Patrick Clancy: Lindsay Clancy’s Ex-Husband Breaks Silence After Mistrial, Reveals His Pain of Going Through Another Trial
Lindsay Clancy’s ex-husband has spoken out after her case ended in a mistrial. Patrick Clancy released a statement through his attorney, thanking everyone involved in the trial. His ex-wife had been facing charges in connection with the deaths of their three children — five-year-old Cora, three-year-old Dawson and eight-month-old Callan — before the trial came to an end on Friday.
“Patrick Clancy is grateful to the Court and to the jurors for their hard work, their commitment, and their perseverance,” his lawyer David Meier said. “The loss of Patrick’s children is something from which he will never recover and from which there will never be closure,” the statement from his lawyer continued.
Breaking His Silence
“The prospect of reliving this tragedy through another trial is extraordinarily painful for Patrick, for his family, and for all of us.” The statement came two days after Patrick was seen stepping out with his new wife, Rachel Danis, in New York City as the jury remained deadlocked after tense deliberations.
Patrick has moved into a high-rise in Midtown Manhattan with his new wife, a doctor and fertility specialist, according to an earlier Daily Mail report.
Public records show Patrick moved from suburban Massachusetts to Manhattan in May 2023, four months after the deaths of his children.
During the trial, Patrick was forced to relive the tragedy that unfolded at his family’s home in the affluent Boston suburb of Duxbury on January 24, 2023, when his former wife strangled their three children with exercise bands.
Judge William Sullivan announced a mistrial at a court in Plymouth, Massachusetts, shortly before 2:30 p.m. ET on Friday after an emergency appeal from Clancy’s attorney, Kevin Reddington, was unsuccessful.
Justice Still Far Away
A mistrial means the case is not over. Prosecutors could choose to try Clancy again, but if they do, the process would have to start from the beginning, including selecting a new jury.
The jury spent nearly 40 hours deliberating after hearing five weeks of evidence. However, the jurors ultimately could not reach a unanimous decision. At least one juror remained unconvinced that Clancy should be acquitted.
A second trial would not violate Clancy’s Fifth Amendment protection against double jeopardy. That constitutional protection generally prevents someone from being tried again for the same crime after being found guilty or not guilty. However, when a jury cannot reach a unanimous verdict and the trial ends in a mistrial, prosecutors are generally permitted to bring the case to trial again.
It is still unclear whether prosecutors will decide to pursue a second trial.
In the meantime, Clancy is likely to remain institutionalized while prosecutors consider what to do next.
Clancy has admitted to killing her children and attempting to take her own life in 2023, but maintains that she was overmedicated and suffering from postpartum psychosis at the time.
A hearing on what happens next is scheduled for September 29. District Attorney Tim Cruz has maintained that Clancy’s killing of her children was cold-blooded murder, but declined to say whether he would seek a retrial, saying no decision had been made.
Prosecutors now have several options, including retrying Clancy on reduced charges or asking a judge to decide the case instead of a jury.
