Lindsay Clancy Trial: Psychologist Says She ‘Had No Appreciation’ for Wrongfulness of Children’s Deaths

A forensic psychologist testified Wednesday that Lindsay Clancy was suffering from a severe mental illness when she killed her three children in January 2023 and had “no appreciation for the wrongfulness of her act,” putting the defense’s central claim of criminal responsibility before jurors on Day 16 of her murder trial.

Dr. Paul Zeizel, who has met with Clancy about 60 times since shortly after the deaths, told the Plymouth Superior Court jury that his assessment was that she had a mental disease that prevented her from conforming her behavior to the law.

His testimony is a key part of the defense argument that postpartum psychosis, rather than a rational decision to kill, drove the January 2023 deaths.

What the Psychologist Told Jurors

Zeizel testified that Clancy had been experiencing worsening psychiatric symptoms before the killings, including intrusive thoughts, dissociation and voices.

He said she believed her brain was damaged, feared she would never recover and had thoughts of killing herself.

According to Zeizel, Clancy called a suicide hotline twice in December 2022 and continued experiencing intrusive thoughts and voices after her January hospitalization at McLean Hospital.

“She felt that her brain was damaged, she felt that she should kill herself and she was never going to get any better,” Zeizel testified.

He said her concern was that her children could be taken from her if others knew what she was experiencing.

Zeizel also previously testified that Clancy told her husband, Patrick Clancy, that a male voice had ordered her to kill her children and then herself.

He said she was not faking her psychiatric symptoms and that psychosis can fluctuate, allowing someone to appear functional at one point and experience hallucinations at another.

Prosecutors Challenge the Defense Expert

The prosecution sharply questioned Zeizel’s conclusions, focusing on when Clancy first described hearing voices and whether her account was consistent with what she told medical providers before the killings.

Prosecutor Shanan Buckingham pointed out that Clancy had previously described intrusive thoughts without specifically saying that a voice was commanding her to kill herself.

“You’re aware that when she described intrusive thoughts, she never referred to them as a voice telling her to kill herself, did she?” Buckingham asked.

“No,” Zeizel replied.

The prosecution also questioned Zeizel about his close relationship with Clancy and raised the possibility of confirmatory bias in his evaluation.

Zeizel defended his professional relationship with Clancy, saying empathy and rapport with a patient are consistent with ethical standards.

Defense Also Raises Questions About Her Treatment

The defense has spent much of its case examining whether Clancy’s health-care providers recognized the severity of her deteriorating mental state before Jan. 24, 2023.

That argument has included scrutiny of her psychiatric treatment, medications and the care she received at McLean Hospital.

ABC News reported that a former McLean social worker, Emily Thorndike, was allowed to speak outside the jury’s presence about her experience at the hospital, but Judge William Sullivan ruled that she could not testify before jurors because her testimony had limited materiality.

The judge did allow the defense to submit staffing records for jurors to consider, leaving the adequacy of Clancy’s treatment as a broader issue without allowing Thorndike’s personal account into the trial evidence.