08/24/2026
After lunch, forensic psychologist Kirk Heilbrun returned to the witness stand and discussed the results of his evaluation of Lindsay Clancy, including his assessment of her mental state at the time of the killings and years later.
Heilbrun described Clancy as “a bright woman” and said she may have underreported some of her symptoms. He noted that she had remained on the highest level of su***de precautions at Tewksbury Hospital for an extended period, indicating that she continued to be considered at high risk for su***de.
According to Heilbrun, the most significant finding was the seriousness of her su***de risk. He said Clancy showed symptoms consistent with depression and reported experiencing problems with voices in her head only on Jan. 24, the day she killed her three children.
Heilbrun considered two possible explanations for the killings. One was acute psychosis accompanied by command hallucinations. The other was that Clancy had made a serious su***de attempt and wanted her children to die with her so they would not be left behind. Heilbrun said most of the evidence supported the second explanation, even though Clancy herself had described the experience as the first.
Heilbrun said Clancy’s thoughts about harming her children did not appear paranoid or delusional to him, although other medical providers viewed them differently. He explained that health care professionals are mandated reporters and would have been legally required to act if they believed she posed a danger to her children.
While Heilbrun acknowledged that acute psychosis could explain behavior that was extremely out of character for Clancy, he also identified evidence that argued against that diagnosis. He said it would be highly unusual for someone to remain psychotic for only the approximately 18 minutes during which the killings occurred.
He also pointed to the fact that the killings occurred about eight months after the birth of Clancy’s youngest child, as well as inconsistencies in the accounts she provided about what she experienced.
Clancy reportedly told Heilbrun that the voice she heard repeatedly said, “This is your last chance.” However, she gave a psychiatric attending a different account, saying the voice told her to take the children with her. Heilbrun said those inconsistencies were significant because they could indicate that her recollection was inaccurate.
He also said Clancy’s description of the experience did not fully match how psychotic episodes are typically reported. Instead, Heilbrun said the possibility that she experienced an unwanted, intrusive thought about killing her children was more consistent with what she had experienced in the months leading up to the killings.
Another detail Heilbrun considered important was Patrick Clancy’s account of what Lindsay said after he discovered the children. Patrick reported that she told him, “I tried to kill myself,” rather than saying she had been commanded by a voice to kill herself or the children.
Heilbrun testified that Clancy said she was not thinking about the morality of killing her children at the time, describing the experience as being focused entirely on taking action.
He also discussed whether the killings could be viewed as an altruistic act. Heilbrun said Clancy was experiencing significant emotional pain and that her decision to end her own life appeared connected to what she believed would happen to her children. He said she did not want to leave them behind.
Heilbrun also referenced Clancy’s reported statement to the children as she killed them, “Go with God,” saying it could suggest that she believed she would see them again after death.
The testimony then shifted to the subject of Catholic teaching and whether su***de is considered a mortal sin. Judge William Sullivan called a sidebar before eventually dismissing the jury for a recess.
Defense attorney Kevin Reddington subsequently asked for a mistrial, reluctantly citing the discussion about mortal sin. The judge denied the request.
Instead, Sullivan told prosecutors he would instruct the jury to disregard Heilbrun’s comments regarding Catholic beliefs and teachings. He said the religion in which Clancy was raised was not an appropriate subject for testimony and that Heilbrun’s understanding of Catholic doctrine was irrelevant.
When the jury returned, Sullivan gave them a strong instruction to disregard the testimony, emphasizing that it should not be considered in their deliberations.
The judge then dismissed the jury for the remainder of the day. Jurors are expected to return tomorrow.
This was a crazy day in court! What’s your thoughts on what went down today?
