State Psychologist Says Lindsay Clancy Strangled Her Three Children to 'Spare Them' From Her Suicide

A prosecution psychologist gave jurors a chilling account of what Lindsay Clancy reportedly told her three children as she strangled them, while challenging her claim that a hallucinated voice drove the killings.

The Lindsay Clancy trial took a disturbing turn when prosecution forensic psychologist Dr Kirk Heilbrun told jurors that Clancy was severely mentally ill when she killed her three children, but was not suffering from acute psychosis at the time.

Heilbrun testified that he believed Clancy killed Cora, five, Dawson, three, and Callan, eight months, because she intended to take her own life and believed her children would suffer if she left them behind.

He characterised the killings as 'altruistic filicide', in which a parent believes killing a child will protect the child from perceived suffering.

Clancy has pleaded not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility to murder charges. Her defence argues that postpartum psychosis left her unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions at the time of the killings.

'Go to God, Baby'

Heilbrun testified that Clancy told him she said, 'Go to God, baby. Go to God,' while strangling her children.

He said the words were consistent with Clancy's expectation that she and her children would eventually be together in heaven. His interpretation directly challenges the defence claim that she was acting under a psychotic command.

The distinction is crucial. The prosecution is not arguing that Clancy was mentally healthy. Its experts say she suffered from significant mental illness but retained the capacity to understand that killing her children was wrong.

The Alleged Command Voice

A central part of Clancy's defence is her account of a male voice that allegedly commanded her to kill her children. Heilbrun questioned that account. He testified that Clancy described the voice as something she had never experienced before the killings and had not experienced since.

He also said the alleged hallucination was highly unusual because Clancy reported hearing a voice during the killings despite having previously described her intrusive thoughts as her own thoughts rather than auditory hallucinations.

'To put it mildly, that would be a very, very unusual pattern or manifestation for how this kind of thing comes about,' Heilbrun testified.

He further questioned Clancy's descriptions of what the voice allegedly told her, adding to his doubts that she was experiencing acute psychosis.

Experts Reach Different Conclusions

The prosecution's experts have not agreed on every aspect of Clancy's diagnosis. Heilbrun diagnosed Clancy with bipolar II disorder, while Dr Avram Mack, another prosecution expert, disagreed, finding that she was experiencing a severe depressive episode but saw no evidence of mania or psychosis at the time of the killings.

Despite that diagnostic disagreement, both experts rejected the defence's central claim that Clancy was acutely psychotic when her children died.

Heilbrun also testified that he had spent approximately 180 hours on the case and had testified in roughly 330 cases involving competency to stand trial.

Defence Experts Disagree

The defence has presented a starkly different picture of Clancy's mental health. Dr Phillip Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist and expert in filicide, testified that Clancy was psychotic and experiencing both a command hallucination and what he described as a 'delusion of influence'.

He described her as being 'almost like a puppet and someone else was pulling the strings'. Psychologist Paul Zeizel similarly concluded that Clancy did not appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions, according to testimony presented by the defence.

Attorney Kevin Reddington has argued that postpartum psychosis, depression, bipolar symptoms and psychiatric medication were central to Clancy's mental state around the time of the killings.

Mistrial Request Follows Religion Testimony

Heilbrun's testimony sparked another courtroom clash when he discussed Clancy's Catholic upbringing and her belief that she and her children would be together in heaven.

Reddington requested a mistrial after Heilbrun referred to suicide as a 'mortal sin'. Judge William Sullivan rejected the request but instructed jurors to disregard the religious testimony, calling the subject inappropriate, immaterial and irrelevant to their deliberations.

The controversy was particularly significant because it marked the second time religion had surfaced during the trial.

Prosecutors had previously asked Clancy's former mother-in-law whether murder was considered a mortal sin, prompting the judge to intervene and later instruct jurors to disregard the question. The episode added another flashpoint to an already closely watched trial.

The Legal Question

The Lindsay Clancy murder trial is not simply about whether Clancy was mentally ill. Both sides have presented evidence of significant mental health problems.

The key question is whether Clancy lacked criminal responsibility because a mental disease or defect left her unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her conduct when she killed the children.

That is why the expert testimony has become so important. The defence says psychosis and hallucinations deprived Clancy of that understanding. Prosecutors argue that she was seriously ill but still understood that killing her children was wrong.

Trial Nears Its End

Clancy attempted to take her own life after the killings by jumping from a second-floor window, according to prosecutors and court testimony. She survived but was left paralysed from the waist down.

The trial is now approaching closing arguments. If jurors find Clancy not criminally responsible, she would be committed to a state mental health facility rather than released. If convicted of first-degree murder, she could face life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

For the jury, the competing explanations are stark: the defence says Clancy was a mother overtaken by postpartum psychosis and command hallucinations, while prosecutors say she was severely mentally ill but remained capable of appreciating the wrongfulness of killing her children. That question now hangs over the final days of the Lindsay Clancy trial.