Lindsay Clancy, a former Massachusetts nurse charged with killing her three children, appeared in court in person for the first time Friday as attorneys argued over how her mental health evidence should be handled and a judge scheduled the next major hearing for early March.
The case has drawn intense attention since prosecutors say the Duxbury mother strangled her children at their home in January 2023 and then tried to take her own life. With a trial date now set for July, the fight has shifted to procedure: how jurors will hear psychiatric testimony, how an evaluation by a prosecution expert will be conducted, and whether the jury should deliver its decision in one verdict or in two stages.
Clancy was brought into the Plymouth County courthouse in a wheelchair after spending much of the pretrial process appearing by video while she remained hospitalized in state custody. She sat beside her lawyers as both sides discussed scheduling and the scope of mental health evidence. Her attorney, Kevin Reddington, told the court the defense is seeking a two-step structure that would require jurors to decide first whether she committed the killings and then, only if they find she did, decide whether she should be found not guilty because of a mental illness.
Prosecutors oppose that approach and have treated the allegations as an intentional triple killing. They have charged Clancy with three counts of murder and additional charges connected to strangulation. She has pleaded not guilty. The deaths happened on Jan. 24, 2023, authorities have said, at the family’s home in Duxbury, about 30 miles southeast of Boston. Investigators have said the children were Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months. Callan was taken to a hospital and died days later, prosecutors have said in earlier court filings and hearings.
Investigators say Clancy’s husband had been out of the home briefly at the time, and that he returned to find the children injured and Clancy badly hurt. Prosecutors say Clancy tried to kill herself after the children were attacked, and her injuries left her paralyzed. Since then, her transport and medical care have become part of the court’s day-to-day planning. The defense has said she remains on suicide watch while held at a state hospital and needs specialized medical support to attend hearings. The prosecution has argued that courtroom logistics should not become a vehicle for shaping jurors’ views of the case.
The legal battle now centers on how Massachusetts courts weigh psychiatric evidence in violent crimes. Under state law, the question of whether a defendant committed an act is separate from whether a defendant should be held criminally responsible at the time. Clancy’s lawyers say severe postpartum mental illness left her unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions or to control her behavior, a standard that can support a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity. Prosecutors contend the evidence will show planning and intent, and they have sought their own expert review as the case moves toward trial.
One flashpoint is an upcoming mental health evaluation by an expert selected by the prosecution, scheduled for April 10. The defense has asked the court to set ground rules for that exam, including whether it can be recorded. Reddington has argued in filings and hearings that recording would create a clear record of what was asked and how Clancy responded, reducing disputes later over what took place. Prosecutors have resisted limits they say could interfere with standard forensic practice and create delays, and the judge has been asked to resolve the disagreement as part of a broader package of pretrial motions.
The next court date is March 2, when the judge is expected to hear oral arguments on the defense request for the two-stage structure and on questions tied to psychiatric testimony. The calendar is already tight. A final trial conference is scheduled for June 18, and jury selection and opening statements are slated to begin July 20. The court has also heard arguments about where the trial should be held and how to manage heavy publicity, with judges weighing whether a move outside Plymouth County is warranted and whether a large jury pool can be seated despite years of attention.
Family members have continued to attend hearings as the case advances, and the courtroom has remained closely watched by people following the proceedings from across Massachusetts and beyond. Outside court, the allegations have sparked fierce debate about postpartum disorders, prescribing practices, and how quickly medical care can change in the weeks and months after childbirth. In court, the focus stays narrower: what evidence jurors will be allowed to hear, which experts will testify, and how the jury will be instructed to consider mental illness if the case reaches a full trial.
For now, no final ruling has been made on the proposed two-stage structure, and the judge has not issued a definitive order on recording the prosecution’s psychiatric evaluation. Clancy remained in custody after the hearing, and the case is set to return to court March 2 for arguments that could shape how the July trial unfolds.
Author note: Last updated February 23, 2026.