Lindsay Clancy Hearing: Judge Delays Dismissal Ruling

Courthouse exterior in Plymouth, Massachusetts, where the Lindsay Clancy hearing took place

The Lindsay Clancy hearing on Tuesday, Sept. 29, 2026, moved her case into a new phase but settled very little. Clancy, 36, returned to Plymouth Superior Court in Massachusetts for the first time since her murder trial ended in a mistrial earlier this month. Judge William Sullivan set Nov. 2 for arguments on several major motions, and no retrial date was set.

Quick Summary

A jury could not reach a verdict at Clancy’s trial. The defense now wants the case dismissed and a retrial barred, while prosecutors say they met their burden of proof. The judge gave prosecutors more time to respond and will hear the main arguments on Nov. 2.

What Happened at the Lindsay Clancy Hearing

Clancy sat beside her lawyer, Kevin Reddington, as the court opened. It was her first public appearance since the mistrial. Defense attorney Martin Weinberg, who joined the team to help with the double jeopardy argument, also took part.

Judge Sullivan began by reviewing the motions before the court. They included a renewed request for a required finding of not guilty, a motion to preserve juror records, and a request for an inquiry into the lone holdout juror, known in court papers as “Juror Doe.”

Supporters gathered outside the courthouse and followed the proceedings on their phones. Inside, the judge did not rule on the big questions. Instead, he set a fuller schedule for November.

Key Facts at a Glance

DetailWhat we know
DefendantLindsay Clancy, 36, a former labor and delivery nurse
CourtPlymouth Superior Court, Massachusetts
JudgeWilliam Sullivan
Hearing dateTuesday, Sept. 29, 2026
Trial outcomeMistrial after the jury failed to reach a unanimous verdict
Next hearingNov. 2, 2026
Retrial dateNone set

Background: The Case and the Mistrial

Clancy is accused of killing her three children, Cora, Dawson and Callan, in January 2023. She has admitted the killings but pleaded not guilty to murder. Her defense argues she had postpartum psychosis at the time and should not be held criminally responsible.

Twelve jurors failed to reach a verdict, and the judge declared a mistrial earlier this month. Before that, the defense had asked the judge to remove one juror who, according to jury notes, was struggling to apply the law. The judge denied that request and instead repeated his instructions on reasonable doubt.

The Defense Asks the Judge to Find Clancy Not Guilty

Reddington told the court the evidence did not show that Clancy committed the crime with criminal responsibility. He questioned the quality of the police investigation and said the prosecution’s expert doctors were not qualified to speak to her mental state.

The defense also argues that the mistrial should not have been declared. In court filings, Reddington said 11 of the 12 jurors were prepared to find Clancy not criminally responsible. That figure comes from the defense, not from a court finding. The filings say the judge should have questioned the lone juror rather than end the trial, and that a retrial could violate double jeopardy protections.

Why it matters: If the judge agreed with the double jeopardy argument, the state would be barred from trying Clancy again. Legal experts told WBUR the defense faces a difficult path, since courts protect the secrecy of jury deliberations.

Prosecutors Say They Met Their Burden

Prosecutor Shanan Buckingham said the defense was only now challenging evidence it had not said was missing during the trial. She argued the state presented numerous pieces of evidence showing Clancy was in a healthy mental state at the time of the killings.

Buckingham also explained that once a defendant raises a lack of criminal responsibility, prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it does not apply. She said the state can do that by showing no mental disease or defect, or by showing Clancy had substantial capacity. She added that prosecutors had presented a motive.

Prosecutors asked for more time to answer the defense’s 34-page memorandum, saying they learned only late last week that it would be heard. The judge agreed the motion was significant and moved it to Nov. 2.

Juror Notes and Sidebar Transcripts

Weinberg asked the court to release jury notes and sealed transcripts of private conversations held at the judge’s bench. He said the material could support the argument that a mistrial was not justified. He suggested limited redactions could protect juror anonymity.

Prosecutor Jennifer Sprague objected. She said events surrounding the case outside the courtroom have discouraged people from wanting to serve as jurors. A lawyer for the Boston Globe also asked the judge to open the sidebar discussions. Judge Sullivan took the juror-related motion under advisement and did not rule on Tuesday.

Gag Order Request Also Pushed to November

Prosecutors have asked the court to limit out-of-court statements to the media. Their motion says Reddington has commented publicly on how Clancy was doing and how witnesses testified, and on the jurors’ deliberations. WBZ-TV and Boston Globe Media Partners filed a motion opposing the request.

Judge Sullivan said the issue raises significant constitutional questions and will be addressed on Nov. 2 along with other pending items.

What Comes Next After the Hearing

The Nov. 2 hearing is expected to cover the motion to dismiss, the request for further inquiry into the holdout juror, and the gag order motion. Prosecutors will file a written opposition beforehand.

The state also has to decide whether to retry Clancy, seek lesser charges, negotiate a plea, or drop the case. That decision was not announced on Tuesday.

Lindsay Clancy Hearing: Frequently Asked Questions

Q1. When did the latest hearing take place?

It took place on Tuesday, Sept. 29, 2026, at Plymouth Superior Court in Massachusetts.

Q2. Did the judge rule on the motion to dismiss?

No. Prosecutors said they needed more time, so the judge scheduled arguments for Nov. 2.

Q3. Has a retrial date been set?

No. Reports from the hearing say no date was set for a possible retrial.

Q4. What is the defense’s main argument?

The defense says the state did not prove its case and that the mistrial was not justified. It argues a retrial could violate double jeopardy protections.

Q5. What is the gag order motion?

Prosecutors asked the court to limit public statements by the defense to the media. The judge will consider it on Nov. 2.

This story involves the deaths of children. Details are based on court coverage from BBC News, CBS Boston, CNN, WBUR and PBS News.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top