Killer Mom Trial: Lindsay Clancy’s Ex Husband Testifies About Weeks And Days Leading Up To Murders

00:00:02
Speaker 1: Hey, that folks sit is Monday, July twenty seventh, and this was day one of testimony in the trial of Lindsey Clancy, the mom who murdered her three young children, but says she is not responsible because of mental illness. And with that, welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ. Roobes. Right off the bat, the prosecutor is trying to get us to believe something that is very hard to believe, that this wonderful, doting mother, by all accounts, wanted to plan and plot and premeditate and kill three young kids just because she didn't want to be a mother anymore. That's the direction they're going.

00:00:40
Speaker 2: Yes, And so we had opening arguments that the prosecution and the defense both had their opening statements to jurors, and then testimony began, and just even listening to the prosecution, the prosecutor go through this big opening statement about what they're going to be presenting in court to these eighteen jurors, six alternates, and it was hard to even get behind what she was saying. I'll be honest, just as trying to remain an objective observer of this case and listening to this prosecutor describe a mom who wanted to be free of her kids. It just didn't it didn't click, It didn't read for me, it was it was. It's a hard sell, and I think it's going to be I think it's going to be hard to prove.

00:01:36
Speaker 1: Rollapes we are. I don't think you are being objective and objectively speaking, it's hard to understand why a mother would do this. And we're talking about a five year old, a three year old, and an eight month old that a thirty five year old mom strangled. Okay, everybody admits. She admits she did this because of mental illness. Bros. We can't get our head around a woman doing this outside of mental illness. So we all go in as jurors or observers robes, waiting to hear from the prosecutor. Okay, tell me the motive, tell me the reason she wanted to do this rose so far the reasoning seems like a high bar just because she decided one day she didn't want to be a mom anymore. That's that's a tough one.

00:02:19
Speaker 2: It's incredibly tough when you also have and look, we haven't seen all the evidence yet. It is just beginning. This trial is expected to last several weeks, maybe even longer than that. But we know that she sought help. We know that she was actively being monitored by and was being tended to by doctors where she was telling them, I have suicidal ideations, I am having hallucinations, I cannot sleep, I am having thoughts of harming my children. I mean, she told her husband this, she told her parents this, she told medical professionals this. So it's hard to imagine that somebody who is evil and is wanting to have a child free life, who is overwhelmed by the responsibilities of motherhood, that she would start telling people what she was going to do before she did it. If it was some big plot to get away with murder rome.

00:03:21
Speaker 1: It didn't at this point. Look, we know she did what she did. We're trying to understand why she did it, and motive goes to it robes. Please articulate for me when I'm missing. But the motive we were given is this correct? She was just fed up with being a mom. She wanted to kill herself, but wanted to kill her kids first motivation.

00:03:47
Speaker 2: She was being painted as selfish, as in control. No one else can take care of my kids the way I can take care of them. So if I'm not doing well and I want to end my life, I should end their lives before and my life so that no one else will be responsible for them. So no one else will take care of them, because no one can love them the way I do. No one can take care of them the way I can.

00:04:09
Speaker 1: You're telling me what you just said is something coming from a sane woman, Madam, prosecutor. You're telling me a really crazy scenario that sounds like it's coming from a person that has a problem. Why the prosecution is completely and I mean robes the jury might see it this way, but they are completely dismissive of mental illness and postpart of anything that impacted this woman's ability to think, to reason, to behave rationally. They are like poop poo in it completely.

00:04:41
Speaker 2: And it's a little bizarre to me just because, look, they've got a female prosecutor. Obviously, we're talking about a mom who had recently had her third child. He was eight months old at the time of the killings. And you've got a jury. I don't know what the makeup of the jury is, but and look and men and women, I don't know if we see this differently, but as a woman I and a woman who was given birth and a woman who suffered from some depression after her first baby, I feel nothing but sympathy for this woman. Yes, what she did was horrific. Yes, what she did was unthinkable and awful, and she needs to be held accountable for it. But my god, I see this woman, this mother, this broken woman, this former delivery nurse who did nothing but care for infants and mothers for her adult profession, wheeled into this Massachusetts courtroom in a wheelchair because she tried to kill herself after she killed her children, and so to see her in this very humbled position with a basically she had a kleenex, she had a tissue with her at all times, wiping away tears throughout the entire day today, and then to hear the prosecution take this hard line against her, I don't know. It just felt uncomfortable to me to watch and to listen to.

00:06:01
Speaker 1: We have to take the prosecutors at their word and in good faith that they believe the case that they are putting forward. But we do these stories or we talk about this and why it's important to speak on because we're all desperate to understand human nature and human behavior. And this is one that just does not read for a woman that we didn't know, but robes everybody describes her, including her ex husband, who was the first witness today on the stand, robes everyone, I haven't have you heard a word about her being a bad mom. Have you had a word about her not being a dedicated mom? Have you heard anything?

00:06:33
Speaker 2: No? And what was even more striking about that is to hear what she did, and this is from the prosecutor in her opening statement, to hear her describe Lindsey Clancy taking her oldest daughter, Cora, who I believe was five, to the doctor the morning she ended up taking her life. So she takes her daughter to her pediatricians appointment and has explained to her about some bowel issues she's having. Where they go and want to get some meds at CVS to help her. Like this wasn't somebody who it seemed was planning her child's death. She's taking her daughter for her checkup.

00:07:13
Speaker 1: Let me ask the one thing And they haven't gotten to this fully, but they did talk about I guess in the opening statement today ropes that she had looked up the distance or in the time it took to go from her house to this fast food or this restaurant where she sent her husband to pick up food. The prosecution suggesting she looked ahead because she wanted to know exactly how much time she had to kill her kids, is that problematic.

00:07:38
Speaker 2: Look, I think she had a plan in place at a certain point, but it's almost as if at some point during that day something snapped, And to me, it would actually fall in line with what we believe the defense is going to say that she heard a voice, a male voice, who was urging her to take her children's life, that this was her last chance before she took her own life. And so I think it can still it can still bolster the defense's version of what happened and why it happened, that she yes looked to see if she had enough time to do what the voice was telling her to do. Look, I just listening to the prosecution's opening statement. I just felt a little icky, like it just didn't land for me. I'm curious what you thought about the defense's opening statement. Because her attorney is a character.

00:08:29
Speaker 1: How many times did I say while we were listening him, Oh, this is gonna be fine. You could just he has a personality, He has a way about him in a courtroom. He stood up there and spoke extemporaneously for how long, Gropes maybe half hours talking and talking and doing his thing, and was animated and was making his points and was driving at home. He is just he's a guy and he has that harsh Boston, that Massachusetts accent. He is just going to be. He is a storyteller. He has fiery and you sit up when he speaks, you absolutely do. And if you need need somebody in the scort to argue on your behalf to save your life, I'll take him. Because Robes compared to the prosecution that went through this is not a criticism of their performance. It's fine evidence is what it is. A rose. This guy is going to be a force in that court room.

00:09:15
Speaker 2: Indeed, he comes off as a man of the people and a guy that everybody knows, a guy that everybody trusts. He has that down to earth spirit about him. Seventy at least, isn't he Yeah, he's an older guy, but he just to hear him in very strong defense of his client, defending her as a mom, defending her as a wife, defending her as a human. It worked for me already. He set a tone much different than the prosecutor. And look, a lot of times when we start these trials, you know, you end up feeling a certain way because they're convincing you that their their argument, or their version of what happened is the way they want jurors to see it, and so you end up kind of falling in line with what they're saying. You go along with the story they're telling. I didn't find myself doing that with the prosecution. I found myself doing that with the defense. I didn't feel like I was with the prosecutor. Wasn't. I wasn't. I wasn't on her path, and I couldn't get there. I just couldn't. So it'll be interesting to see what jurors think and feel.

00:10:18
Speaker 1: I am almost to the point, w Romes, I need the prosecution to prove to me that she was not mentally ill. You're gonna have to prove that to me. I know it's early on this first day, first witness opening statements, but Robes, it's just such an incredible and unbelievable story, and everyone is telling a story about this woman. The defense attorney very effective in the top of the in his opening statement, had that you know what it looked like. It almost looked like one of the President Trump's tariff boards. When he held up that poster and was pointing and going through in this country, he held this thing up, was going through she sought help here and then on this date, and he ticked off a long list of all these times she's sought help, She voluntarily sought help, she was prescribed drugs, and all like, wow, clearly something was wrong with her.

00:11:08
Speaker 2: It was the reverse of what we usually see. Usually you have the prosecution pulling out all of these timelines and here's the evidence we're going to show you, and this is why this happened, and this is why the next thing happened. And you were used to seeing that from the prosecution getting ready to kind of showcase the evidence they have and pulls out whatever list or whatever visual aid they need to tell the jury what they're about to see. It was reversed today. The defense had the evidence, and they're not even required to put on a defense in a criminal proceeding like this, even when someone's life is on the line, we oftentimes don't even see the defense show evidence or actually create a very specific timeline where you've got proof. He he did that. He brought the receipts, he brought the visuals, and it was almost like the reverse of what we're used to seeing court round.

00:12:00
Speaker 1: But don't they don't they switch the burden? Isn't this legally correct? Robes when they say not guilty by reason of insanity, your defense is in insanity defense. Now you do have a burden, that is, the defense needs to bring experts in now. They need to convince the jury that something else because the prosecution's case right now is one because they just they're prosecuting her for a murder. Yeah, she's guilty, Why is she not? The defense has to put on that case in rooms this day one. But so far, I just I don't see how anything else. I don't know what the criminal robes legally speaking, where the line is between when you're criminality you know what the prosecution say, prosecutor, that was a good line. They are people every single day in this country that have mental illness of some kind that commit crimes and they're still guilty of them. They don't get an excuse or reason just because of mental illness. But robes insanity defenses exist for a reason because sometimes they're.

00:13:00
Speaker 2: Yes, they're rare, and they're rarely effective, but they do work in certain moments in certain cases, and it does at least appear right now, this looks like it could be one of them. When we come back, we're going to talk about that first witness. This was perhaps and this is the star witness of this entire trial. Lindsay Clancy's ex husband Patrick was on the stand today for the prosecution. And welcome back everyone, as we talk about day one of testimony, opening statements and testimony began in the trial against Lindsey Clancy, who was accused of murdering her three young children, ages five, three and eight months old. And look, this is this is a different kind of a murder trial because she's not denying that she killed her children. No one saying it wasn't her technically, but in a way they are saying it wasn't her. It isn't the mother that Patrick Clancy knew. It isn't the wife that he fell in love with and married. And he went on the stand today and said as much. And it's interesting he is a witness for the prosecution, and yet it was very interesting to see this back and forth between the prosecutor and Patrick Clancy, who we saw what she was trying to do. She was trying to lay out in the months and weeks before the killings. She was trying to say she wasn't that bad. She was operating, she was participating, she was going to Thanksgiving meals, and she tried to say that they went out for their anniversary dinner. But that kind of blew up in her face. So we see where she's going. But right now it doesn't appear that Patrick Clancy is on the same page as the prosecutor.

00:14:51
Speaker 1: It's day one, just getting started. You and I do this all the time with trials, and we think, oh, my goodness, one side is doing great, and then were I don't know, but so far Robes, it's falling flat to There a lot more stuff to try to understand. But Ropes on the stand today. I believe he's going to be a prime witness for the prosecution and for the defense. He has something he can offer both sides. But they were trying to get it, and I was watching him very closely. You were the one that informed me he's actually remarried. At this point, Aaron.

00:15:19
Speaker 2: Has remarried and he lives in New York now actually, and he has an infant child. But it was so painful. I know you had to feel this too, just having the prosecutor ask him about his children's birthdates and what they were interested and what they were active in. I just I saw him. He was so strong, he really was. I was impressed with his ability to be able to talk about his children. And look, this wasn't that long ago. This was January of twenty twenty three. Three years that is not that long to have lost your entire family. I mean in one moment, he lost all three of his children and his wife for that matter, in one moment while he went to go get takeout. He came back and his entire life was forever changed.

00:16:07
Speaker 1: He was and robes. It was just doing the very basics of starting his testimony. When she was just asking about each kid, and when he had to get around to saying the birth dates, you could tell he didn't break down crying or anything, but anybody could recognize he needed a beat. He'd take took kind of a moment, maybe even needed a breath, but he was He had moments throughout the day today on the stand that your heart really went out for me. And I don't know what the prosecutor was trying. It almost seemed like she didn't know the answer to some of the questions.

00:16:37
Speaker 2: She didn't no, no, no. The one of the big moments that did not go well in her favor today was when she was trying again to paint a picture that Lindsey Clancy wasn't that sick. She said, oh, she didn't really take all of these meds that she was prescribed. She only had seven pills missing out of thirty. And you know, she was only prescribed two pills or two proscribe at the same time, three at the most, versus the six or seven that I believe she had in her possession, so minimizing all of that. But the big moment was when she said, oh, well, your anniversary was December third, granted that's just a few weeks before the kids were killed. And she said, but you all went out onto the town and you had dinner reservations and he said, no, we didn't. We stayed home that night. She wasn't feeling up to it. She said, oh, are you sure you didn't go to see this show and go to have this dinner, and she showed him a picture even to kind of prove that ce you all did go out, and he said to her, no, that wasn't that year. That wasn't twenty twenty two. So that definitely blew up in her face.

00:17:43
Speaker 1: It did, but also wrote, it's one thing that that just didn't work. But on day one that sends a message to anybody watching and especially the people in that jury box, like what you doing, lady?

00:17:56
Speaker 2: How did you not know that?

00:17:57
Speaker 1: It's like you don't know what you're doing. What are you trying to pull over? What are you trying to pull here? It came off that way, and I don't know how stunned she was in that moment, but rogues, that was a hell of a moment. And all the stuff about the pills you were just talking about, and he's trying to say, oh, it had this many pills, only this many pills are gone, So she wasn't really taken. He was making the point of those were just the ones I brought home. She had plenty of other stuff. I don't know how much of that stuff she was taking every time. And he wasn't combat at it at all, not at all. He was matter of fact. Absolutely, it was just like lady of facts are wrong, And.

00:18:30
Speaker 2: That made it all the more effective. It almost was as if the defense scored a little bit of a victory today, maybe even a bigger victory than the prosecutor even realizes. From this person who was objectively watching. But I saw a guy who was describing a wife who was in pain, who was spiraling downwards, who was trying to get help, who was looking to anyone who could possibly help her, who was going to the emergency room, who was going to doctors, who was trying to check herself into hospitals. To who's telling her own husband, the father of her children, I'm having I'm having feelings of wanting to harm our children, I am having feelings of wanting to harm myself. That's a brave thing to have to be able to admit to someone. And she did all of those things. So I'm hearing everything I'm hearing, or everything I heard him testify to today to me bolstered her defense. I didn't see one thing or one point that was scored in the prosecutor's side of things. I didn't see any headway that the prosecutor made, at least today, improving their point that this was a woman who just wanted to stop being a mom and she didn't care at what price.

00:19:51
Speaker 1: You know what, I don't know if it's ever happened that the prosecution tries to make a pleae. This is one of those cases. It's bizarre, and it's only day one, so we need to be mindful of that. There is maybe two months ago in this trial. But we've got an idea of the narrative today more so than any time we had before. And if they make this work, it just seems like such an uphill, chronic climb ropes and a stretch, don't they say all the time? Yes, juries, they can see evidence, circumstantial evidence of goth, but they still want a motive.

00:20:24
Speaker 2: They want to know why, and as human beings, that's part of what they're charged at doing, is assessing and what the evidence is in front of them, but also taking their own personal experiences and applying it to reach a reason and logic. And look right now, yes, I know it is early days, it's day one, but this is the star witness. And look I felt for him when the judge finally broke for the day. You could feel and see the physical relief on him. A lot of folks have written about how he almost like let out a sigh, like he was almost holding his breath the entire time he was on that stand. She was emotional the entire time. You had pointed out they might not have seen each other for years. I mean, we can't. I don't know when the last time was that these two were in the same room.

00:21:12
Speaker 1: He permitted to speak to her, would he have wanted to speak to her? How much support is he giving her behind the scene. I don't know, Rhodes, but I just you think about how horrible it is. Kids are dead, woman's on trial. He is a victim.

00:21:27
Speaker 2: Absolutely, he lost everything Rose.

00:21:32
Speaker 1: Yeah, so he was stow. I mean he was very impressed pressed, So Jash shouldn't say he was stoic. But he kept it together on the stand.

00:21:38
Speaker 2: Yes, as much as anyone possibly could. And so he They are not in session tomorrow. He will be back on the stand on Wednesday. The prosecution still has more questions for him, but then the defense will cross examine him, and that should be really, really really interesting to hear the rest of what he has to say when he's being questioned by the prosecutors, but then to hear what he offers when the Events cross examines him. So of course we will be watching this trial as soon as it resumes on Wednesday. But yes, this young mom of three now in that wheelchair in that Massachusetts courtroom, fighting for her life, even though her attorney told us today she still wants to die, and that is understandable given what happened three years ago. And with that, everyone, we appreciate you listening to us. As always, I'm Amy Roebuck alongside TJ. Holmes. We'll talk to you soon.