Days after Lindsay Clancy’s complicated triple-murder trial ended with a hung jury, leaving her fate in limbo, her defence attorney expressed an openness to reaching a plea agreement with prosecutors to avert a second trial – but experts say any negotiations would likely be an uphill battle. In an interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, defence attorney Kevin Reddington appeared willing to co-operate with Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz to reach an agreement, though he insisted he would not agree to any deal in which his client would serve jail time. “I want to hear what Tim has to say,” the defence attorney said Wednesday, a day after telling ABC’s “Good Morning America” he hoped the DA would reconsider his stance after the first trial. “I hope, however, after sitting through this trial and seeing the evidence that was presented from the government, as well as from the defence, that he would revisit that issue.” Clancy admitted to fatally strangling her three children but pleaded not guilty to three charges of first-degree murder, arguing she should not be held criminally responsible because she was suffering from postpartum psychosis when she killed them and then attempted suicide. After more than 38 hours of deliberations, the trial ended last week with a hung jury, as one holdout juror prevented the panel from finding her not guilty by lack of criminal responsibility. On Thursday, Reddington filed a routine defence motion asking the judge to enter a finding of not guilty by lack of criminal responsibility, alleging prosecutors did not present sufficient evidence to prove Clancy is criminally responsible for her actions. Judge William Sullivan denied two similar motions during the course of the trial. The parties are expected to address the latest motion and next steps in the case when they are due back in court on Sept. 29. The prospect of a plea deal is likely appealing for those who dread the arduous process of another protracted trial full of emotional testimony, graphic evidence, charged public debates and courthouse antics. But Massachusetts lawyers and legal experts expressed skepticism an agreement would be reached, pointing to the difficulty the parties would have in reaching common ground and the various factors Cruz must weigh as he considers retrying the case. “All of these considerations – the sentiments of the victims’ family, the politics, the resource allocation – all of those really should be secondary to that bigger issue of would justice be served,” said Daniel Medwed, a professor of law and criminal justice at Northeastern University School of Law. “Does this case deserve to be prosecuted again? And I think that’s something that the office probably will be struggling with.” DA ‘holds all cards’ but must weigh many factors On Friday, Cruz – a Republican prosecutor who has held his office for nearly 25 years – said he had not yet decided whether to retry the case. But he reiterated his office has always been focused on Clancy’s children: Cora, 5; Dawson, 3; and Callan, 8 months. “We’re here at this courthouse today because those children are not,” he told reporters after the judge declared a mistrial, adding one of a prosecutor’s most important functions is to “speak for the victims who are no longer here.” “I appreciate the fact that there are strong feelings and opinions tied to this case,” Cruz said, nodding to the divisive public sentiment surrounding the case. “However, our job is to set aside our feelings and focus solely on the facts.” A prosecutor’s primary responsibility is to seek justice, Medwed said, though the appropriate way to do so varies case-by-case. “I think the basic question is: Would justice be served by conviction? And if you reach the answer yes, then what’s the best way of achieving that?” Medwed said. “If you’re thinking it’s unlikely that you’ll achieve a conviction through trial, then you might begin to think about the lesser charges that you could offer (in negotiations).” As the person with the authority to both retry the case and initiate plea negotiations, Cruz currently “holds all the cards,” said Janice Bassil, a Massachusetts criminal defence attorney. Legal experts said prosecutors are likely considering the significant resources they invested into the seven-week trial as they decide how to move forward – with some saying the sunk costs could factor into Cruz’s proclivity to retry the case. “He’s a hard-charging prosecutor, and this is also an election year,” said Boston-based defence attorney Elyse Hershon. “So, I don’t see him coming down and backing off of this.” In addition to the logistical strain of a second trial, the emotional toll is also top of mind for many, including Patrick Clancy, the defendant’s former husband and the father of the three victims. After the declaration of a mistrial, his attorney released a statement saying: “The prospect of reliving this tragedy through another trial is extraordinarily painful – for Patrick, for his family, and for all us.” “Hearing from surviving family members is a factor, but it’s not necessarily the dominant factor,” Medwed said. “Because prosecutors represent the people of the jurisdiction, and they have to make a decision that, in their view, is in the best interests of the community.” Though the public sentiment surrounding the case has been divided, many outspoken Massachusetts residents congregated at the courthouse in support of Clancy, wearing their signature pink. Some even heckled Cruz, who is currently running for re-election, after the conclusion of the trial. Still, while the political aspect of the case may be a factor, experts say public pressure may not tip the scales – particularly since Cruz is running unopposed, according to CNN affiliate WCVB. “Until there’s a viable person who’s going to run against him, it just doesn’t matter,” Bassil said. Parties will consider their chances with a new jury The attorneys’ willingness to engage in plea negotiations is closely intertwined with their thoughts about a retrial, experts said, as both sides weigh the likelihood a second trial may play out in their favor. In the days since the declaration of a mistrial, several jurors have publicly spoken about their frustrating conversations inside the deliberation room and the single holdout who prevented the panel from finding Clancy not guilty by lack of criminal responsibility. The vast majority of the jurors sided with the defence and “essentially rejected the Commonwealth’s view,” said former Massachusetts juvenile court judge Carol Erskine – but the attorneys will now be weighing whether another panel would reach the same conclusion. One of Clancy’s jurors believes they would. “If they tried the trial again the way they did, nine times out of ten, I think a jury would come back with not guilty by reason of insanity,” Nick Dargie told ABC News. “No doubt in my mind.” Deal on a lesser charge would be a ‘walk down’ for DA If prosecutors were open to reaching a plea bargain rather than pushing forward with a retrial, legal experts said it would likely be challenging to find a resolution both parties would agree to. Clancy was charged with three counts of first-degree murder, though her jury was also able to consider lesser charges of second-degree murder and manslaughter. But if Cruz were to accept a plea on any of the lesser charges, experts said it would be a drastic reversal from his stance that Clancy deliberately murdered her three children; on Friday, the district attorney reiterated his belief that first-degree murder charges were “warranted and appropriate in these circumstances.” “I don’t see him coming down and backing off of this, especially because at his press conference he doubled down on first degree murder,” Hershon said. Reddington – a longtime Massachusetts defence attorney who is viewed as a feminist icon among Clancy’s supporters – would likely be heading into any negotiations focused on Clancy’s potential sentence and bolstered by the jury’s 11-1 split that appeared to favour his client. In the interview with CNN’s Cooper on Wednesday, the defence attorney said he would not accept a plea agreement that included jail time for his client, who could have been placed in a psychiatric facility had she been found not guilty by lack of criminal responsibility. “I would not ever agree that she do any time in jail,” Reddington said. “She needs to be treated for her mental health condition, has to have good physicians, and she has to have good medication, that’s it.” But experts who spoke with CNN said a typical plea deal would involve the defendant being sentenced to either jail time or probation – not a psychiatric facility. And they struggled to envision a feasible plea agreement that would provide a clear path guaranteeing Clancy would remain in a medical facility, given legal constraints surrounding people with mental illness and the limits of the court’s authority. Some experts raised a remote outcome that could see Clancy committed to a hospital: if the parties jointly agreed Clancy is not guilty by lack of criminal responsibility and the judge concurred, it would likely start the process of having her confined to a psychiatric facility – just as if a jury had rendered such a verdict. But Erskine cautioned it was highly unlikely prosecutors would agree to this option, given “this is what they’ve been fighting all along.” Others expressed doubt Cruz would be willing to agree to a guilty plea on the lesser manslaughter charges, with Hershon saying such a resolution would be “a big walk down” for the district attorney. Bassil agreed: “I don’t see him compromising on this.” By Nicki Brown, CNN If you or someone you know is in crisis, here are some resources that are available: Canada Suicide Crisis Helpline (Call or text 988) Crisis Services Canada (1-833-456-4566 or text 45645) Kids Help Phone (1-800-668-6868) If you need immediate assistance, call 911 or go to the nearest hospital.
