Aug. 14, 2026
Killer Mom Trial: “Can You Treat A Sociopath?” Prosecution Focuses On Lindsay Clancy Searches And Texts
Apple Podcasts 
Spotify 
Castro 
RSS Feed It was another fascinating day in court in the Lindsay Clancy triple murder trial. Three witnesses took the stand on Thursday, all of them from law enforcement. We learned about the searches, texts and notes Lindsay Clancy made in the months, weeks and even on the day of the murders of her three young children. The defense claims Clancy is not responsible for the strangling deaths of her kids because she was suffering from postpartum psychosis. The prosecution tried to establish on Thursday she was actually a controlling mom who was frustrated she couldn’t parent the way she wanted to and even searched whether you can “treat a sociopath” just four days before the killings.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
00:00:02
Speaker 1: Hey there, folks, it is Friday, August fourteenth, and what exactly does a woman google in the days before she strangles her three kids? Where we found that out yesterday in the trial of Lindsay Clancy. Welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ.
00:00:20
Speaker 2: Robes.
00:00:21
Speaker 1: This was kind of we got some kind of an insight. I guess Robes in like the immediate days before the killing, like really intimate portraits of where her head was.
00:00:33
Speaker 3: It's so true, and they were her own words. It was fascinating as we saw. There were three witnesses that took the stand on Thursday, all of them police officers, and the focus, yes was on digital forensics and on what was in Lindsay Clancy's phone, what did they find on her laptop, even on Patrick Clancy's tablet. But it was really like in real time, what was going through her mind, what she was thinking about, what she was searching for, who she was texting, what she was texting. And I don't even know after hearing it all, and we'll go through some of the really interesting searches and texts.
00:01:13
Speaker 4: I don't know if it helps.
00:01:15
Speaker 3: Or hurts the prosecution or the defense, because yes, we're getting a fuller picture, But I'm not sure which side it helped, you.
00:01:23
Speaker 1: Know, I again, I still robes for all we've seen, And maybe that's why I'm putting this in that cat. How does this not prove that this was a woman who wrote she could have been googling other things.
00:01:38
Speaker 2: If she was preparing for a.
00:01:40
Speaker 4: Murder how to kill your children?
00:01:42
Speaker 1: There would been like, what traces of this ord who? He's seen this in a bunch of trials? This is not the stuff people google when they're preparing to murder somebody.
00:01:51
Speaker 4: Yes, but there was some interesting.
00:01:55
Speaker 3: Notes that lindsay Clancy, you know we all some of us, I should say, we don't all, but some of us keep a journal and we write things down. She had kept some things in the notes of her iPhone, and I thought those were especially interesting. The prosecution used them to show a woman who was controlling and was frustrated that she couldn't control the outcome of her children, or she couldn't she was obsessed with this idea of being a perfect parent and raising perfect children. And so is that postpartum psychoacosis or is that someone who is a control freak?
00:02:30
Speaker 1: Or is that motherhood? I think some I could read it differently as a guy. But I think a lot of moms. You've told me this several times. The things I don't pick up on that, Yes, that's a concern a mom would have. And yes, she's trying to make sure she's not talked about by other moms. She wants to fake it. That thing you've explained rogues those searches that we're we're talking about. Those notes at least that we're talking about, sound like a woman who was desperate to be the best mom possible and was obsessed with doing so and didn't know how to do it.
00:03:01
Speaker 3: Yes, I would agree with that, But does that work into the prosecution's.
00:03:06
Speaker 4: Theory of why she killed her children?
00:03:09
Speaker 3: And having that be separate from a postpartum psychosis diagnosis.
00:03:14
Speaker 2: I find out to be.
00:03:16
Speaker 1: That's a big given the notes that you're gonna share, Robes, that's a big mountain, those rope notes about a mom who's obsessed or upset or whatever to get to murdering your kids.
00:03:26
Speaker 2: Robes.
00:03:26
Speaker 1: They have not laid out enough stuff that showed she was that type of upset or controlling or robes.
00:03:37
Speaker 2: It's just just not there. Robes.
00:03:39
Speaker 1: There are suggestions and maybe where her head is. But to take that leap from those notes to a triple murderer of her own kids, that is a huge leap.
00:03:50
Speaker 4: Agreed, What did you think about?
00:03:52
Speaker 3: Because for me, the one thing that really jumped out and stood out was Lindsay's phone search can you treat a sociopath? Four days before she killed her kids. She didn't ask what are the signs of a sociopath? She said can you treat a sociopath? That, according to the prosecution, would fall into their theory that she was absolutely planning to do this and had no guilt or conscience about it.
00:04:22
Speaker 1: Okay, Robes, again, that's a leap, baby, I'm just saying, they just don't have enough. Okay, she googled that, so I'm supposed to jump to a conclusion about what that could have meant.
00:04:35
Speaker 2: That's too much. That is not enough.
00:04:37
Speaker 1: That is not a smoking gun at all, that's not a warm gun, that's not even a loaded gun. Robes, that doesn't That's just too huge of a leap.
00:04:46
Speaker 3: It was fascinating to see and it will be fascinating to see how jurors take all.
00:04:51
Speaker 2: Of this in and what was the breakdown?
00:04:53
Speaker 3: Ten men, six it's twelve women, six men twelve that many, oh, twelve to six, so it's double the amount of women than they are to men. But we don't know which ones are the alternate neither do they, so ultimately we'll find that out after both sides rest their cases.
00:05:09
Speaker 1: But go ahead, well no, no, no, that's just the wow to what those numbers could mean.
00:05:15
Speaker 4: And just given our reaction to certain things, there is.
00:05:19
Speaker 3: I think a divide between men and women about how they view Lindsey Clancy, how they react to certain searches, or just what the defense and prosecution are putting on it is being viewed. I would almost be certain through a lens of gender.
00:05:37
Speaker 1: I think we end up in the same place about the case. But we have to talk first. I hate if anybody's watching and they just start like a guy is watching this and he just jumps on and starts popping off on social media.
00:05:49
Speaker 2: You should talk to a woman.
00:05:50
Speaker 1: First, seriously, because some of the things I have seen, and I consider myself a pretty sharp guy and watched a bunch of trials. After you said something, I was like, oh, and think about that at all, And I wouldn't because I'm not a woman.
00:06:03
Speaker 2: So I assume no matter.
00:06:05
Speaker 1: What, those women will be able to have or any women would be able to have their opinions shared in a jury room. But I think that's maybe I think that is key for her. How can I think that's key? How many women end up on that jury?
00:06:22
Speaker 3: Woo? All right, So we had three witnesses take the stand. The first one was, well, they were all police officers, but he was Sergeant Kyle Paval, I believe, and he's with the cyber crime unit. But you and I were watching this together because he said he got a laptop from the Clancy home in twenty twenty five, so just this past year, and he was looking at this website labeled suicide methods, and so he talked about seeing at nine forty a m.
00:06:54
Speaker 4: That Lindsay had.
00:06:55
Speaker 3: A Spotify search on Tom Hall, which then led to a death action suicide methods, and then next to Grafton Bridge which had jumping as a suicide option.
00:07:06
Speaker 4: So he's going.
00:07:07
Speaker 3: Through these different searches on this laptop that was in the Clancy home. But then the defense comes on and it was a hilarious beginning that you absolutely belly laughed at.
00:07:21
Speaker 1: But wait, do I have right? And is your understanding as well. The prosecution with this witness was trying to at least this line of customs. They were trying to establish that Lindsay Clancy or trying to suggest that Lindsay Clancy was at the house that morning and she was googling some stuff that might suggest she was researching suicide methods.
00:07:43
Speaker 4: Correct.
00:07:43
Speaker 3: And this, by the way, was the day of the murders. So the day of the murders at nine forty am, and I believe she had a ten to fifteen am doctor's appointment for Cora, and it was a four minute drive from the Clancy home to the doctor's office. So there was a big argument back and forth as to if this could have been her, if she would have had enough time to be the person who was making these searches. But when the defense came up, we love Kevin Readingfield.
00:08:14
Speaker 4: He starts out, that's it, that's your testimony.
00:08:17
Speaker 3: That's why you're here today to talk about a search involving Tom Hall or Tim Hall.
00:08:22
Speaker 1: It was so sarcastic, it was so condescending. It was so effective because I'm sitting there, we were listening to the prosecution and what do we you say this all the time robes. When sometimes prosecutors will build something, they ask all these questions and then they don't help you get to what the point was.
00:08:40
Speaker 4: And like, what's the conclusion I'm supposed to reach?
00:08:43
Speaker 1: So we weren't sure, like what conclusion am I supposed to reach? Based on what this guy just testified to reading Field got up robes before his He was fully standing from his chair. He was going off, that's why you're here. That's what it sound like, sarcastic.
00:09:01
Speaker 4: It was hilarious.
00:09:02
Speaker 1: That's all you got. That's why you're here. You're telling me you came here for this. An immediate objection that was sustained.
00:09:09
Speaker 2: Who care?
00:09:10
Speaker 3: He made his point and it landed, it really did. He did get that sergeant to talk about other searches where it was clear that Lindsay Clancy was searching about mental health medications and treatments on.
00:09:23
Speaker 1: The Tom Hall thing, wasn't it then? Weren't they able to establish or at least put in the jurors minds that she might not have been the one at home because you had to get the baby to the damn doctors.
00:09:33
Speaker 4: At the end of the day.
00:09:35
Speaker 3: And this is how the defense left this cross examination of this witness, no one knows who used the computer.
00:09:42
Speaker 4: Is that correct?
00:09:43
Speaker 2: That's correct, and that's the story.
00:09:46
Speaker 3: Now you've just negated everything that was just testified to the point.
00:09:50
Speaker 2: As well wrote, is Tom Hall a musician? Right that Patrick Clancy was a fan.
00:09:58
Speaker 3: Of Yes, And he admitted that on the stand when he was being cross examined by Kevin Writingfield. So yes, he had already established that with Patrick and cross at the first day of trial and then reiterated it at this point with this witness.
00:10:11
Speaker 1: Once again, though, Babe, I feel like the prosecution is trying to trick me, Like this thing you're trying to get me to hold against her was already testified to and is not even something to debate.
00:10:24
Speaker 2: I didn't there have been a few of these with the prosecution.
00:10:29
Speaker 3: You did, You said, I feel like they're trying to pull a fast one.
00:10:32
Speaker 1: Yeah, And that was another case and the suicide meant to hear this guy break it down, like you didn't have to search for suicide.
00:10:39
Speaker 4: This guy, apparently Tom Hall died by suicide.
00:10:42
Speaker 1: So there's some drop down in his Wikipedia page that will show suicide.
00:10:46
Speaker 2: So it looks as links.
00:10:48
Speaker 1: Yes, so it's not like somebody got on was googling how to kill themselves?
00:10:52
Speaker 2: Right, So again it's a fast one.
00:10:55
Speaker 4: It was.
00:10:55
Speaker 3: It was so another police officer takes the stand, Sergeant Timp Timothy Chiappini, and he also is a detective with training and cell phone forensics. And this this was where I got really interesting because he went through Lindsay Clancy's phone, her texts, her searches I put, I put in here some of the ones that really were interesting to me. In October of twenty twenty two. This was a note on Lindsay Clancy's phone. So this is three months before the killing. I'm struggling so hard because I wanted to parent each of my kids like my first and since I can't, that's depressing to me. This is definitely the root cause of all our problems. Now. I feel like I'm not parenting any of my kids the way I want to, and that makes me sad too. But I'm going to try my best. And she went on in that note to say, I'm terrified of something happening to my kids or doing something wrong to mess up their development.
00:11:57
Speaker 4: Wow, isn't that so bizarre?
00:11:59
Speaker 3: To here she was so worried about messing up their development three months before she murdered them, which suggests to you, what well the prosecution in having this be You know, this is their witness, this is their testimony, this is their evidence they're introducing, and the I believe the through line here is that she was controlling, that she wanted her kids to be a certain way, She wanted to be a certain way as a parent, and when she realized she was failing, she decided she was just going to.
00:12:32
Speaker 4: Take everybody out because it wasn't good enough. So it wasn't about.
00:12:36
Speaker 3: Psychosis, it was about control, and that's what they're trying to establish here with this testimony. The note also went on to say, for the last five years, I've filled my mind with just all things parenting, and it's unhealthy.
00:12:53
Speaker 4: So I just thought that.
00:12:54
Speaker 3: Was interesting, and they are trying to sell she was sane and she was acknowledging that she had control issues.
00:13:00
Speaker 1: All right, Two things on that, I'll take The last one first is when you were talking about the control issue, this is something we have been talking about lately when it comes to men and familicized men who kill their entire families oftentimes is because there's something recently that happened, a divorce or bankruptc if something that sets them off and they feel like they have lost control of some societal norm or their position in the community. You in describing her just now made me think of that for the first time.
00:13:33
Speaker 2: Same the same explent.
00:13:35
Speaker 1: These guys don't have right they're considered very upstanding members of the community, and these things happen. I can see and relate, like, Okay, this is a phenomenon that does take place. The difference here is she has years of documented history of.
00:13:51
Speaker 3: Correct illness, and that is the distinction, because otherwise you could apply that same cond that's not a what we just described about men killing their families, and this same notion from Lindsay losing control, that is not a defense for murder, period.
00:14:04
Speaker 4: It just is not.
00:14:05
Speaker 3: And so yes, if you feel like you failed as a parent, you don't get to just take out your family because you want to start over or do it better, or because you couldn't do it well enough, you're just going to end at all.
00:14:17
Speaker 4: Obviously that is not a defense for murder.
00:14:20
Speaker 3: But I just I thought it was an interesting thing, and I don't I think moms, when you talk about men trying having a societal norm of having to be the provider, having to and then when they fail, they take out their family. This would be I actually was thinking, Wow, moms, there's a mom hierarchy, there's a mom verse where yes, moms.
00:14:38
Speaker 4: Compare and compete with each other.
00:14:39
Speaker 3: And here she was a neonatal nurse, or she was a sorry, a labor and delivery nurse. So she even felt like of all people, of all moms, she's been in this world of motherhood and parenting and infants, and she, of all people, should be the best mom ever. So I'm just saying that is what the prosecution is trying to establish here.
00:14:59
Speaker 1: And here's it, Robes. If they made that argument, that one would make sense as some kind there's a through line there, Robes. But like you say, all the time, they just present you the evidence. But then good luck piecing it together whatever narrative that the prosecution's trying to give you. I'm not sure. Sometimes they are not making the point you just made. You just made it clearer than they have in the courtroom.
00:15:27
Speaker 3: Isn't that so weird that we see this all the time with prosecutors. I don't know why they don't land their plane. They don't land their plane a lot of times with jurors, and so you think, I'm thinking, this is what they're doing, and maybe she brings it all home during closing arguments, but it would be more effective, I think if you could find a way, Like the defense has been brilliant at how he asked questions. He's actually getting in like statements, so he's making his point, he's making it very he's underlining everything he's trying to establish and putting an exclaimt point at the end, and they're kind of just putting parentheses out there, and you're kind of confused.
00:16:04
Speaker 1: But look, evidence is evidence, and you're supposed to consider, not supposed to consider any histrionics of some cool Boston attorney.
00:16:14
Speaker 4: Yes, but he's good at his job.
00:16:16
Speaker 2: He's good.
00:16:17
Speaker 1: But yeah, I just that point you're making. I can see that parallel. I can see those connections to control and what we always say the familicide is always almost exclusively a guy thing and robes. You just made the argument for why a woman wouldn't take out her husband because he's not a part necessarily of the structure of what she controls and what she should be getting right.
00:16:41
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean that's there you go and then and to have that.
00:16:44
Speaker 3: Then four days before the murder, she googles can you treat a sociopath?
00:16:48
Speaker 4: They also went through the day of.
00:16:49
Speaker 3: The murders, that timeline between four and eight where just the fact that she was operating normally, texting with Patrick, calling him, and then doing that search to see how long he'd be gone. But it all just seemed like someone who was very sane, very methodical, and.
00:17:06
Speaker 4: Knew exactly what she was doing.
00:17:08
Speaker 3: When the defense got up to counter all of this, he got in some other texts, some other conversations that were interesting, like she searched well. He asked, did you know about the search how to slit your throat and die? Can you turn airbags off on a Kia Sorento. The officer said, I don't recall. Then he had him read aloud messages from Patrick calling her a good mama the day of the killings that was wild, and then text with her mom while she was in the hospital when she's self when she self admitted to the hospital, I'm just worried that they won't send me home soon. I'm waiting for the day I wake up and feel like me, so look. They also the prosecution did get this in that Clancy's mom texted her the day before the murders, nice to see you doing better, And.
00:17:56
Speaker 1: The prosecution thinks that helps them because she's perfectly fine, she's perfectly saying but at the same time, behind the scenes, don't we have writings from her and right, she is actually saying something to herself privately that she is not admitting to or presenting to friends and family exactly exactly.
00:18:15
Speaker 3: And then the final the final witness was pretty quick. Another police officer, a case officer. I think the only thing that was interesting. They got him up there to play a video pretty much of the Clancy family at a museum together, chorus playing Lindsay's holding the baby in a holder, and that was tough. But then at the same time, while they're playing this video, she has this police officer testify about how he met with a medical examiner to tell him it would take minutes for someone to die by strangulation.
00:18:41
Speaker 4: So it was a little I thought it was a little performative.
00:18:44
Speaker 3: They were like tugging at the juror's heartstrings by showing this family and then talking about how long it takes to die by strangulation.
00:18:52
Speaker 4: It was a little tough.
00:18:54
Speaker 2: I didn't appreciate that.
00:18:55
Speaker 4: Yeah, it was a little tough.
00:18:56
Speaker 3: So when we come back, the jury was excused, but there was another hearing between the judge and the attorneys, and this one was all about again those defense witnesses. We are awaiting when the defense begins its case. Welcome back everyone to Amy and TJ.
00:19:23
Speaker 1: So.
00:19:23
Speaker 3: Yes, the jury was dismissed around two forty on Thursday, and they immediately went into a hearing because the prosecution wants security logs from court. They want to know who has been allowed back in the courtroom, and they want to know if any of the folks who've been seated are going to be defense witnesses. They specifically were asking about a priest and a doctor and they believe that they may be in the courtroom listening to evidence, and they were fairly outraged by it.
00:19:55
Speaker 1: What's the official rule, you just not supposed witnesses or does a judge a turn which ones are pertinent enough.
00:20:02
Speaker 3: To I'm not sure because in this case it seems bizarre because it's streaming live. So even if you've got a potential witness who's not in the courtroom and you can tell them don't listen to the trial, you can't confirm that they haven't.
00:20:17
Speaker 2: Bad being instructed not to do they.
00:20:19
Speaker 4: Know not to typically you're not supposed to.
00:20:21
Speaker 2: So ken are you discarded as a witness.
00:20:23
Speaker 3: Then I'm not sure because this is what the prosecution said. It could pose as a potential bias that he's back there talking about this doctor. And then they complained that they haven't been furnished at this point with who the defense is actually going to be calling in this case. They're like the list changes daily, so they're frustrated. And it was kind of funny because we can count on Kevin Reddington to be the performer that he is. He grabs a list alog from a court employee and just gives it tells the prosecution you can review it yourself. So yeah, unclear what's going to happen about who's being called, whether or not anyone will be disco qualified because they're in the court room. The judge was taking issue that anyone was even naming this priest. He seemed very protective of this priest who's grown close to Lindsay Clancy. So he baptized all three children so we'll see if he's going to be called. But this will be I mean, when the defense puts on their case, this will be absolutely fascinating.
00:21:17
Speaker 4: And look, we thought it might even happen this week.
00:21:20
Speaker 3: It ain't gonna happen this week because there's no there's no court today for whatever reason. They didn't give an explanation, but the prosecution will continue presenting their evidence on Monday at nine am.
00:21:32
Speaker 1: Did you get an update about because he thought they were ahead of schedule and on schedule.
00:21:37
Speaker 3: Does this he keeps saying they're on schedule, But yes, there they're I mean, they had even said at the end of last week they could the prosecution could be done as soon as Monday or Tuesday. Here we are on Friday week behind that prediction and the prosecution is still going. So we shall see. But look, I would imagine the prosecution will wrap up their case next week and the defense will start to present theirs. It's never been a there really has not been a dull moment in this case, so we'll continue to follow it. We always appreciate you listening to us, every one. I'm Ami Roboch alongside TJ.
00:22:07
Speaker 4: Holmes. We'll talk soon
Speaker 1: Hey there, folks, it is Friday, August fourteenth, and what exactly does a woman google in the days before she strangles her three kids? Where we found that out yesterday in the trial of Lindsay Clancy. Welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ.
00:00:20
Speaker 2: Robes.
00:00:21
Speaker 1: This was kind of we got some kind of an insight. I guess Robes in like the immediate days before the killing, like really intimate portraits of where her head was.
00:00:33
Speaker 3: It's so true, and they were her own words. It was fascinating as we saw. There were three witnesses that took the stand on Thursday, all of them police officers, and the focus, yes was on digital forensics and on what was in Lindsay Clancy's phone, what did they find on her laptop, even on Patrick Clancy's tablet. But it was really like in real time, what was going through her mind, what she was thinking about, what she was searching for, who she was texting, what she was texting. And I don't even know after hearing it all, and we'll go through some of the really interesting searches and texts.
00:01:13
Speaker 4: I don't know if it helps.
00:01:15
Speaker 3: Or hurts the prosecution or the defense, because yes, we're getting a fuller picture, But I'm not sure which side it helped, you.
00:01:23
Speaker 1: Know, I again, I still robes for all we've seen, And maybe that's why I'm putting this in that cat. How does this not prove that this was a woman who wrote she could have been googling other things.
00:01:38
Speaker 2: If she was preparing for a.
00:01:40
Speaker 4: Murder how to kill your children?
00:01:42
Speaker 1: There would been like, what traces of this ord who? He's seen this in a bunch of trials? This is not the stuff people google when they're preparing to murder somebody.
00:01:51
Speaker 4: Yes, but there was some interesting.
00:01:55
Speaker 3: Notes that lindsay Clancy, you know we all some of us, I should say, we don't all, but some of us keep a journal and we write things down. She had kept some things in the notes of her iPhone, and I thought those were especially interesting. The prosecution used them to show a woman who was controlling and was frustrated that she couldn't control the outcome of her children, or she couldn't she was obsessed with this idea of being a perfect parent and raising perfect children. And so is that postpartum psychoacosis or is that someone who is a control freak?
00:02:30
Speaker 1: Or is that motherhood? I think some I could read it differently as a guy. But I think a lot of moms. You've told me this several times. The things I don't pick up on that, Yes, that's a concern a mom would have. And yes, she's trying to make sure she's not talked about by other moms. She wants to fake it. That thing you've explained rogues those searches that we're we're talking about. Those notes at least that we're talking about, sound like a woman who was desperate to be the best mom possible and was obsessed with doing so and didn't know how to do it.
00:03:01
Speaker 3: Yes, I would agree with that, But does that work into the prosecution's.
00:03:06
Speaker 4: Theory of why she killed her children?
00:03:09
Speaker 3: And having that be separate from a postpartum psychosis diagnosis.
00:03:14
Speaker 2: I find out to be.
00:03:16
Speaker 1: That's a big given the notes that you're gonna share, Robes, that's a big mountain, those rope notes about a mom who's obsessed or upset or whatever to get to murdering your kids.
00:03:26
Speaker 2: Robes.
00:03:26
Speaker 1: They have not laid out enough stuff that showed she was that type of upset or controlling or robes.
00:03:37
Speaker 2: It's just just not there. Robes.
00:03:39
Speaker 1: There are suggestions and maybe where her head is. But to take that leap from those notes to a triple murderer of her own kids, that is a huge leap.
00:03:50
Speaker 4: Agreed, What did you think about?
00:03:52
Speaker 3: Because for me, the one thing that really jumped out and stood out was Lindsay's phone search can you treat a sociopath? Four days before she killed her kids. She didn't ask what are the signs of a sociopath? She said can you treat a sociopath? That, according to the prosecution, would fall into their theory that she was absolutely planning to do this and had no guilt or conscience about it.
00:04:22
Speaker 1: Okay, Robes, again, that's a leap, baby, I'm just saying, they just don't have enough. Okay, she googled that, so I'm supposed to jump to a conclusion about what that could have meant.
00:04:35
Speaker 2: That's too much. That is not enough.
00:04:37
Speaker 1: That is not a smoking gun at all, that's not a warm gun, that's not even a loaded gun. Robes, that doesn't That's just too huge of a leap.
00:04:46
Speaker 3: It was fascinating to see and it will be fascinating to see how jurors take all.
00:04:51
Speaker 2: Of this in and what was the breakdown?
00:04:53
Speaker 3: Ten men, six it's twelve women, six men twelve that many, oh, twelve to six, so it's double the amount of women than they are to men. But we don't know which ones are the alternate neither do they, so ultimately we'll find that out after both sides rest their cases.
00:05:09
Speaker 1: But go ahead, well no, no, no, that's just the wow to what those numbers could mean.
00:05:15
Speaker 4: And just given our reaction to certain things, there is.
00:05:19
Speaker 3: I think a divide between men and women about how they view Lindsey Clancy, how they react to certain searches, or just what the defense and prosecution are putting on it is being viewed. I would almost be certain through a lens of gender.
00:05:37
Speaker 1: I think we end up in the same place about the case. But we have to talk first. I hate if anybody's watching and they just start like a guy is watching this and he just jumps on and starts popping off on social media.
00:05:49
Speaker 2: You should talk to a woman.
00:05:50
Speaker 1: First, seriously, because some of the things I have seen, and I consider myself a pretty sharp guy and watched a bunch of trials. After you said something, I was like, oh, and think about that at all, And I wouldn't because I'm not a woman.
00:06:03
Speaker 2: So I assume no matter.
00:06:05
Speaker 1: What, those women will be able to have or any women would be able to have their opinions shared in a jury room. But I think that's maybe I think that is key for her. How can I think that's key? How many women end up on that jury?
00:06:22
Speaker 3: Woo? All right, So we had three witnesses take the stand. The first one was, well, they were all police officers, but he was Sergeant Kyle Paval, I believe, and he's with the cyber crime unit. But you and I were watching this together because he said he got a laptop from the Clancy home in twenty twenty five, so just this past year, and he was looking at this website labeled suicide methods, and so he talked about seeing at nine forty a m.
00:06:54
Speaker 4: That Lindsay had.
00:06:55
Speaker 3: A Spotify search on Tom Hall, which then led to a death action suicide methods, and then next to Grafton Bridge which had jumping as a suicide option.
00:07:06
Speaker 4: So he's going.
00:07:07
Speaker 3: Through these different searches on this laptop that was in the Clancy home. But then the defense comes on and it was a hilarious beginning that you absolutely belly laughed at.
00:07:21
Speaker 1: But wait, do I have right? And is your understanding as well. The prosecution with this witness was trying to at least this line of customs. They were trying to establish that Lindsay Clancy or trying to suggest that Lindsay Clancy was at the house that morning and she was googling some stuff that might suggest she was researching suicide methods.
00:07:43
Speaker 4: Correct.
00:07:43
Speaker 3: And this, by the way, was the day of the murders. So the day of the murders at nine forty am, and I believe she had a ten to fifteen am doctor's appointment for Cora, and it was a four minute drive from the Clancy home to the doctor's office. So there was a big argument back and forth as to if this could have been her, if she would have had enough time to be the person who was making these searches. But when the defense came up, we love Kevin Readingfield.
00:08:14
Speaker 4: He starts out, that's it, that's your testimony.
00:08:17
Speaker 3: That's why you're here today to talk about a search involving Tom Hall or Tim Hall.
00:08:22
Speaker 1: It was so sarcastic, it was so condescending. It was so effective because I'm sitting there, we were listening to the prosecution and what do we you say this all the time robes. When sometimes prosecutors will build something, they ask all these questions and then they don't help you get to what the point was.
00:08:40
Speaker 4: And like, what's the conclusion I'm supposed to reach?
00:08:43
Speaker 1: So we weren't sure, like what conclusion am I supposed to reach? Based on what this guy just testified to reading Field got up robes before his He was fully standing from his chair. He was going off, that's why you're here. That's what it sound like, sarcastic.
00:09:01
Speaker 4: It was hilarious.
00:09:02
Speaker 1: That's all you got. That's why you're here. You're telling me you came here for this. An immediate objection that was sustained.
00:09:09
Speaker 2: Who care?
00:09:10
Speaker 3: He made his point and it landed, it really did. He did get that sergeant to talk about other searches where it was clear that Lindsay Clancy was searching about mental health medications and treatments on.
00:09:23
Speaker 1: The Tom Hall thing, wasn't it then? Weren't they able to establish or at least put in the jurors minds that she might not have been the one at home because you had to get the baby to the damn doctors.
00:09:33
Speaker 4: At the end of the day.
00:09:35
Speaker 3: And this is how the defense left this cross examination of this witness, no one knows who used the computer.
00:09:42
Speaker 4: Is that correct?
00:09:43
Speaker 2: That's correct, and that's the story.
00:09:46
Speaker 3: Now you've just negated everything that was just testified to the point.
00:09:50
Speaker 2: As well wrote, is Tom Hall a musician? Right that Patrick Clancy was a fan.
00:09:58
Speaker 3: Of Yes, And he admitted that on the stand when he was being cross examined by Kevin Writingfield. So yes, he had already established that with Patrick and cross at the first day of trial and then reiterated it at this point with this witness.
00:10:11
Speaker 1: Once again, though, Babe, I feel like the prosecution is trying to trick me, Like this thing you're trying to get me to hold against her was already testified to and is not even something to debate.
00:10:24
Speaker 2: I didn't there have been a few of these with the prosecution.
00:10:29
Speaker 3: You did, You said, I feel like they're trying to pull a fast one.
00:10:32
Speaker 1: Yeah, And that was another case and the suicide meant to hear this guy break it down, like you didn't have to search for suicide.
00:10:39
Speaker 4: This guy, apparently Tom Hall died by suicide.
00:10:42
Speaker 1: So there's some drop down in his Wikipedia page that will show suicide.
00:10:46
Speaker 2: So it looks as links.
00:10:48
Speaker 1: Yes, so it's not like somebody got on was googling how to kill themselves?
00:10:52
Speaker 2: Right, So again it's a fast one.
00:10:55
Speaker 4: It was.
00:10:55
Speaker 3: It was so another police officer takes the stand, Sergeant Timp Timothy Chiappini, and he also is a detective with training and cell phone forensics. And this this was where I got really interesting because he went through Lindsay Clancy's phone, her texts, her searches I put, I put in here some of the ones that really were interesting to me. In October of twenty twenty two. This was a note on Lindsay Clancy's phone. So this is three months before the killing. I'm struggling so hard because I wanted to parent each of my kids like my first and since I can't, that's depressing to me. This is definitely the root cause of all our problems. Now. I feel like I'm not parenting any of my kids the way I want to, and that makes me sad too. But I'm going to try my best. And she went on in that note to say, I'm terrified of something happening to my kids or doing something wrong to mess up their development.
00:11:57
Speaker 4: Wow, isn't that so bizarre?
00:11:59
Speaker 3: To here she was so worried about messing up their development three months before she murdered them, which suggests to you, what well the prosecution in having this be You know, this is their witness, this is their testimony, this is their evidence they're introducing, and the I believe the through line here is that she was controlling, that she wanted her kids to be a certain way, She wanted to be a certain way as a parent, and when she realized she was failing, she decided she was just going to.
00:12:32
Speaker 4: Take everybody out because it wasn't good enough. So it wasn't about.
00:12:36
Speaker 3: Psychosis, it was about control, and that's what they're trying to establish here with this testimony. The note also went on to say, for the last five years, I've filled my mind with just all things parenting, and it's unhealthy.
00:12:53
Speaker 4: So I just thought that.
00:12:54
Speaker 3: Was interesting, and they are trying to sell she was sane and she was acknowledging that she had control issues.
00:13:00
Speaker 1: All right, Two things on that, I'll take The last one first is when you were talking about the control issue, this is something we have been talking about lately when it comes to men and familicized men who kill their entire families oftentimes is because there's something recently that happened, a divorce or bankruptc if something that sets them off and they feel like they have lost control of some societal norm or their position in the community. You in describing her just now made me think of that for the first time.
00:13:33
Speaker 2: Same the same explent.
00:13:35
Speaker 1: These guys don't have right they're considered very upstanding members of the community, and these things happen. I can see and relate, like, Okay, this is a phenomenon that does take place. The difference here is she has years of documented history of.
00:13:51
Speaker 3: Correct illness, and that is the distinction, because otherwise you could apply that same cond that's not a what we just described about men killing their families, and this same notion from Lindsay losing control, that is not a defense for murder, period.
00:14:04
Speaker 4: It just is not.
00:14:05
Speaker 3: And so yes, if you feel like you failed as a parent, you don't get to just take out your family because you want to start over or do it better, or because you couldn't do it well enough, you're just going to end at all.
00:14:17
Speaker 4: Obviously that is not a defense for murder.
00:14:20
Speaker 3: But I just I thought it was an interesting thing, and I don't I think moms, when you talk about men trying having a societal norm of having to be the provider, having to and then when they fail, they take out their family. This would be I actually was thinking, Wow, moms, there's a mom hierarchy, there's a mom verse where yes, moms.
00:14:38
Speaker 4: Compare and compete with each other.
00:14:39
Speaker 3: And here she was a neonatal nurse, or she was a sorry, a labor and delivery nurse. So she even felt like of all people, of all moms, she's been in this world of motherhood and parenting and infants, and she, of all people, should be the best mom ever. So I'm just saying that is what the prosecution is trying to establish here.
00:14:59
Speaker 1: And here's it, Robes. If they made that argument, that one would make sense as some kind there's a through line there, Robes. But like you say, all the time, they just present you the evidence. But then good luck piecing it together whatever narrative that the prosecution's trying to give you. I'm not sure. Sometimes they are not making the point you just made. You just made it clearer than they have in the courtroom.
00:15:27
Speaker 3: Isn't that so weird that we see this all the time with prosecutors. I don't know why they don't land their plane. They don't land their plane a lot of times with jurors, and so you think, I'm thinking, this is what they're doing, and maybe she brings it all home during closing arguments, but it would be more effective, I think if you could find a way, Like the defense has been brilliant at how he asked questions. He's actually getting in like statements, so he's making his point, he's making it very he's underlining everything he's trying to establish and putting an exclaimt point at the end, and they're kind of just putting parentheses out there, and you're kind of confused.
00:16:04
Speaker 1: But look, evidence is evidence, and you're supposed to consider, not supposed to consider any histrionics of some cool Boston attorney.
00:16:14
Speaker 4: Yes, but he's good at his job.
00:16:16
Speaker 2: He's good.
00:16:17
Speaker 1: But yeah, I just that point you're making. I can see that parallel. I can see those connections to control and what we always say the familicide is always almost exclusively a guy thing and robes. You just made the argument for why a woman wouldn't take out her husband because he's not a part necessarily of the structure of what she controls and what she should be getting right.
00:16:41
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean that's there you go and then and to have that.
00:16:44
Speaker 3: Then four days before the murder, she googles can you treat a sociopath?
00:16:48
Speaker 4: They also went through the day of.
00:16:49
Speaker 3: The murders, that timeline between four and eight where just the fact that she was operating normally, texting with Patrick, calling him, and then doing that search to see how long he'd be gone. But it all just seemed like someone who was very sane, very methodical, and.
00:17:06
Speaker 4: Knew exactly what she was doing.
00:17:08
Speaker 3: When the defense got up to counter all of this, he got in some other texts, some other conversations that were interesting, like she searched well. He asked, did you know about the search how to slit your throat and die? Can you turn airbags off on a Kia Sorento. The officer said, I don't recall. Then he had him read aloud messages from Patrick calling her a good mama the day of the killings that was wild, and then text with her mom while she was in the hospital when she's self when she self admitted to the hospital, I'm just worried that they won't send me home soon. I'm waiting for the day I wake up and feel like me, so look. They also the prosecution did get this in that Clancy's mom texted her the day before the murders, nice to see you doing better, And.
00:17:56
Speaker 1: The prosecution thinks that helps them because she's perfectly fine, she's perfectly saying but at the same time, behind the scenes, don't we have writings from her and right, she is actually saying something to herself privately that she is not admitting to or presenting to friends and family exactly exactly.
00:18:15
Speaker 3: And then the final the final witness was pretty quick. Another police officer, a case officer. I think the only thing that was interesting. They got him up there to play a video pretty much of the Clancy family at a museum together, chorus playing Lindsay's holding the baby in a holder, and that was tough. But then at the same time, while they're playing this video, she has this police officer testify about how he met with a medical examiner to tell him it would take minutes for someone to die by strangulation.
00:18:41
Speaker 4: So it was a little I thought it was a little performative.
00:18:44
Speaker 3: They were like tugging at the juror's heartstrings by showing this family and then talking about how long it takes to die by strangulation.
00:18:52
Speaker 4: It was a little tough.
00:18:54
Speaker 2: I didn't appreciate that.
00:18:55
Speaker 4: Yeah, it was a little tough.
00:18:56
Speaker 3: So when we come back, the jury was excused, but there was another hearing between the judge and the attorneys, and this one was all about again those defense witnesses. We are awaiting when the defense begins its case. Welcome back everyone to Amy and TJ.
00:19:23
Speaker 1: So.
00:19:23
Speaker 3: Yes, the jury was dismissed around two forty on Thursday, and they immediately went into a hearing because the prosecution wants security logs from court. They want to know who has been allowed back in the courtroom, and they want to know if any of the folks who've been seated are going to be defense witnesses. They specifically were asking about a priest and a doctor and they believe that they may be in the courtroom listening to evidence, and they were fairly outraged by it.
00:19:55
Speaker 1: What's the official rule, you just not supposed witnesses or does a judge a turn which ones are pertinent enough.
00:20:02
Speaker 3: To I'm not sure because in this case it seems bizarre because it's streaming live. So even if you've got a potential witness who's not in the courtroom and you can tell them don't listen to the trial, you can't confirm that they haven't.
00:20:17
Speaker 2: Bad being instructed not to do they.
00:20:19
Speaker 4: Know not to typically you're not supposed to.
00:20:21
Speaker 2: So ken are you discarded as a witness.
00:20:23
Speaker 3: Then I'm not sure because this is what the prosecution said. It could pose as a potential bias that he's back there talking about this doctor. And then they complained that they haven't been furnished at this point with who the defense is actually going to be calling in this case. They're like the list changes daily, so they're frustrated. And it was kind of funny because we can count on Kevin Reddington to be the performer that he is. He grabs a list alog from a court employee and just gives it tells the prosecution you can review it yourself. So yeah, unclear what's going to happen about who's being called, whether or not anyone will be disco qualified because they're in the court room. The judge was taking issue that anyone was even naming this priest. He seemed very protective of this priest who's grown close to Lindsay Clancy. So he baptized all three children so we'll see if he's going to be called. But this will be I mean, when the defense puts on their case, this will be absolutely fascinating.
00:21:17
Speaker 4: And look, we thought it might even happen this week.
00:21:20
Speaker 3: It ain't gonna happen this week because there's no there's no court today for whatever reason. They didn't give an explanation, but the prosecution will continue presenting their evidence on Monday at nine am.
00:21:32
Speaker 1: Did you get an update about because he thought they were ahead of schedule and on schedule.
00:21:37
Speaker 3: Does this he keeps saying they're on schedule, But yes, there they're I mean, they had even said at the end of last week they could the prosecution could be done as soon as Monday or Tuesday. Here we are on Friday week behind that prediction and the prosecution is still going. So we shall see. But look, I would imagine the prosecution will wrap up their case next week and the defense will start to present theirs. It's never been a there really has not been a dull moment in this case, so we'll continue to follow it. We always appreciate you listening to us, every one. I'm Ami Roboch alongside TJ.
00:22:07
Speaker 4: Holmes. We'll talk soon