PLYMOUTH, Mass. — The murder trial of Lindsay Clancy has entered a new phase, with the defense now presenting its case after prosecutors spent nearly three weeks calling 71 witnesses to the stand.
Clancy, the Duxbury mother accused of killing her three children in January 2023, is not disputing that the killings occurred. Instead, jurors must decide whether she is guilty of first-degree murder or should be found not criminally responsible because of severe postpartum psychosis.
As defense attorney Kevin Reddington begins calling witnesses, legal analyst Elyse Hershon says the defense’s strategy will center on creating reasonable doubt about the prosecution’s version of events and presenting evidence that Clancy was experiencing a profound mental health crisis.
Defense targets key prosecution arguments
According to Hershon, the defense does not need to prove an entirely different version of events. Instead, it must show that the prosecution’s theory is not the only reasonable explanation.
One area of focus is Clancy’s injuries after the deaths. Throughout the prosecution’s case, jurors repeatedly heard testimony describing some of her wounds as superficial.
However, a doctor called by the defense testified that some injuries extended into deeper tissue layers, supporting the argument that Clancy’s suicide attempt was genuine and severe.
Hershon said testimony about blood loss, body temperature, cardiac arrest, and the extent of Clancy’s injuries could help the defense challenge the prosecution’s narrative and create reasonable doubt.
Battle of the experts expected
The trial is expected to feature a battle between expert witnesses from both sides, particularly on the issue of Clancy’s mental state.
Hershon said one of the defense’s biggest challenges will be convincing jurors that its experts are credible, objective, and qualified to render opinions about Clancy’s condition.
She noted that defense experts will need to explain how they reached their conclusions through scientific analysis, training, and review of evidence, rather than direct treatment of Clancy.
The judge recently reminded jurors that expert witnesses do not decide the case. The jury alone determines the facts.
Prosecutors likely to intensify cross-examinations
While prosecutors were relatively restrained when questioning Clancy’s family members, Hershon expects more aggressive cross-examinations once expert witnesses take the stand.
Because experts are not directly connected to the family and did not suffer a personal loss in the case, prosecutors may challenge their conclusions more forcefully and test the basis for their opinions.
Still, Hershon said prosecutors face a difficult task because they must not only challenge defense experts but also convince jurors that the prosecution’s explanation remains the most reliable interpretation of the evidence.
Family testimony aims to show mental decline
The defense began its case with testimony from Clancy’s mother and sister, who described noticeable changes in her mental health in the months before the killings.
According to Hershon, family testimony is intended to support the defense’s claim that Clancy was suffering from a serious mental illness and experiencing a decline that may not have been fully apparent to doctors or nurses.
The defense is using those accounts to paint a picture of a loving mother whose behavior changed dramatically leading up to January 24, 2023.
Hershon said the central question for jurors will be how Clancy went from a devoted mother and labor-and-delivery nurse to being accused of killing her own children.
“The defense is trying to establish that a psychotic break and severe mental illness explain that transformation,” Hershon said.
The trial resumed Tuesday morning in Plymouth Superior Court as the defense continues presenting witnesses in support of its insanity defense.
Download the FREE Boston 25 News app for breaking news alerts.
Follow Boston 25 News on Facebook and Twitter. | Watch Boston 25 News NOW
©2026 Cox Media Group




