US mother 'begging for help' before children's killings, mother-in-law testifies

Family testimony paints picture of mental decline

In the trial of Lindsay Clancy, a Massachusetts mother charged with three counts of first-degree murder for the deaths of her three children, the court has heard from family members and forensic psychiatrists. Among the most striking testimony came from her former mother-in-law, Susan Clancy, who said that before the killings, Lindsay Clancy was "begging for help."

Susan Clancy described her former daughter-in-law as a "very nurturing, very loving" mother who had insomnia, was losing her appetite, and was "very anxious and sad." Asked by a defense attorney whether Lindsay Clancy had been "interested at all times in trying to get better and see doctors," Susan Clancy replied: "Very much so."

Lindsay Clancy's mother, Paula Musgrove, also testified, saying her daughter always wanted to be a mother. Musgrove recalled that about a month before the killings, Lindsay Clancy told her and her then-husband, Patrick Clancy, that she had thoughts of harming the children. Musgrove said her daughter, a nurse, would say, "This isn't me, I've never been like this before," and Musgrove agreed, because she wasn't.

Clashing expert opinions at the heart of the case

The trial, now in its fifth week at Plymouth Superior Court, has centered on whether Clancy, now 36, was able to conform her actions to the requirements of the law and appreciate the wrongfulness of her acts at the time of the killings, or whether a mental defect absolved her from criminal responsibility. Two psychiatrists who evaluated Clancy and reviewed her medical records reached opposing conclusions.

Dr. Phillip Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist called by the defense, testified that Clancy was suffering from a "command hallucination" and lacked control. In her mind, Resnick said, she believed she would be doing her children a favor by having them go to heaven with her rather than remain on earth without her mothering.

In contrast, the state's expert, Dr. Avram Mack, testified that although Clancy suffered from a major depressive episode, she retained the ability to abide by the law and tell right from wrong. The prosecution may call two additional experts: Dr. Gregory Saathoff, a forensic psychiatrist and consultant to the FBI, and Dr. Kirk Heilbrun, a professor of psychology and brain sciences at Drexel University.

Defense rests after family anecdotes

Prosecutors rested their case on Monday after three weeks of testimony from dozens of witnesses. The defense then began presenting its case, opening with personal anecdotes from family members. Clancy's sister testified about daily suicidal thoughts before the killings. The defense rested on Friday, after calling Resnick, and the case is expected to go to the jury early next week.

Clancy acknowledges killing her children—Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months—in January 2023, but has pleaded not guilty to murder charges, arguing postpartum psychosis. Prosecutors, however, alleged she made a calculated decision to intentionally strangle the children with fitness bands before jumping out of a second-floor window. Clancy was paralyzed by the jump and has attended the trial in a wheelchair.

Case nearing conclusion

Closing arguments are expected within the next few days, followed by jury instructions and deliberations. The trial, which has included nearly a month of testimony, has brought to the forefront questions about mental illness, criminal responsibility, and the limits of the law.

This article contains details of a distressing nature.