Lindsay Clancy faces four dramatically different outcomes as the jury deliberates Thursday in her sensational triple murder trial.
Clancy, 36, who strangled her three young children to death at her home in Massachusetts in 2023, argues she should be found not guilty because she was suffering from severe postpartum psychosis.
Prosecutors say she planned the killings, ensuring her husband was out of the house when she killed little Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and 8-month-old Callan.
Life in prison without parole
In the first scenario, jurors could find her guilty of first-degree murder — which carries a mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
20 years in prison
In a second outcome, jurors could convict her of the lesser charge of manslaughter, which would put her behind bars for a maximum of 20 years for each charge.
In Massachusetts, manslaughter can be either involuntary or voluntary. Voluntary manslaughter is the killing of someone in the heat of the moment — like during a sudden fight. Involuntary manslaughter involves killing someone without meaning to.
Some outside observers didn’t think a manslaughter conviction was likely, with former prosecutor Neama Rahmani predicting her insanity defense would prevail.
“I predict a defense verdict of not criminally responsible,” he told The Post. “I was surprised [the judge] agreed to give manslaughter instruction. It doesn’t seem to fit the facts of this case.”
Committed to a mental hospital
Finally, she could be found not guilty by reason of insanity and be committed to a mental hospital until she’s deemed no longer a danger to herself or others.
Judge William Sullivan on Thursday told jurors that if she’s found not criminally responsible, she would likely be committed to a mental institution or to Bridgewater State Hospital, and that her mental health status would be periodically reviewed.
“The defendant may remain committed for the duration of her life,” Sullivan said.
However, he added, one day she could go free.
Hung jury and mistrial
A fourth option, if the jury can’t make a decision, could result in a mistrial and the entire process starting again.
Mark Bederow, former prosecutor and veteran New York City lawyer, said he believes prosecution didn’t build a strong enough case to put her away for life.
“There is a real chance of a hung jury or a [not guilty by reason of insanity] verdict,” Bederow said.
“The court giving a manslaughter option to the jury also changes the dynamic dramatically. It is open invitation for the jury to compromise.”
“Assuming she knew right from wrong, Clancy’s actions were clearly the actions of someone with intent to kill.”
Clancy, a former labor and delivery nurse, is accused of strangling her 8-month old, 3-year-old and 5-year old children with exercise bands then trying to kill herself by jumping out of a window of her home in Duxbury, Massachusetts on Jan. 24, 2023.
Clancy is seeking to be found not guilty by reason of insanity based on her claim that she was suffering from severe postpartum psychosis and hallucinated a man’s voice telling her to carry out the horrific crimes.
Prosecutors, however, have said Clancy is criminally responsible because she carefully planned the killings.
Psychiatrist Dr. Gregory Saathoff told jurors Wednesday Clancy was “methodical, quite controlled and organized” when she committed the crimes.
She has not contested the killings, so a normal not guilty verdict is highly unlikely in the case.
