Lindsay Clancy returns to court for crucial retrial hearing amid war of words over murder case

Judge William Sullivan sits inside the court room.

Judge William Sullivan scheduled a hearing for Nov. 2 for Clancy lawyer Kevin Reddington’s motion calling for an inquiry into the lone holdout juror, Michael Desronvil.

As prosecution took to the stand, Plymouth County Assistant District Attorney Shanan Buckingham opened with a focus on the core legal standard for the “not guilty by reason of insanity defense” under Massachusetts law.

“She was getting treatment, she was on medication – went to hospitals, but commonwealth doesn’t have to rely on that to say she was in fact criminally responsible,” she said.

She went on to say, “People can still have criminal responsibility despite a mental illness. Defense can argue she was psychotic, but that doesn’t mean the Commonwealth hasn’t proved otherwise.”

Lindsay Clancy looks away from her defense attorney Kevin Reddington as he says “She died in the hospital, there were massive transfusions,” he said at the stand. He referenced her time in the hospital. Reddington also called out government rubuttal witnesses that took to the stand during her trial last month.

“Not one of those rebuttal doctors were qualified to get on that witness stand and tell that jury of their opinion on her mental state,” he said.

Michael Desronvil, the lone holdout juror who caused a mistrial in the Lindsay Clancy murder case, has spoken publicly for the first time in a video statement on Fox News’ Hannity.”I know the whole focus has been on me, but we want to reel everything back and put the focus on the three angels,” Desronvil said, referring to Clancy’s deceased children, Cora, Dawson, and Callan.

With Clancy back in court today, prosecutors are expected to announce plans for a retrial, while the defense fights to dismiss the charges entirely.

Clancy supporters stand outside Plymouth Superior Court in Massachusetts.

A few “Justice for Lindsay” supporters in pink T-shirts were seen outside the Plymouth Superior Court Tuesday morning as Clancy returns to court for the first time since her mistrial.

Dozens of people were seen waiting outside ahead of the hearing, where the judge is expected to hear several motions in a key hearing ahead of a possible retrial.

More supporters and spectators stand outside the courthouse.

Lindsay Clancy, left, and Plymouth County District Attorney Tim Cruz.

Prosecutors filed a motion asking the judge to enforce a gag order in the case. A war of words has erupted since the mistrial, with Clancy’s attorney, Kevin Reddington, trading fiery barbs with Edward Paltzik, the lawyer for the lone holdout juror in the mistrial, Michael Desronvil.

In their motion for the gag order, prosecutors wrote: “counsel for the defendant has engaged in substantial publicity pre-trial, during trial, and post trial that has inevitably tainted any further venire with inflammatory statements about the prosecution of the case, the facts of the case, opinions about the evidence presented as well as evidence of not presented during the trial, and jury deliberations. Restraints on any further extrajudicial statements are necessary in this case to protect the integrity and fairness of the judicial system.“

Prosecutors said they want to “prevent any further pollution of any potential jury venire as well as subsequent witness testimony.”

Lindsay Clancy appears in court during her murder trial.

The Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office filed a motion asking the judge to deny Clancy’s renewed motion for a required finding of not guilty.

Clancy’s claim that she was in a state of psychosis at the time she killed her three children is not supported by the evidence, prosecutors wrote.

“Despite claims by the defense, this Court should be evaluating the sufficiency of the evidence based solely on the evidence presented at trial and not consider any alleged information regarding jury deliberations nor the potential collateral issues regarding the outcome of what would happen to the defendant should to Court consider a required finding of not guilty by lack of criminal responsibility.”

Covered by: Kelsie Cairns and Michael Ruiz