MA v Lindsay Clancy, Part 5

Four experts. Much of the same evidence. Very different conclusions.

As the Lindsay Clancy trial moves toward closing arguments, we're breaking down the testimony that could ultimately determine the verdict: Was Lindsay Clancy criminally responsible for the deaths of her children?

In this episode, we look at the defense's final witnesses, including Dr. Phillip Resnick, before putting his conclusions side-by-side with the Commonwealth's rebuttal experts—Dr. Avram Mack, Dr. Kirk Heilbrun, and Dr. Gregory Saathoff.  

We break down where the experts surprisingly agree, where their opinions sharply diverge, and how the same evidence led them to completely different conclusions about Lindsay's diagnosis, psychosis, the reported command hallucination, and ultimately criminal responsibility.  

And now that all of the testimony is in, we take a bigger look at the Commonwealth's case: Does the theory prosecutors presented in opening statements still fit the evidence that actually came out at trial? And most importantly, have they proven Lindsay's criminal responsibility beyond a reasonable doubt? 

As always, I'll lay out the evidence so you can be the 13th Juror and decide for yourself.

🎧 Follow 13th Juror Podcast on your favorite podcast platform so you never miss an episode.
⭐ If you enjoy the show, please leave a rating and review.
📱 Follow Brandi Churchwell and 13th Juror Podcast on social media for case updates, behind-the-scenes content, and upcoming episode announcements.