Killer Mom Trial: “I Can’t Do It” Sobbing Lindsay Clancy Interrupts Testimony

00:00:02
Speaker 1: Hey there, folks.

00:00:02
Speaker 2: It is Thursday, August thirteen, and Lindsey Clancy once again spoke at her triple murder trial. But I don't think we were supposed to hear this, and with that, welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ. She blurted something out Robes. It was caught on hot mic. Is that fair to say? But it was in the midst of what was an emotional stretch for her in the courtroom.

00:00:29
Speaker 3: Yes, if anybody, if any of you listening, were watching the trial yesterday, I bet you were crying too. It was impossible not to feel the emotion with Lindsey Clancy audibly sobbing, and yes, at one point she's heard on the mic saying I can't do it.

00:00:51
Speaker 2: This was extended. This wasn't a one minute, two minute. This was a stretch of time in which they had to stop the trial. The judge had to stop the trial on at least two occasions. Here, Robes, Just for now, we assume it was for her to compose herself. But Rhodes, it's from what we can tell and reports coming out of there, there's a lot of emotion in netroom.

00:01:13
Speaker 3: Yes, from the jury, from Lindsey Clancy's parents who are sitting behind her throughout this trial. Even her defense attorney had an incredibly pained expression on his face in moments he was trying to comfort her, rub her back. But you have this broken woman physically, mentally, emotionally sobbing, uncontrollably and at times hyperventilating.

00:01:40
Speaker 2: I think that's probably fair to say as well. It got to a point you had to stop. It was too disruptive to the proceedings and roads. I don't know what impact this has, but this was all coming at the time where the testimony was from a medical examiner about the condition of the kid's bodies. Okay, I guess you have to go through. It's a murder trial robes and you're supposed to show this stuff. I just wonder what impact is this having on that jury.

00:02:14
Speaker 3: Oh, it's having an impact.

00:02:16
Speaker 2: But which direction when they look across at the table at her, the monster that the prosecution saying she is over there. This isn't fake crying.

00:02:26
Speaker 3: Oh God, No, this is like gutted, raw emotion that I dare anyone who listens to it or sees it to not feel something just in your soul.

00:02:40
Speaker 1: But is anyone looking at robes.

00:02:41
Speaker 2: Is it possible a couple of jurors are looking at that and shaking their heads at her and like, whatever, lady, you killed your kids. Don't sit over there and cry. Now, is there anyone? It's possible because that is exactly what the prosecution is expecting of this jury and would have to expect of this jury to get the conviction they want. You would have to look at her and go whatever.

00:03:02
Speaker 3: After you hear witness after witness after witness talk about what a wonderful mom she was.

00:03:07
Speaker 1: That's the case the prosecutions.

00:03:09
Speaker 3: But no, I don't know. I just know how I felt watching her, how I felt hearing her. It was the opposite of that.

00:03:19
Speaker 1: I'm with you, This was stunning stuff.

00:03:21
Speaker 3: Bro.

00:03:21
Speaker 1: This is some we have to and I guess they have to roll.

00:03:25
Speaker 2: If this was a regular, if you will murder trial, and you had somebody on trial without the insanity part of it, you would have to go through all these steps. You would have to go through and show what happened to the bodies, show the condition and the brutality and all that you would have to. I guess the prosecution is just carrying on in that manner.

00:03:44
Speaker 3: Oo. But man, we were even looking at the prosecutors while all of this emotions going on.

00:03:51
Speaker 2: Just stonefaced barely even glanced over at the defense table.

00:03:55
Speaker 3: I don't know that I ever saw them even look her way.

00:03:58
Speaker 1: Look.

00:03:59
Speaker 3: So yeah, that obviously is the big headline that came out of Wednesday's testimony. But yes, two medical examiners took the stand. There were six witnesses total, and we can go over some of the other witnesses. The final two witnesses were the medical examiners, and of course that is when all of the emotion came out. A couple of other interesting bits did, though, get presented in court yesterday. A police detective, Sergeant Dan Lawler, was on the stand. He was an evidence officer. He collected evidence from the Clancy home, including some of her clothing, inventoried pill bottles, and he was one of the officers posted outside of Lindsay's hospital room after the killings. Right, so it kind of seemed like there wasn't a lot going on, like okay, just kind of going through the defense on cross examination started pointing out that he used to work at the prosecutor's office, got him to admit that there was blood on her clothing on the floor on the mirror on the window. But then all of a sudden, boom, there's an animated sidebar and then suddenly the jury is excused and a hearing is called and the voideer Sergeant Lawler, and here he was eventually allowed to testify about this. But this was interesting first time I've heard that. We've heard that there was a prosecutor theory that while Lindsey Clancy in those first days after the killings, had one of her doctors come in and let her use her cell phone to call Patrick, and that one of the prosecutor's theories was that the doctor told Lindsay to tell Patrick she heard voices, and so that was what the defense got him to admit that that was a possible theory, but then got him to also testify and from jury that he heard nothing that took place between the doctor and Lindsay. So we just I hadn't heard that way before.

00:05:57
Speaker 2: The point of this was to just trip up this witness, to discredit the witness.

00:06:01
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, to also try to discredit this theory that the prosecution was potentially trying to put out there, that potentially a doctor put the idea into Lindsay's head that she could claim that she was insane by saying she heard voices. And look, the defense got him to fully admit that, yes, that was a theory he heard from another trooper, but that he was the guy outside the room and he never heard that happen. So they're trying to debunk a potential theory that they think the prosecution is trying to put together.

00:06:38
Speaker 2: Didn't know that got so worked up, Like you said, an animated sidebar, and there have been a lot of sidebars.

00:06:44
Speaker 3: Yes, so many sidebars. But yeah, that actually went into a full on private hearing. So he gets off the stand and then they have a perinatal clinician, her name is Letitia Dukes, come up on the stand and look, her basic thing is she saw Lindsay Clancy, I believe four times. And what we've seen from so many other medical professionals who were caring for Lindsay Clancy over this time that yes, she said there was anxiety, lack of sleep, thoughts of wanting to die, concerns about maybe misuse of adavan. But she testified there were no tears, no sadness, no signs of mania, no signs of psychosis, and in fact, in one visit said she was smiling, laughing, and seemingly enjoying time with the family. So you understand why the prosecution wanted to put her up. But the defense did get to have her admit on cross examination that yes, there were numerous times when Lindsay was expressing suicidal thoughts.

00:07:39
Speaker 2: It's funny both sides get up and have the witness just give the part that helps.

00:07:45
Speaker 3: Them, Yeah, and the kind of cancel each other out in a lot of ways.

00:07:50
Speaker 2: That's kind of what that witness was for me. She didn't help one way or another time.

00:07:53
Speaker 3: I don't believe so either. And like there was another police officer who was there during her hospital stay, didn't really add anything. There was only a few questions from either side, kind of confused why he was even up there. Superintendent at the Sheriff's department was just verifying certain documents. The defense didn't ask any questions. So now we get to the meat and the heart of what happened yesterday with those two medical examiners, first Renee Stonebridge and then doctor Barbara Olsen. And in both of these women's testimony, this is where these breaks had to take place because Lindsay Clancy was sobbing, sobbing into her hands. I mean, imagine this first medical examiner is describing the damage to their eyes and their brains from strangulation, Cora and Dawson. That is just unimaginable to hear that being described, and then putting up and putting into evidence the photos of five year old Cora and three year old Dawson. Now the media didn't get to see it, but the jurors had to look at that.

00:09:02
Speaker 1: I don't know.

00:09:04
Speaker 2: I'm trying to remember at any point during the medical examine or testimony where she had a stretch of time where her head was up, where she was actually looking at or paying attention. Her head literally was down on that table, and other times it was in her hands.

00:09:19
Speaker 1: I don't know how much of it.

00:09:21
Speaker 3: Why did you see her look up at all during this time? Anyway, we as we were talking about at the top, she starts sobbing so much that the judge has to call a break, and so when the jury comes back, he actually has to go through this whole process of explaining why they can't let their emotions were their judgment.

00:09:45
Speaker 2: He's given this instruction several times in this case. So it was this is the third full week, right, so I don't know how many more times we got to hear it. I swear he's given it multreemptively, and he has had to give it after you've seen episodes like yesterday Robes.

00:10:02
Speaker 1: What impact is that?

00:10:03
Speaker 2: What is this doing to a juror what is this doing you were you were watching these pictures.

00:10:07
Speaker 1: It's awful.

00:10:08
Speaker 2: You're crying, You're looking over at the roll. She is shaking. She is over that like you say, hey, what do you call an anxiety panic attack?

00:10:17
Speaker 3: You hyper? Yeah, and that it did seem like a panic attack.

00:10:22
Speaker 1: So you're watching that.

00:10:23
Speaker 2: What you're there, human beings, judge, he know that you can't help with the emotional.

00:10:28
Speaker 3: You're watching that. You're here this the hearing like hearing her audibly. I mean it was a painful, gutted sobbing over to the side. And meanwhile, you're listening to a medical examiner describe how a person dies of strangulation and how painful the process is and how long it takes to die. She's describing how Dawson had more hemorrhaging than Kora did because he may have struggled more or Lindsay may have applied more pressure on the ligature. I mean, you're hearing these awful, awful things and you're listening to a mother who is just having a full blown sobbing attack. How do you get through that hours of that? I mean, that was just excruciating.

00:11:22
Speaker 2: But again they are being I don't know how the jury feels about them having to see stuff that nobody is taking issue with. We know the kids are dead, we know that she strangled them. Can we please argue about what we're arguing about the point of the argument, Robes, how is it helped or hurt? Right with these pictures? Again, Babe, from the prosecution standpoint, this is just a murder case. This ain't about what was in her head. This is murder and look at how she murdered these babes. When you take it that way, Robes is I guess it's the standard.

00:11:58
Speaker 1: Stop.

00:11:58
Speaker 2: This is what you're supposed to do. You have to do and to get into evidence. They need to have it when they go back in the jury room. Right, but how are you looking at a picture of a strangled three year old to help you decide whether or not mama was crazy? And again I use the word crazy loosely, but that's what we're talking about here, talking about she was out of her mind with psychosis. I am missing it. I'm sure it's a value, but please do tell me, if you have this already, how those pictures, how we're making a decision about her sanity by looking at the pictures of the string to tell me she was sane or was?

00:12:37
Speaker 3: I believe that. All I can imagine is that the prosecution is trying to show the viciousness of the crime just by the bruising, talking about the bruising and the hemorrhaging and what happened to the baby's brain and their eyes. They're trying to show just how cruel and vicious this action was, and it was and by the woman who, yeah, doesn't want to hear it, but this is what she did. And I that's all I can figure. But how that is being interpreted by the jury is something we don't know yet.

00:13:12
Speaker 2: And this is something Yes, the prosecutor is doing the job, this is what they have to do getting it into evidence, but Robes is also not helping or didn't help. And we gave the photographer whoever's behind the camera credit. He has been trained on the defense table. I say, he is, you could could be she in there, but this person is trained on that table because so much action is taking place, and robes. The defense attorney was making points as these folks were actually testifying because robes he might have been expressing when a lot of jurors were feeling as well.

00:13:47
Speaker 1: Move on.

00:13:47
Speaker 3: Yeah, he was frustrated, and at one point there was several objections. At one point he is like, it's obvious what she wants, like, we know what she's getting at, we know what you're saying. You can move on. Yes, he was very frustrated. I saw him with his hands like yeah, you know, his tapping his fingers, like he was so uncomfortable, and it wasn't performative. I mean, I can't even imagine his role in all of this, and his client right there is absolutely unlike out of control and is in so much visible and audible pain, and he was so uncomfortable and he was so frustrated with the process that it went on for as long as it did. That you had two separate medical examiners testifying, and it wasn't over the top, but his tension was palpable, like and we're watching it from a screen, imagine being in the room and how much more real and present that energy.

00:14:43
Speaker 2: It was authentic. He was You could feel his you could feel he was just ready to just explode. Can we please, like, what are you? Can we please get through all these things we've already agreed to.

00:14:55
Speaker 1: I don't know.

00:14:56
Speaker 2: And he's put his hand on her back and he comforted her plenty throughout that testimony yesterday. And I have right I know at least one of them he didn't. But I don't think he crossed examit either. One of these medical examiners that not.

00:15:05
Speaker 3: A single question he did not. And when we come back, we're going to tell you what the judge left the jurors with at the end of that unbelievably emotional day and what we can expect today. Welcome back everyone to Amy and TJ. We are talking about, Ooh, a really tough day in court on Wednesday in the Lindsay Clancy triple murder trial, with Lindsay Clancy barely able to control herself. Actually, she wasn't able to control herself. The court had to be recessed multiple times because truly it was just it was too uncomfortable for everyone in that courtroom to hear and see and process the testimony on the autopsies of Lindsay Clancy's two oldest kids, who were five and three, and at the same time be watching and listening to Lindsay Clancy crying, sobbing, heaving, hyperventilating, and at one point, yes, saying I can't do this.

00:16:16
Speaker 1: You had to stop.

00:16:17
Speaker 2: She was there was there was a soundtrack of sobbing underneath the medical examiner testimony about these little kids' bodies. You had to stop. It was disruptive, You couldn't pay attention to what the testimony was. He had to stop it, and I think he had to stop it twice in relatively short time span, right, Yes.

00:16:39
Speaker 3: It was within a like fifteen twenty minutes. She just could not she could not pull herself together. And eventually, man, when court was adjourned, the judge had one because we said, in the middle of all this, he talked to them about not letting emotions sway their decisions or their verdict can't be based on feelings of sympathy or anger. So whether it's working towards the defense's benefit or towards the prosecutions benefit, who knows if it's a listening anger or if it's a listening sympathy. Maybe it's a listening both. But he's saying those feelings you're feeling, taking this all in and hearing and seeing what you're seeing cannot affect your verdict. But I would just as a human, how could it not? How could that not? How could that not have an impact on how you feel about what you're listening to in terms of testimony, because the facts are she killed them, and you're supposed to figure out whether or not she was insane. What you're hearing and seeing, and even what you're hearing and seeing in terms of her reaction, I would think still affect your opinion about whether or not she was out of her mind?

00:17:55
Speaker 1: Which way? Which way does it sway?

00:17:58
Speaker 2: You are you looking at a one who's remorseful because she is very aware of what she did, or looking at it the opposite that this woman clearly is now in her right mind.

00:18:11
Speaker 1: I don't know.

00:18:12
Speaker 3: It's fascinating. So here's what the judge told the jurors before they left. He told them that they should get the case out of their heads and during this recess just have a reset. But I don't know. You walk away as a juror from a day like that, back to your probably busy life with your kids and your family, and you got to make dinner whatever. I was just imagining what that has to be like for them. This is for many folks sitting there. There are eighteen of them, twelve of them women. This might be the first time they've ever watched a court trial or actually seen a case like this close up. How do you not take that home with you? I just thought that was so interesting. He told them to get the case out of their heads.

00:18:58
Speaker 2: I don't know how, and then I suppose it is it right?

00:19:01
Speaker 3: So they can't go home and tell her. I would come home and tell you, that's ridiculous. There's no way I'd have to, like from a mental health perspective, I would have to come home and go, oh my god, I got to tell you what happened today, Like you just you'd have to get it off your chest. You'd have to tell someone how you're feeling. Expect you to keep those emotions inside. Energy is transferable, and the energy in that courtroom was untenable, and you have to get that out. I just I thought that was so interesting.

00:19:33
Speaker 1: That.

00:19:33
Speaker 3: I understand why he told them that, but it just seemed like an impossible task to tell eighteen people, many of whom are parents themselves, how do you look at your children when you go home? You know from court that day you hug them a little tighter, You're a little kinder, you're a little more loving. I imagine all of that's probably going on. But today the judge told jurors to expect a similar day. Nine to four is what they went yesterday. So that's about what we're expecting today. And look, last week they said, hey, prosecution might be wrapped up Monday, Tuesday. Well here we are Thursday with expecting another full day of testimony by the prosecution. But we are told they are close to arresting. We just don't know exactly when that may be. We of course will be watching once again today and by the way, if you've got a computer screen nearby, it is absolutely worth a watch. This has been fascinating each and every day for different reasons, but we will always keep you updated. We appreciate you. I made me wrote back alongside TJ. Holmes. We'll talk so