Speaker 1 (00:00):
Let's put it back in session. You may be seated.
Speaker 3 (22:44):
Your Honor, for the purpose of the record, we return back to the matter of Commonwealth versus Lindsay Clancy. All parties are present, including the jury. I mean, including the defendant, excluding the jury.
Speaker 2 (22:52):
All right. Counsel, we ready for the jury?
Speaker 4 (22:54):
Yes.
Speaker 2 (22:54):
All right. Bring him in. Counsel, can I [inaudible 00:24:18] just very briefly?
(23:13)
All right.
Speaker 3 (23:13):
Good. How are you?
Speaker 1 (25:49):
Court, all rise. Very gentle.
(25:49)
This court's now in session, please be seated.
Speaker 3 (25:50):
Your Honor, for the purpose of the record, we return back to the trial of Commonwealth versus Lindsay Clancy. All parties are present, including the defendant and including the 18 jurors.
Speaker 2 (25:59):
All right. Everyone, thank you. Commonwealth, call your next witness, please.
Speaker 5 (26:03):
Thank you. Commonwealth calls Amy Bevins.
Speaker 1 (26:35):
Can you stop right there? Raise your right hand for the clerk, please.
Speaker 3 (26:54):
Good afternoon. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony and the evidence you shall give to the court and the jury in the matter now pending [inaudible 00:26:55] whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? You may have a seat.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
Watch your step, please.
Speaker 3 (26:57):
Bless you.
Speaker 2 (26:57):
All right. Good afternoon. I'd ask you to speak into that microphone. Keep your voice up if you could, okay?
Amy Bevins (27:00):
Okay.
Speaker 2 (27:01):
All right. [inaudible 00:27:03].
Attorney Sprague (27:02):
Thank you. Good afternoon. Can you please state and spell your name for the record?
Amy Bevins (27:08):
Amy Bevins. A-M-Y B-E-V-I-N-S.
Attorney Sprague (27:12):
And your date of birth?
Amy Bevins (27:13):
08/22/90.
Attorney Sprague (27:15):
Do you live in Connecticut?
Amy Bevins (27:16):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (27:17):
What do you do for work?
Amy Bevins (27:19):
I'm a licensed behavior analyst, but I specialize primarily in early intervention for young children with autism.
Attorney Sprague (27:26):
If you could just keep your voice up a little bit, maybe come a little forward to the mic. How long have you been doing that?
Amy Bevins (27:32):
Six years. I was a special education teacher before that for a long time as well.
Attorney Sprague (27:38):
Do you know Lindsay Clancy?
Amy Bevins (27:40):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (27:40):
How do you know her?
Amy Bevins (27:42):
We have been friends for almost 29 years.
Attorney Sprague (27:46):
So you met her when you were children?
Amy Bevins (27:49):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (27:50):
Did you go to school together?
Amy Bevins (27:52):
Elementary school.
Attorney Sprague (27:54):
And after that?
Amy Bevins (27:55):
All the way up through middle school and high school as well.
Attorney Sprague (27:58):
Okay. And did you keep in touch with Lindsay when you went off to college?
Amy Bevins (28:08):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (28:09):
I'm assuming you didn't go to the same college?
Amy Bevins (28:10):
No.
Attorney Sprague (28:11):
Do you know where Lindsay went?
Amy Bevins (28:12):
Quinnipiac University.
Attorney Sprague (28:14):
And how did you keep in touch?
Amy Bevins (28:17):
Through texts, phone calls. We visited each other at each other's campuses.
Attorney Sprague (28:23):
And then when Lindsay went to nursing school, did you still stay in touch at that point in time?
Amy Bevins (28:29):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (28:31):
And how did you do that? The same way, like texts, visits?
Amy Bevins (28:34):
Yes. I also lived in Boston at the same time that she was in nursing school up in Boston.
Attorney Sprague (28:40):
Okay. So was your contact more frequent while she was in nursing school versus when she was in college?
Amy Bevins (28:49):
I can't remember the exact amount of contact, but I would say we were always in contact together, yes.
Attorney Sprague (28:56):
Okay. While Ms. Clancy was in nursing school, did she ever tell you that she was taking some mental health medication?
Amy Bevins (29:05):
I can't recall.
Attorney Sprague (29:07):
Did she ever tell you that she was struggling with anxiety or anything like that while in nursing school?
Amy Bevins (29:13):
Nothing that I can recall.
Attorney Sprague (29:16):
And after she was finished with nursing school, did the two of you still remain in touch?
Amy Bevins (29:22):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (29:23):
And how often would you see her?
Amy Bevins (29:26):
I moved back home to Connecticut, so whenever she was able to visit home, we would stay in touch. I traveled to Boston some, not very frequently, but I would visit her there as well.
Attorney Sprague (29:41):
And did you have a text chain going between the two of you?
Amy Bevins (29:44):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (29:45):
And did you also have a group text with other friends from Connecticut that you both grew up with that you would participate in?
Amy Bevins (29:51):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (29:52):
And how often would you text with Lindsay?
Amy Bevins (29:58):
Pretty frequently. It depended on, I think, the point in life that we were at, but I would say there was regular communication.
Attorney Sprague (30:08):
And growing up with Lindsay and knowing her into adulthood, how would you describe her general demeanor?
Amy Bevins (30:18):
She was pretty a calm person. She was nice and had a very calm approach to herself.
Attorney Sprague (30:33):
And during that time that you knew her and would interact with her, did you ever notice any changes in her pattern of speech or rate of speech?
Amy Bevins (30:44):
No.
Attorney Sprague (30:45):
Was she pretty consistent in her behavior and speech patterns throughout the years that you knew her?
Amy Bevins (30:51):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (30:54):
After Ms. Clancy had Cora, were you still in contact with her at that time?
Amy Bevins (31:02):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (31:02):
And just to get it out of the way, were you in contact with her all the way up through January of 2023?
Amy Bevins (31:09):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (31:10):
Okay. And so after she had Cora, did you notice any changes in her demeanor?
Amy Bevins (31:15):
No.
Attorney Sprague (31:16):
Did you notice any changes in her behavior?
Amy Bevins (31:18):
No.
Attorney Sprague (31:19):
Did you notice any changes in her speech patterns?
Amy Bevins (31:22):
No.
Attorney Sprague (31:25):
After she had Dawson, did she talk to you about that delivery and how that went?
Amy Bevins (31:31):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (31:32):
And what did she tell you about that?
Amy Bevins (31:33):
That it was more of a difficult delivery than the one she had with Cora, that she would maybe need to take some time to recover prior to thinking about having a third child.
Attorney Sprague (31:48):
And during that time after she had Dawson, did you notice any changes in her behavior?
Amy Bevins (31:53):
No.
Attorney Sprague (31:55):
Or her demeanor?
Amy Bevins (31:56):
No.
Attorney Sprague (31:57):
Her speech pattern?
Amy Bevins (31:58):
No.
Attorney Sprague (31:59):
Was there anything about your interactions with Lindsay during that time that caused you to have concern about her harming herself or someone else?
Amy Bevins (32:08):
No.
Attorney Sprague (32:10):
And then after she gave birth to Callan, did you notice a change in her demeanor at that time?
Amy Bevins (32:16):
No.
Attorney Sprague (32:17):
Or her behavior or rate of speech?
Amy Bevins (32:20):
No.
Attorney Sprague (32:21):
Did you see her in Connecticut in November of 2022?
Amy Bevins (32:26):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (32:26):
And why did you see her then? What was happening?
Amy Bevins (32:31):
She had traveled down to Connecticut. We had gotten together as a group to go out to breakfast.
Attorney Sprague (32:40):
And had she come to Connecticut alone or with her family?
Amy Bevins (32:44):
Alone, I believe at that time.
Attorney Sprague (32:47):
And you said you went out to breakfast?
Amy Bevins (32:50):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (32:51):
Was this with that whole group of friends and spouses and everyone that kept in contact from Connecticut?
Amy Bevins (32:56):
Yes. There was a group of us there that had all remained friends.
Attorney Sprague (33:01):
Did you notice anything about her demeanor or behavior at that breakfast in November of 2022 that caused you concern or was different than her typical behavior?
Amy Bevins (33:12):
No.
Attorney Sprague (33:16):
Did you have some text conversations in January of 2023 about some issues that Lindsay was having?
Amy Bevins (33:27):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (33:27):
And do you recall when those messages started?
Amy Bevins (33:32):
I don't recall the exact date of the messages, but it was only, I believe, one night.
Attorney Sprague (33:38):
And in terms of what happened on January 24th, 2023, how close in time was it to that?
Amy Bevins (33:46):
Can you repeat the question? I'm sorry.
Attorney Sprague (33:48):
So in terms of January 24th, 2023, when the children were killed, how close in time were your text messages to that incident?
Amy Bevins (33:56):
Only a few days.
Attorney Sprague (33:58):
Okay. And what was that text conversation?
Amy Bevins (34:03):
She had shared that she had been taking a medication that caused her to have some dark thoughts, but that she was going to, or had been tapering off that medication and was trialing new ones that would remove those side effects and be more helpful and therapeutic to what she needed.
Attorney Sprague (34:27):
And did she tell you what those dark thoughts were?
Amy Bevins (34:30):
No.
Attorney Sprague (34:33):
What was the tone of the conversation?
Amy Bevins (34:36):
Hopeful, I would categorize it. I remember it being something where there was conveying of hope and that we were moving in a positive direction.
Attorney Sprague (34:48):
So basically, would it be fair to say that Lindsay was telling you that she'd had some side effects and some dark thoughts because of medication, but was weaning off of those and moving on to something else that would hopefully help her?
Amy Bevins (35:00):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (35:01):
Did she ever express at any point that-
Amy Bevins (35:00):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (35:01):
Did she ever express at any point that she wanted to harm herself?
Amy Bevins (35:06):
No.
Attorney Sprague (35:06):
Did she ever express that she wanted to harm the children?
Amy Bevins (35:09):
No.
Attorney Sprague (35:10):
Did she ever tell you that she was hearing voices?
Amy Bevins (35:12):
No.
Attorney Sprague (35:13):
Other than saying that she had had some bad thoughts, did she say anything else that was concerning in that conversation?
Amy Bevins (35:20):
No.
Attorney Sprague (35:27):
I want to direct your attention to March of 2023. Did you visit Ms. Clancy while she was at the Spaulding Rehabilitation facility?
Amy Bevins (35:34):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (35:36):
And how was that arranged?
Amy Bevins (35:38):
At the request of one of her family members who reached out to see if I would like to come visit.
Attorney Sprague (35:45):
And you traveled to Massachusetts and visited Lindsay at the Spaulding Rehab Center, is that right?
Amy Bevins (35:52):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (35:53):
And what did you do there with Lindsay that day?
Amy Bevins (35:57):
We made small talk. We played UNO. It was a pretty basic visit.
Attorney Sprague (36:08):
When you say you made small talk, what did she talk about?
Amy Bevins (36:15):
I remember her asking about my daughter. I remember her asking about any updates to life events for our friends. We talked about some hobbies that she was doing while at Spaulding and then played a game.
Attorney Sprague (36:33):
Do you remember what hobbies she was doing at Spaulding?
Amy Bevins (36:37):
I can't recall specifically, no.
Attorney Sprague (36:40):
At any point in time, did she mention the death of her children?
Amy Bevins (36:43):
No.
Attorney Sprague (36:44):
At any point in time, did she break down in tears and cry about her children?
Amy Bevins (36:48):
No.
Attorney Sprague (36:49):
What was her affect during that meeting?
Amy Bevins (36:57):
I don't remember exactly. Neutral, I would say.
Attorney Sprague (37:03):
Did she attempt at any point to harm herself?
Amy Bevins (37:08):
No.
Attorney Sprague (37:09):
Did she ask you for help in harming herself?
Amy Bevins (37:12):
No.
Attorney Sprague (37:14):
Did she talk about Cora, Dawson, or Callan at all?
Amy Bevins (37:17):
No.
Attorney Sprague (37:22):
I have nothing further. Thank you.
Speaker 6 (37:22):
Mr. Reddington.
Mr. Reddington (37:23):
Afternoon. Hi. You're nervous. Don't be. Okay? You guys go back how far?
Amy Bevins (37:40):
Almost 29 years.
Mr. Reddington (37:42):
And over those 29 years, knowing Lindsay, when you guys were in grammar school, I guess, in high school, and then you went off to college and you had your families and your marriages, tell us what your opinion was of her as a person.
Amy Bevins (37:59):
I knew her as a good person, a good friend, a good mom.
Mr. Reddington (38:03):
And you had occasion to see her with her kids and how she acted with her kids, Cora up till Callan?
Amy Bevins (38:12):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (38:14):
And did you ever observe anything out of the ordinary or did she appear to be a loving person and taking care of her kids?
Amy Bevins (38:21):
I never saw anything out of the ordinary.
Mr. Reddington (38:28):
District attorney asked you about the visit that you had when you were good enough to visit with her at Spaulding Rehab. And this was when, in March of '23?
Amy Bevins (38:38):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (38:41):
And arrangements had to be made for you to visit with her. You had to get approval. And whether you know or not, I mean, I had to kind of help you out a little bit trying to get through the red tape to get in there to see her along with her family approval and that type of thing, right?
Amy Bevins (38:54):
I don't recall any of that.
Mr. Reddington (38:56):
But you were able to get in?
Amy Bevins (38:57):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (38:58):
To visit with her. And this would have been in the beginning of March, if you know, the middle of March, the end?
Amy Bevins (39:09):
I don't recall the exact time.
Mr. Reddington (39:10):
Okay. Was she able to walk around and ambulate, or was she in a wheelchair, or what was her condition? Was she in bed?
Amy Bevins (39:16):
She was in a wheelchair. She was sitting up the entire visit.
Mr. Reddington (39:19):
Did you ask her about why she was in the wheelchair and anything like that?
Amy Bevins (39:24):
No.
Mr. Reddington (39:26):
You knew that she had been in the hospital from January 24th, right?
Amy Bevins (39:32):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (39:33):
And you knew that your friend had been charged by the police and had killed her three beautiful children, right?
Amy Bevins (39:39):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (39:40):
That was a bit of an awkward, uncomfortable topic, wasn't it?
Amy Bevins (39:45):
I think it would be for anybody, yes.
Mr. Reddington (39:47):
Absolutely. And the district attorney asked you whether or not she cried and whether or not she told you about her children and anything to do with her children or that incident. You both basically stayed away from that entire subject, right?
Amy Bevins (40:02):
I remember also being told not to bring that up specifically, which, at the time, I figured that that could be due to the recommendation of mental health providers, et cetera, who were treating her.
Mr. Reddington (40:15):
Right. And who told you that?
Amy Bevins (40:18):
Her sister.
Mr. Reddington (40:18):
Now, how long did you visit with her?
Amy Bevins (40:21):
It was brief. Maybe 30 to 45 minutes.
Mr. Reddington (40:31):
That's all I have. Wait a minute. Did you guys have a group get together in December of 2022, if you recall?
Amy Bevins (40:41):
I don't recall.
Mr. Reddington (40:43):
Do you recall seeing her after Thanksgiving around that timeframe in December of '22?
Amy Bevins (40:49):
I don't recall doing, no.
Mr. Reddington (40:52):
Do you recall having conversations with her around that timeframe, which would be in December of 2022, that she was talking to you about medications and asking you questions about a particular medication?
Amy Bevins (41:10):
I don't recall the exact timeframe of those conversations.
Mr. Reddington (41:13):
Okay. You were summoned here today by the DA's office, is that correct?
Amy Bevins (41:20):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (41:20):
You were also on my witness list as well, right?
Amy Bevins (41:23):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (41:25):
And when I ask you about the conversations, the reason is you were questioned by the state police back in January of '23. Do you remember that?
Amy Bevins (41:38):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (41:40):
And one of the troopers had asked you whether or not you had any conversations with Lindsay, your friend, about medications. And you indicated that, and I quote page 12, "She knows that I'm pretty open about mental health, that I'm a big advocate of mental health. And she asked me if I knew, like, you know, if I had tried a medication." Do you remember saying that?
Amy Bevins (42:09):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (42:10):
Okay. Does that refresh your memory at all as to approximately when that was? Would that have been in December of '22 after Thanksgiving?
Amy Bevins (42:19):
I don't know. I still don't recall the exact time, but I do remember that being a conversation that we had.
Mr. Reddington (42:25):
Okay. Do you remember where you had the conversation?
Amy Bevins (42:27):
It was over text message.
Mr. Reddington (42:30):
Okay. Do you recall her asking you what your experience was? Because you had some knowledge of medications, correct?
Amy Bevins (42:39):
As a patient.
Mr. Reddington (42:41):
Okay. And as a result of that and being close and good friends, that she had asked you what your experience was, and again, it's page 13, and she would say, "How was your experience? Did you ever take this? What was your experience with this?" That type of thing. Do you remember that, that conversation?
Amy Bevins (42:58):
I don't recall the specific conversation.
Mr. Reddington (43:06):
Do you recall the medication that she asked you about?
Amy Bevins (43:09):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (43:10):
What was that?
Amy Bevins (43:12):
I remember it being Lexapro.
Mr. Reddington (43:15):
Do you recall, in your text message exchange, that she had asked you about or told you about some of the medications that she was taking and that there was some difficulties with it?
Amy Bevins (43:28):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (43:43):
Do you remember that she had asked you whether or not you had noted or if you were aware of any side effects of medications?
Amy Bevins (43:51):
I don't recall.
Mr. Reddington (43:53):
And after those text threads and with that understanding, being as close to Lindsay as you were, she then confided in you that she was having dark thoughts is I think was the expression.
Amy Bevins (44:08):
That was a long time after the conversation that we had had about the medication. I do remember that being the first time I had heard any concern around her mental health up until that point.
Mr. Reddington (44:21):
Okay. And what point was that, if you remember?
Amy Bevins (44:24):
Can you restate the question?
Mr. Reddington (44:27):
Sure. Let me ask it this way. When she told you that she was having problems or difficulties with the medication and when she was telling you that she was having dark thoughts, do you remember when that was?
Amy Bevins (44:39):
Towards the end of January 2023.
Mr. Reddington (44:42):
Okay. Do you remember, was that in person or was that a message, text message?
Amy Bevins (44:47):
Over text message.
Mr. Reddington (44:50):
Did she explicate it? Did she explain what the dark thoughts were?
Amy Bevins (44:54):
No.
Mr. Reddington (44:57):
And the next time you saw her after that was at the hospital rehab, correct?
Amy Bevins (45:02):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (45:03):
Thank you, ma'am. That's all I have.
Speaker 6 (45:07):
Counsel?
Attorney Sprague (45:07):
Nothing further.
Speaker 6 (45:07):
All right. Thank you, ma'am. You may step down.
Attorney Sprague (45:16):
Commonwealth calls Christopher Clancy.
Speaker X (45:20):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (45:20):
Okay. Good afternoon, sir. Can you stop right there? Raise your right hand for the clerk, please.
Clerk (45:49):
Good afternoon. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony [inaudible 00:45:51] the truth, so help you God?
Christopher Clancy (46:01):
I do.
Clerk (46:01):
Thank you, sir. You may have a seat.
Speaker 2 (46:01):
Watch your step, please.
Christopher Clancy (46:01):
Thank you. Is this my water?
Speaker 2 (46:06):
Yes.
Christopher Clancy (46:06):
Okay.
Speaker 6 (46:07):
Good afternoon, sir.
Christopher Clancy (46:08):
Good afternoon.
Speaker 6 (46:10):
All right. Commonwealth.
Attorney Sprague (46:11):
Thank you. Good afternoon. Can you please state and spell your name for the record?
Christopher Clancy (46:16):
Say that again? I'm sorry.
Attorney Sprague (46:16):
Could you please state and spell your name for the record?
Christopher Clancy (46:19):
Yes. Christopher William Clancy. C-H-R-I-S-T-O-P-H-E-R W C-L-A-N-C-Y.
Attorney Sprague (46:30):
And what's your date of birth?
Christopher Clancy (46:31):
7/26/61.
Attorney Sprague (46:33):
Where do you live?
Christopher Clancy (46:34):
Scituate, Mass.
Attorney Sprague (46:35):
And do you work?
Christopher Clancy (46:38):
No, I'm retired.
Attorney Sprague (46:40):
What did you do before you retired?
Christopher Clancy (46:41):
I was a plumbing contractor.
Attorney Sprague (46:44):
Is Patrick Clancy your son?
Christopher Clancy (46:46):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (46:49):
When did you first meet Lindsay Clancy?
Christopher Clancy (46:53):
I don't know what the year was, but I believe I met her for the first time at the cottage and hall. That was my parents' house. And I believe that's when I met her. I think right around then.
Attorney Sprague (47:07):
Was that before or after she and Patrick had gotten engaged?
Christopher Clancy (47:12):
That was before.
Attorney Sprague (47:14):
And eventually they got engaged and got married, correct?
Christopher Clancy (47:17):
Correct.
Attorney Sprague (47:18):
And had three children, correct?
Christopher Clancy (47:19):
Correct.
Attorney Sprague (47:21):
So I want to direct your attention to the timeframe after Callan was born in May of 2022. Did you have a chance to observe Lindsay interact with Callan?
Christopher Clancy (47:32):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (47:33):
And what was Lindsay like with Callan?
Christopher Clancy (47:37):
She was very mothering.
Attorney Sprague (47:39):
And was she protective?
Christopher Clancy (47:43):
I would say yes, like any mother would be.
Attorney Sprague (47:46):
Do you recall describing her previously as very protective of him?
Christopher Clancy (47:55):
I would say that she was very protective of him.
Attorney Sprague (48:00):
In terms of how protective she was of Callan versus Dawson and Cora, was she more, less, or the same?
Christopher Clancy (48:07):
I would say she was more of the same, when the babies were little, when the babies were young.
Attorney Sprague (48:12):
So was that something typical when she would have one of the children to be very protective when they were first born?
Christopher Clancy (48:17):
Yes. I think that's like any other mother though.
Attorney Sprague (48:20):
And how often would you see the family?
Christopher Clancy (48:27):
We saw them regularly. They lived not too far from us. They lived in Weymouth first and we saw them regularly.
Attorney Sprague (48:34):
And then eventually they moved to Duxbury?
Christopher Clancy (48:36):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (48:37):
And directing your attention to the timeframe between November 16th, 2022 and Thanksgiving of that year, did you see them at your house?
Christopher Clancy (48:50):
I think they did come up to our house one time. Might've been a Saturday or a Sunday.
Attorney Sprague (48:56):
And why did they come over that day?
Christopher Clancy (48:58):
I think they just came over to say hi.
Attorney Sprague (49:01):
And what was Lindsay's demeanor that day?
Christopher Clancy (49:06):
Very good.
Attorney Sprague (49:07):
And was there any difference in her behavior or speech pattern than what you've seen with her previously?
Christopher Clancy (49:15):
Not that day.
Attorney Sprague (49:18):
And how was that visit?
Christopher Clancy (49:19):
Very good.
Attorney Sprague (49:22):
Did you then see them at or around Thanksgiving?
Christopher Clancy (49:26):
Yes, we did.
Attorney Sprague (49:27):
Okay. And where was that?
Christopher Clancy (49:29):
That was at my daughter, Laura's, house in Hamilton.
Attorney Sprague (49:32):
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to-
Christopher Clancy (49:33):
In Hamilton.
Attorney Sprague (49:35):
And did you interact with Lindsay that day?
Christopher Clancy (49:38):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (49:39):
What was her demeanor that day?
Christopher Clancy (49:41):
She seemed a little, how do you say it? Let me think for a minute. She seemed quiet. She seemed quiet.
Attorney Sprague (49:50):
Okay. And did she seem to interact with everyone there as she normally would?
Christopher Clancy (49:57):
Yeah, she was very close with my daughters and her sister-in-law.
Attorney Sprague (50:02):
Do you recall them wearing coordinating shirts that day?
Christopher Clancy (50:05):
I think so.
Attorney Sprague (50:10):
And during dinner that day, did you make observations of Lindsay getting the kids settled down for dinner?
Christopher Clancy (50:18):
I did.
Attorney Sprague (50:19):
And did you see her interact with Dawson?
Christopher Clancy (50:24):
Yes, I did.
Attorney Sprague (50:25):
And can you describe that interaction please?
Christopher Clancy (50:30):
She was getting a little frustrated. Dawson was being a little silly and she was trying to get him to sit down. And she was just a little bit getting frustrated with him. And I noticed it, so I got up to help her.
Attorney Sprague (50:43):
And when you saw her getting frustrated with him, did you see her do something to get him seated?
Christopher Clancy (50:49):
She took him by the arm to get him seated. It wasn't anything crazy.
Attorney Sprague (50:54):
Right. It's not like she hit him or anything like that, right?
Christopher Clancy (50:56):
No, no.
Attorney Sprague (50:57):
She just took his arm and guided him to the seat. Is that correct?
Christopher Clancy (51:00):
Yeah. Correct.
Attorney Sprague (51:01):
But you could see that she was frustrated, correct?
Christopher Clancy (51:03):
I could.
Attorney Sprague (51:04):
And so you stepped in to help her, right?
Christopher Clancy (51:06):
Correct.
Attorney Sprague (51:06):
And what did you do to help?
Christopher Clancy (51:08):
I got her a plate, I believe. There were a lot of people, so it was just a little chaotic.
Attorney Sprague (51:15):
Now, directing your attention to the weekend before Christmas 2022, did you stop by their home that weekend?
Christopher Clancy (51:27):
I believe we did, yeah.
Attorney Sprague (51:28):
And who was there?
Christopher Clancy (51:29):
Her parents.
Attorney Sprague (51:32):
So it'd be Lindsay's parents, Lindsay, Patrick, and the kids?
Christopher Clancy (51:35):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (51:36):
And were you by yourself or with your wife?
Christopher Clancy (51:39):
I was with my wife.
Attorney Sprague (51:41):
And was there a specific point for everyone stopping by and gathering that day?
Christopher Clancy (51:51):
I don't recall that.
Attorney Sprague (51:52):
Okay. Were you and your wife checking in or helping out that day?
Christopher Clancy (51:58):
We might've just been going down to check on things.
Attorney Sprague (52:03):
Okay. Did you know that there were some struggles going on at that point?
Christopher Clancy (52:05):
I did.
Attorney Sprague (52:06):
And did you know that specifically Lindsay was having some struggles at that point?
Christopher Clancy (52:11):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (52:14):
Did you stop by again a few nights before Christmas?
Christopher Clancy (52:22):
I thought that's the night you were talking about. Yes, I guess we did.
Attorney Sprague (52:27):
Okay. And when you stopped by the night before Christmas, do you recall who was there that day?
Christopher Clancy (52:37):
I think the same people, but I'm not positive.
Attorney Sprague (52:39):
So Lindsay's parents, Lindsay, Patrick, and the kids?
Christopher Clancy (52:41):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (52:42):
And what was Lindsay's demeanor that day?
Christopher Clancy (52:47):
It was okay. It wasn't terrible.
Attorney Sprague (52:52):
Do you recall testifying previously and saying that she seemed like she was in good spirits?
Christopher Clancy (52:57):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (52:58):
Would that be accurate?
Christopher Clancy (53:00):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (53:02):
And when you were there at the house that day, did you make plans for the following day, for Christmas Day?
Christopher Clancy (53:07):
Yes, we made plans to go to mass.
Attorney Sprague (53:09):
And who was going to go to mass?
Christopher Clancy (53:11):
Lindsey, Patrick, the kids, my wife Sue, and me.
Attorney Sprague (53:15):
And did you all... Well, strike that. The following day on Christmas, did you go over to Lindsay's home before going to mass?
Christopher Clancy (53:27):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (53:28):
Okay. Did you all gather for breakfast?
Christopher Clancy (53:31):
I don't recall.
Attorney Sprague (53:33):
And let me approach. It's going to be page 33. If you can just read to yourself lines two through seven, and then just look up when you're done.
Christopher Clancy (53:45):
Okay.
Attorney Sprague (53:47):
Take your time.
Christopher Clancy (53:47):
All right.
Attorney Sprague (54:04):
Okay. Does that refresh your memory, sir?
Christopher Clancy (54:06):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (54:06):
And did you go over that day for breakfast?
Christopher Clancy (54:09):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (54:10):
And how was Lindsay's demeanor that day?
Christopher Clancy (54:14):
It was good. She looked beautiful. She had a beautiful dress on.
Attorney Sprague (54:18):
And do you recall saying previously she seemed very happy that day?
Christopher Clancy (54:21):
Yes, she did.
Attorney Sprague (54:23):
And after breakfast, did everyone go to church as planned?
Christopher Clancy (54:26):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (54:27):
And how were the children in church?
Christopher Clancy (54:30):
Fantastic.
Attorney Sprague (54:31):
Very well behaved?
Christopher Clancy (54:33):
Very well.
Attorney Sprague (54:34):
And then after church, did you have a conversation with Lindsay outside of the church?
Christopher Clancy (54:41):
I think we talked a little bit. I don't remember what we said, but we were going our separate ways.
Attorney Sprague (54:47):
Do you recall saying previously that Lindsay said she was glad she came and she really loved it?
Christopher Clancy (54:52):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (54:54):
What was her demeanor while she was engaging with you after mass?
Christopher Clancy (54:59):
She was quiet. She said that she liked the mass and she was really happy that she went.
Attorney Sprague (55:06):
And do you recall saying before that... Strike that. Do you recall, after that conversation, you guys hugged each other and went your separate ways?
Christopher Clancy (55:21):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (55:33):
Did you see the family again after Christmas?
Christopher Clancy (55:44):
I'm not sure. I'm not sure.
Attorney Sprague (55:47):
Did you go to Cora's birthday party?
Christopher Clancy (55:50):
No.
Attorney Sprague (55:51):
Was it more of a kids gathering at a trampoline place?
Christopher Clancy (55:55):
That's what I heard.
Attorney Sprague (55:56):
Okay.
Christopher Clancy (55:56):
Yeah.
Attorney Sprague (55:57):
All right. Did you have plans to see them Tuesday, January 24th, 2023?
Christopher Clancy (56:06):
No.
Attorney Sprague (56:11):
Do you recall saying previously that there were plans to get together for dinner that night, but they changed because your wife had plans with her brother?
Christopher Clancy (56:21):
No, we never had plans to go there Tuesday night. They asked us to come to the Tuesday night, but we already had plans with Sue's sister, Joan.
Attorney Sprague (56:29):
Okay. So there weren't set plans, but you were asked to come to their house that night?
Christopher Clancy (56:32):
Yeah.
Attorney Sprague (56:33):
Okay. And then you couldn't go because you had other plans? Right.
Christopher Clancy (56:38):
Right. We were going to make it for Friday.
Attorney Sprague (56:40):
Thank you for clarifying that.
(56:46)
In terms of your interaction with Lindsay and Patrick and the kids while there were some struggles going on, did you and your wife offer to take the kids to your house overnight to kind of give them a break?
Christopher Clancy (57:02):
I did mention that to my son.
Attorney Sprague (57:05):
And was that offer declined?
Christopher Clancy (57:07):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (57:16):
And going back to Thanksgiving of 2022 when you were interacting with Lindsay, I think you previously said that her demeanor was good. She was quiet. Did you also say at one point she had a little blankness to her at times?
Christopher Clancy (57:32):
She seemed to at times.
Attorney Sprague (57:34):
And can you tell us what that was?
Christopher Clancy (57:36):
Just like a stare.
Attorney Sprague (57:36):
A stare? Kind of staring off into the distance, distracted?
Christopher Clancy (57:41):
No, just not totally interacting.
Attorney Sprague (57:45):
Okay. So at some points-
Christopher Clancy (57:47):
Almost nervous, kind of like.
Attorney Sprague (57:49):
Nervous?
Christopher Clancy (57:49):
Almost just like something like that.
Attorney Sprague (57:54):
Okay. So at some points, she was staring a little bit, seemed a little nervous, but then in other times she was interacting with everyone as she normally would?
Christopher Clancy (58:01):
Pretty much.
Attorney Sprague (58:08):
Okay. You mentioned earlier when you were talking about Lindsay having a little bit of difficulty getting Dawson seated at Thanksgiving, that he was being a little silly.
Christopher Clancy (58:19):
Yeah.
Attorney Sprague (58:19):
Was that typical for him, to behave in that way?
Christopher Clancy (58:22):
Yeah. He was a handful, but he was a good boy.
Attorney Sprague (58:27):
Going back to the night of January 24th, 2023, at some point in time that night, did you get a phone call from Patrick?
Christopher Clancy (58:38):
In January?
Attorney Sprague (58:38):
January 24th, 2023.
Christopher Clancy (58:41):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (58:42):
Go ahead.
Christopher Clancy (58:43):
Yes, we did.
Attorney Sprague (58:44):
And what was his demeanor during that call?
Christopher Clancy (58:48):
Is this the night of the-
Attorney Sprague (58:49):
Yes.
Christopher Clancy (58:50):
Okay.
Attorney Sprague (58:50):
Yes.
Christopher Clancy (58:53):
It was terrible.
Attorney Sprague (58:56):
And did you and your wife leave your home and head to the hospital to be with him?
Christopher Clancy (59:01):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (59:02):
Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 6 (59:09):
[inaudible 00:59:09] Reddington.
Mr. Reddington (59:09):
Thank you. Good afternoon.
Christopher Clancy (59:09):
Good afternoon.
Mr. Reddington (59:16):
Mr. Clancy, just a couple of questions. You were summonsed to be here by the DA, is that correct?
Christopher Clancy (59:22):
Correct.
Mr. Reddington (59:23):
And you gave statements to whoever wanted statements, you were very cooperative with the investigation, is that right?
Christopher Clancy (59:30):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (59:31):
And being as you're the obviously grandfather and father of Pat, over the years from the time they were dating, engaged, married, kids, you and your wife were pretty close with both of them, were you not?
Attorney Sprague (59:45):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (59:46):
Do you have an opinion as to how Lindsay was as a mother that you could see?
Christopher Clancy (59:51):
She was very, very good. She fed them great. She did a lot of things with them. They did like the All American family.
Mr. Reddington (01:00:01):
And district attorney had asked you about Thanksgiving of '22, November 16th of '22, and she made reference. I think you had responded that she appeared to be quiet and then she used the term, "Did you know about the struggles?" Can you tell me what the struggles were? Do you know what she meant by that?
Christopher Clancy (01:00:22):
I knew-
Attorney Sprague (01:00:22):
Can we go to sidebar?
Mr. Reddington (01:04:49):
Sure. Yeah. Thank you, sir. I think I was asking you about the word, "The struggles." And can you just tell the jury what was meant by, "The struggles"?
Christopher Clancy (01:04:59):
I knew she was having a hard time sleeping. I knew she just didn't feel well. I know she had gone to the emergency room where my wife was working. Those types of struggles.
Mr. Reddington (01:05:14):
And just obviously for the record, your wife would be Sue?
Christopher Clancy (01:05:18):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (01:05:19):
And she's a nurse labor and delivery at South Shore?
Christopher Clancy (01:05:21):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (01:05:23):
And did Lindsay confide to your knowledge, yes or no, to your wife about some of her issues as a result of which your wife referred her to a person to speak to?
Christopher Clancy (01:05:36):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (01:05:37):
Do you know who that person was?
Christopher Clancy (01:05:39):
I don't remember the person's name.
Mr. Reddington (01:05:40):
Okay. Would that be the South Shore Perinatal, I think is what it's called?
Christopher Clancy (01:05:44):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (01:05:44):
Okay. And understanding that you're the father-in-law, would you agree that the two of you, you and Lindsay, had a pretty good relationship?
Christopher Clancy (01:05:54):
Yes. Very good.
Mr. Reddington (01:05:59):
And you told us about November 16th and then Thanksgiving of '22, and then up until Christmas, and then after Christmas and the timeframe, actually right up to January 24th, you guys were supposed to get together that night, right?
Christopher Clancy (01:06:14):
Correct. Well, no, we weren't. We were asked to come to dinner that night.
Mr. Reddington (01:06:20):
But you had other plans?
Christopher Clancy (01:06:21):
We had other plans.
Mr. Reddington (01:06:21):
Okay. District attorney asked you about, on a number of occasions, about the time at your home, I think it was on Thanksgiving when Dawson was acting a little rambunctious or silly, and that she guided him to his seat. To your opinion and what you could observe, did you believe that she was being abusive to him at all?
Attorney Sprague (01:06:45):
No.
Mr. Reddington (01:06:50):
And you know her mother and father as well, correct?
Attorney Sprague (01:06:52):
Yeah.
Mr. Reddington (01:06:53):
And the four of you, the in-laws from both sides, you and your wife, Sue, and Lindsay's mother and father both were all kind of pulling together to try to help this young couple out during that timeframe, right?
Attorney Sprague (01:07:06):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (01:07:08):
And your son, Patrick, he was very concerned about his wife, was he not?
Christopher Clancy (01:07:15):
He was.
Mr. Reddington (01:07:16):
And he confided in you on a number of occasions?
Christopher Clancy (01:07:19):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (01:07:23):
I'm sorry, sir. Thank you.
Speaker 6 (01:07:26):
Commonwealth.
Attorney Sprague (01:07:26):
Nothing further.
Speaker 6 (01:07:27):
All right. Thank you, sir. You may step down. Thank you.
Speaker 2 (01:07:32):
Watch your step, please.
Christopher Clancy (01:07:32):
Yeah.
Speaker 6 (01:07:37):
Commonwealth, can I see you over here just [inaudible 01:07:38]? Start the next witness for just a couple of minutes, and we're going to break till 2:00. So I'm going to ask you to be ready to come back here at 2:00. Same instructions I've been giving you the whole time during the break. Don't talk about this case with anybody. Don't do any research about this. Don't look into anything about this case or any similar cases. And I'll see you at 2:00. Hope you have a nice break. Okay? Thank you.
Speaker 2 (01:09:38):
Court, all rise. [inaudible 01:09:43].
Speaker 7 (01:09:38):
[inaudible 01:10:00].
Speaker 8 (01:10:00):
All right, so we'll be in recess on this matter till two o'clock.
Speaker 7 (01:44:56):
Court all rises.
Speaker 9 (01:44:56):
[inaudible 01:10:20].
Speaker 7 (01:44:57):
Court's in recess, [inaudible 01:10:25].
Speaker 9 (01:44:57):
Right.
Judge (01:44:57):
This court is back in session. You may be seated.
Clerk (02:35:29):
Your Honor, for the purpose of the record, we return back to the record in the matter of Commonwealth versus Lindsay Clancy. All parties are present, including Ms. Clancy, excluding the jury.
Judge (02:35:39):
All right. Counsel, are you ready for the jury?
Attorney Sprague (02:35:41):
Yes, Your Honor.
Mr. Reddington (02:35:41):
Yes, Your Honor.
Judge (02:35:42):
Okay, sure.
Bailiff (02:35:42):
Court, all rise. The jurors enter.
Speaker 10 (02:35:42):
Is that right?
Speaker 11 (02:35:42):
Yeah.
Speaker 10 (02:35:42):
[inaudible 02:36:17] I don't think they match. [inaudible 02:36:25].
Bailiff (02:36:25):
This court's now in session. Please be seated.
Clerk (02:36:27):
Good afternoon, Your Honor. For the purpose of the record, we returned back to the trial of Commonwealth versus Lindsay Clancy. All parties are present, including the defendant and including 18 jurors.
Judge (02:36:36):
Madam Clerk, thank you. Members of the jury, good afternoon. We're going to return to the case.
(02:36:40)
Attorney Sprague.
Attorney Sprague (02:36:42):
Yes, Your Honor. Commonwealth calls Kyle Carney.
Speaker 10 (02:36:43):
[inaudible 02:36:47]
Bailiff (02:37:05):
Good afternoon, sir. Stop right here, raise your right hand for the clerk, please.
Clerk (02:37:25):
Good afternoon. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony and the evidence you shall give to the court and the jury in the matter now pending between the Commonwealth [inaudible 02:37:26] so help you God?
Kyle Carney (02:37:25):
I do.
Clerk (02:37:25):
Thank you, sir. You may have a seat.
Bailiff (02:37:25):
Watch your step, please.
Mr. Reddington (02:37:25):
Excuse me. Can we approach?
Judge (02:37:25):
Sure. Hi, good afternoon, sir.
Kyle Carney (02:37:25):
Thank you.
Attorney Sprague (02:38:28):
If I may?
Judge (02:38:29):
Yes, counsel, go ahead.
Attorney Sprague (02:38:30):
Thank you. Good afternoon. Can you please state and spell your name for the record?
Kyle Carney (02:38:33):
Yeah. Kyle Carney, K-Y-L-E C-A-R-N-E-Y.
Attorney Sprague (02:38:38):
And your date of birth, please?
Kyle Carney (02:38:40):
July 6th, 1991.
Attorney Sprague (02:38:42):
And what town do you live in?
Kyle Carney (02:38:44):
Duxbury.
Attorney Sprague (02:38:46):
What do you do for work?
Kyle Carney (02:38:47):
I work in finance.
Attorney Sprague (02:38:49):
And are you married?
Kyle Carney (02:38:50):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (02:38:51):
Who's your wife?
Kyle Carney (02:38:52):
Sarah Carney.
Attorney Sprague (02:38:54):
And you have children?
Kyle Carney (02:38:55):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (02:38:58):
Does your family or did your family know the Clancy family?
Kyle Carney (02:39:01):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (02:39:02):
And did you know them through your friendship with Patrick Clancy?
Kyle Carney (02:39:06):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (02:39:07):
When did you meet Patrick Clancy?
Kyle Carney (02:39:09):
2009.
Attorney Sprague (02:39:12):
And how did you meet?
Kyle Carney (02:39:13):
We went to college together.
Attorney Sprague (02:39:15):
And after going through college together, did you remain friends after school?
Kyle Carney (02:39:20):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (02:39:21):
And eventually, did you end up living in Duxbury at the same time Patrick and his family lived in Duxbury?
Kyle Carney (02:39:31):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (02:39:34):
When did you meet Lindsay Clancy?
Kyle Carney (02:39:36):
Maybe 12 years ago.
Attorney Sprague (02:39:41):
Did you meet them before they were married? Did you meet Lindsay before she married Patrick?
Kyle Carney (02:39:44):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (02:39:44):
Okay. And then obviously you knew them after they got married and as they had their children?
Kyle Carney (02:39:53):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (02:39:55):
How often would you see Patrick and his family while you were both living in Duxbury?
Kyle Carney (02:40:02):
Maybe every other month.
Attorney Sprague (02:40:06):
And would you interact with Lindsay Clancy during those gatherings?
Kyle Carney (02:40:12):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (02:40:13):
And what was her typical demeanor?
Kyle Carney (02:40:18):
Kind, caring.
Attorney Sprague (02:40:20):
Did you ever see any changes, significant changes in her behavior or demeanor when you would interact with her?
Kyle Carney (02:40:27):
No.
Attorney Sprague (02:40:32):
Did you notice any changes in Lindsay Clancy after the birth of Cora or Dawson?
Kyle Carney (02:40:39):
No.
Attorney Sprague (02:40:42):
Directing your attention to after Callan Clancy was born, did you interact with the Clancy family that summer?
Kyle Carney (02:40:49):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (02:40:50):
And how so?
Kyle Carney (02:40:52):
Maybe beach dinners. It's hard to recall exactly.
Attorney Sprague (02:40:57):
So you said beach dinners, is that what you said?
Kyle Carney (02:40:59):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (02:41:00):
So basically families gathering together at the beach, having dinner, interacting with each other. Is that right?
Kyle Carney (02:41:05):
Sure.
Attorney Sprague (02:41:07):
How often would you do that during the summer of 2022?
Kyle Carney (02:41:12):
I couldn't tell you exactly.
Attorney Sprague (02:41:14):
More than once?
Kyle Carney (02:41:16):
Yeah, at least monthly.
Attorney Sprague (02:41:18):
Okay. Did you also go fishing with Patrick during that time?
Kyle Carney (02:41:21):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (02:41:23):
Over the summer of 2022, did you notice any differences in Lindsay Clancy's demeanor or behavior?
Kyle Carney (02:41:31):
No.
Attorney Sprague (02:41:35):
Throughout the fall of 2022 into the beginning of January 2023, would you see Patrick Clancy?
Kyle Carney (02:41:43):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (02:41:44):
How often did you see him?
Kyle Carney (02:41:48):
Again, maybe once a month maybe.
Attorney Sprague (02:41:51):
And directing your attention to Sunday, January 22nd, 2023, did you have a small gathering at your home?
Kyle Carney (02:42:00):
Yes, their family came over to my house.
Attorney Sprague (02:42:02):
Okay. And when you say their family, are you talking about Patrick Clancy and Lindsay Clancy?
Kyle Carney (02:42:07):
And Cora and Dawson too.
Attorney Sprague (02:42:11):
Callan didn't join them?
Kyle Carney (02:42:12):
No.
Attorney Sprague (02:42:13):
Was he home with Lindsay's parents?
Kyle Carney (02:42:16):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (02:42:16):
And what was the purpose of gathering that day?
Kyle Carney (02:42:24):
Socialize. It was a nice day out. I was having a fire to burn some brush in my backyard and thought it'd be nice to invite them to come over and get the kids out and enjoy a nice day.
Attorney Sprague (02:42:37):
And what was Lindsay's demeanor that day?
Kyle Carney (02:42:44):
I'd say quieter than normal.
Attorney Sprague (02:42:49):
And do you recall saying previously that the weekend was fairly normal, that Lindsay had always been a little tough to get a bead on, kind of quiet, but you were in the kitchen talking and it seemed normal?
Kyle Carney (02:43:04):
I mean, in the kitchen we had a conversation and that was normal.
Attorney Sprague (02:43:08):
Normal. Okay. Do you recall describing the day previously as a perfectly normal afternoon, really nice?
Kyle Carney (02:43:17):
It was a nice day. Yeah.
Attorney Sprague (02:43:21):
Okay. And so there was nothing out of the normal that happened that day in terms of Lindsay's behavior or demeanor?
Kyle Carney (02:43:30):
Her behavior, demeanor appeared normal.
Attorney Sprague (02:43:33):
Okay. Did you have any problems communicating with her when you had conversation in the kitchen?
Kyle Carney (02:43:40):
No. Okay.
Attorney Sprague (02:43:43):
How long was the family there at your house that day?
Kyle Carney (02:43:47):
Maybe a few hours.
Attorney Sprague (02:43:50):
And during that time, I believe you described it previously as a normal, great day. Would that be accurate?
Kyle Carney (02:43:58):
Yes.
Attorney Sprague (02:43:58):
Okay. Thank you.
Judge (02:43:59):
Mr. Reddington?
Mr. Reddington (02:44:04):
I have no questions. Thank you, sir.
Judge (02:44:05):
All right. Thank you, sir. You may step down. Thank you.
Kyle Carney (02:44:07):
Thanks.
Bailiff (02:44:08):
Watch your step, please.
Speaker 10 (02:44:20):
Your Honor, the Commonwealth would call Andrew Chiachio as its next witness.
Judge (02:45:13):
All right.
Bailiff (02:45:16):
Good afternoon, sir. Stop right there, raise your right hand for the clerk, please.
Clerk (02:45:17):
Good afternoon. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony and the evidence you shall give to the court and the jury in the matter now pending between the Commonwealth and [inaudible 02:45:17], so help you God?
Andrew Chiachio (02:45:17):
I do.
Clerk (02:45:17):
Thank you, sir. You may have a seat.
Bailiff (02:45:17):
Watch your step, please.
Judge (02:45:17):
All right. Good afternoon, sir.
Andrew Chiachio (02:45:17):
Good afternoon, Your Honor.
Judge (02:45:17):
Counsel.
Speaker 10 (02:45:22):
Thank you. Good afternoon, sir. Can you tell the jurors your first and last name?
Andrew Chiachio (02:45:25):
Andrew Chiachio.
Speaker 10 (02:45:26):
Can you please spell your last name for the record?
Andrew Chiachio (02:45:28):
C-H-I-A-C- H-I-O.
Speaker 10 (02:45:31):
And what do you do for work?
Andrew Chiachio (02:45:32):
I work for the State Police.
Speaker 10 (02:45:34):
And how long have you been with the State Police?
Andrew Chiachio (02:45:35):
Since December of 2013.
Speaker 10 (02:45:38):
And what's your current assignment?
Andrew Chiachio (02:45:40):
I work for the Plymouth County State Police Detective Unit.
Speaker 10 (02:45:42):
How long have you been with the State Police Detective Unit?
Andrew Chiachio (02:45:45):
Five years.
Speaker 10 (02:45:46):
And what's your current rank?
Andrew Chiachio (02:45:48):
Sergeant.
Speaker 10 (02:45:48):
I'm going to draw your attention back to January 24th of the year 2023. Were you still working for the State Police Detective Unit with the District Attorney's Office then?
Andrew Chiachio (02:45:57):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:45:58):
And do you recall being called into an investigation in regards to an incident that happened in the town of Duxbury on January 24th, 2023?
Andrew Chiachio (02:46:08):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:46:08):
Were you assigned as the case officer for that investigation at that time?
Andrew Chiachio (02:46:13):
No.
Speaker 10 (02:46:13):
But you're aware that a number of the other troopers in your unit were all called out to do different parts of the investigation?
Andrew Chiachio (02:46:19):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:46:21):
Do you recall if you actually went first to 47 Summer Street?
Andrew Chiachio (02:46:25):
Yes, I did.
Speaker 10 (02:46:27):
Were you quickly assigned to go someplace else and do some follow-up investigation?
Andrew Chiachio (02:46:32):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:46:32):
And one of the places that you went on that night was the CVS in Kingston, correct?
Andrew Chiachio (02:46:36):
Correct.
Speaker 10 (02:46:37):
That would've been at 189 Summer Street?
Andrew Chiachio (02:46:39):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:46:40):
Why were you asked to go to the CVS in Kingston?
Andrew Chiachio (02:46:42):
To obtain surveillance video.
Speaker 10 (02:46:45):
And had you learned information that one of the homeowners, Patrick Clancy, might have visited that location earlier in the evening?
Andrew Chiachio (02:46:53):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:46:54):
And so when you got to the CVS, did you contact somebody in the store in order to try to determine whether there was surveillance?
Andrew Chiachio (02:47:01):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:47:02):
And did you speak with an employee there?
Andrew Chiachio (02:47:04):
I did.
Speaker 10 (02:47:05):
Do you recall who you spoke to?
Andrew Chiachio (02:47:06):
Angela Krause, who's the manager.
Speaker 10 (02:47:08):
Were you able to get access to the surveillance at that time?
Andrew Chiachio (02:47:12):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:47:13):
And were you able to observe the time on the surveillance at the store as it pertains to real time?
Andrew Chiachio (02:47:21):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:47:21):
So tell us how you determined whether the time was accurate.
Andrew Chiachio (02:47:24):
We look at the live feed and I compare it with my cell phone.
Speaker 10 (02:47:28):
And your cell phone is a department-issued cell phone?
Andrew Chiachio (02:47:30):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:47:31):
Did you notice any discrepancies in the timestamps?
Andrew Chiachio (02:47:33):
I did not.
Speaker 10 (02:47:35):
And after viewing the video surveillance there at CVS, were you able to see Patrick Clancy in the store at CVS?
Andrew Chiachio (02:47:42):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:47:43):
And fair to say you were able to track that he arrived at 17:32:32 and exited the store at 17:37:08?
Andrew Chiachio (02:47:51):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:47:53):
At some point, were you also asked to look for surveillance at a different location?
Andrew Chiachio (02:47:57):
I was.
Speaker 10 (02:47:58):
What was the second location?
Andrew Chiachio (02:48:00):
The ThreeV restaurant.
Speaker 10 (02:48:01):
And where is that located?
Andrew Chiachio (02:48:03):
In Plymouth.
Speaker 10 (02:48:04):
And fair to say the address there is 10 Cordage Park Circle?
Andrew Chiachio (02:48:08):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:48:08):
What is ThreeV?
Andrew Chiachio (02:48:10):
A restaurant.
Speaker 10 (02:48:11):
Okay. And why did you go there?
Andrew Chiachio (02:48:13):
To obtain surveillance video.
Speaker 10 (02:48:15):
Again, based on information that you had available to you, did you believe that Patrick Clancy had visited that location earlier in the evening of January 24th?
Andrew Chiachio (02:48:25):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:48:26):
And when you went to the ThreeV restaurant, did you speak with two employees there?
Andrew Chiachio (02:48:30):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:48:31):
Were you able to access the video surveillance?
Andrew Chiachio (02:48:34):
I was.
Speaker 10 (02:48:35):
And while at the restaurant, were you able to confirm Patrick Clancy on their video surveillance?
Andrew Chiachio (02:48:40):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:48:41):
Now, as far as their video surveillance timestamps, were you able to observe the timestamps at that location?
Andrew Chiachio (02:48:47):
I was.
Speaker 10 (02:48:48):
And did you notice any discrepancies about the time?
Andrew Chiachio (02:48:50):
No.
Speaker 10 (02:48:51):
And what did you do to confirm the time?
Andrew Chiachio (02:48:54):
I compared the live feed with my cell phone.
Speaker 10 (02:48:56):
Fair to say you were able to determine that the video surveillance did confirm Patrick Clancy arriving at 17:54:14, that he paid for a bag of food and he left the store by the front door at 17:55:01?
Andrew Chiachio (02:49:12):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:49:13):
Now, in addition to gathering the video surveillance ... Well, let me back up for a second. So on one particular occasion, you were able to go and view the video surveillance, correct?
Andrew Chiachio (02:49:23):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:49:24):
At some later date, were you provided with copies of the video surveillance from both the CVS in Kingston and the ThreeV restaurant in Plymouth?
Andrew Chiachio (02:49:33):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:49:34):
And you brought that back to the state police? The video?
Andrew Chiachio (02:49:40):
Yes, to the District Attorney's Office. Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:49:42):
Okay. Now, as follow-up for this investigation, did you learn information about the route of travel Patrick Clancy took that night to go from his home to these locations?
Andrew Chiachio (02:49:54):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:49:55):
Did you do anything to try to ascertain approximately how much time it would've taken And him to go to these locations from his home at 47 Summer Street?
Andrew Chiachio (02:50:03):
Yes, I mapped it on the Maps application on my iPhone.
Speaker 10 (02:50:08):
Now, do you recall when you did that?
Andrew Chiachio (02:50:10):
I don't.
Speaker 10 (02:50:12):
When you did this mapping of the locations, did it give you approximate distances and times between the locations?
Andrew Chiachio (02:50:19):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:50:20):
And fair to say, not knowing exactly when it occurred, doesn't account for the time Patrick would've been there or any traffic or accidents or anything like that, right?
Andrew Chiachio (02:50:29):
Correct.
Speaker 10 (02:50:30):
But as far as you could tell, you were just looking for approximate timeframes?
Andrew Chiachio (02:50:34):
Yes, a general idea.
Speaker 10 (02:50:37):
Okay. Now, as part of this investigation, you also were involved in some interviews with potential witnesses?
Andrew Chiachio (02:50:46):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:50:47):
Is that fair to say? Including Paula Musgrove?
Andrew Chiachio (02:50:50):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:50:50):
And who's Paula Musgrove?
Andrew Chiachio (02:50:52):
The Defendant's mother.
Speaker 10 (02:50:53):
Okay. And you also spoke to a former nanny of the Clancy's named Elaine Flaherty?
Andrew Chiachio (02:50:58):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:50:59):
As well as the employees from CVS, Angela Krause and Soraya Sweeney?
Andrew Chiachio (02:51:05):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:51:06):
Did you also, or were you also present in follow-up interviews with all of the first responders to the home in Duxbury on January 24th?
Andrew Chiachio (02:51:15):
Not all of them, but a lot of them.
Speaker 10 (02:51:17):
So that would've been a majority of the paramedics/firefighters from the different towns?
Andrew Chiachio (02:51:21):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:51:23):
On June 12th of 2023, did you apply for and receive a search warrant for 47 Summer Street?
Andrew Chiachio (02:51:30):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:51:32):
And why did you ask for a search warrant then in June of 2023?
Andrew Chiachio (02:51:36):
We were reviewing photos, crime scene photos, and someone noticed that there was potentially blood stains on the outside of the house that we had not swabbed.
Speaker 10 (02:51:46):
So to your knowledge, on the date of the incident on January 24th, the stains on the outside of the house were not swabbed and collected by the crime lab, right?
Andrew Chiachio (02:51:53):
Correct.
Speaker 10 (02:51:54):
Did you have further conversations with forensic scientists at the crime lab to determine the viability of obtaining additional swabs all those months later?
Mr. Reddington (02:52:04):
Objection at this point. It's hearsay and it's already been cross-examined above.
Judge (02:52:07):
I'll allow the question just yes or no, did you speak to somebody, not the answer.
Speaker 10 (02:52:12):
So did you speak to somebody at the crime lab about the possibility of obtaining some biological substances from the home?
Andrew Chiachio (02:52:18):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:52:19):
And as a result of your conversations, did you then apply and were granted a search warrant?
Andrew Chiachio (02:52:23):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:52:24):
So subsequently, some swabs and shingles were collected from the home at 47 Summer Street?
Andrew Chiachio (02:52:31):
Correct.
Speaker 10 (02:52:32):
And were you present when that was done?
Andrew Chiachio (02:52:36):
I was.
Speaker 10 (02:52:36):
On May 15th, 2024, did you have the occasion to go to the Tewksbury State Hospital?
Andrew Chiachio (02:52:42):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:52:43):
And what was the purpose of going there?
Andrew Chiachio (02:52:45):
To collect DNA from the Defendant.
Speaker 10 (02:52:47):
And is there a particular procedure that you, as an investigator, use in order to collect a DNA sample from somebody?
Andrew Chiachio (02:52:55):
Yeah, we use the DNA collection kit. It has a foam swab that you use to swab the inside of a person's mouth to collect saliva. That's then transferred to a collection card. We let it dry, then seal the kit.
Speaker 10 (02:53:06):
So the swab kind of looks like a lollipop-
Andrew Chiachio (02:53:08):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:53:08):
... with a foam and-
Andrew Chiachio (02:53:11):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:53:11):
And you are trained on how to swab the inside of a person's cheek on both sides in order to obtain an adequate sample?
Andrew Chiachio (02:53:18):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:53:19):
And you did that in this case?
Andrew Chiachio (02:53:20):
I did.
Speaker 10 (02:53:20):
Who did you collect the sample from?
Andrew Chiachio (02:53:22):
The Defendant.
Speaker 10 (02:53:23):
And that would be Lindsay Clancy?
Andrew Chiachio (02:53:24):
Correct.
Speaker 10 (02:53:25):
Were other people present when you did this?
Andrew Chiachio (02:53:27):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:53:28):
Who were they?
Andrew Chiachio (02:53:29):
Sergeant Josh McKelligan, DPH Police Chief Michael Riggs, and Attorney Reddington.
Speaker 10 (02:53:35):
What did you do with the sample that was collected from the defendant on May 15th, 2024 at the Tewksbury State Hospital?
Andrew Chiachio (02:53:42):
It was placed into temporary evidence at the DA's Office.
Speaker 10 (02:53:46):
Was that sample then later transported to the state police crime lab?
Andrew Chiachio (02:53:50):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:53:53):
Now, another thing that you did in this investigation sometime later was seek search warrants to Facebook or what's known as Meta, correct?
Andrew Chiachio (02:54:01):
Correct.
Speaker 10 (02:54:02):
As well as a particular Facebook group called Attachment Parenting for Littles.
Andrew Chiachio (02:54:06):
Correct.
Speaker 10 (02:54:07):
As a result of that warrant, did you receive data back from Facebook?
Andrew Chiachio (02:54:11):
I did.
Speaker 10 (02:54:11):
And were you able to confirm a Facebook page in the name of Lindsay Marie Clancy?
Andrew Chiachio (02:54:16):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:54:17):
Were you also able to confirm that there's a particular post by the person named Lindsay Marie Clancy or the Facebook page, Lindsay Marie Clancy, on May 5th, 2021 to the attachment Parenting for Littles group?
Andrew Chiachio (02:54:33):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:54:33):
I'm just going to approach, if I may.
Judge (02:54:37):
You may.
Mr. Reddington (02:54:39):
I have no problem with the approach.
Judge (02:54:40):
No objection? Okay.
Speaker 10 (02:54:43):
I'm just going to show you a document. Is that familiar to you?
Andrew Chiachio (02:54:45):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:54:46):
And is this the Facebook post posted by Lindsay Marie Clancy on May 5th, 2021?
Andrew Chiachio (02:54:52):
It is.
Speaker 10 (02:54:53):
I would move to admit this as the next exhibit.
Judge (02:54:55):
No objection. That may be admitted.
Speaker 10 (02:54:56):
[inaudible 02:55:01]
Speaker 10 (02:54:56):
... [inaudible 02:55:00] 17.
The Court Reporter (02:55:00):
I'm sorry.
Speaker 10 (02:55:08):
That's okay.
(02:55:25)
Sergeant Calcio (phonetic), just showing you what's now been marked as Exhibit 217 on the screen. Is that a Facebook post from the Attachment Parenting for Littles Facebook group?
Sergeant Calcio (02:55:37):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:55:38):
And through the information you received from the search warrant return, you were able to locate the content of this post in the records for the Attachment Parenting for Littles and confirm that it also appeared to be authored by Lindsay Marie Clancy, correct?
Sergeant Calcio (02:55:53):
Correct.
Speaker 10 (02:55:54):
Or by the Facebook page of Lindsey Marie Clancy?
Sergeant Calcio (02:55:56):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:55:57):
And fair to say it reads, "Hello, lovely parents. I'm looking for some advice, solidarity, ideas, something, anything. I'm truly finding my 19-month old to be the most difficult human I've ever encountered. I mean that with all love in my heart, but I honestly cannot make it through a day without getting so frustrated with him. He's not my first child, so not to compare because I know that every child is different, but just for background, this isn't my first rodeo.
(02:56:24)
"Every single thing with him is a battle and it has been this way for a while since he was maybe eight months old. I really try to pick my battles and only do what's completely necessary, but I mean everything, getting out of his crib in the morning and going downstairs, changing his diaper, getting him dressed, getting him in his seat to eat, getting him in the car seat, getting him out of the car seat, putting on his jacket and shoes to go outside, having him come inside when it's time, going to sleep for his nap and at night, he fights me every step of the way with all these normal daily activities. It constantly feels like I have to force him to do these things which feels so wrong, but he is always fighting me and crying about doing these very normal things." You recall seeing that message in the records?
Sergeant Calcio (02:57:13):
I do.
Speaker 10 (02:57:14):
And fair to say there was some comments to the records and also an acknowledgement by the person with the Facebook page, Lindsay Marie Clancy, thanking the contributors for their advice?
Sergeant Calcio (02:57:26):
Yes.
Speaker 10 (02:57:27):
I have no further questions.
Judge (02:57:35):
Mr. Reddington.
Mr. Reddington (02:57:35):
Good afternoon.
Sergeant Calcio (02:57:44):
Good afternoon, sir.
Mr. Reddington (02:57:46):
So this would be Exhibit 217, which is the Parenting for Littles post by Lindsay, correct?
Sergeant Calcio (02:57:55):
Correct.
Mr. Reddington (02:57:56):
And this was back in May of 2021?
Sergeant Calcio (02:58:00):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (02:58:01):
And she was talking about her son who at the time was 19 months old?
Sergeant Calcio (02:58:06):
That's correct.
Mr. Reddington (02:58:08):
Now, as a state police officer, you know how to investigate things, right?
Sergeant Calcio (02:58:11):
Yes.
Mr. Reddington (02:58:12):
You guys must have turned things inside out to find out if Lindsay Clancy was ever abusive to her son Dawson, right?
Sergeant Calcio (02:58:22):
That's correct.
Mr. Reddington (02:58:23):
Found nothing, did you?
Sergeant Calcio (02:58:24):
No.
Mr. Reddington (02:58:25):
Thank you. That's all I have.
Judge (02:58:27):
Anything on that?
Speaker 10 (02:58:29):
No. Thank you.
Judge (02:58:29):
Thank you, sir. You may step down.
Sergeant Calcio (02:58:30):
Thank you, Your Honor.
The Bailiff (02:58:32):
Watch your step, please, sir.
Sergeant Calcio (02:58:32):
Thank you.
Speaker 10 (02:58:32):
May we approach?
Judge (03:00:03):
Sure. All right. Members of the jury, there's a motion or a hearing I have to do with the lawyers and it's going to take a little bit of a while. So I'm going to excuse you for today. Come back tomorrow, 9:00. One of the questions I asked over here was where are we on the time estimate? All right. I'm told that we are on schedule, if not ahead of schedule, in regards to what we told you. All right? So I'm going to excuse you till tomorrow. We're going to stay here, do a few more things.
(03:00:38)
And I'm just going to remind you, as I've said every night, you have to keep an open mind. Don't talk about this with anyone. Don't do any research about anything. If you see anything about this case or any similar case, don't read, listen, or watch anything in regards to that. Don't do any research on this or any matters that you have or questions you have in your mind. Don't take any field trips. Don't happen to just be driving by certain areas that you think you want to double check. We've done that. All right? So you've worked so hard in this case so far, I just want you to continue to follow those instructions.
(03:01:21)
And with that, I'm going to excuse you until tomorrow. I would expect... And every time I say this, I'm usually wrong, but I would expect we'd have a pretty full day tomorrow. Okay? And so with that, I hope you have a nice evening. Hope you stay cool and we will see you tomorrow. So thank you very much.
The Bailiff (03:02:15):
Court, all rise. Good. [inaudible 03:01:43].
(03:02:15)
Jurors have exited the Court. We're still in session. Please be seated.
Speaker 10 (03:02:17):
All right. So we're going to be in recess until 3:00. We're going to come back. We'll have a hearing on the defendant's motion for permission to call certain witnesses. And so we'll have a hearing on that at 3:00. All right. So we'll be in recess. basically so parties can kind of get themselves oriented in regards to that motion. So we'll be in recess.
The Bailiff (03:02:39):
Court, all rise.
(03:02:39)
Court is back in session, you may be seated.
The Clerk (03:27:34):
Your Honor, for purpose of the record, we return back to the matter of Commonwealth versus Lindsay Clancy. All parties are present, excluding the jury.
Judge (03:27:40):
All right. Well, what I wanted to do was hear the arguments in regards to the defendant's motion for permission to call witnesses. I know that this was filed this morning, but it's kind of hand in glove with issues that were raised a couple of weeks ago, at least mention the same witnesses.
(03:28:06)
So I'm going to hear first from the defendant, then we'll hear from the Commonwealth. I will probably take it under advisement and review some of the other documents, but I want to make this decision as soon as I can so everybody can plan on how they go based on the decision. So Mr. Reddington, let me hear you first on this.
Mr. Reddington (03:28:32):
Thank you. Your Honor, obviously I don't have to belabor the obvious. This is a murder trial, very serious business. And we've all been working very hard on the discovery, which as you can tell is voluminous. Hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of pages of state police interviews. And I mentioned about with the government, they have cops, they have people going out and interviewing, they have videos, they have chemists, they have detectives, they have local cops. They want a cup of coffee, they can send five cops down the street to get one. I'm it, except for my son Patrick, who helps me out getting coffee. And the reason I sound frustrated is that they are objecting two weeks ago because they need time to review, to cross-examine doctors on very basic items of evidence that are their items of evidence. Now one of those witnesses is adding or bringing anything new to the discovery, if you will.
(03:29:33)
And not by way of excuse, but I am a sole practitioner. In the past May, June, July... In the past three months, I've had a murder, a rape, and two back-to-back federal trials that ended one week before we empaneled on this case. I have worked really hard to pull this case together with expert witnesses, civilian witnesses, private investigators been investigating. I provide everything to them as soon as I get it, and they have been doing the-
Mr. Reddington (03:30:00):
... as soon as I get it. And they have been doing the same with me. I haven't objected to one thing that they have offered. They put an AutoCAD computer animated display disc on my desk last week. I didn't complain about it, run to you and try to exclude it. I said, "Fine, no problem. Put it in my pile and move on." That's it.
(03:30:22)
So to suggest that they need time to be able to cross-examine both... I've had trials with both of these prosecutors. They're both experienced. They're very, very familiar with the trial of major criminal cases. I feel that they're more than capable of being able to cross examine, for example, number one, Dr. Vukovich, who is a board certified emergency medicine physician. His report indicates that he has taken a look at South Shore Hospital. He's taken a look at the Brigham and Women's Hospital. He's taken a look at the photographs. That's their evidence. That's all he looked at.
(03:31:05)
And all he's doing is basically what all of their South Shore doctors came in and testified to as to the nature of the injuries in his opinion, the type of injury that she suffered. Talking about the injuries to the right and left wrist, as well as the neck. In his opinion, dealing with suicide attempts, that it's a legitimate suicide attempt. There's no secrets. There's nothing new that they have to prepare to cross-examine him on.
(03:31:33)
Dr. Laposata is a doctor that is well known to most of us, and I've been using Dr. Laposata's fine services for the past decade or longer. I know that both of these attorneys are familiar with her. She's not bringing anything new to the table. She's bringing her opinion based upon their evidence as to the medical records, x-rays, all of the rest of the indicia of the injury that she suffered.
(03:32:01)
Now, they're talking about Lindsay going out and hanging off of a window and then doing, like I said, the Spider-Man slide down the side of the house apparently. Absolutely ridiculous. She dove out that window. She hit her head and she suffered what Dr. Laposata refers to as a Jefferson fracture of the spine that is very, very, very typical for this type of an injury. When somebody dives into the shallow end of a pool, they get that injury, unfortunately. When somebody, kids are on a boat and they're drunk and one of them jumps off a mast into the shallow end of the water off of Cape Cod, they get that type of injury. Superman, when he gets thrown off the horse, six feet high, same injury. That's all. She's not bringing any esoteric theory to this case that they need time to prepare. Interestingly enough, the Brigham and Women's Hospital records do make reference to the Jefferson fracture right from jump.
(03:32:57)
She also assists me as she always does on autopsy photographs, any indicia of injuries. And it's her opinion that if they try to say that there are bruises to these little babies that were inflicted by her, they're absolutely wrong. And Dr. Laposata would indicate that these are consistent with either EMT. God bless those first responders, but they were in a panic and they're trying to take care of these kids and pick them up and run them up to their trucks and vehicles. And other, obviously the intraosseous injection into the legs, the shins, the thighs, all of these bruises are from medical intervention, not Lindsay Clancy. That's what she would testify to. That's it. They don't need time to prepare to cross-examine for that.
(03:33:45)
Finally, I have Dr. Conti. Dr. Conti signed even better than a report. He signed an affidavit. And again, it's based upon medical records that we all have. Way back when this case first started, the government presented the case to the grand jury. First thing I said to Lindsay was sign a release. Let the government give all the medical records. We'll all have access to them. This case is obviously going to be predicated upon the medical records, psychiatric records. We signed every release. They got every document and had them into the grand jury. I got copies. They have copies. Conti would testify to the horrific, in his opinion, failure to comply with the standard of care that would govern psychiatrists, psychologists, Dr. Tufts, who's going to be testifying tomorrow, Nurse Practitioner Jollotta, the other individual from the McLean Hospital, all records that they had for years. So they don't need time to prepare for cross-examination.
(03:34:53)
So weeks ago, counsel, after I gave them copies of all of these reports and affidavit. Strike that. I'm sorry. The reports I just got and I just sent them the affidavit from Conti they already have. I disclosed to them what my opinion would be of the opinions from these doctors that would be testifying, and the report carries that out.
(03:35:19)
I suggest to the court that to strip Lindsay's ability to present evidence in support of her defense, number one, it would not be in the interest of justice. I'd like to hear a DA stand up and say in the interest of justice in this case, because weeks ago we got this information and were not prepared to cross-examine the testifying witnesses. I think even Your Honor would agree is a disingenuous argument. She came in and said to you, "Rule 14 matters and it applies to the government just as it applies to the defense. And therefore you should exclude these witnesses." Well, if I messed up and it's my trial schedule that caused me to not be able to have written reports of the stuff that they've had for years to prepare to cross-examine these witnesses, then it's my fault. And it deprives her of effective assistance of counsel because that would then deprive her of her defense.
(03:36:26)
This is a pathologist, an emergency room doctor, and a doctor who would testify to the standards that would apply to these doctors that they're going to call as their witnesses, which is another interesting fillip, if you will, where they're calling Tufts, Jollotta, the other individuals from McLean, all treating physicians of her that are all lined up to come in and testify against her on this case. Fine, bring it. But at least give me the ammunition to counter it.
Judge (03:36:56):
Let me ask you this. Can I go backwards? In regards to Dr. Conti, the affidavit really speaks more towards the standard of care.
Mr. Reddington (03:37:10):
That's right. He's not giving an opinion of criminal responsibility.
Judge (03:37:13):
Right. But I'm struggling to see how that comes in. Now maybe-
Mr. Reddington (03:37:20):
Well, he's the doctor that I'm using for toxicology.
Judge (03:37:23):
That's what I feel. But the reason I'm asking that is I'm not sure in this case, is the standard of care necessarily as relevant in regards as opposed to causation? Do you know what I mean?
Mr. Reddington (03:37:43):
Well, yeah. I think the standard of care does speak to causation. He doesn't have to use it as standard of care. He can use it as his opinion as to the first doctor that he spoke to, she spoke to, Dr. Tufts, when she presents with a bipolar one presentation and then Tufts prescribes an SSRI to her, which applies in the face of any rational psychiatrist and what they would prescribe and do. He's more than qualified to testify.
Judge (03:38:08):
No, that's a different question. And that may be more admissible than someone saying, "Oh, I found what the standard of care and I find that this violates it." If we had got an expert who says, "Listen, I am qualified. I looked at these records. I disagree with that treatment. I'd be more inclined to allow that than to get into the standard of care, which is obviously consistent more with the civil world."
Mr. Reddington (03:38:42):
I understand that. With that, I can reach out to Dr. Conti and have him delete reference to standard of care in his report and address the actual treatment as to an opinion as to its appropriateness. But again, on the issue that they're raising, that they need time to prepare to cross-examine, I don't think that lies even if he revises his report by removing standard of care.
Judge (03:39:05):
Let me ask you this, because I haven't had an opportunity. This is probably what I'm going to have to look at tonight. Is Dr. Conti adding anything to the expert disclosures that have already been made? Because I know there's disclosures.
Mr. Reddington (03:39:19):
That I'm aware of. He's taking the medical records, Tufts, Jollotta, McLean Hospital, and just commenting on the care and the treatment that was presented to her as a patient looking for help. That's all he's doing. He's not adding anything. He's talking about the prescriptions that were provided to her. The SSRIs, the antipsychotics, the benzodiazepines, all of that. That's what his opinion is predicated upon, which is all of the prescriptions that the government has already introduced into evidence and is well aware of.
Judge (03:39:54):
Right. But I know that the parties have already exchanged reports months ago, and I know that everybody did that. And I haven't had a chance to review specifically the defendant's reports. And is there an expert who is going to address these issues already?
Mr. Reddington (03:40:19):
No. Dr. Conti was my toxicologist and my treating... No treating, but a physician that would give an opinion as to the appropriateness of the treatment that she received, especially as it relates to the prescriptions. I mean, Dr. Laposata is a pathologist. She has nothing to do with it. Dr. Zeisel is a psychologist. He has nothing to do with it. Dr. Resnick is a psychiatrist specializing in infanticide. He's not addressing that issue and nor is Dr. Spinelli, who is a postpartum depression, postpartum psychosis expert. So Dr. Conti is my expert for toxicology and level of care that she received. Which guts the defense if their argument that they need time to cross-examine or prepare results in an exclusion.
Judge (03:41:12):
Okay. Commonwealth.
Attorney Sprague (03:41:16):
Thank you, Your Honor. With regard to Dr. Conti, one of my points is going to be that his affidavit addresses the standard of care, which is more of the civil issue, but you've already addressed that with defense counsel's pivot that he would then instead testify about the treatment of the defendant in toxicology. Looking at the affidavit in which he outlines his qualifications, he's not a toxicologist. He's a physician licensed here in Massachusetts. He's done a residency in general psychiatry, child and adolescent psychiatry and forensic psychiatry, but he's not a toxicologist. And also, it's not just us having all the same records that makes for cross-examination to be fundamentally fair. There's more to cross-examination than just having the underlying data. It's also knowing more about the expert, being able to look into their publications and their prior testimony and being able to prepare to rebut anything that they might testify to.
(03:42:21)
And where we have this late disclosure, which was one week prior to trial starting, that's fundamentally unfair to the Commonwealth. And I think what Dr. Conti would be testifying to, if it's just limited to her treatment and what was prescribed to her, that's covered by the other three experts that defense already has. They all talk about her treatment, the prescription she was on and the effects those had on her. So I think that would be redundant and it would be unfair to the Commonwealth to add this fourth expert to talk about the same things that the other three experts are going to talk about when we haven't had a chance to prepare for this particular expert. For Dr. Laposata, what we have is a two and a half page letter to attorney Reddington outlining her thoughts, but it doesn't say what her opinions are based on.
(03:43:11)
It doesn't say which materials she's reviewed and what she's relying on. So I would suggest that it's an insufficient report. And again, with the delayed disclosure... For example, she talks about Jefferson fracture causing the injuries. Well, if we had this information previously and knew this is what they were going to argue, we could have obtained our own expert to talk about the mechanism of injury and Jefferson fractures and all of those things. But we weren't told until a week before trial that she would even potentially be a witness. And then we get this report on July 26th that's a two and a half page letter.
Judge (03:43:46):
But didn't we have multiple trauma surgeons, neurosurgeons who've testified, who treated her? Couldn't someone just ask, is that consistent with... And that's pretty much from looking at Dr. Laposata's note. I'm not sure I would allow in opinions regarding whether or not it's a serious suicide or not, but she does indicate it's consistent with landing on an individual's head.
Attorney Sprague (03:44:19):
Well, your Honor, we had a trauma surgeon from the South Shore Hospital testify who said that the injuries that Ms. Clancy sustained were a level one and she had to be transported to another hospital where doctors who were trained in those injuries could operate on her. So we didn't think that she would have the knowledge and the training and experience to testify about the nature of those injuries and how they occur. The trauma surgeon from Brigham and Women's Hospital is with the military and is overseas in the Middle East and so was unavailable. But had we known that this was going to be an issue and they were going to allege this particular type of fracture, we would have endeavored to get another expert in replace of the doctor who treated her at Brigham and Women's. But we didn't know that this would even be an issue until a week before trial.
(03:45:10)
And again, this letter is dated July 26th and it doesn't tell us which records, which reports or what medical journals or training or anything that these opinions are based on.
Judge (03:45:23):
Well, that could be done by voir dire. I mean, the Commonwealth has at least inferred through their case that this was not a serious suicide attempt. Right?
Attorney Sprague (03:45:43):
No.
Judge (03:45:44):
I mean, and there's questions about whether or not somebody's hanging outside the window or not. And so why wasn't this an issue that the Commonwealth could have anticipated would come up?
Attorney Sprague (03:45:59):
The position of the Commonwealth isn't that it wasn't a serious suicide attempt. It's that the methods that were chosen were insufficient to achieve the goal. And the reasons for that we would argue in our closing, I don't think we have to disclose that theory at this point, but we've never said it wasn't a serious suicide attempt. We've never said it was a fake suicide attempt. What we've endeavored to develop from the testimony is that the methods that were chosen were methods that would be unsuccessful, but we're not saying it wasn't a serious attempt. And I think the reasons for that will become clearer when the doctors give their testimony. But it's our position that she was attempting to kill herself that night. And there are various reasons and factors where she was unsuccessful in killing herself, but successful in killing her children.
Judge (03:46:50):
But there's been all kinds of testimony regarding, it seems to be a dispute of whether or not she's hanging from the window sill or goes out head first. There's some testimony that's been raised even with the blood experts and things that she may have been hanging from the window sill. Dr. Laposata, it seems what they're seeking in is those injuries are consistent with somebody who lands on their head.
Attorney Sprague (03:47:24):
So would the court allow us to call a witness who's not on our witness list to rebut that evidence?
Judge (03:47:30):
Yeah, I would consider that. Sure.
Mr. Reddington (03:47:32):
I would have no problem with that.
Judge (03:47:38):
And this is why I didn't make a decision on this earlier because I have to see how the case develops. And this issue of how this injury occurs is certainly, it's either been specifically and explicitly raised or inferred in multiple questions, even to the length of, to the part of the cuts and things like that. It's been over and over and over. So if the Commonwealth seeks to get somebody to rebut that, I would strongly consider that. In regards to Dr. Laposata's opinion, we may need a voir dire in regards to, but I wouldn't imagine the voir dire would take that long. It would be, did you view the x-rays? I mean, that kind of an injury is probably pretty clear on the x-rays or the MRIs.
Attorney Sprague (03:48:36):
If we could get a list from defense counsel on what she's basing her opinion on so we can have our witness review the same material.
Mr. Reddington (03:48:44):
I can tell you right now, it's just simple. It's just the South Shore Hospital medical records, Brigham and Women's medical records that have already been discussed with the jury.
Judge (03:48:50):
Why don't we do this just so it's clear because when a witness is on the stand, it's much easier to have something in writing to say, "Is this what you relied on?" So if you could get from Dr. Laposata what she is relying upon to form that opinion. Like I said, I'm inclined to allow that opinion. And I would allow then the Commonwealth to present a rebuttal witness if they seek to.
Attorney Sprague (03:49:21):
And just note our objection.
Judge (03:49:23):
Sure.
Attorney Sprague (03:49:24):
But also the third expert, what we have here is a letter dated August 4th. That's a page and a half that's not even signed by, I believe it's Dr-
Mr. Reddington (03:49:36):
Vukovich.
Attorney Sprague (03:49:37):
Vukovich.
Judge (03:49:37):
Yeah. I'm more concerned with that is whether or not the opinion is admissible. The opinion as I see it is he's reviewed the medical records and it's his opinion. These are injuries that commonly observed in the quote serious suicide attempts.
Mr. Reddington (03:49:58):
We could delete serious.
Judge (03:50:00):
Yeah. Or even suicide attempts. That's an opinion.
Mr. Reddington (03:50:08):
Their doctors waxed eloquently about suicide and whether or not it's-
Judge (03:50:16):
Right.
Mr. Reddington (03:50:16):
I mean, they delete serious.
Judge (03:50:16):
But I'm just concerned that how are we going to parse out what he looked at? A hundred other cases and then we go through into all of those. So I'm going to have to take a look. That's what I'm going to take under advisement for sure. That doesn't mean he may have other opinions I'm going to have to look at. I think he talked about some of his observations as an emergency room doctor, I think, didn't he? Yeah. I'm more reluctant to allow in that individual's opinion that this was a suicide attempt.
Mr. Reddington (03:51:05):
So their South Shore doctors are able to talk about superficial, superficial as we've heard for a week now. But his opinion that it's consistent with what he's observed in his emergency room treatment is not admissible.
Judge (03:51:22):
No, that's not what I'm saying.
Mr. Reddington (03:51:23):
Oh, I'm sorry.
Judge (03:51:24):
What I'm saying is that he can't necessarily give the opinion, I've looked at this. It's my opinion, this was a suicide attempt. But he could certainly testify. I've looked at the cuts. These are the phrase superficial. I think that's been mixed up in this whole thing too. That seems to be more of a medical term as opposed to-
Mr. Reddington (03:51:44):
Well, no. They basically beat it to death with not being a medical term until we were able to show that in fact it was deep 3.5 and 2. Okay.
Judge (03:51:54):
Yeah. I mean, if you want to call this doctor, he's going to say that's a significant cut. That's different than saying, looking at that, I find that this is a suicide attempt. Just like there's never been an opinion here that this was not a suicide attempt. That's probably something that the jury-
Mr. Reddington (03:52:16):
Now, but it wasn't a week ago.
Judge (03:52:17):
Well, that's going to probably be for the jury to determine. But I would allow going into the characteristics that have already been testified to. We need a further voir dire on that doctor as well. But I think he lists in there what he reviewed.
Attorney Sprague (03:52:37):
He did.
Judge (03:52:38):
Yeah.
Mr. Reddington (03:52:39):
Yep.
Judge (03:52:40):
All right. Anything else in regards to those three witnesses?
Mr. Reddington (03:52:45):
Nope.
Judge (03:52:45):
All right.
Attorney Sprague (03:52:46):
No.
Judge (03:52:46):
So I'm going to take this under advisement, but just for... What I'm inclined to do is I'm going to take a look at Dr. Conti's report and compare it to some of the other reports. I'm inclined to let Dr. Laposata testify that the injuries are consistent with basically a fall on the head. And the last doctor, I've got to take a look at his language, but I would not be allowing in his opinion that this is a suicide attempt. But he may testify as to all the other observations that he took from those records. All right.
Mr. Reddington (03:53:33):
Understood. Just note my objection for what it's worth.
Judge (03:53:34):
All right. And so I'll note the Commonwealth's objection. I'll note the defendant's objection. And like I said, I'll take it under advisement and everybody can renew those objections
Mr. Reddington (03:53:46):
Again. As it relates to Conti, once you make your decision, you let me know. I can certainly reach out to him and have him delete this standard as to standard of care and just reference the actual treatment and prescriptions that she received.
Judge (03:54:00):
All Right. So I'll take a look at this... I'll have this tomorrow morning for everybody when you come in.
Mr. Reddington (03:54:06):
Great.
Judge (03:54:06):
All right.
Mr. Reddington (03:54:06):
Thank you.
Judge (03:54:08):
So anything else we need to address?
Mr. Reddington (03:54:12):
Just in case there's a problem. Dr. Laposata has been working with a gentleman by the name of Mr. Drake, Drake Laboratories that is putting together an auto computer animated display of coming out the window, the injuries to the neck, showing the vertebrae and that type of thing, which is all based upon evidence that's already in evidence here. So I haven't got it yet. It's not done yet. So I don't want to not say anything about it now because they'll be objecting to it tomorrow, I'm sure. Or whenever it's ready.
Judge (03:54:48):
I assume we'll have to take a look at that and give the Commonwealth the opportunity to view it and hear the arguments in regards. It may be something nobody has objected to or maybe. I don't know. All right?
Attorney Sprague (03:55:02):
The commonwealth would have an objection to it.
Judge (03:55:02):
We don't know. You haven't seen it.
Attorney Sprague (03:55:06):
Well, it goes back to the whole position that we have the right to, if we want to obtain another expert-
Judge (03:55:10):
Sure.
Attorney Sprague (03:55:10):
... and then that expert could review that material and use it to form his opinion. This is different than the 3D diagram of the house that the Commonwealth gave. The defense was on notice that that was becoming the basis of it, the measurements, what the house looked like itself. And so that was turned over. This is completely different.
Mr. Reddington (03:55:31):
And I just note that, as I said, the medical records that the government has talks about Jefferson Fracture. You might remember two weeks ago or two and a half weeks ago when they first raised their objection, I told you that I can't know what they're going to argue until they argue it. So I didn't know whether or not they were going to say that it's a fake suicide or that she didn't jump out the window. I had to wait to see what their opening was. Now I know I have to rebut it.
Judge (03:55:59):
We were almost out of here till you mentioned that BD thing.
Mr. Reddington (03:56:03):
Yeah. Sorry.
Judge (03:56:03):
So why don't we do this? We'll wait on that. All right. I'm not committing one way or the other in regards to that. We'll see. So maybe the testimony with the 3D, the testimony without the 3D. We'll just see where we go. All right. All right. So thanks everybody for buckling down and going through that so we could resolve that as best we can. I appreciate that.
Mr. Reddington (03:56:29):
Thank you, Judge.
Judge (03:56:30):
So we'll be in recess on this matter till tomorrow morning at 9:00 o'clock. All right. Thank you.
Speaker 12 (03:56:35):
Court, all rise.
