How Would You Have Applied Massachusetts Law in the Lindsay Clancy Trial?

Read the original at Reason ↗
Cite

Volokh, E. (2026, September 5). How Would You Have Applied Massachusetts Law in the Lindsay Clancy Trial? Reason. https://reason.com/volokh/2026/09/05/how-would-you-have-applied-massachusetts-law-in-the-lindsay-clancy-trial/

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

Reason · collected 2026-09-05 · by Eugene Volokh

Quick Summary

This opinion piece is written by a law professor who is asking readers to imagine they were jurors in the Lindsay Clancy trial and apply Massachusetts state laws regarding insanity defenses. According to the standard instructions for Massachusetts, if evidence of a mental disease or defect is raised, the prosecution must disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt. In this case, the defense claimed that Clancy suffered from postpartum psychosis, which would require the prosecution to prove her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The author notes that only about 1/3 of states follow Massachusetts' approach on insanity defenses.
Written locally by qwen2.5:14b on 2026-09-05, using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the same event (that is the story summary below).

AI analysis runs on qwen2.5:14b, locally

Story summary

As of September 2026, Lindsay Clancy's murder trial in Duxbury, Massachusetts ended in a mistrial after five weeks due to a hung jury. The case involves the deaths of Clancy’s three young children—5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson, and 8-month-old Callan—in January 2023. Clancy did not testify but admitted to killing her children while arguing she was suffering from postpartum psychosis at the time. The prosecution presented over 70 witnesses, including an FBI psychiatrist who testified that he does not believe Clancy heard a voice ordering her actions, suggesting she had control over her decisions.

The defense highlighted systemic failures in mental health support and rallied public sympathy by highlighting the challenges new mothers face when seeking help. However, one juror’s alleged misconduct prompted Clancy's attorney to ask Judge William Sullivan to investigate his phone use during deliberations and review a questionnaire he filled out prior to the trial. The judge is now considering whether Desronvil shared information or used his phone improperly during jury deliberation hours, which lasted seven days without reaching a verdict.

Written for “Lindsay Clancy Murder Trial” on 2026-10-21, grounded in this article and the 112 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 Lindsay Clancy Murder Trial
Crime & Law · 113 article(s) covering the same event. Compare every outlet's account →

Compared with similar articles

This article reads unscored and hedges 20% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
CBC News
⚖️ leaning not scored 🔴 8% hedged 4 of 49 📰 publisher trust 74
“Both articles report on the mistrial declaration in Lindsay Clancy's murder trial, with Article A providing more immediate news and details about the court proceedings.”
CBS News
⚖️ leaning not scored 🔴 5% hedged 9 of 190 📰 publisher trust 66
“Both articles describe the same trial of Lindsay Clancy, referencing the same judge, attorney, and mistrial declaration.”
NBC News
⚖️ leaning not scored 🔴 2% hedged 1 of 42 📰 publisher trust 95
“Both articles refer to the Lindsay Clancy trial, the judge declaring a mistrial, and the defense's appeal attempt on September 4, 2026.”
The Guardian
⚖️ Leans left 🔴 8% hedged 4 of 48 📰 publisher trust 69
“Both articles describe the trial of Lindsay Clancy coming to an end with a mistrial declaration, at the exact same time, due to jury's inability to reach a verdict.”
The Guardian
⚖️ leaning not scored 🔴 10% hedged 6 of 60 📰 publisher trust 69
“Both articles describe the same trial of Lindsay Clancy, where a mistrial was declared after the jury deadlocked.”
CBS News
⚖️ leaning not scored 🔴 5% hedged 1 of 21 📰 publisher trust 66
“Both articles describe the Lindsay Clancy trial proceedings on September 4, 2026, including the judge's indication of a mistrial and a subsequent one-hour delay granted to the defense.”
Washington Examiner
⚖️ leaning not scored 🔴 25% hedged 1 of 4 📰 publisher trust 66
“Both articles report on the ongoing murder trial of Lindsay Clancy, specifically mentioning the jury's deadlock after seven days of deliberation and a potential mistrial”
The Guardian
⚖️ Leans left 🔴 21% hedged 5 of 24 📰 publisher trust 69
“Both articles cover the ongoing trial of Lindsay Clancy, specifically mentioning the deadlocked jury and the issue with a single juror's interpretation of reasonable doubt.”
The Independent
⚖️ leaning not scored 🔴 18% hedged 6 of 33 📰 publisher trust 59
“Both articles report on the ongoing deliberations of the Lindsay Clancy trial jury, specifically mentioning the holdout juror and the judge's interactions with the defense attorney.”
NBC News
⚖️ leaning not scored 🔴 no claims extracted 📰 publisher trust 95
“Both articles mention the Lindsay Clancy trial and discuss its outcome (a mistrial), indicating they are referring to the same specific incident.”
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
64
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
20%
13 of 64 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
not political
takes no side on a contested political question
Publisher signals
67/100
Reason's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
113
Crime & Law
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-09-05 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Reason · 849 article(s) · 4 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 4 correction(s)

Who wrote this

Eugene Volokh
154 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 Body armor may be used more today than Defendants' understanding of its use in 1791.
2026-10-21 · assertive framing · Body Armor Ban Struck Down by N.Y. Federal Court
🔮 Readers might want to know: How often do civilians use guns to help stop shooters who pose ongoing threats to multiple people?
🔮 The reality is that our en banc court is often unable or unwilling to fix things at odds with Supreme Court precedent.
🔮 Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent From a press release last month, just posted on Westlaw: N.C. Detective Agency, a Durham-based security company, will pay $65,231 in compensatory damages and back pay, and take other corrective actions to voluntarily resolve a religious discrimination investigation by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced today.
🔮 During a discussion in 2016 concerning whether Sabatini would endorse Knouse's application for an upcoming fellowship at Whitehead, Sabatini expressed concern that Knouse took herself too seriously and asked Knouse whether she ever had "fun," "fuck[ed] around," or had sex.
🔮 Some colorful lawyer wisdom (see, e.g., Dunn v. U.S.(5th Cir. 1962)); I found versions of this in newspapers going back to 1931, though it may have been a familiar phrase even then.
🔮 The dictionary definition of "refuse" cited by Nunes includes this meaning: "to show or express an unwillingness to do or comply with."
🔮 [Under Pennsylvania precedent,] [A] court may prohibit a parent from advocating religious beliefs, which, if acted upon, would constitute a crime.
🔮 Even in First Amendment cases, where the facial-challenge bar is lower than it otherwise might be, the plaintiff [in a facial challenge] must show that "a substantial number of [the law's] applications are unconstitutional, judged in relation to the statute's plainly legitimate sweep."
🔮 Officers who violate the law may be criminally prosecuted by the State.
Also by Eugene Volokh
Open Thread
2026-10-19 · Reason
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 154 articles by Eugene Volokh →

Topics

Massachusetts Paul Robinson et al U.S.

Subjects

Massachusetts GPE · 7× Clancy PERSON · 5× Duxbury GPE · 1× Lindsay Clancy PERSON · 1× Paul Robinson et al ORG · 1× Sally Satel PERSON · 1× The Free Press ORG · 1× U.S. GPE · 1×

Narrative

[2.] The substantive rule is that a defendant is not criminally responsible if (a) he or she "suffer[ed] from a mental disease or defect at the time of the alleged offense" (with no further definition of the terms, at least as part of the standard instruction) and (b) either (i) the defendant lacked "the substantial capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness or criminality of their conduct" or (ii) the defendant lacked "the substantial capacity … to conform their conduct to the requirements of the law."
framing: mixed · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-05
🔮 If you have followed the factual allegations in the case, please post a comment and indicate how you would have voted if you were a juror, based on your knowledge (even if limited) of the factual allegations, and why you would have so voted.

Claims (64 extracted, 13 hedged)

[A.] I know lots of people have opinions about the Lindsay Clancy trial, and I wanted to pass along the Massachusetts standard criminal jury instructions for such matters. asserted
I → know → matters
(I can't be certain that this is the instruction that was actually given in the case, but it's the recommended instruction for such cases, so I assume the actual instruction wasn't far off.) asserted
instruction → give → cases
If you have followed the factual allegations in the case, please post a comment and indicate how you would have voted if you were a juror, based on your knowledge (even if limited) of the factual allegations, and why you would have so voted. asserted
you → follow → allegations
Please keep in mind two important things: [1.] Once evidence triggering the defense is raised, the government must disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt. asserted
government → keep → doubt
To draw an analogy from how people talk about the reasonable doubt standard as to other guilt/innocence questions, Massachusetts takes the view that it is better that 10 non-insane people are wrongly acquitted than that one insane person is wrongly convicted. asserted
person → draw → view
This is not the uniform rule in the U.S.; for instance, in federal cases, the law is almost the opposite—the defendant must prove insanity by clear and convincing evidence. asserted
defendant → prove → evidence
Indeed, my quick research suggests that this is the rule only in a minority of states. uncertain
this → suggest → states
But the law in Massachusetts on this is as settled. asserted
law → settle → this
[2.] The substantive rule is that a defendant is not criminally responsible if (a) he or she "suffer[ed] from a mental disease or defect at the time of the alleged offense" (with no further definition of the terms, at least as part of the standard instruction) and (b) either (i) the defendant lacked "the substantial capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness or criminality of their conduct" or (ii) the defendant lacked "the substantial capacity … to conform their conduct to the requirements of the law." asserted
defendant → suffer[e → law
(From what I understand of the Clancy defense, it is that she suffered from a mental disease and lacked the substantial capacity to refrain from killing her children—or at least there's a reasonable possibility that this was so.) asserted
this → understand → children
This substantive standard is likewise not a uniform view throughout the country; many other states follow different approaches. asserted
states → follow → approaches
According to a Paul Robinson et al. study from 2015, about 1/3 of the states take the same substantive approach as Massachusetts does. uncertain
Massachusetts → accord → approach
[B.] Please focus in your comment on how you would apply Massachusetts law, not whether you think the law should be changed (either as to the burden and quantum of proof, or as to the substantive definition of when the defendant isn't legally responsible). asserted
defendant → focus → definition
Also, please focus on how you think this standard should apply in this case to this person. asserted
standard → focus → person
The question isn't the prevalence of postpartum psychosis as such, or of how often women can be highly distraught and not kill their children. asserted
women → kill → children
Nor is it whether Clancy's public supporters or detractors are acting badly or opining foolishly. asserted
supporters → act → ?
Rather, the question is whether, on the facts of this case, you would think that there's a reasonable doubt about Clancy's sanity (as defined by the Massachusetts law summarized in item A.2 above). asserted
you → think → item
[C.] If you want more details on the Clancy case, here's a summary by Dr. Sally Satel (The Free Press), whom I know in some measure and whose work I've generally found to be thoughtful and balanced. asserted
I → want → measure
She ultimately comes down in favor of acquittal, but the factual summary generally appears consistent with what I've heard from other news sources: On January 24, 2023, Clancy took her children, one by one, into the basement of the family's home in Duxbury, Massachusetts. asserted
Clancy → come → Duxbury
"Go to God, baby," she allegedly said as she asphyxiated each of them with exercise bands. uncertain
she → go → bands
She then made cuts on her wrists and neck, and jumped out of a second-story window in a suicide attempt that left her paralyzed below the waist. asserted
that → make → waist
She did these things during the hour it took her husband to complete an errand she asked him to run. asserted
she → do → him
Although Clancy said she initially felt well following Callan's birth in May 2022, she saw a psychiatrist in late summer for help with depression, severe insomnia, and feelings of being overwhelmed by simple tasks like dressing or showering. uncertain
she → say → tasks
Over time, she allegedly began having suicidal ideation and experiencing what have been variously described as "intrusive thoughts" and "auditory hallucinations" telling her that she was "damaged" and would "not be the same," and that "the only option is to die." uncertain
option → begin → her
In December 2022, she told her husband and mother that she had thoughts of harming her children and was worried that other people could hear those thoughts. uncertain
people → tell → thoughts
After Clancy's husband left to pick up food and medication on January 24, 2023, she said that a loud, demanding male voice told her over and over, "This is your last chance. asserted
This → leave → her
You have to kill the kids so you can kill yourself." asserted
you → have → yourself
She allegedly entered "a dreamlike state" and watched herself act, feeling as if she had "no choice." uncertain
she → enter → choice
A hospital chaplain who met with Clancy within weeks of the crime testified that Clancy said the voice "told her that if she did not follow the command, neither she nor her children would be safe." asserted
she → meet → command
From September 2022 to January 2023, Clancy received several formal diagnoses: adjustment disorder and generalized anxiety disorder at the Aster Mental Health clinic, and major depressive disorder at McLean Hospital. asserted
Clancy → receive → Hospital
A psychiatric nurse practitioner raised the possibility of postpartum depression before the killings, though it was never formally diagnosed, and Clancy's bipolar disorder and PTSD were not fully diagnosed until afterward. asserted
disorder → raise → killings
And why might postpartum psychosis have been missed until after the killings? uncertain
psychosis → miss → killings
Unlike postpartum depression, a relatively common diagnosis that occurs in one out of eight deliveries, postpartum psychosis is rare, occurring just once or twice in every 1,000 deliveries. asserted
psychosis → occur → deliveries
She did not have symptoms for three months after Callan's birth, although, according to the DSM-5, postpartum psychosis manifests rapidly within the first month after delivery. uncertain
psychosis → have → delivery
Also, expert witnesses at her trial debated whether Clancy suffered actual psychotic episodes before the killing and whether the voice she heard in her basement on January 24 was a true command hallucination or merely an insistent internal thought that she chose to obey. asserted
she → debate → that
Also, Clancy did not consistently report suicidal or homicidal thinking or hallucinations to clinicians, perhaps because her mood and ideation fluctuated over the course of the day—a standard feature of postpartum psychosis…. asserted
mood → report → psychosis
In reaching these conclusions, I have accepted the truth of Clancy's description of the voice she heard and her explanation of why she followed its command. asserted
she → reach → command
I believe her account because absolutely nothing in her past foreshadowed her cataclysmic act. asserted
nothing → believe → act
She was uniformly regarded by family members, friends, and her nanny as an excellent mother and a caring, sensitive woman. asserted
She → regard → mother
She had no history of aggression, child abuse, or violence—apparently, she had never even spanked her kids. asserted
she → have → kids
…and 24 more, not listed.
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support