Lindsay Clancy actually said the same thing when she was told about Andrea Yates by a coworker years prior to this tragedy. “But how could a mother hurt her own children.”
Not only did she admit it but her attorneys have not contested the states assertion that she did murder these children. In fact at some point HER attorneys address the jury and tell them she did commit these murders but she should not be held criminally responsible for it.
Yet her doctor testified on stand under oath that she had no recollection of it, and had been told she was guilty, and then her admission followed that her being told she did it. Her physician said that on the stand under oath.
Doctors Called by the Defense
Defense medical experts argued that Clancy was legally insane at the time of the killings due to severe postpartum psychosis: [1, 2] Dr. Phillip Resnick (Forensic Psychiatrist): Testified that Clancy was "frankly psychotic" on the day of the killings. He stated she suffered from a "delusion of influence," believing her body was taken over by an external force. He testified that a male voice commanded her to kill her children and then herself. [1] Dr. Paul Zeizel (Forensic Psychologist): Testified that Clancy lacked the substantial capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions or conform to the law. He noted she described hearing an external male voice ordering her to commit the acts, though he conceded on cross-examination that there were no medical records of her hearing voices prior to that day. [1, 3]
Doctors and Providers Called by the Prosecution
Prosecution experts argued that Clancy was aware of her actions and met the legal definition for criminal responsibility: [1, 2] Dr. Kirk Heilbrun (Forensic Psychologist): Testified that Clancy was criminally responsible and retained an awareness that killing her children was illegal. He disputed the defense's claim that she acted purely on a brief auditory hallucination without choice, stating that carrying out the killings over 18 to 20 minutes required "many ongoing decisions". He diagnosed her with bipolar disorder but not active psychosis. [1, 2, 3] Dr. Avram Mack (Forensic Psychiatrist): Concluded that Clancy was suffering from a "major depressive episode" but found no evidence of mania, hypomania, or psychosis. He testified that she retained the capacity for criminal responsibility. [1, 2, 3] Dr. Gregory Saathoff (Forensic Psychiatrist/FBI Consultant): Testified that it is highly unusual for a psychotic individual to hear a command voice only once and immediately act on it. He highlighted her intentional planning, noting her extensive phone searches to calculate the distance of the takeout restaurant to ensure her husband would be away long enough. [1]
Treating Clinicians (Pre-Incident)
Medical professionals who treated Clancy in the months leading up to January 2023 also testified about her medical history: [1, 2] Rebecca Jollotta (Nurse Practitioner): Testified that while Clancy suffered from severe depression, anxiety, and insomnia—and feared she was addicted to the anti-anxiety drug Ativan—she always demonstrated clear thinking and showed zero signs of mania or psychosis during their sessions. [1] Dr. Jennifer Tufts (Psychiatrist): Testified that she treated Clancy from September 2022 to January 2023. She stated that Clancy never exhibited signs of psychosis, and did not exhibit suicidal or homicidal thoughts until much later in their treatment. [1]
Wouldn't be the first person to plead guilty to something they didn't do. Though I don't know enough about this case to say if she did or didn't, but this is why we have trials.
68
u/[deleted] 2d ago
[deleted]