Attorney says Lindsay Clancy rejects online theories blaming ex-husband for children’s deaths

Lindsay Clancy’s defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, told NBC News that she rejects internet conspiracy theories that accuse her ex-husband, Patrick Clancy, of murdering their three children in 2023. Reddington said the allegations have turned Patrick’s life into “a nightmare he doesn’t deserve.”

Patrick Clancy’s lawyers issued a statement describing the online narratives as a “campaign of misinformation” and said they will pursue legal action against those spreading false claims, noting that law enforcement has been notified.

The comments follow a mistrial declared by Judge William Sullivan after a jury deadlocked three times on whether Lindsay Clancy was criminally responsible for the strangulation deaths of her children, Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months. Reddington said the former teacher is “on 24/7, one-on-one suicide watch” and remains “suicidal,” though he emphasized she receives strong family support.

Reddington reiterated that Clancy does not hold anger toward prosecutors, jurors, or witnesses and frequently repeats the phrase “I want my babies.” He argued that she acted under auditory hallucinations linked to postpartum psychosis, a condition he says was exacerbated by medication. Both the defense and prosecution agree she killed the children, but differ on her mental state at the time.

Prosecutors have highlighted that Clancy never reported hearing voices before the night of the killings, while Reddington said she told several people, including her ex-husband and mother, about her struggles. He criticized the medical response, suggesting she was not given adequate care.

After 38 hours of deliberations, the jury remained deadlocked 11-1, with most jurors favoring a verdict of not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility and one juror insisting on conviction. Prosecutors must now decide whether to retry the case, with the next hearing set for Sept. 29.

Reddington indicated he will file a motion to dismiss the charges and is open to plea discussions, though he rejects any deal that would result in jail time. He also mentioned having suggested that President Donald Trump might intervene, despite the case being under state jurisdiction.

The attorney concluded that misunderstanding the case could lead the public to think that acknowledging a lack of criminal responsibility ignores the loss of the children, which he says is “as far from the truth as possible.”