Uploaded August 2026 | Updated September 2026, 3 weeks ago
As the jury deliberates in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial, let's take a look back at the Commonwealth's closing argument.
Prosecutors say that despite Lindsay suffering from mental illness, her actions were still planned and she knew what she was doing was wrong. They argue that she deliberately made sure that her then-husband, Patrick Clancy, was out of the house so she could kill her three children. The prosecution also stated that Clancy had ample mental health resources available to her but was not fully honest with her doctors and providers about what she was experiencing.
Jurors can consider first-degree murder, second-degree murder or involuntary manslaughter — or find Clancy not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility.
What do you think? If you were a juror, how would you rule and why?
#LindsayClancy #Massachusetts
As the jury deliberates in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial, let's take a look back at the Commonwealth's closing argument.
Prosecutors say that despite Lindsay suffering from mental illness, her actions were still planned and she knew what she was doing was wrong. They argue that she deliberately made sure that her then-husband, Patrick Clancy, was out of the house so she could kill her three children. The prosecution also stated that Clancy had ample mental health resources available to her but was not fully honest with her doctors and providers about what she was experiencing.
Jurors can consider first-degree murder, second-degree murder or involuntary manslaughter — or find Clancy not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility.
What do you think? If you were a juror, how would you rule and why?
#LindsayClancy #Massachusetts
