382. The Lindsay Clancy Trial Part 10

The moment a body is found, the clock starts ticking. 48 hours before the trail goes cold. From A&E and Crime House, this is the official podcast from the famous True Crime series, The First 48. I'm Carter Roy. Every Thursday, I revisit a landmark homicide investigation in depth with long-form storytelling built for your ears. Listen to and follow The First 48 on Apple Podcasts. Spotify, Amazon Music, or wherever you listen to podcasts. I'm Brett. And I'm Malice. And we are The Prosecutors. Today on The Prosecutors, the prosecution's case ends, and the defense case begins in Lindsay Clancy Trial. (upbeat music) Hello everybody and welcome to this episode of The Prosecutors I'm Brett. And I'm joined as always by my resting co-host, Alice. If only how we're actually resting. And you weren't making a pun on the prosecution and Lindsay Clancy's trial resting today. Good pun. What can I say? Who can rest when there's so much law to be talked about? It's true, and that's what we're going to do today. Thank you guys, once again, for joining us as we walk through the Lindsay Clancy Trial in real time. And hey, you know, it's not the end, and it's not the beginning of the end, but it is the end of the beginning. The prosecution did rest today. And honestly, they would have rested last week. I'm gonna go on a limb and say that Ian Wiffen was not available last week. So he was their last witness. And I think at the end of Thursday, they were like, we don't have anybody else, but we can't rest yet. So they ended up taking Friday off. That's what I assumed happened. I think that's right. 'Cause he was definitely a witness. He's not an afterthought. Like you need him 'cause he put the timeline together. But for him, like not to do it on Thursday or Friday. 'Cause I think he might not live here, like in the United States. I mean, he's not from here originally, but I don't know if he's still in Britain or what. But either way, that's how we started off the case today. Was with Ian Wiffen, a celebrate expert, which is something Alice and I were very familiar with when we were prosecutors. It's what she used basically to get all the data off of a cell phone. And many of you will be familiar with Ian Wiffen because he was an important witness in the Karen Retro. There was even a callback to the Karen Retro today. Not explicit, but he was mentioned by Kevin Reddington, who I believe may represent some of the, what I'm gonna call the victims of the Karen Retro, noted that-- - Wait, did he really? - Yeah, he's involved somehow in the defamation, all that stuff. - Oh, oh, oh, oh, not a gotcha in the other. It's a small, small-- - Small world, small bar. - He noted, Dearing Cross examination, that one thing they can cause an apple watch and a cell phone to register a stair climb is going up and down a hill, which is exactly what happened in the Karen Retro. - Wait a second. How can you have your cake and eat it too? - Yeah, you know. So that's Ian Wiffen, he's there and he is going to be telling us about the apple health data and the cell phone data and what it tells us about the timeline in this case. So on the 24th, which is obviously the day that matters the most, the heart rate data started at 652 in the morning. When things some people had wanted, they wanted to see her apple watch data to confirm her insomnia. Well, it seems pretty obvious. She takes her watch off at night, probably charges it. So it wouldn't be very helpful. And this makes sense. She puts it on around 652, which I guess is when she woke up that morning or when she got up that morning. And it starts recording her heart rate data. Interestingly, the last heart record was at 523 and 53 seconds that day, which means at that point, she probably took her watch off. I don't think it died on her at 523. That would be a very convenient time for it to die. It seems like that she took it off. That most sort of conservatively is non minutes after Patrick left to pick up stuff from CVS and the 3V. Now, that's Patrick's estimation of when exactly he left, around 515. I think he probably left a little bit later than that, but it seems like very quickly after he left. Probably at most non minutes, maybe less than that, she is taking off her apple watch for whatever reason. The last heart rate record that we have from Lindsay's Apple Watch, who is 57 beats a minute, which is very low. Very low, much lower than mine ever gets to. Like calm. In fact, I think Wiffin was saying that she has a range as everyone would and she typically ranged from, he said the 50s up to, you know, when you exercise. I don't know. It was over 100. Yeah, over 100. In other words, like below 60 beats per minute, typically you're like an athlete. Like it's a very healthy, resting heart rate, but it also means that you're at a calm pace and you're at a resting pace. You're usually not agitated. And I say these things because when we talk about polygraph tests, that's one of the things they look at. If you're agitated, your heart rate goes up, for example, even if you're not running, even if you're sitting still. And look, I don't know if this is important and I don't know if the prosecution thought it was important. One thing that I don't understand from the prosecution perspective is it seems like they will take forever with certain witnesses that don't matter. And then you have a witness up there that does matter, that's given important information and they just kind of rush through it. Like they slap those files up on the screen and then rip them off as soon as the question's answered. You don't get to look at it. The jury doesn't get to look at it. You know, if the heart rate's important, if you think the fact that she was at 57 beats a minute right before the killings, I mean, 'cause the killings sort of happened, right? Basically after she took off her watch and you think that's important and you think it indicates something. Then I think spending a little time going through in a more methodical manner, what her heart rate was? - I wanted to know what the heart rate was the hour before, the 40 minutes before, the 30 minutes before, has this been consistent or was it like higher? And then as, for example, Patrick is leaving, it starts to go down and she's calm. Of course, he's just looking at the data. He makes a very good point of that. He's like, I don't know anything about the case. I look at the data because the data is all I have to go by. And that's exactly right. So he can't go into why something is 57. But I think it's really helpful to know the context. 'Cause what if she's been 57 all day? It's really interesting though, if like earlier in the day when she's building a snowman, she's at 132 during like physical activity or when she's agitated and texting him like, I'm stressed today, I didn't make dinner. Like maybe that was making her agitated, maybe her heart rate was higher. - And why not go through that? Why not say there's a picture she sent of a snowman, what was her heart rate then? She just sent a text about how she didn't have time to make food, what's her heart rate then? I mean, just kind of, and maybe it doesn't matter. And maybe they don't care about it. But they're the ones who brought it up. They're the ones who put it on the screen. And I feel like this happens so much with this prosecution. They just throw data out there sometimes and then never give you any context of why it's important. Is it important? Is this just, it was all in here. So we're gonna tell you about it. It's just impossible to know. And I feel like they're saving up for some sort of just miraculous closing argument where like Matlock, they bring it all together. And I just gotta tell you, in the law, hiding the ball to the end is almost always a bad idea. Whether it's a brief or a trial or an oral argument, make your case and then support it. And they have not done that. They wanna have some sort of clue. It was, you know, Mrs. Marple in the library with a tyrant reveal at the end. And I just think it's a mistake. And so they threw a bunch of information at the jury throughout this entire case, including today, but never tied it together. - And another thing I would have liked to know. Okay, our brains are all going. Why would you take off your watch? Like I will tell you, like if I'm the prosecution, a theory will be you are not in psychosis. You know exactly what you're doing if methodically as Patrick leaves you take off your watch which can track your emotions and you put it aside. And you do that while your heart rate is very low. Right, that is seemingly the obvious theory that would support this is a methodical intentional killing in which she was in control. But this is what would be really helpful. Other times, the data will show when she takes off her watch. Does she never take off her watch? We've talked about this with wedding rings and Ellen Greenberg case, right? We've talked about this where it may not matter at all that Ellen Greenberg didn't have her engagement ring on. If she took it off all the time when she watched dishes when she did X, Y or Z. Some people truly never take off their ring. Like. Like me. It's terrible. You should not do that. It's really bad for your ring to do that. But I just never take it off because otherwise I will lose it. So going through her data, even though he may not know why the data stops registering there, we know from the timeline and all the testimony that's come out. She's not asleep at that time, and even if you're asleep, you're heart rate registers. So he's postulating that the battery has died. So you can also see charging data. Did the battery die? What was the charge on the battery? When was the last time it was charged? When was the last time she takes off? Did she take it off every day around the same time to make dinner, for example, or to give the kids bads? So that would be a regular time, like, five thirties about bath times. I always take it off. And I believe he even said he only looked at the data from the 24th. And that is where I thought was a mistake for the prosecution because even earlier that day, or to give him all the data and say, when was the last time, like, give us all the other times in the last week, in which heart rate stopped registering, which may indicate the same event here. And if it never happened, that, I think the jury even sitting there, not needing a mat lock moment would say, so today was different. Today is not something that she does often, and it was different than all the other days. So she did something intentionally, which is take off her watch, which she never does. But we don't have that data. And you know, you could have looked at her Apple data for all of January. Was it common for her heart rate to drop to 57? Was that significant? Is that a significant thing that is that low or was that pretty common for her? Because she's in great shape and when she's resting, it's low because you're right. If you're the prosecution, and you're trying to make this argument that this was, I don't think, cold blooded murders what they're going for, but a very intentional, purposeful act that she did when she made a decision. And you want to build in this hole. It was the best I she'd had because she'd made that decision and the weights off a 57 heart rates. It's pretty good. That's not bad. It's not bad piece of circumstantial evidence that she could go with. And I'll just go with one thing, 57, like we said, it's pretty low. We know she just got left home alone with three kids by herself during what she has called before in her notes, witching hour, which I think any parent would recognize 530 at my house is always crazy and my heart rate, I can tell you 30 out of 30 days, my heart rate at 530, just because we're about to eat dinner, kids are tired from the day, from school, people are waking up from naps, is chaos at my house, it just truly is. And so this is, again, helpful to know, does that apply to her? One just independent factor we know. She is home alone with three kids, which is more work than if it were the other way around. She were out running errands by herself with no kids and Patrick were home with the kids. So I do think this heart rate could be important with more context. But we don't have that. So, you know, we've spent way more time than the prosecution's been on it. We actually really did. She averaged a high 70s, low 80s that day, I think that was a little thrown off by probably being outside and building the snowman, but nevertheless, much higher than 57. There was also some flight climb data, which is climbing flights of stairs. My understanding has always been going back to the Care and Read case. This is just very inaccurate data. You know, this is one of those things that like Apple does its best to tell you, but it's a little off. Nevertheless, you know, we've got it for what it's worth. So remember, so there's a lot of climb data at 503, so she probably maybe climbed a lot of stairs at that point. That was obviously before Patrick had left. Now, we know she takes off the watch at 523, so at that point, her watch is no longer reading this information. But apparently, at least during some periods, she has her cell phone with her because she completes a climb at 533 and she completes another climb at 538. Now, why is this important because the phone call that was made to Patrick, I believe I'm getting this right, was at 534. So if you just want to put in your mind, what could be happening here? And this is not telling us all the data we'd like to see. I mean, what would have been nice to see the chilling would have been up and down the stairs at, you know, let's see, 525 and then 529 and then 535, because what she'd be seeing is she's going up, she's getting one of the children, she's taking them down. She's killing them. She's then going back up and doing it. We don't have that. So we can't say definitively when all that's happening, but it is interesting that she misses the call that he makes to her at around 533. She then completes a stair climb and makes the phone call at 534. One possibility is that's her coming up from the basement where she's been doing what she's doing. Then she makes the phone call to him. He mentioned that she seemed like she was busy in the middle of something. She then gathers the things she needs, the pills, the knife, because she's finished with the children at this point. And then the 538 stair climb is up to their bedroom. The phone is found on the bed. It is found with no blood on it, presumably after that is when she cuts her wrist and cuts her throat and goes out the window. So this is a possibility here of this timing. The data is just incomplete. And I think it's incomplete because once again, the stair climb function is not perfect. You only have these two. For instance, the 533, she's going up from somewhere, but there's no, she ever went down anywhere or anything like that. So not perfect data, can't guarantee that's what's happening, but it sort of fits with the general idea of what we believe, which is, he leaves. He goes around the corner, she goes back in. And I think now the theory is that Dawson is the first one that she killed. Dawson's eating his snack on the couch, which was found half eaten on the couch. She takes him. She kills him. She comes back. She gets chorus. She kills her. She comes back and gets the baby. Kills him. Then the phone call comes in from her husband. She goes upstairs, she calls him back. Then she goes upstairs and the attempted suicide happens. Then she goes out the window and then from that point forward, she is there until he gets back. I think that's sort of the timeline at this point. Guys, if there's one thing you know about us, it's that we are always cooking for ourselves, but mostly for our ravenous children. That's why I'm so glad that our place is a sponsor. Our place makes beautiful, high performance kitchenware designed to make home cooking easier, simpler, and more enjoyable. Everything is designed to be multifunctional. So you're not filling your kitchen with single use pans and appliances that only do one thing and that frankly, you're probably never going to use again. And their cookware is made without forever chemicals and has been since day one. It's third party tested to meet global safety standards. These products aren't just aesthetically pleasing. They genuinely perform, which is what keeps people coming back. Okay, you guys know I cook every single night of the week. I have too many children who eat too many foods, so we cook all the time. I was a little wary about getting yet another appliance to let me down, but I was influenced. I got the wonder of in pro and oh my goodness. Honestly, it's become one of the most used appliances in my kitchen. It's an eight in one that preheats 60% faster than a traditional oven, which means dinner gets done 60% faster for me. And it cooks up to 40% faster, so meals really happen quicker. It air fries. It roasts. It base. It toasts. It reheats. Proofs. The hydrates and broils all in one compact footprint. And every cooking surface, my favorite part, is made without forever chemicals. Just tonight, I air fried some salmon and then I made homemade fries in the wonder of in pro, all in one thing, enough to feed my family of six. Everyone loved it. The kids loved the wonder of in pro and it's easy enough for them to use it. Upgrade your kitchen with our place today. Visit from our place.com/prosecute and use code prosecute for 10% off-site wide. That's F-R-O-N-O-U-R-P-L-A-C-E.com/P-R-O-S-E-C-U-T-E and use code prosecute for 10% off-site wide. With a 100 day trial, you can try it completely risk-free. Does anyone else feel like August is the Sunday of summer? It's the perfect time to hit reset before the autumn rush and for me, that always starts with my wardrobe. Quince proves you don't need a crowded closet to look incredible. You just need the right pieces. Quince specializes in effortless high quality essentials like ultra soft organic cotton and premium Mongolian cashmere sweaters. They're beautifully tailored, built to last, and transitions seamlessly from morning meetings to dinner. Quince also has premium stretch denim starting at just $50. You heard me. And with the kind of perfect fit structure and weight you'd expect from a luxury designer brand, I have all of these pieces from their washable silk to their amazing jeans. And I wear them all the time going up to dinner, I even wear them to court. and it makes me feel put together and also like I'm in the highest quality of clothes. - Guys, if you see me out, if you saw me at Cromcon, if you see us on the various things we do, chances are I'm wearing one of two things. Either it's a T-shirt, I'm probably some shorts, or I'm wearing something for Quince. Oh, I got a jacket on, that's Quince. Oh, nice button up shirt, Quince. Oh, I got some nice pants, Quince. And you know what, it's August, it's still hot, but I'm looking forward to the winter because I've got my Quince cashmere sweater. And anyone who ever grew up watching Seinfeld knows, cashmere is the best, and you can get it from Quince. So what are you waiting on? Upgrade your every day. Download the Quince app for app exclusive offers, or go to quince.com/prosecuters. Get free shipping on your order in 365 day returns, now available in Canada and the UK too. That's quinceqinc.com/prosecuters. We're going to shop in the future. Because the healthiest, happiest mom, I worked out every morning, meditated, and took care of myself so I could be the best for my kids. Until prescription medications stole me from my own body, and began with a touch of postpartum anxiety, the baby wouldn't take a bottle, and I was due to go back to work. He was on a strict nap schedule to get him to sleep through the night. I had three young kids to take care of, and was a touch anxious. So I did what you do. Asked a psychiatrist for some zooloft. It took me weeks to take it, but I finally took the plunge. I took 25 milligrams for one week, and then on the seventh day I increased to 50 milligrams as instructed by my doctor. Well, that night I couldn't sleep a wink. I did take the medication at night, and didn't know I wasn't supposed to, but still not a wink. I called my psychiatrist the next morning. She said to stop taking it. The second night I barely slept, too. She prescribed Adavant and Benadriel to follow sleep for the next night, which isn't true. Lindsay started taking Benadriel on her own. We know that. That's when everything started going downhill. I took those, which is also weird, because that is not consistent with anything anyone said. Adavant was one of the few things that actually helped her, and I think Patrick's talked about that it was a seraquil when everything really started going downhill, but nevertheless that's what she's saying. I took those men to sleep for two and a half weeks until the zooloft was out of my system, and then weaned off the Adavant, followed by the Benadriel, and then once I tried not taking anything, I couldn't fall asleep and stay asleep. I had become so dependent on the Adavant to sleep, but I didn't realize it. That's all we have. There's more to this note. We have no idea how it finishes or what else it says. Presumably, as I said, at some point, the prosecution will read it. It's a very interesting note, particularly given that it is edited right before, I mean, the day before the murders, she's editing this note. We cannot know the changes. Whiffin talks about that. We know that, and he even was vague about this, that the beginning is similar, maybe even the same, the first few lines, maybe, but he doesn't know anything else, and we don't know what she changed, and we don't know why she changed it. We haven't seen the rest of the note. Can't say what it says, but I don't understand the prosecution hiding the ball in this. They read other notes that she wrote. Notes that were better for her, by the way, that she wrote that they read those. And this is why I think they're trying to hold it back for a paramedic moment, which I think is a mistake. There are no paramedic moments really in trial. You've said this because the defense knows this note exists, so it's not like it's going to be a surprise later on, and it's going to have the same effect whenever the longer you have to dissect it, it might actually be better with different experts or different case agents or different people who knew her. Like for example, all the people who are testifying the defense's case right now, you could ask them, like, did you know that she was going through this right now? Did she divulge that to you? So even if this is meant to be a paramedic moment, it's strategically not a good call. And I just once again, lost y'all young lawyers out there, just a point I want to make again. When your case is fast as you can, because once people make up their mind, it is much more difficult to move them off of that. So if by the time you get around to reading the note, there are some of those jurors who already crossed in their arms and have said, I'm not going to do this, the note's not going to move them. But if you get them on your side early on, then probably they're not going to move off of it. That's a strategy of holding back and not explaining things until the closing, which just seems to be what they're going to do, is it is a bad strategy, it is bad lawyering, and you should not do that. Or if you're not going to read the note, don't introduce it. I mean, that's the thing. It's not like you have to introduce every single thing on the phone, which they clearly have it because I want to know the other data from the Apple Watch. Exactly. So. Anyways. What the note says, if you're curious about that, I read that note. Somebody said on the gallery, and I thought this was a really good point. If Lindsay had succeeded in killing herself, if the suicide had been successful, a lot of people would say that's a suicide note. She's explaining why she did what she did. Some people see it as more like a blog post, which that was something she did, and it does kind of read like that. You could imagine her putting that on a Facebook page for mom struggling with postpartum depression. You just have to decide for yourself, and obviously it might be easier if we had the end of the note. And I do think it's interesting that it seems like she is lying. I mean, I'm going to say lying. Lying's maybe strong. She is misrepresenting the history of this in this note. In her own writings, she is saying things that don't seem to be quite accurate. Okay. So then we go through the messages that were sent on January 24 back and forth with their mom back and forth with Patrick. We share some photographs, including I think that selfie at the South Shore Medical Center. It was hard to see because the cameraman today was terrible. We spent the whole time watching Lindsay sitting there and not doing anything instead of putting the camera on the screen as the evidence is coming up. So hard to say, but they're showing that you really wanted to catch a sobbing moment. You did. Not a whole lot going on there. Okay. What interesting thing on phone usage? So the last time the device was unlocked was 5/13, it was locked again at 5/16 to view the PDLX thing. That was the last time it was unlocked. The phone call, I don't have an apple, so I didn't know this. When you miss the phone call, you don't have to unlock it to call back. You can just call back. So it seems like that is probably what she did. And that's true because remember the timestamp, she called back within less than half a second. It was like milliseconds. And if you do have an iPhone, you know that it like screens and there's a green and a red dot, it says like or a circle where you can just immediately press back. So I think she immediately missed it, looked down and pressed the call back number, which is why her phone was never unlocked. See, I think she was going upstairs as the phone was ringing with the intention of answering the phone when she got upstairs. She missed the call. She was upstairs. She calls it. That's what I think. Based on what we saw today with the stairs and everything else, I think when he called, he was killing one of the kids downstairs. I think that's what happened. So probably the last one at that. Okay. So there is then remember we're still on just the cell bright. I had always called it cell bright core, but everyone kept saying celebrate today. So I was like, I heard it with ways and honestly Ian didn't really clarify it. He did not. But he also has his beautiful accent. Beautiful. So it was really wonderful. I thought it was all sterile and apparently it's British, but it is spelled celebrate. This is of no import except that I spent many years of my career calling it celebrate. So remember, we're still talking to the celebrate analytics guy. He's looking at the data. So the defense cross examines him. Any questions him about the accuracy of the Apple watch health data, which is fair, right? Like it only tracks when it's being worn, for example, and there's like double tracking. So that would not mean that there's two sets of data, but rather the phone and the Apple and they kind of go into, you know, why you extract the data from the phone that sinks with the Apple watch, that sort of thing. And the whole point of this is just to call into doubt, like you see some sort of a timeline emerging with this Apple watch health data and they just want to detract from it in the sense of saying, well, you can't really trust it. We know that the stair climb data, flight climb data isn't totally accurate, right? That's right. Like you could be in a car. You could be climbing stairs. It doesn't mean that she took five minutes to climb the stairs. She could have stopped, but it doesn't register as different things. So then he also goes into the fact that there's no usage or health data after 538 on the phone, which question, why wouldn't the prosecution point that out? Because that seems like pretty significant thing because that tells me everything's done by then. Everything's done by. Everything's done by then. Four minutes after she calls them back. In other words, she was in the middle of something. And it also means, by the way, she jumped just like we hypothesized last time. She jumped into action as soon as basically the door closed and Patrick was off, which again, if you're trying to show intentionality, there was no dilly-dalling. There was a some event that triggered it. Rather, it was waiting for the door to close and then to jump into action because she had limited time. 538 is way earlier than when he gets home at what, six, six something, five, fifteen, nine, six, oh nine. She finishes with plenty of time. That is an incredibly short amount of time, especially when we've heard how long it takes to strangle three children. So, I don't know why it's a defense pointing it out, if I had a prosecution, I probably would have started there and worked backwards because less interesting to me is when she took off her watch. More interesting to me is when everything stopped. Then they go backwards to those web searches that she did. Also on January 10th, Redington asks about these searches where she asks about prescription information, specifically about trasodone and venodril, trasodone and headache, trasodone and ibuprofen, trasodone and Tylenol interactions. In other words, she clearly was prescribed the trasodone and she wanted to know how it pairs with others. Basically pointing out how many medications she's on and this is not her. Now, they go through the same searches as the prosecution pointed out, but knows that there are a bunch of searches along those lines. It's not just what we've read. She searches this, this is like all that's on her mind. She is consumed by not getting better and all these medications that all these doctors are throwing at her, this poor woman who was just inundated with prescriptions and she's turning to Google to try and figure out how to heal herself. Then they talk about the note, no one will read the January 23rd edited note that started in December 22nd. So, it started with that same sentence on December 22nd, otherwise we don't know because we didn't read it. It is hard to believe, but it is back to school season. And I gotta tell you, in addition to being concerned about what they're gonna learn, there's something else that keeps me up at night as a parent. Our kids are the first generation growing up on ultra-processed foods. And what are the long-term effects? We're only beginning to understand them, but that's why Haya exists. It gives parents a real solution in a market flooded with kids' vitamins that prioritize candy-like appeal over actual nutrition. That is not Haya. It is packed with a blend of 12 organic fruits and vegetables plus 15 essential vitamins and minerals into every chewable. We're talking vitamin D, B12 C, zinc, folate, all the foundational nutrients that support immune health, brain function, mood regulation, concentration, and the development of strong and teeth and bones. And Haya is NSF certified and received clean label projects' highest purity award. Music to a parent's ears, but here's the thing. And if it's the best ingredients, if my kids won't eat it, it's no good to me. Well, here's the thing. You guys know I have four kids? Sometimes a little picky on what they eat, not when it comes to Haya vitamins. They love it. They get their own bottles and stickers that come with it so they can personalize their own bottles, they fill it with their vitamins, and they're the ones who remind me every single day that they get to take their Haya vitamin. What more could you ask for as a parent? And if bedtime battles and restless nights are a struggle in your house, a calming, nightly chewable design just for kids might be exactly what they need, especially when the new school year is just around the corner. Haya's new kids bedtime essentials is a total game changer. It's not a sleep aid. It's a non-habit forming chewable with L-F-E-N-A-N, B-G-6 GABA, and chamomile flower extract, plus magnesium and calcium that helps kids relax before bed and wake up rejuvenated and refreshed. No synthetic hormones like melatonin, no sugar, just calm support to help them recharge for everything they've got going on. You can now find Haya in person at Target stores nationwide or order directly from their website with a special deal we've worked out just for you. Receive 50% off your first order on any of their products. To claim this deal, you must go to hayahealth.com/prosecute. This deal is not available on their regular website, go to h-i-y-a-h-e-a-l-t-h.com/prosecute and get your kids the full body support they deserve. Guys, summer is the season of ponytails, messy buns, and braids. When it's hot outside, I need my hair off my neck. I used to feel self-conscious about how my hair looked in these styles, but after using neutralful, I've noticed a real difference in how I feel about my hair. Instead of worrying about it, I can pull it back and get on with my day knowing it still looks healthy, full, and beautiful. Neutralful is the #1 dermatologist recommended hair growth supplement brand and it's the #1 hair growth supplement brand personally used by dermatologists. Neutralful's hair growth supplements are peer-reviewed, NSF certified for sport and clinically tested. It's not a one-size-fits-all approach. Neutralful offers multiple formulas for men and women tailored to different life stages, high postpartum or menopause, and lifestyle factors such as a plant-based diet, so you get support that actually is right for you. Adding neutralful to your daily routine is easy, order online, no prescription needed, with automated deliveries and free shipping to keep you on track. Plus, with a neutralful subscription, you can save up to 20% off and get added perks to support your hair, health, journey. Let your hair be one less thing to worry about. The visibly thicker, stronger, faster growing hair in three to six months with neutralful. For a limited time, neutralful is offering our listeners $10 off your first month subscription and free shipping when you visit Neutralful.com and Interpromo Code prosecutors. That's neutralful.com, spailed in-ut-r-a-f-o-l-dot-com, promo code, prosecutors. I mean, I just don't get it. We're all talking about this net, we won't read. It's kind of like I'm walking by the man that the Good Samaritan finally helped. I was like, "Whoa, let's step over that one." Yeah, we don't. Nobody will. It's a big no. Let's step over that one. Actually, for the jury, you're like, "What's going on here? Is this important? Why are we reading this net? Why are we talking about this net?" But anyways, whatever. We spend enough time on that. Okay, so then we go through some text with our mothers and photos back and forth with Patrick. Texts about how there's nothing going on with Koura's kidneys, the morning of her check-up. A bunch of stuff to show how perfectly normal she was. And it's so interesting because both the prosecution and the defense want to show this. Both sides want to establish how perfectly normal everything seemed before this happened. And the prosecution wants to do that to say, "See? No evidence of psychosis here?" And the defense wants to do it to say, "See? This is not a woman who's going to murder her three kids later on and is planning it. This had to have been some sort of psychotic break." So they're both trying to prove the same thing, which means a lot of repetition. Reddington and sort of a flare, I enjoy Reddington's flare. He enters Lindsay's entire web history into evidence. And says, "In case anyone wants to look at it, I'm entering the whole thing." And it's kind of like a nice "I'm opening my book to you." Nothing to hide, prosecution, they don't want to give you everything. We got nothing to hide, that's what he does. And he's been that way the whole time. His no objection, she doesn't have to, why is she doing this? We have no objection. Put it in. I want him to see it. He's very much doing this whole, "We have nothing to hide. You should trust us." Which I think is pretty effective. Once again, we talk about how the police never searched that drawer. He also tries to make hay out of Ian having never seen the Apple Watch. But this doesn't matter at all because they never actually look at the watch. Apple's encryption data on the watch is, it's just not worth it. And they can get all the information from the phone. So that's what they do. They talk about some data from January 25th, which is when she was in a coma. He didn't look at that because all he looked at was 24. Anyways, and it comes up on redirect that this could have come from either the watch or the phone. It could have come from any number of things. Not a big deal. After Ian, the Commonwealth rests. At this point, we have a motion for judgment of a quiddle, which is standard operating procedure. Very pro-form emotion here, if you watched it. I mean, Reddington basically gets up and says, "Hey, there's a case where it kind of says that cross-examination can be enough to show that someone was not mentally competent." So I've done that. Why don't you just say, "We win," which is essentially what he does. When the court is not going to do that, obviously, this is going to go to the jury. Now, one of the most interesting things he does is he argues that the judge should reduce the charge based on what the prosecution has proven down to murder, too. I actually think this is a mistake because I think I could imagine a jury looking for a compromise would feel better with a murder, too, guilty than maybe a murder, one guilty. So he said that if I was a prosecution, I might almost be like, "Yeah, why don't we do that?" Give them that option. It'd be even better. They can choose between the two, but that's his position and we'll see what ends up happening at the end of the case. I don't think he'll win that motion, but I guess you never know. You never know. Okay. So I guess they're making it for lost time of ending early Thursday and not having court on Friday because they jumped right into the defense's case. I really have expected them to just like rest for the day because that's kind of been the timeline in which they've been going. But the defense did start their case today and the first person that Reddington called was Margaret Hampe, who was a labor and delivery nurse at Mass Journal since 2006. She's someone who worked with Lindsay starting in 2015. And so she's her friend, coworker, and here to talk about Lindsay as a nurse and kind of knowing her through all these years. She said Lindsay loved being a nurse and she was really good at it. She said Lindsay was the type of nurse she wanted taking care of you because she cared so much about her job and she'd even be emotional during births because she would cry out of happiness for the person she was helping. And she would engage with her patients. She would often ask them questions about childcare and parenting tips because she couldn't wait to be a parent. Now Margaret didn't see Lindsay after Callan was born, but she did text with her and she sent her a gift. She was there for this now infamous incident when Coral was a baby and Lindsay had access to her baby monitor on her phone and was watching it at the nurse's station during work. So Margaret was there when Lindsay saw Coral crying in the monitor and she said that Lindsay was worried that Coral was crying and Patrick wasn't answering his phone. So that's when she called the police. So the prosecution is now in the position of doing cross examination and they stand up and say, "But you've never visited the Clancy home." So you don't really actually know anything about her life during this time. You only knew her in the work context, right? She said, "Yes." And they also, I thought, did a good tactic because clearly Margaret Hampe is there not in her capacity really as a labor delivery nurse. She's there to be like a character witness for Lindsay. And the prosecution says, "But you, you're a nurse. You've had some training on how to deal with patients who've had mental issues having you." And she says, "Yes, I have." And they get her to agree that those patients, they need to stay on their medication and they need to be compliant in order to get better, which was good because we obviously know from all the practitioners testimony that Lindsay Clancy was. anything but medication compliant. - Yeah, and so this was really a good cross, but I don't know if Reddington anticipated this, or what, but man, was he ready with a redirect? - This was a good redirect, so that was me, Minosh, tip in the hand, because then Reddington gets up with a redirect. I'll say, he's organized, like he's been thinking about his defense, what she should. So he asks her, are you aware of any incidents when a woman has expressed concerns when she wanted to hurt her child? And she says, yes, you know, in my position as a nurse, I, in fact, have had that situation come up. And when that happened, Lindsay was actually there. That patient was trying to harm herself while pregnant. And the nurse mentioned Andrea Yates. Now, when she mentioned this, Lindsay was like, who is Andrea Yates? I don't know who that is. And so Margaret told Lindsay about the Andrea Yates crime, where she killed her six children. Like, six children, I think. - I don't remember how it was. - Many children, drowned all of her children, devastating case out of Texas. And when she told Lindsay about Andrea Yates, Lindsay cried and said, how could a mother hurt her children? That's a Zinger, way to go Reddington. - Yeah, I mean, I was like. - That's a Zinger, like he was prepared, and he saved that for redirect. - Yeah. Like, he knew that was testimony she was going to say, and he saved it, and he played it just right. - I mean, he really did. And that was just a great moment for him. And I said this on Twitter, and it's just true. I mean, Reddington, the defense case, unlike the Commonwealth case. And look, to a certain extent, this is to be expected, because it's easier to put on a defense sometimes. And then it is necessarily to tell the whole story of a prosecution. But he is focused. He knows what he wants to accomplish. He's put together, he's organized. He knows which witnesses he wants to put on. What he wants to get out of him. He's direct, he's quick, he's concise. It's a much better storytelling. When Reddington stands up, then when the prosecution did. And this was just such a perfect example of that. So the next person to testify is Allison Osko. So she's actually Lindsay's sister. So we'd heard about Lindsay's sister before, but we didn't really know much about her. So she testifies. She's all Lindsay Thanksgiving 2022. She said that Lindsay had decompensated in December. It will turn out that she's a licensed therapist so she understands this kind of language and everything else. She asked her at the time if she was safe. She said she was. She had insomnia, suicidal thoughts, depression. She told her that she had had a terrible reaction to so off and told her that she felt nothing and scared. She went to McLean to wean off of Cerequel. It was discharged five days later. After she was out of the hospital, she was feeling better. Her sister would say that Lindsay's not a complainer, which does not seem true to me, but it seems like she might not have been a complainer, but she was definitely a warrior. And that fed into her anxiety or came from her anxiety. I'm not sure which one. She saw her at Cora's birthday party. She seemed like she was going through the motion. She was tired and she was struggling. So it could cut either way. I know how it tends to cut for me, but I do think this is incredibly interesting. Obviously, before this trial started, we were kind of fed this story that this was going to be a case about how the medical system failed a postpartum mother in crisis. And there are doubts to that narrative. Specifically for her, that is not a commentary on whether postpartum women in general who are in crisis get enough healthcare. We're talking about Lindsay. I think it's very interesting that it's not just Lindsay. He was a labor and delivery nurse in hall. Many of her friends and colleagues are also medically trained nurses. Her sister is a trained therapist. Her mother-in-law is also a nurse. So she is in addition to being surrounded by practitioners who see her very often. Her support group, her immediate family members who she sees, not infrequently, are also trained professionals. Now could that mean that she's better at masking? But I just, I want to note that like the narrative we were initially told, and I'm just saying told because I think it's the news that initially put it out there, right? That this whole case is just about medical system failing is certainly not the case with risk, like look, most people don't have family members who are trained therapists and medical professionals. So most people don't even have that benefit of being able to call someone and say like, who should I talk to if I am struggling with postpartum depression? And Lindsey does have access to that. So just a note here, we'll see where this goes 'cause there's going to be more to the defense here. - Yeah, now point out exactly what Alice just said. On cross examination, I thought this was one of the better cross examinations. You gotta be careful with this because I did see some people who thought the prosecution was mean to the sister and the mother. Well, I mean, you gotta do it together. - By the way, the mother's been in trial this whole time. - Yeah, she has. Now, she obviously, I assume, wasn't accepted witness because- - She wasn't accepted witness. The reason I point this out is usually, there's a rule of sequestration where witnesses can't watch other witnesses testify. And when she took the stand, and she wasn't the first one to take the stand. So when she was the third to take the stand, I was like, huh, she's listening to all of this. - Yeah, and it is interesting. Usually it's weird because it's usually a family member of the victim. So like, the mother of a child that's murdered can often stay through the whole trial, even if they're on the witness list. Theoretically, she's the grandpa. The parents of the victim. But she's also the mother of the accused. So I didn't think that was a little weird. I was saying that all was dealt with and pretrial stuff. And, but I, I mean- - I guess she testified. - You could see, maybe she's shaping some things based on what she's heard. Anyways, I get to the cross examination here. - Sorry, sorry, sorry. - We get to mom, mom's next. - Just jumpin' ahead. - Jumpin' ahead. So they asked the questions. Did you know she was actually discharged early on her own request? She did not. January 25th, her sisters spoke to the police. Told them that she seemed okay at the party. She seemed better on phone calls. She met Talon via text message. She had spoken to her on January 19th on text message. And she seemed okay. And then it's pointed out that she is a licensed social worker. She is a mandated reporter. And she never felt she needed to report anything about Lindsay or had any concerns. And that's interesting because it does go to this question of, did all the people around her, that were her doctors and everything else that they failure? You know, if they'd talked to her family, what would the outcome have been different? It doesn't seem like the answer to any of that is yes. Once again, not a huge bearing on the actual outcome of the case, but something that has come up a lot just in sort of the general question of what she failed by all these providers. (upbeat music) - Insurance is at one size fits all and shopping for it shouldn't feel like squeezing into something that just doesn't fit. That's why drivers have enjoyed progressives name your price tool for years. With the name your price tool, you tell them what you wanna pay and they show you options that fit your budget. Enough hunting for discounts, trying to calculate rates and tinkering with coverages. - Maybe you're picking out your very first policy or maybe you're just looking for something that works better for you and your family. Either way, they make it simple to see your options. No guesswork, no surprises. Great to see how easy and fun. Shopping for car insurance can be. Visit progressive.com and give the name your price tool to try. Take the stress out of shopping and find the coverage that fits your life on your terms. Progressive casually insurance company and affiliates price and coverage match limited by state law. Guys, do you love finding a good deal? One of my formative memories in life was going with my mom shopping. We would go to these outlet stores that had all these great products that you could buy for cheaper than you could ever imagine. And my mom was always looking for a good deal and I grew up thinking that is a good thing and you know what, it is. And now in the modern day, when you're looking for a deal, you should look to what not. It is an app that focuses on community, on deals, on being a seller yourself and enabling you to find all the great brands that you didn't realize had great deals. Or what not you're connecting with sellers and other shoppers. It's like hanging with the group that gets you. This is a fun way to shop and you almost never pay full price. You can shop name brands across makeup, perfume, clothes, handbags, jewelry and more all without the retail sticker shock. This is the best place to find great deals on the products you love. And guys, I love shopping, I love a good deal, but I'm also really busy. So I don't really get the live shopping experience that I just crave until what not. This is where shopping happens in real time with real people, real conversations and these incredible deals. Okay, I like nice things, but let's be honest. I have lots of kids I have to feed. So I can't really afford to pay top price for it. I wanted this beautiful designer bag and I thought, you know, let me just check what not for it. Not only was it on what not for literally half of what what it's going like right now on other sites. I got to watch the seller show me close up everything about the bag. I got to ask questions to a real person about the bag and its condition. I knew exactly what I was getting and I was thrilled. Download what not today and get $20 off your first purchase. Search what not W-H-A-T-N-O-T in the App Store. sign up and start finding the best deals on the price. you love with $20 off your first purchase. Yeah. Okay, so next is Lindsay's mom, Paula Musgrove. And she talks about things that you would expect a mother to talk about. Lindsay was a good kid, she was an excellent student, she was never in trouble. And of course, she's in the unenviable position as well, where she knows these children, right? She said she loved her grandkids with all her heart. And that Lindsay was a loving and good mother. She said in the summer of 2022, everyone was happy. Then things seemed to just change around the second week in October. That's when Lindsay became very anxious about going back to work. And that's when she was anxious that Alan wouldn't take a bottle, which of course feeds into the whole going to work. Like, how's my baby going to eat if he cannot, when I go back to work? And Lindsay just didn't feel right about leaving Calend at that time. So, Reddington goes through October text messages that Paula has with her daughter, Lindsay. On October 20, Lindsay texted her mom and asked her to come up. She said she was having a bad reaction to medication and she wanted her mom to come and help her. Lindsay said that she was scared. So her mom went up to Duxbury that same day and she said that Lindsay couldn't sleep. She was anxious, she was afraid. And her mom was there to help her. She stayed for about a week. Then in late November, early December, Lindsay again messaged her and said that she was afraid to be alone. And she asked her mom to sleep with her. So Paula was there most of December until Christmas Eve. She said that everyone was pitching and everyone is helping out trying to help with these kids to help whatever Lindsay was going through. Now in January, Lindsay had lost a lot of weight. And she was paranoid about things that she shouldn't otherwise be. She would say it wasn't her mind that she'd never been like this before and it just wasn't her. She would go through the motions of being a mom and we've kind of heard this from other witnesses as well, like her sister right before the mom. And Lindsay told her mom she didn't want to drive. So her mom would drive her everywhere. And she was worried that the school knew something was going on. Lindsay said to her mom that the medication was destroying her mind and that this wasn't her. What she was presenting as this wasn't her self. She just wanted to feel better and enjoy her kids again. And look, have a hard time with mom's testifying. And we talked about this for it because moms will take a bullet for their kids. Yeah, and they're always not saying she's lying, not saying that at all. But the way she remembers things now, you wonder, she's looking at it through a lens. She's trying to understand why her three beautiful grandchildren who she loved with all her heart. She talked about that very emotional moment. We're killed by her own daughter. Just imagine trying to come to terms with that. And then you decide it wasn't her. It was the medicine or it was the postpartum depression. Whether that's true or not, you're going to want to believe that. And you're going to build the narrative around that. And now every interaction you think back on, you see hints of it. And we see this all the time. You know, every time somebody does something terrible and people, you know, their grocer will be like when they came in to buy steaks that day, I could tell. They just had murder in their eyes, right? Like everybody looks back at stuff like that. It happens that if someone dies, if someone takes their own life, you're just you're pouring over everything, every interaction. You can imagine she did that too. So how accurate is this stuff? I don't know. And we're about to come to one of the biggest moments that I don't know what actually happened. And that's in December in the kitchen with her and Patrick. Lindsay's there. She's nervous. She says, I just have to tell you guys something. I've had thoughts of harming the children. Now, according to Lindsay's mom, Patrick asked, you know, how did he put it? It wasn't, do you have a plan? But it was something along those lines. It was a follow-up where Patrick is essentially asking, do you know what you're going to do to them? Yeah, do you know what you're going to do? He says, actually, and this comes up on cross, do you think you can't be alone with the children? That's what her mom says, Patrick asked. Very interesting. Go back to Patrick's testimony. He initially testified to something similar. Testified to a moment in December where she said something like she was going to hurt the children. But then he clarifies, I think on cross. He clarifies, or maybe redirect, that it wasn't so much that she was going to do something. It was that something bad was going to happen to the children. So in his mind, it was more like an intrusive thought than it was a homicidal ideation against the kids. Mom puts it very different. And here's where it's really interesting. Is it just difference in hearing or is she shaping based on what she's hearing in trial? Because she's hurt every witness, testify. This is exactly why actually you need like sequestration of witnesses. And you can see how this can go either way, depending on, you know, you can see how it can be framed one way or the other. It's a really interesting question, because and this is, it's just, you just never know how this stuff's going to go. A lot of people have responded with a lot of anger here. Why didn't anyone do anything? If what Patrick said is what happened, it's understandable. It's just an intrusive thought. She's anxious. She's having intrusive thoughts. She's imagining a fire in her house where all her kids die. Or a horrible car wreck. Or they're being swept away in a flood. I mean, she's thinking of stuff like that. What you often see in postpartum anxiety type issues. Intrusive thoughts are very common. Thoughts of terrible things happened to your kids. That you just can't get out of your head. Very common. That is a very different thing than I am having thoughts of hurting the children. To the point that Patrick's asking, "Do you need to not be alone with him?" A month before she kills them. Really, really difficult question here. You know, another place. Because Patrick, remember, he's talking to the various providers. He speaks to the various providers. He never says to them, "Hey, you need to know. My wife's saying that she's thinking about hurting our kids." Like, he never says that. I don't mean that as a criticism. I mean that as I don't know that mom's recollection is the accurate one. It feels like what Patrick is saying is more consistent with how everyone treated her. Nobody pulled the fire alarm. Nobody said, "Oh my goodness, this has gotten really bad. We've got to protect the kids." Nobody did that. Now granted, you never think your daughter is going to kill your grandchildren. You never think your wife is going to kill your kids. No one ever does. But it's a contentious point in this case. And I don't know which way it'll end up cutting for the jury. So, she gets asked, "Did you have any concerns about the children's safety? She did not." They go through the text where Lindsay's saying that she's good. They walk through all the January texts. None of which are particularly illuminating. They're very short. It's just very pro forma. When I walk into the store, I say, "How you doing?" To the guy behind the counter. I don't really care. He doesn't really care. He says a couple words back to me. Honestly, most of their texts were like that. Hey, how you doing today? Doing good today. Doing a little better today. Stuff like that. It's not incredibly enlightening. But the prosecution goes through all of them, nonetheless. And the prosecution points out that most of them seem to be pretty positive. And mom's being pretty positive. And saying positive things about you seem like you're doing better. And seems like everything's on the right track. And she basically says, "That's not necessarily reflective of reality. I was trying to be hopeful. I was trying to be encouraging. I wanted to say good things. I didn't want to bring her down. So you can take that for what you will." But one thing she did do that she does not remember doing is telling the police that before this happened, Lindsay seemed like she was getting better. She was engaging with the kids. She was brighter. And she seemed to feel better. So that's how the cross ended. Okay, so then we have redirect. This is a weird redirect. Reddington basically spends the whole time talking about how some of the texts that the prosecutor talked about weren't the ones he was talking about. And we're in his version. And maybe not their version, which he had tried to get in before. It was only one version. Oh no, he wanted his version in as an exhibit. And the judge said the texts are already in. So a market for identification. So he uses this as an opportunity to ask again that his version that had been marked for identification can be entered as evidence. Nothing burger doesn't matter. Stay on. And that's the end of that witness. And the last fact witness that we may see for a while. So the next we said this all along, there's going to be experts because we have to talk about whether she was not only in psychosis, but whether it kept her from understanding the criminality what she was doing or to conform her actions, right? That is the insanity defense in Massachusetts. So before they call their first expert, the judge charges the jury on expert witnesses. How to treat an expert witness, what you take from them, that sort of thing. I mean, it's pretty straightforward. Experts witnesses, they're not fact witnesses. They have an expertise. Yep, they're looking at the records and. But it's always the jury that makes the ultimate decision. Not the expert. And judges are always warn jurors. You know, don't substitute. You're common sense. Just because they say it doesn't mean it's true, yeah. So the first expert they call to the sand is Michael Vulfovich, who is a board-certified emergency medicine doctor. He's been a doctor for 15 years and he didn't treat so part of being an expert. You're not the one like the treating physician. He is brought in to look at this file cold. And he reviewed photos and emergency medical records for Lindsay. And he said that she was not very responsive on arrival. And the doctors were concerned about her ability to maintain the airway. So they put her on a ventilator which we know because she wasn't able to speak when she first came to. They also noted in her record that she was hypothermic, so very cold. And her blood pressure was low. Her heart rate was high, very different than when she took off her apple watch. Noteworthy, and that she had lacerations to her wrist. She had multiple superficial, oh, we've heard that word before. Lacerations to her arm and neck with deeper lacerations as well. Was it this witness who finally told us what superficial meant? He was. We finally got what superficial wounds are. We did it. We're not making light of that. It's because superficial is not used in the colloquial sense. In the medical sense, it means how deep it goes, like whether it reaches the muscle and fat and tendons and it did not. That's why it's called superficial. And he probably clarified it for us. A defense expert. Then he went on to say that there were, so these superficial lacerations to her arms and neck and that there were no additional structures that were injured. The wounds only went into the fatty tissue, hence the superficial classification. And her injuries were consistent with self-injurious behavior, which drew objections because he was asking him to give the ultimate conclusions about whether she was hurting herself or not, which is proper. Which is, nobody ever explained that, but that's for those who you don't know. That's why they kept objecting. Because Reddington was asking in your expert opinion, did Lindsay Clancy attempt suicide? That is the ultimate question. That is for the jury to decide not for the expert. You just have to be careful about the way you word your question. So that essentially he's answering that without saying that. And Reddington never really, he needs to work on this, frankly, because he's going to have a lot of experts and he needs to get this information out without drawing objections. And he can't ask the ultimate conclusion. Just ask all the questions that lead up to that. That's why you have to say things like, is it consistent with self-injurious behavior? Yes. What leads you to think that this is self-injurious behavior? Stuff like that. Well, it doesn't look like someone else held the knife. For example, the angle is consistent with blah, blah, blah. That's how you get to it without stating the ultimate conclusion. So he went on to say based on this medical record that there are two lacerations on the left and right wrists, and they were threw the dermis into the fatty tissues. And he also noted that there were hesitation wounds on the neck and wrist, and that she had multiple fractures of her spine, that she coated, which we knew, and went into full cardiac arrest. And that's why the doctors did chest tubes. He said that there was lots of blood in Lindsay's chest and around the spine, and that this was caused by her going out of the window, hitting the ground, which causes this injury. Reddington asks a question, which gets an objection, and then they sidebar. Sidebar. They did. They did or didn't? They did not. I thought they sidebar'd. No, they were going to. Reddington reached his limit. Oh, they haven't sidebar'd yet. They're not. Reddington was like, I am so sick of sidebars, I just would draw the question. I did forget about this, which is quite the flair, because I haven't really been any sidebars today. I guess I'd been so many up to this point, and he was sick of him. Or he was like, well, can't fix that one. So let's just keep going. And there's no cross of this expert. So that's the first day. First day of the defense case. What do you think, Alice? I mean, this is unlike other, we've talked about there's like three parts of this case, right? There's putting on the charges that she killed the kids and she did this intentionally. But then we know that the defense, they have to put on the defense because insanity is a defense. They can't just like assert it and not put on any evidence. So we knew that there was always going to be a more fulsome defense than in a typical criminal case in which there's not an insanity defense. I think he's being pretty organized. It makes sense where he started. This is going to come down to a lot of experts. So we've only gotten a taste of what one of the experts. This was we didn't learn anything new from this expert today. This was already in the record. We knew all of this. So I don't really know how this helps him except this is like guess cutting against what the prosecution is saying that she didn't try to hurt herself. But what is important is if she was in psychosis at the time and this expert didn't get into it. So we haven't gotten really anything of use for purposes of the insanity defense so far. But we are literally a half day into their case. And I'll say this about Reddington and one thing I appreciate about him. He's put on a lot of evidence and some of you out there are thinking this all helps the prosecution. I've heard people say that. A mom's testimony health prosecution because there are things she said sister helped prosecution and it may. But the thing about Reddington is he knows what he's going to argue. He's going to argue it and it's either going to work or it's not. And you're going to know what his argument is and you may not buy it, but it's either going to work or it's not. And I just like that he is committed to that in that way. And I think the prosecution would have been better off if they'd done the same thing. If they had been very committed to their theory of the case, put it out there and you either buy it or you don't. And there's some strength to doing it the way Reddington's doing it. Even if some of you are hearing it and thinking, Oh, I don't know. That makes me think she's guilty. That's just part of it. He can't be afraid of that. He has to put the mom on, let her say what she says and hope that there are people on that jury who take it to mean there's no way Lindsey Clancy would have done this if she weren't suffering some sort of mental disease. So that's where we are. Very early on, keep an open mind. As Alice said, it is an affirmative defense. They're going to put on a lot of information. So I know a lot of people have already decided what they think about this case, but just give the defense a chance. I mean, see if they can move you off the line that you're currently on. Thank you to all of you who've joined us for this and for our prior episodes on this case. We'll probably have another one tomorrow. Thank you for all the emails you've been sending. Remember, it's prosecutor's [email protected]. Add prosecutor's pod for all your social media. Join us on the gallery, but there's a lot of discussions about this. That's on Facebook. Join Patreon to watch these episodes as we record them, usually the day of testimony. And you also get edited episodes early and add free. You can do that on Apple subscriptions as well, or you can join our sub-stack and see the edited videos. This case continues eventually, we'll come to an end. Hopefully you guys that are new will stick with us. Check out our other podcast, League of Breasts, too. It's so happy. So many of you have joined. We've been getting lots of emails from people who say this is the first thing they've ever listened to by us. We really appreciate you guys. And I hope you'll check out the back catalog. If you enjoy this, just think how much you'll enjoy the murder case. And maybe murder case part two. We can do homework for the next murder trial. There you go. All right, Alice. Is there anything else you want to add before we sign off for today? No, this is in a lot of ways, almost like the start of another trial because we are diving into what we've all been wondering about. We know that the defense had wanted to stipulate to the murders in the first place. They wanted to jump straight to this, but we are in week three, four. I've lost count at this point. Week three, I think of trial. I actually have no idea what we were in. Day 14. Day 14. I think that's week three. We're entering week three of trial. And in a lot of ways, we're starting a new. So this feels fresh again because now we're seeing it from the defense's perspective. I'm very interested to see what other experts come on and how the cross examination will go with each of them as well. So come back tomorrow because that will probably be another exciting day. We'll see how many side bars there are. I just wanted to say that it always starts with a side by. Well, of course, it doesn't need to start with a side by if you just need to do. Yeah, no side bars when you're just in the courtroom. I'll say this about the care and read case. It typically started on time. They do know it. We never start on time here. I'm always like pulling the little little dial trying to find when it starts. I'm always like, is this frozen? Or it's on the seal. We need the fan. We need the fan because we need something to let me know. It's not frozen. That's a good point. All right, guys. Well, I hope you've enjoyed this episode. We'll be back soon with another one. But until then, I'm Brett and I'm Alice and we are The Prosecutors. Well, you're a celebrity. Well, I don't know about that. Actually, I just looked at them. They have half a million followers on Instagram. I'm like, oh, you know, maybe I should put on a letter jacket and be cool about it. Be cool, girl. Be cool. You know what? It's not cool being in August and I still have a snow polar bear blanket because my legs get cold. Okay. That's cool. All right. Are you ready? I don't know if I'm ready. Okay. Apparently Brett told me I get very loud when I sound in my microphone. I don't know when I possibly shout. In this case, or when I get excited, but I will probably shout today. [Music] (upbeat music) - Your new promised is back, you know how like they have - I know. - They're not a pop star, I'm not a pop star. - I'm not a pop star. - You know, you got a lot. - That's a plan, I think we know that about me. We're six years now, great shirt, great shirt. - All right, we ready? - I'm ready, ready. (upbeat music) (upbeat music) - Hello, and welcome to Pluto, Fall. If you know the name of the movie you'd like to see, just stream it for free on Pluto TV. We're all your blockbuster favorites are landing all summer long. Catch anchor man, the legend of Ron Burgundy. - Fantastic. - The Matrix trilogy. - Welcome to the real world. - Mean Girls. - Side up. - Titanic. - Run the key in the world. - And so much more for Showtime's press nothing. They're free 24/7. - That is so fast. - On Pluto TV, stream now, pay never.