Latest / Crime Stories with Nancy Grace / HAIL MARY MISFIRE! LINDSEY CLANCY JURY HANGS: MISTRIAL DECLARED

Transcript

HAIL MARY MISFIRE! LINDSEY CLANCY JURY HANGS: MISTRIAL DECLARED · Crime Stories with Nancy Grace

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Crime Stories with Nancy Grace.
• 0:07
  Speaker 2: Three little tots, one an infant, all found strangled dead
• 0:13
  Speaker 2: by mommy. with her own exercise bans. I would not
• 0:19
  Speaker 2: have gone for a lesser charge, but the law is clear.
• 0:22
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 0:23
  Speaker 2: And the law is if there's any fact to support
• 0:25
  Speaker 2: that lesser charge, it must be given. You don't want
• 0:27
  Speaker 2: to go with murder one, you don't want to go
• 0:29
  Speaker 2: with not guilty, that's dead in the middle.
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: I've noticed that.
• 0:32
  Speaker 2: When a woman is on trial for murder, specifically murder
• 0:36
  Speaker 2: of her children, people.
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: Search, scour for a motive. It doesn't matter. They're dead,
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: she's alive.
• 0:44
  Speaker 2: So far, the jury has been out for hours and hours.
• 0:48
  Speaker 2: What does it mean? This is not a popularity contest.
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: Was she a good mom? Was she a bad mom?
• 0:53
  Speaker 2: It's only about intent at the time of the act.
• 0:59
  Speaker 2: Either she's in psychosis or she is a criminal mastermind.
• 1:03
  Speaker 2: You can see how vested people are in the outcome
• 1:08
  Speaker 2: of this case. We're talking about what is seeping into
• 1:11
  Speaker 2: the minds of the jurors. Well, they're certainly trained on
• 1:15
  Speaker 2: Lindsay Clancy. Take a look at Lindsay Clancy grabbing her
• 1:19
  Speaker 2: lawyer's hands in court. The sobbing and the crying and
• 1:24
  Speaker 2: the hiding her face, I really don't know what to
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: make of that because they're dead. I don't care how
• 1:31
  Speaker 2: much she cries now. They're dead, and she did it.
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: Unbelievable.
• 1:43
  Speaker 2: The events that unfolded inside that courtroom today in the
• 1:49
  Speaker 2: Clancy murder trial. Bottom line, the jury hangs. First thing
• 1:55
  Speaker 2: this morning, the judge says, bring in the jury. And
• 1:59
  Speaker 2: just as they are coming in, the defense attorney, Reddington,
• 2:02
  Speaker 2: stands up and goes, wait a minute.
• 2:04
  Speaker 4: No.
• 2:06
  Speaker 5: No.
• 2:07
  Speaker 2: I want to take a certificate of immediate review all
• 2:10
  Speaker 2: the way up to the state Supreme Court because I
• 2:13
  Speaker 2: want you to throw that juror off, put on an alternate,
• 2:17
  Speaker 2: and continue deliberations. No mistrial. Well, the judge was extremely irritated.
• 2:24
  Speaker 2: You could tell by the way he acted. But he
• 2:26
  Speaker 2: agreed to a one-hour stay, which turned into a two-hour stay. Finally,
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: coming back and declaring a mistrial. after the defense bid
• 2:37
  Speaker 2: to the state Supreme Court, failed. Straight out to Dave Mack,
• 2:41
  Speaker 2: Crime Stories investigative reporter, on the story from the very beginning.
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: What happened?
• 2:46
  Speaker 6: Well, Nancy, it's just as you said.
• 2:48
  Speaker 7: The defense was staring a mistrial and did not want it.
• 2:52
  Speaker 6: They knew it was coming.
• 2:54
  Speaker 7: We had had three different times where the jurors came
• 2:56
  Speaker 7: back and said, we got one person holding us up.
• 2:59
  Speaker 7: And in this case, the judge allowed Reddington to file
• 3:03
  Speaker 7: with the Massachusetts.
• 3:04
  Speaker 6: Supreme Judicial Court to intervene.
• 3:07
  Speaker 7: And in the letter sent to the court, it was
• 3:11
  Speaker 7: very specific that they had a juror that was simply
• 3:14
  Speaker 7: not following the instructions about reasonable doubt. And they wanted
• 3:19
  Speaker 7: the Supremes to jump in and get rid of the
• 3:22
  Speaker 7: juror and replace the juror with a new one so
• 3:25
  Speaker 7: they could go on deliberating.
• 3:27
  Speaker 6: Didn't happen. It just wasn't going to happen.
• 3:29
  Speaker 7: So it came back to the trial where the judge said, okay, mistrial,
• 3:34
  Speaker 7: can't do it anymore.
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: Well, you're right, Dave Mack.
• 3:38
  Speaker 2: In a flip-flop yesterday, the defense attorney demanded a mistrial.
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: But then this morning, he.
• 3:48
  Speaker 2: Wanted that juror taken off, the alternate put on, and
• 3:52
  Speaker 2: no mistrial accepted. If you carefully read the defense's motion
• 3:58
  Speaker 2: to the state Supreme Court, he even suggested that one
• 4:01
  Speaker 2: of the jurors could be biased against his client because
• 4:07
  Speaker 2: of her mental illness, citing the Americans with Disabilities Act.
• 4:12
  Speaker 2: If that's not a Hail Mary, then I don't know football.
• 4:15
  Speaker 2: What led to a hung jury?
• 4:19
  Speaker 7: Nancy, what led us to this hung jury? Remember, we
• 4:25
  Speaker 7: had seven days of jury deliberations. We had three different
• 4:30
  Speaker 7: notes sent to the judge saying, we are at an impasse.
• 4:33
  Speaker 7: We are not going to be able to have an
• 4:36
  Speaker 7: answer for you. And it seems like, you know, the
• 4:38
  Speaker 7: first time judge like, it's not unusual.
• 4:40
  Speaker 6: Get back in there. Keep trying.
• 4:42
  Speaker 7: It was the second note that seemed to have a
• 4:44
  Speaker 7: lot of frustration in it from the jurors. And that's
• 4:47
  Speaker 7: where the judge, he flat out said, boom, stop everything.
• 4:52
  Speaker 6: Go home.
• 4:53
  Speaker 7: I want you to think about this and really consider your,
• 4:58
  Speaker 7: what you've heard so far and what you think as
• 5:00
  Speaker 7: a juror and see how you, and he.
• 5:03
  Speaker 6: Wasn't telling all of them. He's saying each individual, what.
• 5:07
  Speaker 7: You think, what you feel, what you've heard and what
• 5:09
  Speaker 7: you've deliberated, put all that aside for a minute and
• 5:12
  Speaker 7: really think about the greater good of coming up with
• 5:14
  Speaker 7: a decision and where you could feasibly move yourself towards
• 5:21
  Speaker 7: a decision. and giving them that last directive for the
• 5:25
  Speaker 7: jury to come back and say, no, we can't do anything.
• 5:30
  Speaker 6: The judge says, well, then it's a mistrial.
• 5:31
  Speaker 7: So it really came down to seven days of deliberations
• 5:35
  Speaker 7: where I think after day two, Nancy, they knew, the
• 5:39
  Speaker 7: jury knew they had one holdout.
• 5:40
  Speaker 6: I think it probably happened.
• 5:41
  Speaker 7: From the first time they sent a note saying we're hung,
• 5:44
  Speaker 7: we can't decide. There was one person who just put
• 5:47
  Speaker 7: their foot down and said, not going to budge. And
• 5:49
  Speaker 7: I can't imagine what that must be like. Can you
• 5:51
  Speaker 7: imagine sitting in a room with 11 other people that
• 5:55
  Speaker 7: are all waiting for you to change your mind, to join?
• 5:58
  Speaker 6: Talk about peer pressure.
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: Wow.
• 6:00
  Speaker 2: I still can't believe the way it all played out
• 6:02
  Speaker 2: in court today. Hung jury. But what led us to
• 6:07
  Speaker 2: this moment tonight?
• 6:09
  Speaker 8: This case is not about our mental health system or
• 6:13
  Speaker 8: how it treats women or what's in the DSM-5 and
• 6:16
  Speaker 8: what's not. That's a distraction to get you angry and
• 6:19
  Speaker 8: passionate about an important issue, but an issue that's not
• 6:23
  Speaker 8: on trial here. What's on trial here, what the issue
• 6:26
  Speaker 8: is here, is what Lindsay Clancy did the night of
• 6:30
  Speaker 8: January 24th, 2023, and what her mental state was.
• 6:34
  Speaker 9: At the time.
• 6:36
  Speaker 2: We are in a verdict watch here at Crime Stories
• 6:39
  Speaker 2: as we wait for a verdict to be handed down
• 6:42
  Speaker 2: in the case against so-called loving mom Lindsay Clancy. That
• 6:46
  Speaker 2: sound from our friends at East Idaho News. That is
• 6:48
  Speaker 2: Prosecutor Sprague as she gave her closing arguments, which weighed
• 6:52
  Speaker 2: heavily on the minds of the jurors. So far, the
• 6:57
  Speaker 2: jury has been out for hours and hours. What does
• 7:00
  Speaker 2: it mean? We know that this morning to you, Shannon Hill,
• 7:03
  Speaker 2: joining us, star of Shannon Hill News, that they came
• 7:07
  Speaker 2: in first thing bright and early this morning dressed to
• 7:11
  Speaker 2: the nines.
• 7:12
  Speaker 10: I was in the courtroom on Thursday during closing arguments.
• 7:16
  Speaker 10: And the interesting thing is that the investigators who testified
• 7:21
  Speaker 10: in the trial, in the very beginning parts of the trial,
• 7:24
  Speaker 10: actually showed up and sat behind prosecution to show their support.
• 7:29
  Speaker 10: And while attorney Kevin Reddington was giving his closing argument,
• 7:34
  Speaker 10: he pointed at them and said, I don't care that
• 7:36
  Speaker 10: they're sitting here right now. He looked straight at the
• 7:38
  Speaker 10: jury and told them, I don't care that these investigators
• 7:41
  Speaker 10: are sitting here right now. That means nothing to him
• 7:44
  Speaker 10: because he feels that his client is innocent. He also
• 7:50
  Speaker 10: did the three coin toss on the table in front
• 7:54
  Speaker 10: of the prosecution. And the public seems to really be
• 7:56
  Speaker 10: taking that on as some sort of biblical message, considering
• 8:02
  Speaker 10: the topic of Catholicism has been brought up several times
• 8:05
  Speaker 10: in the courtroom now.
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: Did you say a coin toss?
• 8:08
  Speaker 2: The defense attorney did a coin toss in front of
• 8:11
  Speaker 2: the jury at the prosecution table?
• 8:13
  Speaker 8: A coin slam to the table.
• 8:15
  Speaker 10: He did a three coin slam to the prosecution's table.
• 8:18
  Speaker 10: And people are comparing this to the 30 pieces of
• 8:21
  Speaker 10: silver in the Judas betrayal in the Bible.
• 8:24
  Speaker 1: But what I actually took it as.
• 8:25
  Speaker 2: What did he say when he did the coin slam?
• 8:28
  Speaker 2: What was the point in his mind?
• 8:30
  Speaker 10: My interpretation was that it wasn't biblical at all and
• 8:34
  Speaker 10: that he was actually pointing out each time he felt
• 8:36
  Speaker 10: the prosecution manipulated the evidence against his client. So each
• 8:40
  Speaker 10: coin stood for, you know, a different piece of evidence
• 8:44
  Speaker 10: that prosecution brought up during the trial, which one was
• 8:48
  Speaker 10: the drinking, the amount of drinking Lindsay Clancy did during
• 8:50
  Speaker 10: the week. Another was the Facebook post about her son Dawson.
• 8:56
  Speaker 10: And the coins were there to represent each one of
• 9:00
  Speaker 10: these times he felt that prosecution was being misleading or manipulative.
• 9:05
  Speaker 2: Tracy Brown is joining us out of Boulder, body language expert,
• 9:08
  Speaker 2: behavior analyst, trained alongside law enforcement and special forces. She's
• 9:14
  Speaker 2: author of multiple books, most notably, How to Detect Lies,
• 9:19
  Speaker 2: Fraud and Identity Theft. And you can find her at bodylanguagetrainer.com. Tracy,
• 9:26
  Speaker 2: thank you for being with us.
• 9:28
  Speaker 9: Hey, thanks for having me.
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: Tracy, tonight I'd like you.
• 9:33
  Speaker 2: To look at certain moments in court, captured in court,
• 9:40
  Speaker 2: because we're talking about what is seeping into the minds
• 9:43
  Speaker 2: of the jurors. Well, they're certainly trained on Lindsey Clancy.
• 9:48
  Speaker 1: Let's take a look. What do you see here, Tracy?
• 9:52
  Speaker 9: Well, this is the first time she's seen him in court,
• 9:54
  Speaker 9: presumably in a long time. And she is under deep
• 9:58
  Speaker 9: stress now. She's really hard to read. because she's paralyzed
• 10:02
  Speaker 9: from the waist down. And that restricts, I mean, it
• 10:06
  Speaker 9: eliminates a lot of movements that we would normally see. Now,
• 10:09
  Speaker 9: here's what's interesting to me is that she licks her
• 10:13
  Speaker 9: lips four times before he even says a word. Um,
• 10:19
  Speaker 9: it could be a lip grooming. So she's trying to
• 10:20
  Speaker 9: look better. It could be that she's really stressed or
• 10:24
  Speaker 9: it could be that she's really angry.
• 10:26
  Speaker 3: Okay.
• 10:27
  Speaker 9: So you have all of those and it could be
• 10:29
  Speaker 9: a combo of all of those right there. Now she
• 10:32
  Speaker 9: does something else with her eyebrows. Now the forehead is the, uh, billboard,
• 10:39
  Speaker 9: the eyebrows are the writing. And so we want to
• 10:43
  Speaker 9: look for small, small little movements in that writing to understand,
• 10:47
  Speaker 9: what emotions are really going on. And we start to
• 10:50
  Speaker 9: see the medial, that's above your nose, the middle part
• 10:55
  Speaker 9: of her eyebrows go up. So that says there's sadness there.
• 10:59
  Speaker 9: But then they start to rise just.
• 11:02
  Speaker 4: A little bit.
• 11:02
  Speaker 9: And so there can be some fear. and anxiety going
• 11:05
  Speaker 9: on there too. So she has a lot of emotions
• 11:07
  Speaker 9: going on all at once, even though she's really still.
• 11:12
  Speaker 9: And like I said, she's one of the hardest people
• 11:15
  Speaker 9: to read that I've ever had to do just because
• 11:17
  Speaker 9: of the paralyzation.
• 11:19
  Speaker 11: I'm on the way, we're with the county.
• 11:26
  Speaker 10: I'm at the two pediatrics arrest, we got mutual aid
• 11:33
  Speaker 10: on the way.
• 11:35
  Speaker 8: Mutual aid at this time.
• 11:38
  Speaker 2: You're hearing parts of the 911 dispatch call after three
• 11:42
  Speaker 2: little tots, one an infant, all found strangled dead by
• 11:48
  Speaker 2: mommy with her own exercise bands.
• 12:00
  Speaker 1: Crime Stories with Nancy Grace.
• 12:06
  Speaker 2: We all know the stretchy nature of exercise bands or
• 12:11
  Speaker 2: bungee cords. Imagine the force and exertion required. It's like
• 12:17
  Speaker 2: strangling someone with a rubber band. How hard she had
• 12:21
  Speaker 2: to pull the exercise cords in order to murder her
• 12:28
  Speaker 2: own children. And tonight we find out that one of
• 12:32
  Speaker 2: the first things that comes out of her mouth When
• 12:37
  Speaker 2: she's in the hospital, she's taken off the ventilator. She says,
• 12:44
  Speaker 2: do I have a lawyer?
• 12:46
  Speaker 12: Okay.
• 12:48
  Speaker 2: Straight out to Randy Kessler joining us, veteran trial lawyer,
• 12:51
  Speaker 2: professor at the Emory Law School, former chair of the
• 12:55
  Speaker 2: ABA Family Law Section for the entire American Bar Association,
• 12:59
  Speaker 2: author of Divorce, Protect Yourself, Your Kids.
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: And Your Future.
• 13:03
  Speaker 4: Randy.
• 13:04
  Speaker 1: Randy.
• 13:06
  Speaker 2: The reason I am emphasizing the force and exertion necessary
• 13:13
  Speaker 2: to strangle not one, two, but three children, one of
• 13:17
  Speaker 2: whom we believe ran in fear to his father's basement office,
• 13:21
  Speaker 2: the older boy, there you see Callum there, he's just
• 13:25
  Speaker 2: an infant, is akin to, the reason I'm bringing it
• 13:31
  Speaker 2: up is because You and I have argued that on
• 13:35
  Speaker 2: different sides of the fence, of course, in court when
• 13:37
  Speaker 2: it comes to the force necessary to pull a trigger. Remember,
• 13:44
  Speaker 2: we just had that come up in court with a
• 13:48
  Speaker 2: veteran and well-known lawyer in your jurisdiction that shot his
• 13:51
  Speaker 2: wife dead and he said it was an accident. Said
• 13:55
  Speaker 2: that he was sleeping and woke up and went, oh, bam,
• 13:58
  Speaker 2: and killed his wife.
• 14:00
  Speaker 1: Yeah, that did not work for me.
• 14:02
  Speaker 2: The point is the force and exertion used to pull
• 14:06
  Speaker 2: a trigger goes to intent.
• 14:10
  Speaker 1: And here we have it, intent times three.
• 14:14
  Speaker 2: The force necessary to use those elastic bands to pull
• 14:19
  Speaker 2: them so tightly as they were stretchy and giving. That
• 14:24
  Speaker 2: takes a lot of force, a lot of exertion, and
• 14:26
  Speaker 2: a lot of time during which she could have formed intent. Kessler,
• 14:31
  Speaker 2: do you agree with me you know the law as
• 14:34
  Speaker 2: well as I do, that intent to commit a crime,
• 14:38
  Speaker 2: any crime, does not require a long period of planning.
• 14:42
  Speaker 2: Intent can be formed, as our former judge would say,
• 14:46
  Speaker 2: Luther Alverson, in the blink of an eye, the twinkling
• 14:49
  Speaker 2: of a moment, in the time it takes you to
• 14:52
  Speaker 2: raise a gun and pull the trigger, much less the
• 14:54
  Speaker 2: time it takes you to pull and pull and pull.
• 14:58
  Speaker 1: Exercise bands to kill them. That's time to form intent.
• 15:02
  Speaker 11: Yes, she had the time to form intent. She had
• 15:06
  Speaker 11: that intent, and she killed her children. But the question,
• 15:09
  Speaker 11: my opening statement and my closing argument would be, she
• 15:13
  Speaker 11: did this because. That's the only question the defense can
• 15:17
  Speaker 11: rely on, which is, I know motive's not a question
• 15:20
  Speaker 11: in front of this jury, but she did this because,
• 15:23
  Speaker 11: and the jury's going to fill that answer, that blank
• 15:25
  Speaker 11: in with, she was crazy, she was psychotic, she was
• 15:28
  Speaker 11: mentally insane, because there's no other answer to that question.
• 15:31
  Speaker 11: She did this because... Why? She wanted out of the marriage?
• 15:35
  Speaker 11: There was no other answer that makes as much sense
• 15:37
  Speaker 11: as she did this because she was not mentally capable
• 15:41
  Speaker 11: of making the right decision. That's the only defense the
• 15:44
  Speaker 11: defense has.
• 15:45
  Speaker 2: Randy Kessler, could you hold up your sign again, please?
• 15:49
  Speaker 2: I'd like to see that.
• 15:51
  Speaker 11: Like my artwork?
• 15:54
  Speaker 1: Okay, I'm very impressed. I'm impressed that you had your
• 15:58
  Speaker 1: assistant print that out. Straight out to Penny commit.
• 16:03
  Speaker 2: Penny Commit joining us, Boston investigative reporter, WBZ, CBS Boston,
• 16:09
  Speaker 2: has covered multiple high-profile cases, including this one. Penny Commit,
• 16:14
  Speaker 2: thank you for being with us. I'm going to get
• 16:16
  Speaker 2: into all the facts, but answer me this. Riddle me this, Penny.
• 16:22
  Speaker 2: One of the first things that came out of her
• 16:24
  Speaker 2: mouth when she came to and they removed the.
• 16:27
  Speaker 1: Breathing device was about a lawyer. Isn't that true? What
• 16:31
  Speaker 1: did she say?
• 16:33
  Speaker 13: So one of her doctors testified that she was actually
• 16:36
  Speaker 13: writing answers on a piece of paper because she had
• 16:38
  Speaker 13: all these tubes in her mouth. She was hooked up
• 16:41
  Speaker 13: to all these different pieces of equipment. And she wrote
• 16:44
  Speaker 13: that she felt horrified. And then she asked, where is
• 16:48
  Speaker 13: her family? And then one of the first things she
• 16:50
  Speaker 13: did ask is, do I need a lawyer?
• 16:56
  Speaker 2: After hours of back and forth hot potato, In the end,
• 17:01
  Speaker 2: a hung jury prevailed. There is a mistrial at the
• 17:08
  Speaker 2: end of the courtroom day today. The judge evokes Winston
• 17:13
  Speaker 2: Churchill and describes how Churchill stood up against the Nazis,
• 17:21
  Speaker 2: how he stood up against many people in Parliament. and
• 17:26
  Speaker 2: told the people of Great Britain they had to brace
• 17:29
  Speaker 2: themselves for duty. The judge said he admired the jury
• 17:35
  Speaker 2: for bracing themselves for duty and doing their duty, although
• 17:39
  Speaker 2: they could not reach a unanimous verdict. He told them
• 17:43
  Speaker 2: they should be proud. What led us to this very
• 17:47
  Speaker 2: moment tonight?
• 17:49
  Speaker 8: She denied suicidal ideation. She denied homicidal ideation. She said
• 17:53
  Speaker 8: she wasn't hearing voices or seeing anything. They saw the
• 17:57
  Speaker 8: entire time she was there, no signs of psychosis. In fact,
• 18:00
  Speaker 8: every doctor she saw from Tufts in September all the
• 18:05
  Speaker 8: way through Tufts at January 23rd, none of them saw
• 18:10
  Speaker 8: any signs of psychosis ever. So they're all wrong? All
• 18:15
  Speaker 8: these different doctors at all these different practices, they're all
• 18:19
  Speaker 8: collectively together wrong?
• 18:21
  Speaker 1: That doesn't make sense.
• 18:25
  Speaker 8: You're at 413, you see her search for takeout from 3V.
• 18:29
  Speaker 8: And then immediately after, she does the Apple Maps search
• 18:32
  Speaker 8: to see how long it takes to get to 3V. Well,
• 18:36
  Speaker 8: defense wants you to believe that, you know, she was
• 18:40
  Speaker 8: checking that because she didn't want him gone for too long.
• 18:43
  Speaker 14: She wanted him home.
• 18:44
  Speaker 8: She was in distress. If you're in distress, don't send
• 18:48
  Speaker 8: him anywhere.
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: Make food at home.
• 18:50
  Speaker 8: Have him cook.
• 18:51
  Speaker 1: Get delivery.
• 18:52
  Speaker 8: Get DoorDash. Go to one of the other restaurants that
• 18:55
  Speaker 8: Patrick mentioned that were two minutes down the road.
• 18:58
  Speaker 2: That is Prosecutor Sprague in her closing statements to the jury,
• 19:01
  Speaker 2: which weigh very heavily on the jurors as they go
• 19:05
  Speaker 2: out for deliberations. That's from our friends at East Idaho News.
• 19:08
  Speaker 1: Straight out to Dr.
• 19:09
  Speaker 2: Cheryl Erick joining us, clinical forensic psychologist specializing in in
• 19:14
  Speaker 2: cases just like this.
• 19:16
  Speaker 5: Dr.
• 19:16
  Speaker 2: Sherrill, thank you for being with us. So you just
• 19:19
  Speaker 2: heard Prosecutor Sprague describing clear planning.
• 19:25
  Speaker 1: The law is.
• 19:26
  Speaker 2: Intent can be formed just like that. And here we
• 19:32
  Speaker 2: see clear planning, which no one really wants to address
• 19:37
  Speaker 2: because we all find it much more comfortable To believe, oh, okay,
• 19:41
  Speaker 2: she was insane.
• 19:43
  Speaker 1: That's better than her planning the deaths of her children.
• 19:46
  Speaker 1: Can you be in postpartum psychosis and intend to kill.
• 19:51
  Speaker 12: You're you're looking at intent and you're looking at planning
• 19:57
  Speaker 12: and nancy lindsey clancy could absolutely have done planning that
• 20:04
  Speaker 12: was triggered by by auditory hallucinations and planning that was
• 20:09
  Speaker 12: shaped by psychotic delusions. For example, if she believed that
• 20:14
  Speaker 12: she was protecting her children from something by killing them,
• 20:19
  Speaker 12: she could very much in a psychotic state, plan that,
• 20:23
  Speaker 12: carry it out. And then when she came out of
• 20:25
  Speaker 12: the psychotic state being a completely different state of mind,
• 20:27
  Speaker 12: people really confuse postpartum psychosis, which is incredibly rare. You
• 20:33
  Speaker 12: see this one or two in a thousand Whereas postpartum
• 20:37
  Speaker 12: depression is much, much more common. This is a loss
• 20:41
  Speaker 12: of touch with reality. This is a person when they
• 20:44
  Speaker 12: are in a psychotic state who cannot think about the
• 20:48
  Speaker 12: law and reality and all of the state of mind
• 20:51
  Speaker 12: things that her mother-in-law testified to about what a wonderful
• 20:54
  Speaker 12: loving mother she was when she was in her right mind.
• 20:58
  Speaker 12: But postpartum psychosis is different, and it doesn't look like
• 21:02
  Speaker 12: regular psychosis. When I watched the prosecution talk about, are
• 21:06
  Speaker 12: all of these doctors wrong because they didn't see it,
• 21:09
  Speaker 12: they were on Zoom with her for 20 minutes here
• 21:12
  Speaker 12: and there. Postpartum psychosis, rapid cycles, and people can look really,
• 21:17
  Speaker 12: really insane one minute and look completely put together the
• 21:21
  Speaker 12: next and hours later. This is something that is a
• 21:25
  Speaker 12: psychiatric emergency. It's an obstetric emergency. And she absolutely could
• 21:31
  Speaker 12: plan these things. And when we look at motive, we
• 21:34
  Speaker 12: look at all of the testimony from the people in
• 21:38
  Speaker 12: her life. If she wasn't in a psychotic state where
• 21:41
  Speaker 12: she could not tell what was real and what wasn't,
• 21:45
  Speaker 12: what is the motive? Why would this woman do this terrible,
• 21:48
  Speaker 12: heinous thing to her children? That doesn't make sense.
• 21:52
  Speaker 1: Dr.
• 21:53
  Speaker 2: Cheryl, here's the deal. No one has to prove motive.
• 22:00
  Speaker 2: In any child killing, you can say, what's the motive?
• 22:03
  Speaker 1: Why would you kill a child? I don't know.
• 22:08
  Speaker 2: All I want to know is if she could form
• 22:11
  Speaker 2: intent to kill. And clearly, she did.
• 22:16
  Speaker 6: Listen.
• 22:17
  Speaker 8: What she told Dr. Statoff, that when she gets the call,
• 22:20
  Speaker 8: she's at the fridge getting... chicken nuggets out of the
• 22:23
  Speaker 8: fridge to make dinner.
• 22:25
  Speaker 1: You heard from Patrick.
• 22:27
  Speaker 8: When he's leaving, Dawson is sitting on the couch eating
• 22:30
  Speaker 8: chicken nuggets and green beans out of a bowl. So
• 22:33
  Speaker 8: why would the defendant make that up? Why would she
• 22:36
  Speaker 8: say she's doing that during the phone call? Because if
• 22:40
  Speaker 8: she's already killed the kids because of a voice and
• 22:44
  Speaker 8: being compelled and it being against her will and she's
• 22:48
  Speaker 8: like a puppet, then she can't get a call and
• 22:52
  Speaker 8: miss it and then call the person back and have
• 22:55
  Speaker 8: a conversation and then hang up. A puppet can't do
• 22:58
  Speaker 8: those things. Those are decisions and choices and actions that
• 23:03
  Speaker 8: she's controlling.
• 23:04
  Speaker 1: Prosecutors pray giving closing statements. That's from East Idaho News.
• 23:08
  Speaker 1: So how do you reconcile that, Dr. Cheryl Arrett?
• 23:14
  Speaker 12: She's cherry-picking. We can look at intent. We can look
• 23:19
  Speaker 12: at what is the state of mind when someone is
• 23:21
  Speaker 12: formulating intent. And the question that they have to prove
• 23:24
  Speaker 12: is that she was conscious of reality, of the law,
• 23:28
  Speaker 12: of the meaning of this, that this was a permanent,
• 23:32
  Speaker 12: forever separation from her children, that she was committing a crime.
• 23:38
  Speaker 12: This is something that they have to prove. And they
• 23:41
  Speaker 12: have not.
• 23:43
  Speaker 5: I hear what you're saying, but let me give you
• 23:47
  Speaker 5: the legal parameters within which you should be working on
• 23:51
  Speaker 5: this case.
• 23:53
  Speaker 2: Intent is the intent to do the act. It doesn't
• 23:58
  Speaker 2: mean that you're thinking about it as you described forever separation.
• 24:03
  Speaker 2: It's whether I have intent to hold up a gun
• 24:06
  Speaker 2: and shoot you in the head.
• 24:08
  Speaker 1: That intent.
• 24:08
  Speaker 4: Right.
• 24:09
  Speaker 2: And she clearly had intent to get her husband out
• 24:13
  Speaker 2: of the house so she could kill the children.
• 24:18
  Speaker 12: She had intent to kill the children. What we're looking at,
• 24:21
  Speaker 12: was she criminally responsible? What was her state of mind
• 24:24
  Speaker 12: when she formulated the intent? And that is a forensic
• 24:27
  Speaker 12: psychiatric issue. Her state of mind when she formulated the
• 24:31
  Speaker 12: intent matters in this case. If she is not guilty,
• 24:37
  Speaker 12: if she's found not guilty by reason of insanity, she
• 24:40
  Speaker 12: may have formulated a tent under a delusion. And it
• 24:43
  Speaker 12: depends on whether it's egocentronic or egodistonic. Egodistonic is when
• 24:48
  Speaker 12: someone is having thoughts of hurting their baby and they're
• 24:51
  Speaker 12: absolutely horrified by it and it scares them. Egocentronic means
• 24:55
  Speaker 12: they are having these thoughts and they think that's not
• 24:59
  Speaker 12: an awful thing. That is not something that the evidence
• 25:02
  Speaker 12: shows that was a normal state of mind for this woman.
• 25:05
  Speaker 12: And there are lots and lots of attempts that this
• 25:08
  Speaker 12: woman made from what I can see, to get help
• 25:11
  Speaker 12: and a whole lot of people who did not understand
• 25:14
  Speaker 12: postpartum psychosis. This woman should have been hospitalized immediately with
• 25:19
  Speaker 12: her baby if possible, never left alone with her baby
• 25:23
  Speaker 12: if possible. She should have been given lithium. There are
• 25:28
  Speaker 12: all kinds of best practices about postpartum psychosis that were
• 25:33
  Speaker 12: not followed even by the admission of the treating mental
• 25:36
  Speaker 12: health professionals here. This is a tragedy. But this does
• 25:40
  Speaker 12: not look to me like a Casey Anthony or somebody
• 25:44
  Speaker 12: who is out partying and not, I mean, it's a
• 25:50
  Speaker 12: completely different mentality than what we've seen in some of
• 25:54
  Speaker 12: these other awful cases that you and I have covered.
• 25:56
  Speaker 2: Let's see the video again.
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: You know, to you, Dr. Gerilyn Utter, Utter is a
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: clinical psychologist.
• 26:05
  Speaker 2: Oh, by the way, this is from our friend, Nate
• 26:08
  Speaker 2: Eaton over at East Idaho News in the courtroom every
• 26:10
  Speaker 2: single day.
• 26:12
  Speaker 1: To me, she looks upset. She looks hurt.
• 26:16
  Speaker 2: Maybe she's thinking about what they had that she completely
• 26:20
  Speaker 2: destroyed with the three murders. Maybe she still loves him.
• 26:24
  Speaker 2: He testified for the state, as I recall. Maybe she
• 26:29
  Speaker 2: sees it as some sort of a betrayal. She just
• 26:33
  Speaker 2: looks very hurt and anxious like she doesn't know what's
• 26:36
  Speaker 2: about to happen. To Dr. Gerilyn Utter, you know, when
• 26:42
  Speaker 2: you see your ex possibly for the first time in
• 26:44
  Speaker 2: a long time, there are floods of emotion, much.
• 26:48
  Speaker 1: Less when you've killed his three children.
• 26:54
  Speaker 12: I mean, I agree with you, Nancy.
• 26:55
  Speaker 15: She definitely, and Tracy, she definitely looks like she is emotional,
• 26:59
  Speaker 15: but when it comes to reading the small gesticulations in
• 27:03
  Speaker 15: her face, I think one thing that we want to
• 27:05
  Speaker 15: remember is that she is on a variety of different
• 27:08
  Speaker 15: psychiatric medications that can cause something called tardive dyskinesia. And
• 27:13
  Speaker 15: that is exactly kind of what she could be demonstrating,
• 27:16
  Speaker 15: which is the lip movements.
• 27:18
  Speaker 9: You have like involuntary lip movements, brow.
• 27:21
  Speaker 15: Movements, So to Tracy's point, she's saying she's.
• 27:24
  Speaker 9: Hard to read.
• 27:25
  Speaker 15: And we want to measure that as a confounding factor
• 27:29
  Speaker 15: that the facial movements, the lips moving, that could be
• 27:33
  Speaker 15: a side effect or an adverse event of medication. But
• 27:37
  Speaker 15: she does look very sad and upset. The thing that
• 27:40
  Speaker 15: I noticed as well is she seems to be looking
• 27:42
  Speaker 15: straight ahead. I don't know if she's looking exactly at him,
• 27:46
  Speaker 15: but she can also be depersonalizing and kind of dissociating.
• 27:51
  Speaker 15: checking out in that moment, maybe not staring directly at him,
• 27:54
  Speaker 15: but around him to try to manage some of her emotions,
• 27:58
  Speaker 15: even though she's clearly emoting a little bit on the
• 28:00
  Speaker 15: screen there, as we can see.
• 28:02
  Speaker 2: Based on her reaction to him in.
• 28:06
  Speaker 1: Court, I would like to point out to Dr.
• 28:20
  Speaker 2: She admits she killed her children. She has pled not guilty, N-G-B-R-I,
• 28:26
  Speaker 2: not guilty by reason of insanity, which says, which means
• 28:30
  Speaker 2: I did it, but I was insane. So let's be clear.
• 28:35
  Speaker 2: She has pled not guilty by reason of insanity. She
• 28:39
  Speaker 2: admits she did it. Nobody's claiming Patrick Clancy did this.
• 28:45
  Speaker 2: But something about this video, something about her reaction in court,
• 28:49
  Speaker 2: has engendered a lot of sympathy, a lot of empathy,
• 28:53
  Speaker 2: and a lot of blaming Patrick Clancy.
• 28:57
  Speaker 4: Why?
• 28:57
  Speaker 6: You know what?
• 28:58
  Speaker 2: Let me go to Shannon Hill on That Star, Shannon
• 29:00
  Speaker 2: Hill News. What is this groundswell of hatred toward the
• 29:06
  Speaker 2: husband and empathy toward her?
• 29:11
  Speaker 10: I think it really started off with the surveillance footage
• 29:14
  Speaker 10: found in CBS that night, as well as the 3B restaurant.
• 29:19
  Speaker 10: The online sleuths are claiming that Patrick Clancy changed his
• 29:23
  Speaker 10: clothes between the time he went to CVS and the
• 29:26
  Speaker 10: time he went to 3-V restaurant. And this is where
• 29:29
  Speaker 10: all of the rumors began. But if you look very
• 29:31
  Speaker 10: closely at the footage from 3V and CBS, the 3V
• 29:36
  Speaker 10: footage is a little clearer and more concise, whereas the
• 29:39
  Speaker 10: CBS footage is a little more grainier. So you're seeing
• 29:42
  Speaker 10: something that might look a little different in the next
• 29:45
  Speaker 10: surveillance footage because they're completely different qualities, different lighting, different
• 29:51
  Speaker 10: side profile.
• 29:52
  Speaker 2: So Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. To Randy Kessler, hearing
• 30:10
  Speaker 2: the premeditation, the planning, and what the children endured, and
• 30:16
  Speaker 2: I've seen this in court a million times, defense attorneys
• 30:19
  Speaker 2: do their very best so the jury doesn't hear what
• 30:22
  Speaker 2: the victims went through. There is no victim in the courtroom.
• 30:26
  Speaker 2: All the jury sees is the defendant. This defendant is
• 30:31
  Speaker 2: paralyzed from the waist down, from jumping.
• 30:33
  Speaker 1: Out of her window.
• 30:35
  Speaker 2: So they are seeing her looking sympathetic. And I think
• 30:42
  Speaker 2: what happened to the children is getting lost in the sauce, Randy.
• 30:45
  Speaker 2: But I want to hear your response to the effort
• 30:49
  Speaker 2: it took to strangle the children and that some of
• 30:52
  Speaker 2: her first communications were, do I have a lawyer?
• 30:57
  Speaker 1: Not Did my children live?
• 31:00
  Speaker 2: How are my children? What have I done to my children?
• 31:03
  Speaker 2: Is this a horrible dream? Are they dead? Are they alive?
• 31:06
  Speaker 1: But do I have a lawyer?
• 31:08
  Speaker 2: I find that to be troublesome, to say the least.
• 31:14
  Speaker 11: And combined with the horrific nature of the murder, no
• 31:17
  Speaker 11: question about it, but all those facts, Nancy, are prejudicial,
• 31:21
  Speaker 11: not probative. Those facts don't need to be said. They're
• 31:24
  Speaker 11: being said to play on the sympathy of the jury.
• 31:27
  Speaker 11: The question, the issue of whether she did this has
• 31:30
  Speaker 11: been answered. She's acknowledged it. She's admitted it. Her lawyer
• 31:33
  Speaker 11: said she did it. Whether she did it and it
• 31:36
  Speaker 11: caused a lot of pain or little pain, it's horrible.
• 31:39
  Speaker 11: But they're emphasizing how much pain it caused these children,
• 31:42
  Speaker 11: how horrible it was, to get the jury more sympathetic
• 31:45
  Speaker 11: to the victims and more likely to want to punish
• 31:48
  Speaker 11: the mother. But that's not the legal standard. The legal
• 31:50
  Speaker 11: question here is not how bad was it? How much
• 31:53
  Speaker 11: did they suffer? The question is, Did she do it
• 31:56
  Speaker 11: because she had a mental break, because she was in
• 31:58
  Speaker 11: a state of psychosis? And none of the questions you're raising,
• 32:01
  Speaker 11: none of the issues you're bringing up mitigate or change
• 32:05
  Speaker 11: the fact that if she did it, it was because
• 32:08
  Speaker 11: she was under a state of psychosis. There's no other reason.
• 32:10
  Speaker 11: She did not hate the husband.
• 32:12
  Speaker 1: That is absolutely not correct, Kessler.
• 32:15
  Speaker 2: Because if she could create a plan, intent, and then
• 32:18
  Speaker 2: carry out the intent, that goes to presence of mind.
• 32:24
  Speaker 2: It goes to frame of mind, course of conduct, so
• 32:29
  Speaker 2: many more aspects that are probative at trial. I appreciate
• 32:33
  Speaker 2: your attempt. Maybe the defense attorney can learn from what
• 32:35
  Speaker 2: you just said. Joining us now, Dr. Leslie Dobson, clinical
• 32:40
  Speaker 2: forensic psychologist, host of a brand new podcast on iHeart,
• 32:44
  Speaker 2: Intentionally Disturbing. And you can find her at drlesliedobson.com, author
• 32:51
  Speaker 2: of The Friend Cleanse.
• 32:54
  Speaker 1: How to Set Boundaries with Energy Vampires.
• 32:57
  Speaker 2: Dr.
• 32:58
  Speaker 1: Leslie, weigh in.
• 33:01
  Speaker 3: I think she was floridly psychotic, and you cannot convince
• 33:04
  Speaker 3: me otherwise. We have a violence-free history, a happy mother,
• 33:09
  Speaker 3: and she faked going to all these doctors, getting all
• 33:12
  Speaker 3: these medications, faked everything. being completely insane, faked having all
• 33:17
  Speaker 3: of this anxiety, faked suicidal thoughts and harm for her children,
• 33:21
  Speaker 3: then all of a sudden premeditated, killed her three kids
• 33:24
  Speaker 3: and jumped out a window and wanted to be paralyzed.
• 33:26
  Speaker 3: It makes no sense.
• 33:28
  Speaker 1: And there is no way.
• 33:29
  Speaker 3: The prosecution is going to be able to convince a
• 33:31
  Speaker 3: jury to say without doubt that there was no question
• 33:35
  Speaker 3: of insanity.
• 33:37
  Speaker 1: Well, of course, that's not the legal standard, Dr. Leslie.
• 33:40
  Speaker 2: The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt, not no doubt.
• 33:44
  Speaker 2: beyond a reasonable doubt.
• 33:46
  Speaker 3: Well, it's two prongs in Massachusetts.
• 33:50
  Speaker 1: And they are?
• 33:52
  Speaker 3: The two prongs are that you have to, we need
• 33:55
  Speaker 3: clear and convincing evidence. So do we have doubt? And
• 34:00
  Speaker 3: do we actually believe that she was sane or insane
• 34:05
  Speaker 3: at the time of the crime?
• 34:07
  Speaker 1: Back to you, Jeff Gentry.
• 34:08
  Speaker 2: Again, why would she search on the internet sending her
• 34:14
  Speaker 2: husband on an errand. And then the moment the door
• 34:17
  Speaker 2: is closed, she, she kills the children. And he calls
• 34:20
  Speaker 2: to ask her a question in the middle of that.
• 34:22
  Speaker 2: And she puts on an Oscar winning performance, acting like
• 34:25
  Speaker 2: nothing is wrong, speaks normally into the phone.
• 34:28
  Speaker 1: Okay. Has a conversation.
• 34:31
  Speaker 14: I think we both agree that we're not going to
• 34:34
  Speaker 14: be on the same page with this one, because I
• 34:36
  Speaker 14: think that that could mean anything, but I do want
• 34:37
  Speaker 14: to talk about the evidence. I want to talk about
• 34:40
  Speaker 14: The way she harmed these children, I mean, that's not
• 34:42
  Speaker 14: a normal method of homicide. It's spur of the moment,
• 34:46
  Speaker 14: you grab the closest thing nearby, and you harm your children.
• 34:49
  Speaker 14: And then even the way that she harmed herself.
• 34:51
  Speaker 1: People do that all the time. People grab a kitchen appliance.
• 34:55
  Speaker 1: People stick a baby in the microwave.
• 34:58
  Speaker 14: Let's look at what we saw upstairs. So we see
• 35:00
  Speaker 14: blood evidence that indicates that multiple self-inflicted injuries, which that
• 35:05
  Speaker 14: can happen in somebody that's wanting to harm themselves. But
• 35:09
  Speaker 14: then you have pills involved. You have diving out of
• 35:11
  Speaker 14: a window. Those are not normal. I mean, normally when
• 35:15
  Speaker 14: somebody harms himself, they pick one method and they go
• 35:17
  Speaker 14: with it. They don't use multiple methods to inflict injury
• 35:21
  Speaker 14: on themselves. So this is essentially overkill.
• 35:23
  Speaker 1: It's amazing that none of them worked, isn't it?
• 35:26
  Speaker 14: It really is amazing.
• 35:27
  Speaker 2: It worked on the children, but she did not actually
• 35:31
  Speaker 2: commit suicide.
• 35:33
  Speaker 14: But to me, all of this adds up and shows
• 35:36
  Speaker 14: that this is kind of a spur of the moment thing.
• 35:37
  Speaker 14: This isn't necessarily something that's planned out. Maybe she heard
• 35:41
  Speaker 14: the voice and sent her husband away for a period
• 35:44
  Speaker 14: of time, but nothing to me about this crime suggests
• 35:48
  Speaker 14: that this is spur of the moment. Plus, her entire
• 35:51
  Speaker 14: history shows that she has mental health issues, that she's
• 35:54
  Speaker 14: prone to postpartum depression, that this could be a psychosis-related
• 35:58
  Speaker 14: issue as opposed to something that was planned. I'm not
• 36:01
  Speaker 14: saying that she didn't kill her kids. I'm not saying
• 36:03
  Speaker 14: that she didn't harm them, but we have to look
• 36:04
  Speaker 14: at the entire set of circumstances. We also have to
• 36:06
  Speaker 14: look at Patrick's involvement in this too. Where was he
• 36:09
  Speaker 14: at when she was struggling? Where was he at? I
• 36:11
  Speaker 14: was mentioning before, I'm a father of four. I have
• 36:14
  Speaker 14: full custody of all four of my children. I have
• 36:17
  Speaker 14: always been part of their life. And if my children's
• 36:19
  Speaker 14: mother was struggling with mental health issues or possibly saying
• 36:23
  Speaker 14: that she was going to harm the children, there is
• 36:25
  Speaker 14: no way in hell I would ever leave that person
• 36:27
  Speaker 14: alone with my kids. I would have them out at
• 36:28
  Speaker 14: the store picking up groceries with me.
• 36:31
  Speaker 2: Shannon Hill joining us tonight, host of Shannon Hill News. Shannon,
• 36:36
  Speaker 2: to try and answer the question I was asking, were
• 36:42
  Speaker 2: Lindsay Clancy's fingerprints on the exercise bands or just her DNA?
• 36:51
  Speaker 10: Nancy, from my understanding, there weren't exact fingerprints. However, there
• 36:55
  Speaker 10: was mixed DNA. We have to remember that the children's
• 36:58
  Speaker 10: DNA was on the exercise bands and they both carry
• 37:03
  Speaker 10: DNA pieces from both parents. So there wasn't really a
• 37:07
  Speaker 10: standalone DNA that stood out to forensic scientists when they
• 37:11
  Speaker 10: were looking over these pieces of evidence. It was mixed DNA.
• 37:15
  Speaker 10: All family members.
• 37:16
  Speaker 2: So mixed DNA between her and the husband, no fingerprints, correct?
• 37:21
  Speaker 10: As far as I know, there were no fingerprints.
• 37:24
  Speaker 1: Alice LaCour, is that.
• 37:25
  Speaker 2: Your understanding as well, star of Legal Briefs podcast and
• 37:29
  Speaker 2: the Prosecutors podcast?
• 37:31
  Speaker 4: That's right. And also note that that's going to be
• 37:34
  Speaker 4: a substance that's going to be very hard to get
• 37:36
  Speaker 4: any fingerprints off of. So I'm not surprised there are
• 37:39
  Speaker 4: no fingerprints. That doesn't mean she wasn't the one to
• 37:42
  Speaker 4: have her hands around it.
• 37:44
  Speaker 2: To Alice LaCour and Shannon Hill, what can you tell
• 37:48
  Speaker 2: me about her internet searches leading up to this day?
• 37:51
  Speaker 2: We hear gentry going on and on about how this
• 37:53
  Speaker 2: wasn't planned, but I'm referring to January 20, 2023, and
• 37:56
  Speaker 2: more to you. Alice, what were the searches?
• 38:04
  Speaker 4: I want to point out something that the defense actually
• 38:08
  Speaker 4: brought out that I don't think I picked up on
• 38:10
  Speaker 4: until Reddington said it in closing. She has been planning
• 38:13
  Speaker 4: this for weeks. She was keeping detailed notes in her
• 38:17
  Speaker 4: journal about her medications and the effects it had on
• 38:20
  Speaker 4: her until January 18th, the week before the murders. At
• 38:24
  Speaker 4: that point, she stops writing Everything. And in fact, she
• 38:28
  Speaker 4: goes back to a note in December, just the night before,
• 38:32
  Speaker 4: and she edits that note, seeming to blame the medications
• 38:36
  Speaker 4: and her doctors for the way she's feeling. And it's
• 38:40
  Speaker 4: a clear suicide note. This note was not read out loud,
• 38:43
  Speaker 4: but it was flashed on the screen. I think she
• 38:46
  Speaker 4: stopped taking these meticulous notes on January 18th because she
• 38:49
  Speaker 4: had decided what she was going to do. She just
• 38:52
  Speaker 4: needed to look for the opportunity. So even all of
• 38:55
  Speaker 4: her friends, her family, and Patrick themselves said she seemed
• 38:59
  Speaker 4: much better. She had the best day she'd had on
• 39:02
  Speaker 4: January 24th, the day of the murders. Did you know
• 39:05
  Speaker 4: that her sister is a certified therapist? A certified therapist
• 39:10
  Speaker 4: she talked to daily. Her sister never saw the need,
• 39:13
  Speaker 4: saw the need to intervene, to come to her house,
• 39:17
  Speaker 4: to give her involuntary commitment. She had all of the
• 39:20
  Speaker 4: support around her. And it's because she knew exactly what
• 39:24
  Speaker 4: to say to people so that she could get her way.
• 39:28
  Speaker 1: Shannon Hill, what about it? Including the... the internet searches?
• 39:33
  Speaker 10: Nancy, one of the searches that Lindsay Clancy made was,
• 39:36
  Speaker 10: can you cure a sociopath? Which sort of breaks at
• 39:41
  Speaker 10: the psychotic defense. Because she was clear-minded enough three days
• 39:46
  Speaker 10: before the murders to Google, can you cure a sociopath
• 39:50
  Speaker 10: on her phone? This is something that the prosecution has
• 39:54
  Speaker 10: talked about throughout the trials is she was of clear mind.
• 39:59
  Speaker 10: She was Googling how to cure a sociopath.
• 40:02
  Speaker 7: To Dr.
• 40:02
  Speaker 2: Janie Lacey, also joining us tonight, psychotherapist and CEO of
• 40:07
  Speaker 2: Life Counseling Solutions and author of How to Heal from
• 40:12
  Speaker 2: a Toxic Relationship. Host, let's talk about it with Janie Lacey.
• 40:16
  Speaker 1: Weigh in, Dr. Lacey.
• 40:19
  Speaker 16: You know, Nancy, what I would say is it is hard,
• 40:23
  Speaker 16: and I'm hearing the conversation, it is hard for people
• 40:25
  Speaker 16: to hold to truths that someone could have moments of
• 40:29
  Speaker 16: being a good mother and also not want to be
• 40:32
  Speaker 16: a mother.
• 40:32
  Speaker 9: And this is where I land.
• 40:35
  Speaker 16: We're not arguing whether.
• 40:36
  Speaker 9: Postpartum psychosis is real.
• 40:40
  Speaker 6: It is real.
• 40:40
  Speaker 1: However.
• 40:42
  Speaker 16: This is what we look at. And I've been a
• 40:43
  Speaker 16: psychotherapist for 20 years. It is one of the most
• 40:46
  Speaker 16: severe emergencies in psychiatry, right? Postpartum psychosis is not the
• 40:52
  Speaker 16: baby blues and it is not even a standard postpartum depression.
• 40:56
  Speaker 16: It is a full break from reality. Hallucinations, delusions, a
• 41:00
  Speaker 16: mind that can no longer trust what it's seeing or hearing.
• 41:03
  Speaker 4: It is rare.
• 41:04
  Speaker 9: And when it happens, it happens fast.
• 41:06
  Speaker 16: I kind of equate it to like a medical emergency,
• 41:09
  Speaker 16: like a stroke or cardiac event, right? You're not planning,
• 41:13
  Speaker 16: you're not Googling, you're not doing all those things. When
• 41:15
  Speaker 16: it happens, it happens and it happens quickly. It's real
• 41:18
  Speaker 16: and it's treatable when it's caught in time. But when
• 41:20
  Speaker 16: we're looking at this case as a whole, there is
• 41:22
  Speaker 16: a contradiction.
• 41:23
  Speaker 1: Okay, what's the contradiction?
• 41:26
  Speaker 16: The contradiction is that when we're looking at someone that
• 41:30
  Speaker 16: has the evidence of Googling, planning, there's forethought, there is timing,
• 41:36
  Speaker 16: there is all the things that we're talking about in
• 41:39
  Speaker 16: today's show, that is not a break in reality.
• 41:41
  Speaker 9: That is the contradiction.
• 41:43
  Speaker 16: When we look at psychotic, psychiatric, treatment of postpartum psychosis.
• 41:49
  Speaker 16: It is a break in reality. I like to equate
• 41:51
  Speaker 16: it so that normal people can understand. It's like having
• 41:53
  Speaker 16: a stroke or having a cardiac arrest. I'm not Googling
• 41:56
  Speaker 16: a cardiac arrest or a stroke before I think I'm
• 41:59
  Speaker 16: going to have a stroke, right?
• 42:00
  Speaker 4: It just happens.
• 42:01
  Speaker 16: And that is the difference between what we're talking about,
• 42:04
  Speaker 16: all the treatment for postpartum depression, postpartum depression, the baby blues.
• 42:07
  Speaker 16: That is something very different when we're looking at this
• 42:09
  Speaker 16: very rare diagnosable condition.
• 42:12
  Speaker 9: That is a contradiction, Nancy.
• 42:14
  Speaker 2: State vs. Lindsay Clancy is over for today. But as
• 42:18
  Speaker 2: I say goodnight, I remember Cora, Dawson, and Callan. It's
• 42:25
  Speaker 2: not over yet. If you know or think you know
• 42:30
  Speaker 2: anyone considering suicide, please dial the suicide hotline. You can
• 42:37
  Speaker 2: call or text very simply 988- Tonight, we remember American
• 42:44
  Speaker 2: hero Deputy Sheriff Troy Bailey, Lancaster County Sheriff's Nebraska, passed
• 42:49
  Speaker 2: away in the line of duty after 33 years on
• 42:52
  Speaker 2: the force, leaving behind grieving fiancé Danielle and children Rachel, Taylor,
• 42:59
  Speaker 2: and Trevor. American hero Deputy Sheriff Troy Bailey. Thank you
• 43:06
  Speaker 2: to all of our guests being with us tonight, but
• 43:09
  Speaker 2: especially to you, Nancy Grace signing off for tonight, but
• 43:13
  Speaker 2: I'll see you tomorrow night. And until then, good night, friend.