Lindsay Clancy 'Doesn't Remember' Killing Her Children as Lawyer Kevin Reddington Claims There's 'No Proof' She Committed Murders — and Demands Charges Be Dismissed
Lindsay Clancy reportedly does not remember killing her three young children.
Sept. 29 2026, Published 1:45 p.m. ET
Lindsay Clancy's attorney offered up a strange defense at the first hearing after the Massachusetts mom's murder trial ended with a deadlocked jury, RadarOnline.com can reveal.
Kevin Reddington requested that a judge throw out the case completely because there's not enough evidence to prove she killed her three children – despite her own admission to doing so.
Kevin Reddington Argues a 'Total and Complete Lack of Evidence'
Clancy's attorney, Kevin Reddington, is now arguing there is not enough evidence to prove she committed the crimes.
As prosecutors continue to weigh whether or not to retry the 36-year-old, Reddington's latest attempt to spare his client seems to be contradicting his own argument.
Reddington centered his defense around admitting Clancy killed her kids, but was suffering from postpartum psychosis at the time, and should be sentenced accordingly.
However, the case was thrown into chaos during deliberations, when one lone juror refused to change his decision that Clancy was guilty, despite his 11 colleagues concluding she was not guilty by reason of insanity.
In court on Tuesday, September 29, Reddington changed his strategy, now arguing that there was a "total and complete lack of evidence" presented by the prosecution of Clancy's guilt.
"I ask the court to look back at the evidence presented and ask yourself, where is the evidence that she did this?" Reddington said.
Kevin Reddington Questions Lindsay Clancy's Admission of Guilt
Prosecutors countered the evidence was scattered throughout the Clancy home.
Reddington focused on Clancy's mental and physical condition when she was found, badly injured and bleeding in the yard outside her home after allegedly jumping out of a second-story window. The failed suicide attempt left her paralyzed from the waist down.
The lawyer further claimed that Clancy does not even remember her alleged crime, and there is no evidence she ever confessed to the killings.
"Where is the admission? Where does she say that she did this?" Reddington asked, recapping his claims that she was psychotic and delusional at the time of the children’s deaths.
Prosecutors Counter Kevin Reddington's Claims
Reddington has asked for the case to be completely thrown out.
Prosecutors called the notion that Clancy doesn't remember or never actually killed her kids "laughable."
Shanan Buckingham pointed out at trial that Clancy didn't contest that she killed Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months, but rather argued she couldn't be held criminally responsible because she was suffering from severe postpartum psychosis at the time.
"Now, for the first time, the defense is arguing that there is no evidence that she did this," Buckingham said in shock.
Judge William Sullivan advised that he would take the defense request into consideration before setting the next hearing date for Nov. 2. He advised that he would like to finalize a date for a retrial at that hearing.
Lindsay Clancy's Case Declared a Mistrial
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Clancy's trial ended with a deadlocked jury.
Clancy's highly publicized murder trial ended in a mistrial on September 4 after jurors could not come to a unanimous verdict, despite more than a week of deliberations.
As Radar reported, Judge Sullivan told the court he had "no choice" but to declare a mistrial after one juror reportedly refused to budge while the other 11 seemed to have reached a "not guilty by reason of insanity" conclusion.
Reddington had asked Sullivan to replace the juror, but the judge refused and declared the mistrial, essentially resetting the case back to square one. Clancy's attorney told CBS he didn't blame the juror for sticking to his opinion, but felt the unnamed man would not listen to the judge's instructions.
"I would defend that person's right to be a holdout for a month. That's what the system is about," Reddington said. "But when the forelady indicated clearly and unequivocally in the jury question that this person had doubt, reasonable doubt, as we know now, and just refused to listen to the judge's instruction on the law, that's when I was upset, because that's why I used the expressions and the terms I did. It just wasn't right."
