Duxbury Mother’s Murder Case Heads Toward Trial as Attorneys Battle Over Key Evidence

DUXBURY, Mass. — The criminal case against Duxbury mother Lindsay Clancy continues to move closer to trial, with both prosecutors and defense attorneys locked in a series of intense legal disputes that could shape what jurors ultimately hear and see in court.

Clancy, 35, is accused of killing her three children — 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson, and 8-month-old Callan — inside the family’s Duxbury home on January 24, 2023.

She has pleaded not guilty to multiple murder and strangulation charges.
As the trial approaches, several major pieces of evidence have become the focus of courtroom arguments, including the 911 call made by Clancy’s husband, Patrick Clancy, and graphic autopsy photographs of the children.
Prosecutors argue the 911 recording provides a real-time account of the moments after Patrick Clancy returned home and discovered the tragedy. They say statements made during the call could help establish what happened inside the home and support their case against Clancy.
Defense attorneys are expected to challenge the use of portions of the recording, arguing that statements made during an extreme emotional crisis may not accurately reflect the facts of the situation.
Another major issue involves autopsy photographs that prosecutors want jurors to see during trial. Prosecutors say the images are necessary to explain medical findings and support allegations of deliberate and intentional actions. The defense is expected to argue that the photographs could unfairly influence jurors by creating an emotional reaction that outweighs the evidence itself.
The case is also expected to center heavily on Clancy’s mental state at the time of the deaths.
Her defense team has indicated it plans to pursue an insanity defense, arguing that Clancy was suffering from severe postpartum psychiatric illness and was taking multiple prescription medications. Attorneys have previously claimed those conditions may have contributed to a mental health crisis that left her unable to fully understand or control her actions.
Prosecutors are expected to counter that mental illness alone does not meet Massachusetts’ legal standard for criminal irresponsibility and will argue that evidence shows intent and awareness of wrongdoing.
Another dispute involves bloodstain pattern analysis. Defense attorneys are seeking to limit testimony from forensic experts, arguing that some conclusions drawn from blood evidence can be subjective. Prosecutors maintain that such evidence is a widely accepted investigative tool used in homicide cases.
At the center of the prosecution’s timeline is a roughly 45-minute period when Patrick Clancy was away from the home. Investigators allege the children’s deaths occurred during that timeframe. Prosecutors view the timeline as evidence of planning and intent, while the defense is expected to argue that a severe psychiatric episode can develop rapidly and affect judgment, memory, and behavior.
Before the trial begins, a judge will decide what evidence jurors will be allowed to hear and view. Those rulings could play a significant role in shaping one of Massachusetts’ most closely watched criminal cases in recent years.
The trial date has not yet been announced, but additional pretrial hearings are expected in the coming months.

💬 What do you think?
👍 Guilty
❤️ Not Guilty
😮 Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity
👇 Share your thoughts in the comments and keep the discussion respectful.