Lindsay Clancy Returns To Court

What happened

Lindsay Clancy returned to Plymouth Superior Court as her lawyers pressed Judge William Sullivan to end the murder case after a deadlocked trial. Defense lawyer Kevin Reddington asked for a not-guilty finding under Rule 25, arguing the evidence did not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Clancy admits she killed her three children, but her defense says postpartum psychosis made her not criminally responsible. Prosecutors say she acted deliberately and planned the killings. Reddington also sought dismissal on double-jeopardy grounds and asked for an inquiry into the lone holdout juror. Sullivan took the Rule 25 motion under advisement and set another hearing for November 2.

How each side covered it

From the left

Left-leaning accounts framed the hearing as a defense effort to stop a second trial, with criminal responsibility at the center rather than only the deaths. The Guardian emphasized that posture, while Rolling Stone focused on Reddington’s attack on the prosecution’s proof as speculative. CNN lingered on the holdout juror’s role and the privacy fight around him.

From the right

Right-leaning accounts put the holdout juror and the next procedural stakes in the foreground, giving the hearing a more pivotal frame. Fox News centered the juror who resisted the rest of the panel and drew praise for refocusing attention on the children. The New York Post highlighted the defense’s bid as a striking challenge to the prosecution’s proof.

Headlines

Lindsay Clancy Returns To Court

What happened

How each side covered it

From the left

From the right

Headlines

Left5

Center5

Right14

Every side, every morning

Also today