Lindsay Clancy loses bid to dismiss murder charges as judge clears the ways for retrial

A judge has rejected a motion to dismiss Lindsay Clancy’s murder charges, clearing a path for a retrial.

Clancy is accused of murdering her three young children: five-year-old Cora, three-year-old Dawson and eight-month-old Callan at their Massachusetts home in January 2023.

Following a high-profile trial earlier this year, Clancy’s case ended in a mistrial as the jurors failed to reach a unanimous verdict.

Clancy’s legal team wanted the case against the former nurse to be dismissed but in a new ruling Judge William Sullivan rejected the request.

Her team had argued that the judge shouldn’t have declared a mistrial back in September when the jury of 12 people were unable to come to a unanimous verdict, claiming that he should have looked for a viable alternative instead.

Lindsay Clancy’s legal team have had their motion to drop the murder charges rejected (Greg Derr / POOL / AFP via Getty Images)

They also asked for the case to be dismissed due to ‘double jeopardy’ - a legal defence that prevents the state from trying the same person twice.

However, Reuters reported that in his ruling on Monday (9 November) Judge Sullivan said that a retrial would not unconstitutionally subject her to double jeopardy and maintained that the deadlocked jury did justify a mistrial.

“Because the court concludes that there was manifest necessity for a mistrial based on the jury's deadlock, a retrial on the murder indictments does not violate Clancy's right not to be placed in double jeopardy,” Judge Sullivan wrote, per the Daily Mail.

The judge also denied a motion requesting Clancy’s legal team be allowed to see records of the holdout juror and to question him under oath.

He wrote: “Because Clancy has failed to demonstrate that the requested evidence is relevant and material to her defense at any retrial of the murder indictment, the Court declines to exercise its discretion to order production.

“Nor can the Court perceive any valid justification for examining Juror Doe under oath at this point in the proceedings.”

At her trial, Clancy did not deny killing her children but her legal team claimed she did so as she was suffering from severe postpartum psychosis at the time and therefore should be found not guilty by reason of insanity, which is known as lack of criminal responsibility in Massachusetts.

Prosecutors said the killings were intentional.

After weeks of testimony, the jury approached the judge three times saying they were deadlocked before he declared a mistrial.

In TV interviews after the mistrial was announced, several jurors said that they had been prepared to find Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity had it not been for one juror who refused.

The lone holdout has also spoken out, saying that he believed Clancy was guilty 'from day one' so had no option other than to disagree with his fellow jurors.

Prosecutors have previously said they intend to retry Clancy but have not revealed whether they will pursue the same charges or opt for reduced charges.

Judge Sullivan has scheduled a hearing o 16 November to ⁠discuss when to hold a second trial, which he has suggested could occur in March next year.