The Plain Record

Neutral daily news — clear headlines, complete facts.

Legal

Lawyer for Lindsay Clancy challenges evidence sufficiency during court hearing

Defense attorneys for Lindsay Clancy argued there is no evidence she killed her children, seeking to avoid a retrial following a September 4 mistrial.

Background: Birthright citizenship and the 14th Amendment, explained

Published September 29, 2026 at 12:00 AM EDT

The short answer

Defense attorneys for Lindsay Clancy argued there is no evidence she killed her children, seeking to avoid a retrial following a September 4 mistrial. Defense attorney Kevin Reddington argued in a status conference on Tuesday, September 29, 2026, that there is no evidence Lindsay Clancy killed her three children.

Lawyer for Lindsay Clancy challenges evidence sufficiency during court hearing

The Facts

Who
Lindsay Clancy, defense attorney Kevin Reddington, Assistant District Attorney Shanan Buckingham, and District Attorney Timothy Cruz.
What
A status conference where the defense attorney for Lindsay Clancy argued against a retrial and challenged the evidence that she killed her three children.
When
Tuesday, September 29, 2026
Where
Plymouth Superior Court in Plymouth, Massachusetts
Why
The defense is attempting to prevent a second trial for triple murder by arguing the prosecution failed to provide sufficient evidence and that a retrial would violate double jeopardy protections.

Defense attorney Kevin Reddington argued in a status conference on Tuesday, September 29, 2026, that there is no evidence Lindsay Clancy killed her three children. The 36-year-old Massachusetts woman appeared in Plymouth Superior Court for the first time since her murder trial ended in a mistrial on September 4, 2026. Reddington requested that the judge issue a directive of not guilty and argued that a retrial would subject Clancy to double jeopardy, a legal protection against being tried twice for the same crime.

The hearing follows a trial where jurors in Plymouth County Superior Court deadlocked after seven days of deliberation. The jury was reportedly split 11 to 1 in favor of acquittal. The mistrial occurred after the jury failed to reach a unanimous verdict on charges that Clancy strangled her children—Cora, Dawson, and Callan—with exercise bands in the basement of their Duxbury home in 2023. During the first trial, the defense did not dispute that Clancy caused the deaths but argued she was not criminally responsible due to postpartum psychosis, a rare mental health condition.

On Tuesday, Reddington shifted the defense strategy, questioning the sufficiency of the prosecution's evidence. He challenged the accuracy of statements Clancy made in the hospital following an attempted suicide, claiming she was "told what happened" rather than admitting to the acts. Plymouth County Assistant District Attorney Shanan Buckingham countered that the evidence is "voluminous," citing DNA found on the exercise bands and testimony from a hospital chaplain who stated Clancy admitted she had to kill the children.

The scale of the case is highlighted by the 12-person jury's near-total agreement on acquittal during the first trial, with 11 jurors reportedly favoring that outcome. If a retrial proceeds, it will require another extensive selection process for jurors in Plymouth County and a significant expenditure of court resources. A person following this case would notice the concrete change in defense strategy from an insanity-based defense to a direct challenge of the prosecution's proof that Clancy committed the physical acts. This shift forces the court to re-examine the original investigation, which Reddington characterized as "ridiculous" for immediately assuming his client's guilt.

The knock-on effects include potential precedents regarding the "Latimore standard," a Massachusetts legal test used to determine if evidence is sufficient to sustain a conviction. If the judge grants a directive of not guilty, it could impact how future murder cases involving mental health and circumstantial evidence are prosecuted in the state. Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz stated his office is conducting a "thorough review" before deciding whether to pursue a retrial. A hearing to consider the motion to dismiss and other defense filings is scheduled for November 2, 2026.

Timeline of what happened

Key dates and decisions, in the order they occurred.

  1. September 4, 2026

    Mistrial declared in murder case

  2. September 29, 2026

    Status conference held in Plymouth Superior Court

  3. November 2, 2026

    Scheduled hearing for motions to dismiss retrial

Summaries are written by The Plain Record to state the facts of a story plainly and without political slant. Drafted with AI assistance and checked against the source record before publication. See how we report, or report a correction.

← Back to the front page

Questions readers ask

What happened: Lawyer for Lindsay Clancy challenges evidence sufficiency during court hearing?

A status conference where the defense attorney for Lindsay Clancy argued against a retrial and challenged the evidence that she killed her three children.

Who is involved?

Lindsay Clancy, defense attorney Kevin Reddington, Assistant District Attorney Shanan Buckingham, and District Attorney Timothy Cruz.

When did this happen?

Tuesday, September 29, 2026

Where did this happen?

Plymouth Superior Court in Plymouth, Massachusetts

Why does this matter?

The defense is attempting to prevent a second trial for triple murder by arguing the prosecution failed to provide sufficient evidence and that a retrial would violate double jeopardy protections.