Latest / Crime Stories with Nancy Grace / KILLER MOM, LINDSAY CLANCY IN COURT MONDAY, NEW TRIAL?

Transcript

KILLER MOM, LINDSAY CLANCY IN COURT MONDAY, NEW TRIAL? · Crime Stories with Nancy Grace

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Tonight, Lindsay Clancy in her own bizarre private money grab,
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: suing for millions and carefully embedded in her claim for money,
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: her confessions over and over again. This is her document,
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: not mine. This is not by the state. What is
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: she thinking as her attorney, Kevin Reddington, now claims There
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: is no proof she killed her three children. She stated
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: the male voice told her to kill her children on
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: that day within 24 hours of killing the children. Amazingly, Reddington,
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: with a straight face, is saying, yeah, that never happened.
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: Where is the evidence? Her lawyer, Reddington, asks In her
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: own filings. By her and her fleet of lawyers. Let's
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: have a little refresher about what this case is all about.
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: It's about Cora, Dawson, and Callen. And all he has...
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: Is Callan dying in his arms?
• 1:25
  Speaker 2: They're never happy with any answer.
• 1:27
  Speaker 3: They get from Patrick Clancy.
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: These children suffered and they suffered at the hand of
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: their mother. Joining us tonight, Crime Stories investigative reporter Dave Mack. Dave,
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: what's the latest?
• 1:39
  Speaker 4: Nancy, Lindsay Clancy is due back in a Plymouth courtroom
• 1:42
  Speaker 4: Monday for a hearing that could determine whether or not
• 1:46
  Speaker 4: She's going to face another trial over the deaths of
• 1:48
  Speaker 4: her three children. The Plymouth County DA's office has not
• 1:51
  Speaker 4: yet revealed their plans in the case. If they seek
• 1:54
  Speaker 4: a new trial, it's unclear whether they will pursue a
• 1:57
  Speaker 4: first-degree murder charge or opt for lesser charges. But in
• 2:01
  Speaker 4: a motion filed this week, prosecutors indicated they do seek
• 2:05
  Speaker 4: to pursue justice for Clancy's children. So it looks like
• 2:08
  Speaker 4: no matter what, they're moving forward. In a filing this week,
• 2:11
  Speaker 4: in the Plymouth County DA's office included notes sent to
• 2:15
  Speaker 4: the judge from the jury during deliberations before the mistrial
• 2:18
  Speaker 4: was declared. Excerpts from those notes have been revealed, and
• 2:22
  Speaker 4: some of them are pretty dry, okay? One note says,
• 2:26
  Speaker 4: after many hours of deliberation, we're unable to come to
• 2:28
  Speaker 4: a unanimous verdict. That was the first one sent. Second one,
• 2:31
  Speaker 4: after much deliberation, we are still unable to come to
• 2:35
  Speaker 4: a unanimous decision.
• 2:36
  Speaker 3: Now, the next one was.
• 2:38
  Speaker 4: Kind of interesting, saying, quote, A member of the jury
• 2:42
  Speaker 4: is unable to follow the instructions regarding reasonable doubt. How
• 2:46
  Speaker 4: should we proceed? And then they got a little more direct.
• 2:51
  Speaker 4: This one, they redacted the juror's name, but says, juror
• 2:54
  Speaker 4: number blank has made statements acknowledging doubt, but refuses to
• 2:59
  Speaker 4: apply it to the verdict as the law states. This
• 3:02
  Speaker 4: is why we cannot come to unanimous decision. And as
• 3:06
  Speaker 4: you know, the last one they sent was with a
• 3:09
  Speaker 4: heavy heart, that we report we are unable to come
• 3:12
  Speaker 4: to unanimous decision and will not be able to continue.
• 3:15
  Speaker 4: So that's where we were left when the mistrial was declared.
• 3:19
  Speaker 4: So during the hearing on Monday, Judge William Sullivan is
• 3:24
  Speaker 4: going to have to consider a lot of different things.
• 3:27
  Speaker 4: The defense motion to dismiss the murder charges on grounds
• 3:30
  Speaker 4: of double jeopardy, that's coming up. The defense request to
• 3:33
  Speaker 4: preserve juror records and conduct an inquiry into the holdout juror.
• 3:40
  Speaker 4: the prosecution's request for a gag order and limits on
• 3:44
  Speaker 4: public statements from the attorneys. There will also be discussions
• 3:48
  Speaker 4: regarding whether the Commonwealth will officially pursue a retrial and
• 3:52
  Speaker 4: when a new trial day might be set. Now, as
• 3:56
  Speaker 4: most of you know, after the trial ended, several jurors
• 4:00
  Speaker 4: came forward claiming 11 out of the 12 jurors were
• 4:03
  Speaker 4: prepared to find Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity.
• 4:07
  Speaker 4: That's where we still stand today as they consider what
• 4:10
  Speaker 4: to do next. Now, Clancy's attorney, Kevin Reddington, denies that
• 4:14
  Speaker 4: Lindsay Clancy will testify in Patrick Clancy's civil suit. That's
• 4:20
  Speaker 4: big news because it was indicated earlier that she would testify. Also,
• 4:25
  Speaker 4: psychiatrists are moving in to dismiss Patrick Clancy's suit. They're
• 4:29
  Speaker 4: arguing the Massachusetts law generally shields mental health providers from
• 4:34
  Speaker 4: liability for crimes committed by patients. The judge has to
• 4:38
  Speaker 4: consider this motion to dismiss under advisement and did not
• 4:43
  Speaker 4: make a ruling. So that's where we sit. It's going
• 4:46
  Speaker 4: to be a busy day in court Monday and beyond.
• 4:49
  Speaker 5: This is a woman that was suffering from psychosis at
• 4:54
  Speaker 5: the time that she went down to that basement. She
• 4:59
  Speaker 5: had no motive. She loves her children. She intended to
• 5:05
  Speaker 5: kill herself. She didn't fake that. Threw herself out the window.
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: There you see defense attorney Kevin Reddington in court stating
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: that his client was suffering postpartum psychosis when she went
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: down to the basement, the murder scene where her three
• 5:23
  Speaker 1: children were murdered, and then tried to kill herself. But
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: now we're hearing an entirely different story. That's from our
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: friends at East Idaho News. And this is what he
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: says in court now.
• 5:37
  Speaker 6: Where is the evidence that she did this? You have
• 5:40
  Speaker 6: a situation where Patrick comes home. Your Honor recalls the
• 5:46
  Speaker 6: evidence that he indicates that when he came home, that
• 5:50
  Speaker 6: he enters the house, he puts the food down on
• 5:52
  Speaker 6: the table, comes back from the restaurant. It's quiet, eerily quiet,
• 5:58
  Speaker 6: as the government indicates in their motion. That he then
• 6:01
  Speaker 6: indicates that he goes upstairs into the bedroom and After
• 6:06
  Speaker 6: yelling downstairs to the basement, there's no response.
• 6:08
  Speaker 3: He goes upstairs. And when he goes upstairs, he goes
• 6:11
  Speaker 3: into the bedroom.
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: Okay. Amazingly, Reddington, with a straight face, is saying, yeah,
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: that never happened. That's my friends at East Idaho News.
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: The entire defense for Lindsay Clancy was that she murdered
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: her children and but she was insane. That's what NGBRI means,
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: not guilty by reason of insanity. You must admit you
• 6:39
  Speaker 1: did the act, but were insane at the time to
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: utilize that defense. Now, a stunning example about face. Some
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: would claim a lie. Joining us, an all-star panel straight
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: out to Penny Commit, investigative reporter with Boston's WBZCBS, who
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: covered the case from the very beginning. What is happening?
• 7:03
  Speaker 7: Well, what's happening here, Nancy, is something that happens at
• 7:05
  Speaker 7: a lot of criminal trials.
• 7:07
  Speaker 2: It's called Rule 25.
• 7:08
  Speaker 7: It's something in Massachusetts that a lot of attorneys will
• 7:12
  Speaker 7: argue for after a trial. Basically, he's asking the judge
• 7:16
  Speaker 7: here for a required finding of not guilty.
• 7:21
  Speaker 2: And it's kind of nuanced.
• 7:22
  Speaker 7: What he's arguing here is that there is insufficient evidence
• 7:27
  Speaker 7: from the Commonwealth. The prosecution did not prove that Lindsay
• 7:31
  Speaker 7: Clancy committed these crimes. What was so shocking, and as
• 7:35
  Speaker 7: someone who was sitting in the courtroom, heads were certainly turning,
• 7:38
  Speaker 7: people were looking around. He didn't only argue that there
• 7:41
  Speaker 7: was insufficient evidence that she was criminally responsible.
• 7:45
  Speaker 2: He argued there.
• 7:45
  Speaker 7: Was insufficient evidence that she committed these crimes at all,
• 7:49
  Speaker 7: which is a totally different tune than what we've heard
• 7:51
  Speaker 7: from him prior. But it shows that he's really going
• 7:54
  Speaker 7: to bat for his client and trying anything he can
• 7:57
  Speaker 7: to prevent a second trial.
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: To Dr. Bethany Marshall joining us, renowned psychoanalyst in the L.A. jurisdiction.
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: You can see her on Peacock. on Bravo, on Hulu.
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: She's a star of a new hit podcast, On the
• 8:11
  Speaker 1: Couch with Dr. Bethany Marshall.
• 8:13
  Speaker 2: Dr.
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: Bethany, thank you for being with us. You have consulted
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: and studied on many, many not guilty by reason of insanities.
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: And the foundation of NGBRI is you're claiming insanity at
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: the time you committed the offense. Please explain.
• 8:34
  Speaker 8: Well, what that means is that, first of all, you
• 8:38
  Speaker 8: did not know right from wrong. So you were basically
• 8:41
  Speaker 8: psychotic or out of your mind, which is what Reddington
• 8:45
  Speaker 8: was saying. Also that you couldn't control or stop yourself.
• 8:50
  Speaker 8: Remember when Zyzelle, the doctor who goes to the hospital
• 8:53
  Speaker 8: to visit Clancy, hands Clancy his phone, she says to
• 8:58
  Speaker 8: Patrick Clancy, A man told me to do it, but
• 9:01
  Speaker 8: I couldn't stop myself. So there she's already building the
• 9:06
  Speaker 8: defense or Zizel is building the defense. But basically, basically,
• 9:10
  Speaker 8: it's the idea that the defendant does not know right
• 9:14
  Speaker 8: from wrong.
• 9:15
  Speaker 9: At the charging conference, you were talking about the investigation,
• 9:18
  Speaker 9: the police. Do you think that's something that you're going
• 9:19
  Speaker 9: to bring up.
• 9:20
  Speaker 3: In the closings?
• 9:21
  Speaker 6: You know, it's a difficult if you remember back to
• 9:24
  Speaker 6: when I filed the motion for the bifurcation, I was
• 9:27
  Speaker 6: arguing to the judge. It's difficult because a defendant on
• 9:31
  Speaker 6: the lack of criminal responsibility defense has to basically admit
• 9:36
  Speaker 6: that he or she is guilty before you're able to
• 9:38
  Speaker 6: do that.
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: From our friends at Law and Crime, Josh Colesry, what
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: did he just say?
• 9:43
  Speaker 10: He said he has to basically admit, but he did
• 9:45
  Speaker 10: not basically admit. You know, he didn't admit to anything.
• 9:48
  Speaker 10: He didn't stipulate to anything. And he's correct about the law.
• 9:52
  Speaker 10: The prosecution still bears the burden of proof that lindsey
• 9:57
  Speaker 10: clancy committed on a reasonable doubt and he didn't argue
• 10:02
  Speaker 10: against it okay he did not argue against it but
• 10:05
  Speaker 10: he did not say yes she did it he just
• 10:08
  Speaker 10: didn't address it he didn't say yes my client murdered
• 10:12
  Speaker 10: you know what children old blood.
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: Let's hear it one more time just just to make
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: Maybe you didn't hear it correctly. Let's play it one
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: more time.
• 10:21
  Speaker 9: At the charging conference, you were talking about the investigation,
• 10:24
  Speaker 9: the police. Do you think that's something that you're going
• 10:26
  Speaker 9: to bring up in the closings?
• 10:28
  Speaker 6: It's a difficult, if you remember back to when I
• 10:31
  Speaker 6: filed the motion for the bifurcation, I was arguing to
• 10:34
  Speaker 6: the judge, it's difficult because a defendant on the lack
• 10:38
  Speaker 6: of criminal responsibility defense has to basically admit that he
• 10:43
  Speaker 6: or she is guilty before you're able to do that.
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: So he just said, It's difficult on Clancy because she
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: has to basically admit she's guilty before you can argue insanity. Okay,
• 11:01
  Speaker 1: and there's more. There's more, Colesrud.
• 11:03
  Speaker 6: Many, many lay people have difficulty understanding the concept of
• 11:08
  Speaker 6: the bifurcation and say, well, you know, she admitted that
• 11:13
  Speaker 6: she did it, so she's guilty.
• 11:15
  Speaker 3: And therefore... she's just guilty.
• 11:18
  Speaker 6: And then they go off on a tangent about all
• 11:20
  Speaker 6: of these horrific allegations, you know, that she's a demon
• 11:25
  Speaker 6: and she's possessed and she should be executed. And this
• 11:27
  Speaker 6: is coming from politicians, you know, from President Trump all
• 11:31
  Speaker 6: the way down.
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: From East Idaho News, Colesrood, you and I have both
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: tried cases where the trial was bifurcated. That's a fancy
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: legal term for split in half. Here's an easy one.
• 11:45
  Speaker 1: to compare. In a death penalty case, you do the
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: guilt innocence phase. And if found guilty, the defendant is
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: then tried for sentencing. Because a lot of the evidence
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: that comes in at sentencing by the state is so
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: inflammatory about why the death penalty should be imposed that
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: it would prejudice the jury if they heard all of that,
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: although it be true, in the guilt innocence phase. So
• 12:16
  Speaker 1: you have to bifurcate or split the trial in half. Now,
• 12:22
  Speaker 1: Kevin Reddington wanted a bifurcated trial because in the first
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: part of the trial, he would have to admit she
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: was claiming insanity because she killed the children. Okay. So
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: in your own words, Colesrood, why Did Reddington fight for
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: a bifurcated trial?
• 12:48
  Speaker 10: So, you know, one thing that you're doing that's a
• 12:50
  Speaker 10: little unfair, Nancy, is that you're juxtaposing statements that he
• 12:53
  Speaker 10: gave about what he was going to say during his
• 12:56
  Speaker 10: closing argument to the jury compared to his legal argument
• 13:01
  Speaker 10: to a judge after a non-verdict.
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: Well, shouldn't it all be true?
• 13:08
  Speaker 10: No, it's different.
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: What he says in openings, closings to the press and
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: to the judge, shouldn't it all be the truth?
• 13:14
  Speaker 10: No, it's not. It's not.
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: One is a question of fact. I'm so glad you
• 13:18
  Speaker 1: said that. You cleared up a lot for me. So
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: Reddington can just lie.
• 13:24
  Speaker 10: A question of fact to the jury, and then it's
• 13:26
  Speaker 10: an argument of question of law to a judge. It's
• 13:28
  Speaker 10: a different type of argument. You're not going to be
• 13:31
  Speaker 10: arguing legal theories before a jury. You're only going to
• 13:34
  Speaker 10: be arguing fact, whether or not the prosecution had enough
• 13:39
  Speaker 10: evidence to prove their case before a jury. It's a
• 13:43
  Speaker 10: different type of argument and analysis after a jury to
• 13:49
  Speaker 10: a judge.
• 13:50
  Speaker 11: I'm a postpartum psychosis survivor. And I have said this
• 13:53
  Speaker 11: multiple times that I don't remember anything about my episodes.
• 13:56
  Speaker 11: I woke up in the hospital repeating what my nurses
• 13:59
  Speaker 11: and my husband were talking about around me. And I
• 14:02
  Speaker 11: had no clue what I was saying. It was one
• 14:06
  Speaker 11: of the most scariest times in my life, waking up
• 14:11
  Speaker 11: and becoming lucid from psychosis because I had to rely
• 14:15
  Speaker 11: basically on everybody else and what they were saying and
• 14:19
  Speaker 11: their recollection of what I went through. Lindsay has only
• 14:24
  Speaker 11: ever been told what happened that night. She doesn't remember.
• 14:28
  Speaker 1: That is Blair Wilson on Insta. transposing her psychosis onto
• 14:34
  Speaker 1: what happened with Lindsay Clancy. But to Penny Commit joining us,
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: investigative reporter WBZ CBS Boston, it's my understanding from the
• 14:45
  Speaker 1: testimony that she stated she was in a dream state.
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: It was like a dream. When she recalled killing her children,
• 14:56
  Speaker 1: it was as if she saw it happening in a dream.
• 15:01
  Speaker 7: That is what her psychologist has testified to. That's what
• 15:04
  Speaker 7: the chaplain at the hospital had testified to. And Patrick
• 15:08
  Speaker 7: Clancy himself said that Lindsay called him and told him
• 15:12
  Speaker 7: that she was experiencing some type.
• 15:14
  Speaker 2: Of mental episode.
• 15:16
  Speaker 7: But the difficulty here, and I think with the defense,
• 15:19
  Speaker 7: Kevin Reddington was really trying to get at when he
• 15:21
  Speaker 7: argued for this required finding of not guilty, is that
• 15:25
  Speaker 7: there's no physical evidence of these things. All this evidence
• 15:28
  Speaker 7: comes from testimony comes from other people. And there's not
• 15:33
  Speaker 7: any concrete evidence that she said this. So that is
• 15:37
  Speaker 7: what the defense is really using as a basis of
• 15:39
  Speaker 7: their argument during Tuesday's hearing.
• 15:41
  Speaker 2: And it's really, really rare.
• 15:44
  Speaker 1: You mean other than all the people that she told
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: she did it? So they're all lying?
• 15:51
  Speaker 7: Well, that's why the defense is trying to argue that
• 15:55
  Speaker 7: The Commonwealth did not prove their case and does not
• 15:57
  Speaker 7: have sufficient evidence. I mean, again, it's really rare that
• 16:02
  Speaker 7: this is granted by a judge in between trials, this
• 16:06
  Speaker 7: not guilty required finding.
• 16:08
  Speaker 2: It's very, very rare this happens.
• 16:10
  Speaker 7: I've covered so many trials in Massachusetts, I've actually never
• 16:12
  Speaker 7: seen it be successful. But again, Kevin Reddington.
• 16:15
  Speaker 2: Is trying everything he can to prevent a second trial
• 16:18
  Speaker 2: of his client.
• 16:19
  Speaker 1: Penny Kmet, what did the chaplain testify to regarding Clancy's
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: statements to him?
• 16:26
  Speaker 2: So the chaplain is in the hospital.
• 16:29
  Speaker 7: So a hospital chaplain who spoke with Lindsay Clancy shortly
• 16:33
  Speaker 7: after these events, she testified to several different things that
• 16:36
  Speaker 7: Lindsay told her about trying to save the children, that
• 16:40
  Speaker 7: she was told by a voice that she would not
• 16:44
  Speaker 7: only be in danger, but her children would be in danger.
• 16:47
  Speaker 7: Her children would not be safe if she did not
• 16:49
  Speaker 7: commit these killings. And I think a really powerful quote
• 16:52
  Speaker 7: from the chaplain is, is she claims that Clancy told her, I'm.
• 16:56
  Speaker 2: So glad my children are safe.
• 16:59
  Speaker 7: And remember, this chaplain was one of the defensive witnesses
• 17:03
  Speaker 7: to try and prove that she was, in their opinion,
• 17:06
  Speaker 7: experiencing a postpartum psychosis.
• 17:08
  Speaker 1: And let's finish that sentence. Experiencing postpartum psychosis at the
• 17:12
  Speaker 1: time she killed her children. Correct.
• 17:16
  Speaker 2: That's what they were arguing.
• 17:20
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 17:21
  Speaker 3: So.
• 17:22
  Speaker 1: To Dr. Jessica Dwyer joining us, Director, Chief Medical Examiner,
• 17:27
  Speaker 1: Southwestern Institute of Forensic Sciences. How long would it take?
• 17:32
  Speaker 1: How many minutes or seconds to ligature strangle a child?
• 17:39
  Speaker 12: Well, it's documented that the time it would take for
• 17:43
  Speaker 12: occlusion of the airway vasculature for somebody to pass out
• 17:47
  Speaker 12: would be on a spectrum of seconds. For you to
• 17:50
  Speaker 12: continue that pressure to where it would be death, it
• 17:53
  Speaker 12: could be on a spectrum of anywhere from seconds to minutes.
• 17:56
  Speaker 12: It's going to be variable by individual.
• 17:58
  Speaker 13: Did you ask Lindsay why she did it?
• 18:04
  Speaker 3: I asked her if she remembered it. And what did
• 18:07
  Speaker 3: she say?
• 18:08
  Speaker 9: She said it was like a dream.
• 18:10
  Speaker 14: And she remembered it much in the way you would
• 18:15
  Speaker 14: remember a dream after waking up.
• 18:17
  Speaker 1: That's from our friends at 60 Minutes. So Dr. Bethany Marshall,
• 18:22
  Speaker 1: she tells the chaplain why she killed the children. She
• 18:27
  Speaker 1: told others, including psychiatrists, that she heard an auditory hallucination,
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: male voice telling her to kill the children. She then
• 18:38
  Speaker 1: reportedly tried to kill herself after killing the children. And
• 18:44
  Speaker 1: she echoes the same story to her husband as overheard
• 18:50
  Speaker 1: by a treating physician. Does that make sense to you?
• 18:55
  Speaker 1: The dreamlike state, the auditory hallucination.
• 19:00
  Speaker 8: This is what I call the sleepwalking defense. There was
• 19:02
  Speaker 8: a man in the late 1900s who stabbed his wife
• 19:08
  Speaker 8: 44 times, drowned her in a pool, and later said
• 19:11
  Speaker 8: that he was sleepwalking. And Nancy, this is so common
• 19:16
  Speaker 8: for defendants. People have committed a crime to say that
• 19:19
  Speaker 8: they were not in their right mind. They didn't do it.
• 19:21
  Speaker 8: They were sleepwalking. You know, Nancy, another confession that she made,
• 19:25
  Speaker 8: these words came right out of her mouth, is multiple
• 19:30
  Speaker 8: times she says she's glad the children are in a
• 19:32
  Speaker 8: safe place. Well, if she has no knowledge of having
• 19:37
  Speaker 8: done this, why is she already saying that she's glad
• 19:41
  Speaker 8: they are in a safe place? So her story just
• 19:44
  Speaker 8: really contradicts itself.
• 19:47
  Speaker 3: Weird. is the evidence that she did this? You have
• 19:53
  Speaker 3: a situation where Patrick comes home.
• 19:58
  Speaker 6: Your Honor recalls the evidence that he indicates that when
• 20:01
  Speaker 6: he came home, that he enters the house, he puts
• 20:04
  Speaker 6: the food down on the table, comes back from the restaurant,
• 20:08
  Speaker 6: It's quiet, eerily quiet, as.
• 20:10
  Speaker 3: The government indicates in their motion.
• 20:13
  Speaker 6: That he then indicates that he goes upstairs into the
• 20:17
  Speaker 6: bedroom after yelling downstairs to the basement.
• 20:20
  Speaker 3: There's no response. He goes upstairs.
• 20:22
  Speaker 6: And when he goes upstairs, he goes into the bedroom.
• 20:25
  Speaker 2: Where is the evidence?
• 20:27
  Speaker 1: Her lawyer, Reddington, asks. in her own filings by her
• 20:34
  Speaker 1: and her fleet of lawyers. This case back in court
• 20:39
  Speaker 1: again as Reddington demands the trial judge investigate the holdout Gerard.
• 20:46
  Speaker 1: You know, it's true. Josh Colesrood joining me, veteran criminal
• 20:50
  Speaker 1: defense attorney. Colesrood, that was from our friends at East
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: Idaho News for Reddington saying, where's the evidence? Where's the evidence?
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: How about looking at her admissions report in her civil lawsuit.
• 21:01
  Speaker 1: Isn't it true, Colesrud, that that is why you don't
• 21:04
  Speaker 1: go ahead and file civil lawsuits before the end of
• 21:08
  Speaker 1: a criminal case, because everything that comes out in a
• 21:11
  Speaker 1: civil lawsuit can be used in the criminal trial.
• 21:14
  Speaker 3: That is true.
• 21:16
  Speaker 10: But the prosecution chose not to admit that evidence. I mean,
• 21:19
  Speaker 10: this lawsuit was filed in January of this year, and
• 21:24
  Speaker 10: the prosecution could have used those statements, and they chose
• 21:27
  Speaker 10: not to.
• 21:27
  Speaker 3: So the jury.
• 21:29
  Speaker 10: They didn't have time to consider that. It wasn't before them.
• 21:31
  Speaker 10: You either use it or you lose it. And the
• 21:33
  Speaker 10: prosecution lost it. And in Massachusetts, they still have, the
• 21:37
  Speaker 10: prosecution still has the burden of proving that she did it.
• 21:41
  Speaker 10: And they chose not to use that so-called confession to
• 21:45
  Speaker 10: do that.
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: So-called confession? You're saying the state, quote, lost? I'm sorry,
• 21:53
  Speaker 1: was there, Jim, was there a not guilty verdict that
• 21:56
  Speaker 1: I did? Oh, no, there's not. They have not lost anything.
• 21:58
  Speaker 1: There was a mistrial, and I predict there will be
• 22:01
  Speaker 1: a retrial. And I guarantee you, if they know they're
• 22:06
  Speaker 1: rear-end from a hole in the ground, they're going to
• 22:08
  Speaker 1: use these confessions in her, Lindsay Clancy's, shameless money-grab suing.
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: Everybody she could think of for money because of the
• 22:19
  Speaker 1: loss of her children, because she killed her children. She's
• 22:22
  Speaker 1: suing them. She's even suing for loss of sex with
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: her husband.
• 22:28
  Speaker 3: Wow.
• 22:29
  Speaker 1: Whose fault is that?
• 22:30
  Speaker 9: I mean, Dr.
• 22:30
  Speaker 1: Bethany Marshall, how could Patrick Clancy ever have sex with
• 22:35
  Speaker 1: Lindsay Clancy again with thoughts of his children dancing through
• 22:39
  Speaker 1: his head? And she sues over loss of consortium. You
• 22:43
  Speaker 1: know what loss of consortium is? Conjugal consortium. That's sex. She,
• 22:47
  Speaker 1: Lindsay Clancy, actually sues doctors and hospitals because she's not
• 22:51
  Speaker 1: having sex with her husband anymore. Gee, I wonder why, Bethany.
• 22:55
  Speaker 1: I don't know.
• 22:56
  Speaker 8: Well, if you think of how that plays into the
• 22:58
  Speaker 8: case and she's thinking about loss of sex with him
• 23:01
  Speaker 8: rather than the loss of her children or allegedly strangling them,
• 23:05
  Speaker 8: murdering them, you know, that gives you an indication into
• 23:08
  Speaker 8: her state of mind leading up to the killing of
• 23:11
  Speaker 8: her children, which was thinking about herself and exercising and
• 23:15
  Speaker 8: her own well-being. You know, it's just a continuous state
• 23:18
  Speaker 8: of mind that is focused on self rather than her
• 23:21
  Speaker 8: maternal duties.
• 23:23
  Speaker 3: Okay.
• 23:23
  Speaker 1: You know what? I got to give Colesroot a tiny,
• 23:26
  Speaker 1: tiny taste. I combed through these documents. It took me
• 23:30
  Speaker 1: hours and hours and hours to find all of the
• 23:33
  Speaker 1: damning confessions and epiphanies contained in her filing. Okay, let's
• 23:41
  Speaker 1: start with defendants knew or should have known. Defendants knew
• 23:45
  Speaker 1: or should have known Lindsay presented a real clear present
• 23:47
  Speaker 1: danger of harm to herself and her children. Defendant, that's
• 23:51
  Speaker 1: the doctors in the hospitals. Their failures to comply, more
• 23:57
  Speaker 1: likely than not, caused the injuries suffered by Lindsay, including
• 24:01
  Speaker 1: Lindsay's killing her children. Okay, hold on everybody. Just let
• 24:10
  Speaker 1: me understand. This is from her lawsuit, which I have
• 24:17
  Speaker 1: right here, which I read the entire time. thing over
• 24:22
  Speaker 1: and over, and I was stunned that she, and she
• 24:26
  Speaker 1: has her name at the end of this, admits she
• 24:29
  Speaker 1: killed her children. But now, Reddington is saying something completely different.
• 24:35
  Speaker 15: Forget about the law, forget about the motions, forget about everything.
• 24:40
  Speaker 15: Talk like human beings. Why would this woman, who the
• 24:47
  Speaker 15: evidence shows clearly and unequivocally Was a nurse, a mother,
• 24:54
  Speaker 15: a friend, did nothing wrong in her life? Why would
• 25:01
  Speaker 15: she kill those three children?
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: From our friends at East Idaho News, Reddington really laying
• 25:07
  Speaker 1: it on thick. He's icing that cake. Here's another admission
• 25:11
  Speaker 1: in her money grab court documents. I lost all control.
• 25:16
  Speaker 1: My body started acting without any control on my part.
• 25:19
  Speaker 1: I was following commands. All action. The voice demanded action.
• 25:23
  Speaker 1: Lindsay proceeded to strangle each of her children, uttering, go
• 25:28
  Speaker 1: to God, baby. Okay. There's no way around it. There's
• 25:36
  Speaker 1: no way around it. To Dave Mack, joining us, Crime
• 25:39
  Speaker 1: Stories investigative reporter. Who all is Lindsay Clancy suing?
• 25:45
  Speaker 4: Oh my gosh, Nancy, she is suing Every doctor that
• 25:50
  Speaker 4: treated her at the hospital, she's saying that everybody involved
• 25:55
  Speaker 4: in her diagnosis or lack thereof caused all of this
• 25:58
  Speaker 4: to happen. So just put the umbrella up, every doctor,
• 26:02
  Speaker 4: every nurse, every person. And then we got to go
• 26:06
  Speaker 4: after the 911. We've got to go after paramedics taking
• 26:09
  Speaker 4: way too long to come and get her, the ambulance
• 26:11
  Speaker 4: going to the hospital. So anybody who was involved with
• 26:14
  Speaker 4: her in the days leading up to and the day of,
• 26:18
  Speaker 4: and the day after, all included in the civil lawsuit, Nancy.
• 26:23
  Speaker 16: She retained an awareness of the illegality of killing others,
• 26:27
  Speaker 16: including killing her children. Her moral awareness of the wrongfulness
• 26:31
  Speaker 16: of this killing was influenced by her strong desire to
• 26:35
  Speaker 16: die and, if she were dead, not to leave her
• 26:39
  Speaker 16: children behind.
• 26:40
  Speaker 1: Hold everything. Let me hear that again. You have got
• 26:45
  Speaker 1: on the stand a psychiatrist talking about what Lindsay Clancy
• 26:49
  Speaker 1: told him.
• 26:51
  Speaker 16: She retained an awareness of the illegality of killing others,
• 26:55
  Speaker 16: including killing her children. Her moral awareness of the wrongfulness
• 26:59
  Speaker 16: of this killing was influenced by her strong desire to
• 27:03
  Speaker 16: die and, if she were dead, not to leave her
• 27:07
  Speaker 16: children behind.
• 27:08
  Speaker 1: She retained an awareness of the illegality of killing her children.
• 27:16
  Speaker 1: She knew she killed her children. What, I mean, what's
• 27:20
  Speaker 1: the argument? That someone framed her to tell the psychiatrist that?
• 27:27
  Speaker 1: That's from East Idaho News. Let's have a little refresher
• 27:31
  Speaker 1: about what this case is all about. It's about Cora
• 27:36
  Speaker 1: Dawson and Callen. Straight out to special guest Dr. Jessica Dwyer. Director,
• 27:43
  Speaker 1: Chief Medical Examiner, Southwestern Institute of Forensic Scientists, joining us
• 27:48
  Speaker 1: tonight out of Texas.
• 27:52
  Speaker 16: Dr.
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: Dwyer, thank you for being with us. What exactly happened
• 27:56
  Speaker 1: to the three children?
• 27:58
  Speaker 12: What occurs in a situation with ligature strangulation is you
• 28:01
  Speaker 12: have an object. In this instance, you have these elastic
• 28:04
  Speaker 12: exercise bands. that are applied around the neck. It requires
• 28:08
  Speaker 12: a significant amount of pressure to hold that, to actually
• 28:11
  Speaker 12: occlude the vascular supply airway in the neck. And it
• 28:17
  Speaker 12: requires a significant degree of force to actually subdue the victim.
• 28:21
  Speaker 1: In the civil lawsuit that she files along with her lawyers,
• 28:24
  Speaker 1: her name is on it, asking for money from everybody,
• 28:29
  Speaker 1: blaming everybody but herself. She says she had a normal day.
• 28:34
  Speaker 1: Let's see, it took Cora to the pediatrician. Later, she
• 28:37
  Speaker 1: went to the backyard with the children, built a snowman.
• 28:40
  Speaker 1: We know she sent photos of that to her in-laws
• 28:43
  Speaker 1: and her husband. Later in the afternoon, the voice begins saying,
• 28:48
  Speaker 1: you should harm the children. Lindsay thought about dinner and
• 28:53
  Speaker 1: realized she had not prepared anything. She asked Patrick about takeout.
• 28:59
  Speaker 1: She's having rational thoughts. Here she admits she looked at
• 29:05
  Speaker 1: a map to see how long it would take. Now
• 29:10
  Speaker 1: they're adding because she didn't want to be alone. There
• 29:15
  Speaker 1: she confesses, Dr. Bethany Marshall, that she is the one
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: that looked up the route how long it would take
• 29:25
  Speaker 1: for her husband to be gone on the errand on
• 29:29
  Speaker 1: which she sent him. Because there was speculation that someone
• 29:33
  Speaker 1: else tampered with her devices, that she really didn't look
• 29:37
  Speaker 1: that up. Well, here she confesses she did.
• 29:40
  Speaker 8: You know, Nancy, all this planning shows a high degree
• 29:44
  Speaker 8: of organization. And then when she describes the so-called command
• 29:48
  Speaker 8: hallucinations that then come into the case, there's a high
• 29:52
  Speaker 8: degree of descriptive detail about the voice. What's the voice like?
• 29:56
  Speaker 8: How the voice tells her to do it, the go
• 29:59
  Speaker 8: to God baby. When I sit with patients who have
• 30:02
  Speaker 8: command hallucinations, they do not describe those command hallucinations so clearly.
• 30:09
  Speaker 8: They are often grossly disorganized in their presentation in my
• 30:13
  Speaker 8: office and never, ever, ever have I treated a patient
• 30:17
  Speaker 8: who reported no command hallucinations prior to an event. Then
• 30:22
  Speaker 8: they have command hallucinations for 18 minutes and And then
• 30:26
  Speaker 8: they never have those command hallucinations again. That is just
• 30:29
  Speaker 8: not a clinical possibility, Nancy. I can't state that enough.
• 30:33
  Speaker 8: That never happens. Usually it's a part of a chronic picture.
• 30:38
  Speaker 8: So this organization does make me feel very suspicious about
• 30:42
  Speaker 8: the fact that she says she couldn't resist the voice.
• 30:45
  Speaker 8: And one final thing, Nancy, when people have command hallucinations,
• 30:49
  Speaker 8: they resist those hallucinations. That's why when you see schizophrenics
• 30:53
  Speaker 8: or Homeless people walking down the street, they are batting
• 30:56
  Speaker 8: at imaginary things. They are trying to send off the voices,
• 31:01
  Speaker 8: which they experience as very distressing. So this is an
• 31:05
  Speaker 8: irregular clinical picture that would be an outlier and does
• 31:09
  Speaker 8: not make sense to me from a mental health perspective.
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: On and on, we have heard people blaming Patrick Clancy
• 31:19
  Speaker 1: for these murders. Just totally erroneous. based on what Free
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: just told you. Now, we have her. We have Lindsay
• 31:30
  Speaker 1: Clancy herself admitting he was gone when the children were killed.
• 31:36
  Speaker 1: Look at this. And this is part of her bizarre
• 31:38
  Speaker 1: money grab. As soon as Patrick left to pick up
• 31:41
  Speaker 1: the food, there was a loud, demanding, repetitious voice. This
• 31:45
  Speaker 1: is your last chance. Kill the children so you can
• 31:47
  Speaker 1: kill yourself. You have to kill the kids. Lindsay felt
• 31:53
  Speaker 1: a force come over her The point of that, Colesrud,
• 31:58
  Speaker 1: vindicates the state because part of the argument, part of
• 32:01
  Speaker 1: the speculation, let me correct, is that Patrick Clancy did this.
• 32:05
  Speaker 1: She is confessing in the civil lawsuit. He was gone.
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: He left. So there goes that, some other dude defense.
• 32:15
  Speaker 10: Well, if it vindicates the state, why didn't they use it, right? Well,
• 32:19
  Speaker 10: they didn't use it because that statement was written by
• 32:22
  Speaker 10: her lawyers. The entire lawsuit was written by her lawyers
• 32:26
  Speaker 10: in a way that makes her look like she was
• 32:29
  Speaker 10: insane when this happened. And if the prosecution would have
• 32:34
  Speaker 10: brought that statement in under Rule 106, the defense would
• 32:37
  Speaker 10: be able to bring in the entire lawsuit, which really
• 32:41
  Speaker 10: helps their case for insanity because their lawsuits against the
• 32:45
  Speaker 10: doctors is predicated on the idea that she was insane.
• 32:49
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 32:50
  Speaker 10: And you have an entire case. lawsuit that is written
• 32:53
  Speaker 10: by the lawyers that would certainly prejudice the jury if
• 32:56
  Speaker 10: they saw it.
• 32:57
  Speaker 12: Okay.
• 32:58
  Speaker 1: So you're telling me that it would just be too
• 33:03
  Speaker 1: onerous to bring this in. These are admissions by her,
• 33:07
  Speaker 1: Lindsay Clancy.
• 33:07
  Speaker 10: Why didn't they bring it in?
• 33:09
  Speaker 1: All the claims that Patrick Clancy or somebody else did it.
• 33:12
  Speaker 16: What?
• 33:14
  Speaker 10: Why didn't the prosecution bring it in? They certainly could have.
• 33:17
  Speaker 2: I don't know.
• 33:18
  Speaker 1: And I don't care. I am telling you, that there
• 33:21
  Speaker 1: are admissions by her, Lindsay Clancy, that she killed her children.
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: So all of the legions of trolls claiming Patrick Clancy
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: did it, read the civil lawsuit. See her admissions. And
• 33:34
  Speaker 1: not only that, she actually has the chutzpah to sue
• 33:40
  Speaker 1: because she can no longer have sex with her husband.
• 33:45
  Speaker 1: Let me quote it. Here's Lindsay Clancy suing over lack
• 33:48
  Speaker 1: of sex. Lindsay suffered and will continue to suffer loss
• 33:52
  Speaker 1: of her normal marital relationship with husband, including loss of companionship, consortium,
• 33:58
  Speaker 1: that's sex, society, comfort, guidance, counsel, advice, and conjugal fellowship. Okay,
• 34:06
  Speaker 1: let me understand this. Dave Mack, she is suing the
• 34:10
  Speaker 1: hospital and the doctors because she's not having sex with
• 34:13
  Speaker 1: Patrick Clancy. I don't think that's why they're not having sex.
• 34:16
  Speaker 4: I think you're dead on accurate, Nancy, that Patrick Clancy,
• 34:20
  Speaker 4: you know, he filed for divorce pretty much as quickly
• 34:22
  Speaker 4: as he could to get away from her after he
• 34:24
  Speaker 4: knows she killed the three children, as she admits in
• 34:27
  Speaker 4: the civil suit. But the reality is, well, he's not
• 34:29
  Speaker 4: her husband anymore. Hasn't been since almost 12 months after
• 34:33
  Speaker 4: she killed the children. And he didn't want anything to
• 34:36
  Speaker 4: do with her. So there you go. Physically, anyway, I mean,
• 34:38
  Speaker 4: why would he? They lost three children at her hands.
• 34:42
  Speaker 1: To you, Judge Coles, rude veteran trial lawyer, isn't it true?
• 34:45
  Speaker 1: Conjugal means sex. Inmates want conjugal visits. You sue for
• 34:50
  Speaker 1: lack of conjugal consortium. She's actually suing for lack of sex.
• 34:56
  Speaker 10: Well, it's loss of the, I guess, the fun that
• 35:01
  Speaker 10: she would have in marriage, right? It's not just that.
• 35:03
  Speaker 10: And that's just boilerplate language in these types of civil lawsuits.
• 35:08
  Speaker 10: And she's saying that because The doctors didn't prescribe her
• 35:12
  Speaker 10: the correct medication. They didn't give her the correct care
• 35:15
  Speaker 10: that it led to the horrible tragedy in this case.
• 35:19
  Speaker 10: And but for the negligence of these doctors, that the
• 35:23
  Speaker 10: children would still be alive. And but for the negligence
• 35:27
  Speaker 10: of these doctors, that her marriage would still be a
• 35:30
  Speaker 10: good marriage. That's what this lawsuit is all about.
• 35:35
  Speaker 1: Now, I know you probably know more than Daniel Webster,
• 35:39
  Speaker 1: according to you. but you're saying conjugal means she's missing
• 35:42
  Speaker 1: out on all that fun. Well, conjugal, the term is
• 35:45
  Speaker 1: used to focus specifically on the sex, sexual or intimate
• 35:50
  Speaker 1: relationship between married partners. So that's what conjugal really means.
• 35:55
  Speaker 1: And she is suing over lack of sex. Lindsay Clancy,
• 36:00
  Speaker 1: who killed.
• 36:00
  Speaker 10: Her three children. There's 10 other here. There's so many
• 36:07
  Speaker 10: other accounts that are more important than that count. In
• 36:10
  Speaker 10: a civil lawsuit, you have to kind of.
• 36:12
  Speaker 1: Yeah, like the death of the children. That's a lot
• 36:15
  Speaker 1: more important. But she's got a set of balls the
• 36:17
  Speaker 1: size of coconuts to sue over lack of sex with
• 36:21
  Speaker 1: her husband after she murdered the children?
• 36:24
  Speaker 10: No, she's suing over the negligence of her doctors for
• 36:27
  Speaker 10: creating this scenario. The fact that they didn't give her
• 36:31
  Speaker 10: the time and care that somebody who's psychotic needed, it
• 36:35
  Speaker 10: leads to a tragedy like there is in this case.
• 36:40
  Speaker 10: And that's why these doctors need to be held accountable.
• 36:43
  Speaker 10: And just remember, Nancy, that 11 jurors did believe.
• 36:47
  Speaker 1: Oh, good gravy. You just are saying anything to avoid
• 36:51
  Speaker 1: the fact that she's suing over lack of sex. I
• 36:54
  Speaker 1: hope everyone online that has tried to blame Patrick Clancy
• 37:00
  Speaker 1: for these murders is listening tonight because she, Lindsay Clancy,
• 37:04
  Speaker 1: admits in her civil filings that that she killed the children.
• 37:08
  Speaker 1: I don't know how this legion of online sleuths is
• 37:13
  Speaker 1: going to get around this, but don't try.
• 37:18
  Speaker 17: The defendant used Dr. Ziesel's cell phone to call her husband.
• 37:22
  Speaker 17: She left a voicemail stating that she loved him. Yesterday
• 37:25
  Speaker 17: on February 6th, 2023 at 10.09 a.m., she again used Dr.
• 37:29
  Speaker 17: Ziesel's cell phone to call her husband. This time he answered,
• 37:32
  Speaker 17: and during this call, the defendant stated, that after he
• 37:36
  Speaker 17: left the house that night, she killed the kids because
• 37:39
  Speaker 17: she heard a voice and had, quote, a moment of psychosis,
• 37:43
  Speaker 17: end quote. He asked her what voices she heard, and
• 37:47
  Speaker 17: she said she heard a man's voice telling her to
• 37:49
  Speaker 17: kill the kids and kill herself because it was her
• 37:51
  Speaker 17: last chance. Patrick Clancy told the police the defendant had
• 37:55
  Speaker 17: never heard voices before. He also told the police the
• 37:59
  Speaker 17: defendant had never used the word psychosis to him before.
• 38:02
  Speaker 17: The first time she used that word psychosis was when
• 38:05
  Speaker 17: she was with the doctor hired by defense counsel and
• 38:07
  Speaker 17: using his cell phone.
• 38:09
  Speaker 1: That's where our friends at court chopped. So immediately, Dr. Bethany,
• 38:14
  Speaker 1: she is in the hospital. No one has told her anything.
• 38:19
  Speaker 1: She hasn't been fed any information yet, according to conspiracy theorists.
• 38:24
  Speaker 1: Yet she is telling her husband there lying in the
• 38:28
  Speaker 1: hospital bed that she heard a voice that told her
• 38:30
  Speaker 1: to kill the children. How does that jive with claims
• 38:33
  Speaker 1: now by Reddington that she didn't do it?
• 38:36
  Speaker 8: What she's doing there is what's called malingering a defense.
• 38:40
  Speaker 8: Malingering is when you make up some fictitious syndrome or
• 38:44
  Speaker 8: illness to get out of some dreaded punishment. And we
• 38:47
  Speaker 8: see it is very common with defendants and people who
• 38:50
  Speaker 8: commit atrocious acts to say, I didn't remember it.
• 38:54
  Speaker 2: I was sleepwalking. This is so classic.
• 38:57
  Speaker 8: But what's also interesting, and I think this points to
• 38:59
  Speaker 8: guilt too, is that she doesn't say, well, who's taking
• 39:03
  Speaker 8: care of the kids? Where are the kids? She's not
• 39:06
  Speaker 8: talking about them, Nancy, because she knows they're not alive.
• 39:11
  Speaker 8: And so in terms of this planting this idea in
• 39:15
  Speaker 8: her head, why would Zyzelle plant the idea in her
• 39:20
  Speaker 8: head if Reddington is always already going towards a postpartum
• 39:25
  Speaker 8: psychosis defense? Reddington sent Zysel to the hospital. That makes
• 39:30
  Speaker 8: no sense in terms of the strategy that was forming
• 39:34
  Speaker 8: for Zysel and Reddington from the very beginning.
• 39:37
  Speaker 1: Dave Mack joining me, Crime Stories investigative reporter. We also
• 39:41
  Speaker 1: learned that Lindsay Clancy is obsessed with her own body,
• 39:46
  Speaker 1: with looking good, and getting back to her, quote, beach
• 39:51
  Speaker 1: body shape, which goes hand in hand with her suing
• 39:56
  Speaker 1: hospitals and doctors for her lack of sex with her husband. Hey,
• 40:02
  Speaker 1: you know what, Dave? Let's look at what she says
• 40:05
  Speaker 1: in her lawsuit. She embarked upon an extensive program of
• 40:10
  Speaker 1: exercise one week after delivering, waking every morning, before the
• 40:17
  Speaker 1: children at 4 a.m. ran three miles, spinning 30 minutes
• 40:21
  Speaker 1: on the Peloton, 30 minutes of aerobic. Five weeks after delivery,
• 40:26
  Speaker 1: she ran a five-mile race and then bought into a
• 40:29
  Speaker 1: Beachbody multi-level marketing scheme, purchasing products, they now say, to resell.
• 40:38
  Speaker 1: Dave Mack, why is she so obsessed with her body?
• 40:40
  Speaker 1: What do we know?
• 40:41
  Speaker 4: Well, what we know is that this Beachbody multi-level marketing company, Nancy,
• 40:46
  Speaker 4: is all about personal appearance and being fit and all that.
• 40:50
  Speaker 4: It was a way for her to be what she
• 40:53
  Speaker 4: believed she needed to be. It was a fixation on
• 40:56
  Speaker 4: her physical appearance. You mentioned that she was exercising, seriously exercising,
• 41:02
  Speaker 4: within a matter of weeks. From the time she gives
• 41:06
  Speaker 4: birth to Callan to the time she's able to run,
• 41:10
  Speaker 4: to actually be participating in events, five weeks. Her lawsuit
• 41:15
  Speaker 4: alleges that she developed worsening anxiety, depression, insomnia, and other
• 41:19
  Speaker 4: psychiatric symptoms as part of her desire to meet this
• 41:24
  Speaker 4: physically fit beach body persona. The fitness program.
• 41:29
  Speaker 1: So, Lindsay Clancy and the famous words of, I think,
• 41:33
  Speaker 1: Justin Timberlake, she was bringing sexy back.
• 41:36
  Speaker 4: Trying to. That was her goal, I think. And that's
• 41:39
  Speaker 4: how she got into the multi-level marketing.
• 41:41
  Speaker 12: Dr.
• 41:41
  Speaker 1: Bethany.
• 41:42
  Speaker 8: Okay.
• 41:43
  Speaker 1: Beachbody?
• 41:45
  Speaker 8: You know, Nancy, I hear all of this and I
• 41:47
  Speaker 8: just think something's rotten in Denmark. But what I mean
• 41:50
  Speaker 8: by that is that she has, it speaks to kind
• 41:53
  Speaker 8: of a hypomania, all this excessive energy getting up at
• 41:56
  Speaker 8: four in the morning, this multi-level marketing scheme, you know,
• 42:00
  Speaker 8: obsession with sex and money is often a part of mania.
• 42:06
  Speaker 8: And yet her family says she was such a great mother.
• 42:09
  Speaker 8: So it speaks to me of this larger breakdown in
• 42:13
  Speaker 8: the family system. And within these court pleadings, you don't
• 42:18
  Speaker 8: hear anything about her care for the kids, you know,
• 42:21
  Speaker 8: a calm state of mind, feeding them, their sleep-wake cycle,
• 42:26
  Speaker 8: all of that kind of stuff. All of this data
• 42:28
  Speaker 8: is just about her, herself. And, you know, Nancy, monetizing
• 42:33
  Speaker 8: the tragedy of the loss of killing her kids is,
• 42:38
  Speaker 8: by attacking the professionals, the very professionals who tried to
• 42:43
  Speaker 8: help her, is cruel, hard-hearted. It is self-serving.
• 42:49
  Speaker 2: It is callous.
• 42:50
  Speaker 8: And this is the kind of person who is mothering
• 42:53
  Speaker 8: young children. Imagine you're the doctor who took care of her,
• 42:57
  Speaker 8: did your best, and now you're being sued, but she's
• 42:59
  Speaker 8: the one who killed the children. I just want the
• 43:02
  Speaker 8: listeners to hang on to the idea of her mindset
• 43:05
  Speaker 8: and the preoccupation with the beach body And then think
• 43:08
  Speaker 8: about what kind of a mother that made her.
• 43:11
  Speaker 1: You mentioned that she seemingly was a loving mom. Well,
• 43:17
  Speaker 1: listen to State Trooper Timothy Ciappini.
• 43:20
  Speaker 14: January 24th, 2023, 836 to 17 seconds AM. Lindsay to Pat,
• 43:27
  Speaker 14: loved an image. From Patrick to Lindsay, how's it going?
• 43:31
  Speaker 14: Lindsay to Patrick, good. Patrick to Lindsay, you're a good mama.
• 43:35
  Speaker 14: Lindsay to Patrick.
• 43:37
  Speaker 3: Smiley face with hearts.
• 43:39
  Speaker 1: That's from East Idaho News. That's sworn testimony. But yet,
• 43:43
  Speaker 1: even with all of these admissions and damning evidence in
• 43:46
  Speaker 1: her own civil lawsuit, Reddington still claims the entire case
• 43:51
  Speaker 1: is built on nothing but speculation.
• 43:54
  Speaker 6: This entire case is based on speculation. Where is the admission?
• 44:01
  Speaker 6: Where does she say that she did this? And what's
• 44:05
  Speaker 6: most chilling is is the fact that when she comes
• 44:10
  Speaker 6: out of this obvious coma that she is in, that
• 44:15
  Speaker 6: when she comes out of it, Your Honor heard the
• 44:17
  Speaker 6: testimony from the psychiatrist and from the doctors at Brigham
• 44:20
  Speaker 6: and Women's Hospital.
• 44:23
  Speaker 3: She was told what happened.
• 44:26
  Speaker 1: That's from East Idaho News, Nate Eaton. Dr. Bethany Marshall,
• 44:29
  Speaker 1: does that even make sense to you? That somebody told
• 44:32
  Speaker 1: her what she did to her children? That she I mean,
• 44:36
  Speaker 1: in this civil lawsuit, she says she did it. She
• 44:40
  Speaker 1: says she sent her husband on errands, that she timed
• 44:44
  Speaker 1: out the length of his errands, how long the tasks
• 44:47
  Speaker 1: would take. She says she did it. But he's saying, yeah,
• 44:53
  Speaker 1: she only thought that because people told her that.
• 44:56
  Speaker 8: Okay, so Nancy, why when ambulance chaser Zizel, who worked
• 45:01
  Speaker 8: for Reddington, went and visited her first time in the hospital,
• 45:05
  Speaker 8: Did she ask for his phone, called her husband Clancy,
• 45:10
  Speaker 8: and started to talk immediately about the command hallucinations? That's
• 45:16
  Speaker 8: not thinking about homicide because somebody told you.
• 45:20
  Speaker 1: That's what we.
• 45:20
  Speaker 8: Call malingering a defense. That's a fancy word for making
• 45:25
  Speaker 8: up some fictitious illness or some syndrome or something to
• 45:30
  Speaker 8: convince another party that you didn't really do it. So
• 45:34
  Speaker 8: it's not true that that somebody told her, but then
• 45:37
  Speaker 8: she's concocting this elaborate story, which is clearly not true
• 45:41
  Speaker 8: because somebody who is texting back and forth, smiley faces
• 45:46
  Speaker 8: is not, if they are so disorganized that they're going
• 45:49
  Speaker 8: to have command hallucinations, he wouldn't have left her alone
• 45:53
  Speaker 8: with the kids that day. In that way, Nancy, the
• 45:56
  Speaker 8: whole thing just doesn't make sense.
• 45:58
  Speaker 1: Listen to Age Your RR.
• 46:01
  Speaker 13: Even though we didn't know what was going on outside
• 46:04
  Speaker 13: of our little bubble that we were in, we knew
• 46:09
  Speaker 13: that this was a turning point and this would be
• 46:14
  Speaker 13: something that could change something to make it better for
• 46:18
  Speaker 13: other women in the future, for other families. You know,
• 46:22
  Speaker 13: justice for those children is this never happening again.
• 46:26
  Speaker 1: From CBS, well, I hate to burst your bubble, lady,
• 46:30
  Speaker 1: but Lindsey Clancy admits she kills her children in her
• 46:34
  Speaker 1: money grab civil lawsuit. If you know or think you
• 46:39
  Speaker 1: know anything regarding this case, dial 781-934-5656. Tonight, we remember
• 46:47
  Speaker 1: American hero Deputy Sheriff Brian Etheridge, Sedgwick County Sheriff's, Kansas,
• 46:53
  Speaker 1: just 26, shot and killed in the line of duty,
• 46:58
  Speaker 1: leaving behind his wife, Sarah, and daughter, Natalie, American hero,
• 47:03
  Speaker 1: Deputy Sheriff Brian Etheridge. Thank you to our guests, but
• 47:08
  Speaker 1: especially to you for being with us. Nancy Gray signing
• 47:11
  Speaker 1: off for tonight, but I'll see you tomorrow night. And
• 47:13
  Speaker 1: until then, good night, friend.