Lindsay Clancy ‘criminally responsible’ for killing her children, psychologist testifies

Court has adjourned for the day, with Judge William Sullivan instructing the jury that the presentation of evidence is likely to conclude tomorrow.

He warned that closing arguments will be the day after that and deliberations are unlikely to start until Friday.

"You've heard a lot of evidence, but you haven't heard all of it, right? And like I said before, you haven't heard the closing arguments of the attorneys," Sullivan told the jury. "You haven't heard the law that you're going to have to apply to this. So you still have to keep an open mind."

Clancy’s father, sitting in the courtroom gallery, was looking down during some of Saathoff's testimony detailing how Clancy killed her three children one by one.

Clancy herself could be seen hanging her head and wiping her eyes.

Clancy told Saathoff she took each child down to the basement and strangled them one by one, a process he found significant.

First she took 3-year-old Dawson downstairs and killed him in Patrick Clancy's office, the forensic psychiatrist testified. She then went back upstairs to get 5-year-old Cora, brought her to the basement and killed her in a living room area. She then went back upstairs to get 8-month-old Callan — maybe from a playpen — and took him downstairs to kill him.

While Clancy said a voice told her to kill the children, it did not tell her how to kill them, which Saathoff testified was significant. Clancy said she did not recall how she got the kids downstairs or if they struggled, but told doctors she felt like a puppet and wasn't in control of her actions while she strangled them.

But Saathoff said "children are not puppets."

"You know, just like adults, children have a will to survive — a strong, strong will to survive. I think it’s just part of being human," Saathoff said. "I mean, they ... are active. They can walk. They can run."

Saathoff testified that Clancy never mentioned that she had crushed the pills during her suicide attempt, something he mentioned as being significant.

"Lindsey Clancy told me that she had lemonade in (a) wine tumbler when she took the overdose," he said on the stand. "Now, when I asked Patrick Clancy, he told me he didn't think they had any lemonade in the house."

Clancy's former husband also noted that he didn't think that she drank much lemonade, according to Saathoff.

The reason why it was significant to Saathoff is that lemonade was likely used to cover the bitterness of the pills. He added that it was difficult to crush pills, describing it as "kind of a laborious process."

It seems this line of questioning by the prosecution is attempting to get at their position that Clancy was acting with premeditation and used "sequential decision making.”

Saathoff said there were multiple "inconsistent" details told to him by Clancy, raising red flags.

The defendant wasn't on the same page with her ex-husband as they recounted what she was doing when they spoke on the phone the night she killed their children.

Clancy had told Saathoff that she was making chicken nuggets for the kids when Patrick Clancy called her, but Patrick Clancy told Saathoff that the kids were already eating chicken nuggets when he left that night.

"Well, it's inconsistent," Saathoff said.

Clancy also told differing stories as to when exactly she first heard the voice telling her to kill the couple's children, Saathoff said.

While offering his analysis on Clancy's case, Saathoff said he found it significant and unusual that Clancy had never reported hearing voices before the day she killed her children.

She had not reported voices to any of the mental health professionals or physicians, he added. Clancy said she only heard a voice telling her to kill the children just before they died and that the voice stopped once she finished killing them.

Saathoff said it was unusual for an auditory hallucination to occur in such a limited fashion.

"And so this was the first time that she reported that was documented, but also that she experienced an auditory hallucination, according to what she told me," Saathoff said.

Dr. Gregory Saathoff, a forensic psychiatrist, testifies today. Greg Derr / Pool via The Patriot Ledger

He said it was also unusual that the voices stopped as soon as she finished killing the children.

Committing the act associated with a command hallucination, in his experience, did not stop the hallucination, he testified. Kirk Heilbrun, who testified before Saathoff, similarly said it was unusual for Clancy's auditory hallucination to only happen once and for such a short period of time.

Saathoff testified that he's not being paid by the district attorney for his expert testimony.

"So I do my work in testimony and the like through the University of Virginia," he said.

"So my department is the recipient of any funds that come from the work that I do. I get a salary from the university that is not dependent on the number of cases that I am involved with."

Saathoff wrote a paper in 1987 on the connection between postpartum psychosis and a medication used to stop lactation that was once prescribed to postpartum mothers.

Psychosis is a symptom of other issues, such as mental illness or drug abuse, he testified. There are many different forms that psychosis can take, according to Saathoff.

He testified that it can present with "perceptual disturbances," known as hallucinations. It can also present in delusions or how people communicate, he added.

"Sometimes you can have psychosis, or someone can be psychotic, with just a delusion and no perceptual disturbance, no type of hallucination," Saathoff said.

Saathoff told jurors he's treated several women who have killed their children.

"I would say five to seven women who had killed their children," he said, summing up his experience with this unique subsection of killers.

Saathoff said it was important work to be "able to speak about their experience and also how to deal with issues or how they dealt with issues over and above the medications that they were receiving."

Prosecutors called forensic psychiatrist Gregory Saathoff, affiliated with the FBI and University of Virginia, to the witness stand.

Saathoff teaches at the university and is a senior psychiatrist for the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit in Quantico.

The jury is back inside and court is back in session after an hourlong lunch break.

The jury intently watched and listened to the proceedings, with some taking notes. One juror was leaning forward in his seat during Heilbrun’s testimony.

The last sidebar called by the judge before lunch appeared intense, with Reddington seen waving his hands a few times.

Clancy's parents are in court again. The spectator rows are still completely full.

Judge Sullivan sent the jurors away for their lunch break and asked them to return to court at 2 p.m.

There's one more witness left to testify before closing arguments.

As Heilbrun's time on the stand came to a close, the attorneys and judge had a sidebar over Reddington asserting that his office did not interfere with Heilbrun's assessment.

Reddington was questioning Heilbrun after the prosecution's redirect and had Heilbrun confirm he had to get a court order to visit Clancy for his assessment on the case.

"You're not suggesting or trying to leave with this jury that it was me or my office that interfered or impeded?" Reddington said. "I think the question was that you were unable to see her. I had nothing to do with that, right?"

"Objection!"

The judge called the attorneys to the bench for a sidebar.

The witness didn't want to agree with the defense's argument that Clancy suffered from postpartum psychosis, leading to a tense moment.

When asked by Reddington if the DSM diagnostic manual should devote more space to postpartum psychosis, Heilbrun said he's "not in a position to offer an informed opinion."

That's when Reddington sarcastically shot back: “Obviously."

The remark drew an immediate objection from prosecutors and Judge Sullivan had the comment struck from the record.

Responding to another question, Heilbrun began by saying, "Let me just say..." Reddington cut him off and said, "I don't want to let you do anything."

Judge William Sullivan listens to attorney Kevin Reddington question rebuttal witness Dr. Kirk Heilbrun today. Greg Derr / Pool via The Patriot Ledger

Tension is palpable between Reddington and Heilbrun as the defense presses the forensic psychologist on Clancy's mental state, including whether she was still within the time frame to be affected by postpartum depression at the time of the killings.

Heilbrun was questioned on whether disassociation is an altered mental state, whether Clancy was "thought broadcasting" and whether Clancy may have experienced acute psychosis. Reddington got particularly testy when asking Heilbrun whether the World Health Organization says women can experience postpartum depression and psychosis up to a year after giving birth.

"There are different kinds of outcomes and time periods (from) different organizations," Heilbrun said.

"I'm not asking about outcomes and time periods, I'm asking about the World Health Organization cut off for a woman with postpartum depression or psychosis. What's the time frame?" Reddington pressed.

"Well, I don't know," Heilbrun said.

Heilbrun then went on to say the DSM, a diagnostic guide, is on the "conservative" side. It says that women experience symptoms one or two months after birth, he testified.

The prosecution witness conceded that Clancy is one of the "few people" who experience "very poor" results from psychotropic medication.

"For a few people, there are side effects and what we call adverse reactions, and they don’t help. In fact, they might make things worse," Heilbrun told jurors. "And it appeared to me, from reviewing the records for Ms. Clancy, that’s she’s one of those few people where the reactions were very, very different, very poor."

Heilbrun added: "They were not the kind of reactions that were designed to have the medication prescribed for and improve the symptoms."

Reddington wants to show that his client never received a clear, focused treatment plan for her alleged postpartum psychosis.

At one point during his cross-examination of Heilbrun, Reddington put his hands on Clancy's shoulders when asking about all the different, perhaps conflicting, treatment recommendations the defendant received.

Reddington pushed Heilbrun on the report that Clancy spoke to her then-husband after she attempted to kill herself, saying the 911 call from the scene suggests her injuries prevented her from speaking.

Heilbrun had referred to statements Clancy allegedly made when Patrick Clancy returned to the home to find her in the snow. He had said she told him she tried to kill herself and that the kids were in the basement. The forensic psychologist said he knew these things because of the ex-husband's previous testimony.

But Clancy's attorney turned the court's attention to the 911 tape from the day. Reddington pointed out that Clancy's suicide attempt injured her spine and throat.

"If I suggest to you, sir, that if you listen to the 911 tape as it relates to Patrick Clancy interacting with her, that she can only make grunting noises, would you be surprised?" Reddington asked

"I would be surprised, yes," Heilbrun said.

Heilbrun then admitted he had not listened to the tape.

Defendant Lindsay Clancy at the defense table today. Greg Derr / Pool via The Patriot Ledger

Judge Sullivan took the bench again at about 11:37 a.m. and the cross-examination of Heilbrun continued.

Every spectator seat is filled in the courtroom this morning, with Clancy's parents sitting in the gallery once again.

Jurors seemed to be listening intently, looking back-and-forth between Reddington and Heilbrun during their exchange. A few of the jurors have notebooks out, appearing to take notes.

Judge Sullivan called a recess at about 11 a.m. after Reddington and Heilbrun engaged in a contentious back-and-forth.

Reddington was walking Heilbrun through the long history of Clancy's treatment, in hopes of showing how his client's mental illness was not properly addressed.

The exchange became heated at times, with Reddington accusing Heilbrun of not even reading Clancy's medical reports and dismissing his answers as a "word salad."

The "word salad" remark drew an objection from prosecutors and the judge urged Reddington to move on.

Defense attorney Kevin Reddington expresses frustration during his cross-examination of forensic psychologist Kirk Heilbrun today. Greg Derr / Pool via The Patriot Ledger

The defense's move to try to establish Clancy as a good mother led to an interesting exchange between Reddington and Heilbrun.

Reddington was pressing Heilbrun on whether Clancy was a good wife and mother. Then the defense attorney asked a question that threw Heilbrun off.

"You know Rascal Flatts?" Reddington asked.

"I'm sorry?" Heilbrun responded.

"Rascal Flatts, you ever heard of them?"

Reddington used the moment to highlight that Clancy would sing to her daughter, including music by the country band Rascal Flatts, every night before putting Cora to bed.

Reddington admonished the witness after he appeared to let out a nervous chuckle during his testimony.

"That's funny?" Reddington asked.

Heilbrun said he was only commenting on what he believed was repetitive questioning.

"No, it’s not funny. It’s just that you ask me whether I agree with something that I testified to yesterday," he responded.

Defense attorney Kevin Reddington waits to start his cross-examination of rebuttal witness Kirk Heilbrun today. Greg Derr / Pool via The Patriot Ledger

Heilbrun insisted he had an open mind going into his evaluation of Clancy.

Reddington asked if he's engaged in "confirmation bias" due to the publicity surrounding the case.

Heilbrun appeared to bristle at the suggestion and forcefully said he did not agree with that characterization.

"I did my best to have an open mind," Heilbrun pushed back.

The witness admitted that in his long career, he has had relatively little experience with postpartum mental health issues.

Reddington walked Heilbrun through his career and papers he's written about all kinds of mental health and criminal issues.

"Is there one article, one, that you wrote about a woman who is pregnant, who is undergoing postpartum depression and, God forbid, psychosis?" Redding asked.

"No," Heilbrun responded.

Heilbrun has worked about 180 hours on the case and has charged the state $300 an hour — so about $54,000, he said under cross-examination.

Reddington seems to want to discredit Heilbrun as a hired gun for the state and show that the witness's meter is running. He's made $54,000 so far and Heilbrun said the final bill will be greater.

"It’ll be more, yes," the witness said.

Reddington then went on to list Heilbrun's many other consultation jobs and speaking engagements.

Kirk Heilbrun testifies today. Greg Derr / Pool

The defendant knew she was acting with criminal intent when killing her children, the witness said.

While Clancy might have been suffering from bipolar disorder, Heilbrun said she had appreciated the legal and moral implications of her actions.

"She retained an awareness of the illegality of killing others, including killing her children. Her moral awareness of the wrongfulness of this killing was influenced by her strong desire to die," Heilbrun said.

The prosecution asked him point-blank if Clancy was guilty under the eyes of Massachusetts law and Heilbrun said: "My clinical opinion is that she was criminally responsible on Jan. 24."

Prosecutors then ended their questions, teeing up cross-examination from defense attorney Kevin Reddington.

Lindsay Clancy in court today. Greg Derr / Pool via The Patriot Ledger

Clancy had to make a series of well-considered decisions before killing her children and then attempting suicide, the prosecution witness said.

The prosecution took Heilbrun through Clancy's step-by-step of her actions, such as taking the children into the basement, asking each time if those were "decisions" that had to be made to carry out the killings.

Each time, Heilbrun answered in the affirmative, feeding the state's argument that Clancy was committing a planned series of murders.

Forensic psychologist Kirk Heilbrun retook the witness stand as this trial nears the end.

Judge Sullivan told jurors that Heilbrun and one more witness should be the final people to testify.

Judge William Sullivan took the bench at about 9:25 a.m. and welcomed everyone back to court — before asking all lawyers to approach for a sidebar.

Good morning from the line outside Plymouth Superior Court! It's a hot and sunny day here, but spectators, reporters and others waiting for jury duty in other cases are still talking and laughing. There are slightly fewer people than yesterday.

The courtroom should open a little before 9, when the trial is set to begin.

The line forming outside Plymouth Superior Court.  Minyvonne Burke / NBC News

Reddington says he believes the jury will listen to the judge’s instructions on disregarding testimony on Clancy’s Catholic faith as the trial inches closer to deliberations.

“It’s a trial, you never know — up and down, you’re happy, you’re not — who knows?” Reddington told reporters. “Yeah, it’s been a good trial. The evidence has come out and I feel pretty good about it.”

Asked whether the comments could provide an option for an appeal, the defense attorney said he would rather not say. An appeal means Clancy has to be found guilty first, which Reddington said he’d prefer didn’t happen.

He also said that Clancy “doesn’t have a mindset” at the moment.

“She just listens and sits there,” he said.

Lindsay Clancy’s lawyers say a rare mental health condition caused her to kill her three children. So what is postpartum psychosis, and why is it so difficult to diagnose and treat? NBC News’ Erika Edwards reports.

What is postpartum psychosis? The mental health condition is at the center of the Lindsay Clancy trial

03:52

A statement from a forensic psychologist regarding Catholicism’s view of suicide led to a fiery courtroom moment just as the trial was coming to a close.

Heilbrun was speaking to his evaluation of Clancy’s case and her understanding of what is immoral. He said that Clancy reported that she told each of her children to “go with God” while killing them.

“And that was part of her expectation: that she and the children would be together in heaven with God,” Heilbrun said. “She was raised as a Catholic, and, as I understand Catholic considerations, that’s not necessarily what happens.”

Forensic psychologist Kirk Heilbrun testifies yesterday. Greg Derr / Pool

The judge paused the testimony moments later, when Heilbrun said he asked Clancy whether suicide was a “mortal sin.”

Reddington previously objected to the injection of Catholic teachings on “mortal sin” when prosecution cross-examined Clancy’s mother-in-law last week. Judge William Sullivan also instructed jury members to strike it from the record in that instance.

Defense attorney Kevin Reddington submitted a motion for a mistrial on Monday afternoon after a prosecution witness brought up Clancy’s Catholic faith, describing it as “intentional misconduct.”

Prior to a recess, Kirk Heilbrun described that he found Clancy’s statements about her children “going to God” after their death as contrary to her Catholic religion’s belief. It was part of his evaluation of Clancy’s view of moral wrong.

Prosecutors said the witness was not intending to be inflammatory and asked that the jury be instructed to dismiss the statements from Heilbrun on her religion.

Clancy with her lawyer Kevin Reddington yesterday. Greg Derr / Pool photo

The judge denied the mistrial motion, siding with the prosecution that the jury will be told to disregard the comments on Clancy’s faith. He will then dismiss them for the day.

“I’m going to tell them that’s an inappropriate area of inquiry and that this witness’ understanding of Catholic dogma or Catholic teaching is irrelevant,” the judge said.

Judge in Lindsay Clancy case denies defense's motion for mistrial after witness brings up religion

04:43

Three mothers who survived postpartum psychosis describe their experiences with the condition — and what they want people following the Lindsay Clancy trial to know.

“I honestly found my experience humbling because it was a reminder that psychosis does not care about your status or your age or your socioeconomic position,” Ayana Lage, 33, said about her 2020 experience. “It can truly happen to anyone.”

Read the full story here.

The opposing narratives in the Lindsay Clancy trial

20:25

At the center of a case that is gripping the nation stands the question: Is Lindsay Clancy criminally responsible for killing her three children? The prosecution and defense made clear the competing narratives they would present to the jury in their opening statements. NBC News' Misty Marris and Steven Romo analyze what each side wanted jurors to believe before the first witness ever took the stand.

The final days of testimony in Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial are expected to continue Tuesday.

Kirk Heilbrun, a forensic psychologist who diagnosed Clancy with bipolar II disorder, is back on the stand.