42:34
Speaker 1: Did you all know that that's what CBS stands for?
42:37
Speaker 1: All right? Let's talk about Patrick's New York connection. So
42:40
Speaker 1: Patrick Clancy did visit New York prior to the crime
42:43
Speaker 1: and now lives there with his new wife. By the way,
42:45
Speaker 1: have you seen a picture of his new wife, because
42:46
Speaker 1: his new wife looks exactly like his ex wife. Yeah,
42:50
Speaker 1: I mean identical. I even saw someone cut their photos
42:54
Speaker 1: of them in half and then line them up together
42:56
Speaker 1: and they like perfectly lined up.
42:58
Speaker 2: Well she knows is that she married him? Like talk
43:04
Speaker 2: about baggage. Oh yeah, they said I killed my wife,
43:07
Speaker 2: or they that I tried to kill my wife and kids,
43:09
Speaker 2: but I didn't do it.
43:10
Speaker 1: No, but nobody said that till the trial. There was
43:12
Speaker 1: never any speculation that he was involved at all. The
43:14
Speaker 1: question is is she questioning that now currently? Is that
43:17
Speaker 1: is she does she have things in the back of
43:19
Speaker 1: her mind about it? I don't know.
43:21
Speaker 2: Maybe so a reasonable person would.
43:24
Speaker 1: So he did visit New York prior to the crime
43:26
Speaker 1: and now lives there with his new wife. Whether that
43:28
Speaker 1: visit was connected to any pre planned escape or affair
43:31
Speaker 1: is unconfirmed. It's just speculation. A lot of people are
43:34
Speaker 1: claiming that he would travel to New York to possibly
43:37
Speaker 1: meet up with her, and maybe he had an affair
43:39
Speaker 1: going on. And if he had some affair, this is
43:42
Speaker 1: all speculative, by the way, then maybe he wanted to
43:44
Speaker 1: get rid of his wife and children. And that's anyway.
43:47
Speaker 1: She's a doctor.
43:48
Speaker 2: I've heard of that story before.
43:49
Speaker 1: Yes, that's a tale as old as time. Yes, Chris Watts, Yes,
43:55
Speaker 1: we could. There's more. We could name.
43:56
Speaker 2: Powell, Yeah, Susan Powell. Yeah, got Peterson.
44:00
Speaker 1: Well, I don't know. It is undeniably suspicious that he
44:06
Speaker 1: married his new wife just months after his children's murders.
44:10
Speaker 1: Doctor Rachel Danis. Patrick's new wife is a reproductive indochronologist
44:15
Speaker 1: and infertility specialist. And again, she looks just like his
44:21
Speaker 1: ex wife, which seems you think that means something. I
44:24
Speaker 1: don't know. I think that's odd. I think if we
44:26
Speaker 1: got divorced and then you started dating someone that looked
44:28
Speaker 1: just like me, I think that would be weird.
44:31
Speaker 2: Well, it depends with the personality. Just like you, No,
44:33
Speaker 2: just looks.
44:34
Speaker 1: I don't know what her personality is.
44:37
Speaker 2: There's only one Emily Simpson.
44:40
Speaker 1: All right, so let's talk about in the hospital. Lindsey
44:42
Speaker 1: communicated via whiteboard in the hospital because she couldn't speak,
44:45
Speaker 1: and asked what had happened she was told by the
44:48
Speaker 1: medical professionals. Some speculate that given her mental and physical state,
44:52
Speaker 1: she could have accepted whatever she was told without independent recollection.
44:56
Speaker 1: What specifically she was told and her comprehension of it
45:00
Speaker 1: is unconfirmed at this time. This is also interesting, and
45:05
Speaker 1: I've seen a lot of this. The dinner plates and
45:08
Speaker 1: the CVS bag, so court photographs of the scene show
45:12
Speaker 1: the children's dinner plates sitting on top of the CVS bag.
45:17
Speaker 1: Patrick testified the children had been eating before he left.
45:21
Speaker 1: I don't know. I find that really significant. How so,
45:25
Speaker 1: because if the children were eating before he left to
45:28
Speaker 1: go run the errand to CVS and to the restaurant
45:30
Speaker 1: to pick up the takeout, their plates would be laying
45:33
Speaker 1: on the table, which means then they were murdered while
45:36
Speaker 1: he was gone in the basement, which means when he
45:38
Speaker 1: comes home from CVS, he would put the bag on
45:40
Speaker 1: top of the plates. However, the plates are sitting on
45:44
Speaker 1: top of the CVS bag, which means that he possibly
45:47
Speaker 1: returned from CVS they weren't done eating, the plates were
45:52
Speaker 1: put on top of the bag.
45:54
Speaker 2: Who puts plates on top of a bag, I.
45:56
Speaker 1: Don't know, but who who I don't know, but it's
45:59
Speaker 1: signific and meaning that possibly it is out of order.
46:05
Speaker 2: But this also seemed like a weird thing to do anyway.
46:07
Speaker 1: Well, it just means that that possibly dinner was still
46:11
Speaker 1: happening and kids were still alive after he returned it
46:15
Speaker 1: from CBS. That's what it could. Is it is it
46:18
Speaker 1: is it a smoking gun smoking But it's an interesting
46:23
Speaker 1: thought and piece of evidence that you can talk about.
46:27
Speaker 1: All right, So Lindsay took her four year old daughter
46:29
Speaker 1: Cora to the pediatrician the same day that she allegedly
46:31
Speaker 1: committed all of the murders. What would be the motive there? Like,
46:34
Speaker 1: why if she if it was premeditated, pre planned, she
46:37
Speaker 1: knew she was going to do it, Why why do
46:39
Speaker 1: you put the time and effort into taking your daughter
46:41
Speaker 1: to the doctor and asking questions and being concerned about
46:44
Speaker 1: our medical welfare. And it's just a thought, it's just
46:47
Speaker 1: a it's just a question to throw out there. It's
46:50
Speaker 1: just a piece of evidence.
46:51
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm even more like uncertain about anything on this case. Now.
46:57
Speaker 2: I don't know if she did it or he did it.
46:59
Speaker 2: I don't know. The three kids are dead, all.
47:01
Speaker 1: Right, Let's talk about one last thing Lindsay's diary entries.
47:04
Speaker 1: So Lindsay frequently documented her feelings in a journal while
47:07
Speaker 1: navigating her postpartum depression and postpartum psychosis. I feel like
47:13
Speaker 1: I'm drowning every day, she had written in the journal.
47:16
Speaker 1: I have crazy brain fog. I feel like I can't
47:18
Speaker 1: make a plan, I can't carry it out, like I
47:21
Speaker 1: just live moment to moment, waiting for the next nap time.
47:24
Speaker 1: I'm terrified of cal that's their eight month old baby
47:28
Speaker 1: getting overtired now because I feel I can't help him.
47:31
Speaker 1: These are all the things that she wrote in a journal.
47:34
Speaker 1: I don't know what's wrong with me. I want help,
47:36
Speaker 1: I want to be well. That's another entry in her
47:38
Speaker 1: journal that was read in court. And her journal entries
47:41
Speaker 1: also documented her efforts to cope, including affirmations such as
47:46
Speaker 1: I am calm, I will sleep tonight, and today will
47:49
Speaker 1: be a great day. So those are just those were
47:52
Speaker 1: red in court. Those are her journal entries. She was
47:54
Speaker 1: clearly struggling.
47:55
Speaker 2: Sounds like someone who knows they're struggling is trying to
47:57
Speaker 2: work through it.
47:59
Speaker 1: You know, a lot of people question, like why Patrick
48:01
Speaker 1: Clancy would leave her alone with the kids when he
48:02
Speaker 1: was well aware of her struggles and the postpartum and
48:05
Speaker 1: the different medications that she was on. If he clearly,
48:09
Speaker 1: you know, cared about his wife, he would have never left.
48:12
Speaker 1: He wouldn't have left her alone with children.
48:14
Speaker 2: You know.
48:14
Speaker 1: I don't know how feasible that is. I don't know
48:17
Speaker 1: if that's if that's a realistic expectation. I don't know.
48:21
Speaker 1: I just know that for me, a lot of women
48:24
Speaker 1: are rallying around her and do not see her as
48:27
Speaker 1: a you know, as a as a you know, plan
48:31
Speaker 1: pre planned, premeditated.
48:33
Speaker 2: Killer, rather as a troubled rather.
48:35
Speaker 1: As a as a troubled mother who was failed by
48:37
Speaker 1: the medical society and by psychiatrists and doctors and her
48:42
Speaker 1: husband and basically everyone in her life, that she was
48:45
Speaker 1: doing everything possible to help herself, to get help, to
48:48
Speaker 1: be better, to do all the things, and that if
48:51
Speaker 1: it really was her that ended their lives, that it
48:55
Speaker 1: wasn't because she was some horrible, awful, monster monster, but
48:59
Speaker 1: because she was in a state of psychosis, had too
49:01
Speaker 1: many drugs in her system, the system failed her, no
49:03
Speaker 1: one was helping her, and that she really is kind
49:06
Speaker 1: of a martyr for women out there dealing with postpartum
49:11
Speaker 1: and they're rallying and a lot of and a lot
49:13
Speaker 1: of women are rallying around her and feeling very sympathetic
49:16
Speaker 1: to her and what she has gone through. So anyway,
49:19
Speaker 1: that is where we're at with the Lindsay Clancy trial.
49:22
Speaker 1: Thank you guys so much for reaching out and having
49:24
Speaker 1: us and asking for us to talk about it and
49:27
Speaker 1: discuss it. I wish I had some clear cut answers,
49:31
Speaker 1: but really all this trial has done is make me
49:33
Speaker 1: question everything and kind of make my brain hurt, and
49:36
Speaker 1: all the times I lay in bed at night going
49:38
Speaker 1: over the timeline and what could have possibly happened, and
49:42
Speaker 1: you know, hopefully maybe more things will come out as
49:44
Speaker 1: the trial goes on. Will continue to talk about it
49:46
Speaker 1: and continue to follow it. So also, after listening to this,
49:50
Speaker 1: if you have theories or you have other thoughts, I
49:55
Speaker 1: love to hear those. We could obviously discuss those, so
49:58
Speaker 1: please reach out and send me. I like to hear
50:01
Speaker 1: your feedback on the cases and especially this case with
50:04
Speaker 1: Lindsay Clancy. So anyway, you guys, thank you so much
50:08
Speaker 1: for listening to Legally Brunette. As always, please follow legally
50:12
Speaker 1: Brunette wherever you listen to podcasts, and be sure to
50:15
Speaker 1: tell your friends and family. We appreciate you guys so much.