'Male Voice' Told Lindsay Clancy to Kill Kids?

She alluded to having heard a voice, >> a voice that allegedly told Lindsay. Clancy to kill her children. >> She said she heard a man's voice telling. her that if she didn't do it now, she. would lose her chance or something like. that. >> But the prosecution says this story. about that voice, it emerged in a. critical 18minute window. Well, because. it provides a convenient way of of. lessening your own culpability.

>> Lindsay Clancy has admitted she killed. her three kids, but was she in control. when she did it? That answer may come. down to one thing, the voice. Who heard. about it, what they heard, and what. exactly they were told. We are going to. be zeroing in on that voice, and we will. let you decide. Welcome to Sidebar. presented by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse. Weber. Lindseay Clancy. This is the woman that.

all of America has been talking about. because she is the mother accused of. strangling to death her three young. children. Kora Dawson Ken. Now, here's. the thing. This is what makes this case. very different. There is no dispute. really about what happened on January. 24th, 2023. because Lindseay Clancy. admitted to killing her kids. I say no. dispute. You'll see there's certain. things on social media. We're not even. going to touch that. The question is, the legal question for this jury that's.

hearing this case. The one that they. have to answer is why. That's the. critical question because her defense. says she wasn't in control. that she was. hearing a male voice, a command, one. that was very straightforward, allegedly. saying, "You have to kill the kids. before she potentially did harm to. herself." The legal question that this. jury will be confronted with is whether. or not she was criminally responsible.

Did she suffer from a mental disease or. defect that put her in a position where. she could not conform her actions to the. law? That she could not appreciate the. wrongfulness of her actions, the. illegality of her actions? Was this a. conscious voluntary action? Now, this. voice, this alleged command was. something the prosecution argues only. manifested during the roughly 18minute.

window that it took to kill her. children. And that's significant because. one of the prosecution's witnesses on. rebuttal, this is Dr. Kirk Hybrum, referred to this as a convenient. explanation for her actions. Now, the. defense is saying, "No, this is. psychosis. This is a postpartum. psychosis." So, the question that we're. left with, the question that the jury is. going to be left with is this. Did. Lindsey Clancy really hear this voice or. does she just need you to believe that.

she heard it? Can a hallucination. even really be proven or disproven? So, we're going to try to answer this based. on what we know from this testimony. And. in a bit, we're going to also hear from. our friend, long crime reporter, host of. Scandal, Sierra Gillespie. Uh she's been. doing a terrific job covering this case. and she is on the ground reporting live. from Massachusetts on this case. So. we're going to bring her on in a little. bit. Now before I even get into all. this, you know, this is a massive case, right? One that we've been following. here on Law and Crime. So one of the.

things that we do when we have a big. case like this or the other big cases. that we follow, we're kind of limited in. how much we can show you on our YouTube. shows. Well, if you haven't heard yet, so we have this case file section on the. Long Crime Plus app. This is exactly. what you need because we're opening up. the evidence vault so you can inspect. all of this for yourself. The raw body. cam footage, the 911 calls, the crime. scene photos, the full trial tapes, all. firsthand. You can see it for yourself. Plus, you get adree streaming of all. your favorite long crime and court TV. shows. So, you can see the full picture, by the way, for an entire month free.

You head on over to longrimeplus.com, enter promo code sidebar, and you can. start exploring today. Again, check it. out if you want a more full 360 degree. picture of this case. Okay, back to. this. So, for now, if the defense is. going to convince a jury that Lindsey. Clancy was acting on a command from. hallucination, they need to show that this wasn't. something that she just made up after. the fact, right? So, enter Sheila. Kavanaaugh. She is a boardcertified. chaplain at Brigham and Women's Hospital.

in Boston. She's been reportedly doing. this work for seven years and she was. the first person that Lindseay Clancy. spoke to after she was exabated, meaning. after they removed the breathing tube. You recall that there was an allegation. that Lindseay Clancy also tried to kill. herself, that she jumped out of a. window. So, she was called to testify as. a witness for the defense. Now, Kavanaaugh showed up to the ICU on the. morning of January 25th, 2023. So, that's the day after the killings. Lindsay was still in a neck brace. She.

was still covered in bandages. She. couldn't speak, but by January 31st, that tube was out. Okay, here is what. Kavanaaugh told the jury about that. conversation. >> Did she make any other statements to. you? >> She did. She alluded to having heard a. voice, and the voice, according to. Lindsay, told her that if she did not. follow the command, neither she nor her. children would be safe. And did she.

indicate whether it was a male voice, a. female voice, loud, soft? >> She alluded to the fact that it was a. male voice and it was persistent. >> Any further conversation that you recall. about that, not about general things, you know, >> that that came up several times. I. visited Lindsay minimally 14 times while. she was hospitalized at the Bighgam and. the voice conversation came up several. times during several of our visits. >> So Kavanaaugh says that this voice came.

up repeatedly. But here is where the prosecution pushed. back because Kavanaaugh testified she. kept notes. So the prosecution. questioned her about those notes. You. wrote very detailed notes that are. contained in the Bighamin Women's. Hospital records regarding your. interactions with Lindsay Clancy, didn't. you? >> Yes, I did. >> And and in all of these notes that. detail every time you interacted with. her, you never once wrote that she told.

you she heard a voice or what that voice. said. Correct. >> Correct. >> And you also said that this voice, talking about the voice, came up in. several of your meetings. Correct. >> Correct. And you never once wrote about. any of it in any of your very detailed. notes. Correct. >> Well, chaplain not notes are not. verbatim transcripts of patient. conversations. I'm not there to evaluate. the patient. I'm there to bear witness. to their suffering. >> Okay. But the question was, you did not.

document those statements in your notes. Correct. >> Correct. >> But you did document some other. statements in those notes. Correct. >> Perhaps. All right. Real quick before we. go any further, got something important. to tell you about. Did you know that the. Medicare annual enrollment period is. right around the corner? And look, if. you or someone you love is on Medicare, you really need to pay attention because. the truth is Medicare can be really, really frustrating and honestly pretty. confusing. Millions of seniors, they're.

on the wrong Medicare plan. They don't. even know about it. That's why I'm. telling you about Chapter. Our sponsor. Chapter has unbiased independent. Medicare advisors who are salary based. They're not paid on commissions. So, they're not trying to sell you something. to help you understand your options and. find the plan that best fits your needs. The call is completely free. There's no. pressure to enroll in anything. If. you're already on the right plan, they're going to tell you. But it look, if there's a better option for your. situation, they'll walk you through it. step by step. Look, most people, they. can review their options in under 20.

minutes. Historically, seniors who have. worked with Chapter, they have saved an. average of more than $1,100 a year. So, don't guess when it comes to your. Medicare coverage. Call chapter today at. 845-4933791. Again, that's 845-4933791. You're going to speak with a real person. who can help you understand your. options. And again, that call is. completely free. Now, the defense did. explain that chaplain aren't there to. take evidence. They're just there to. comfort people. But Kavanaaugh.

documented several things that Lindseay. Clancy said or allegedly said. For. instance, on February uh 6, 2023. So. that's less than two weeks after the. killings. Kavanaaugh wrote that Clancy. shared her fears about quote not being. able to walk again. But she also wrote. that Clancy was quote visibly engaged, energized, and hopeful. February 9th, she noted that Lindseay Clancy spoke. hopefully of being discharged. February. 13th, she wrote that Clancy feels she.

has gained considerable physical. strength and agility and that she feels. deserving of this in light of recent. events. February 16th, she apparently. wrote that Clancy was playing cards with. her mother, laughing, expressed. hopefulness. Seemingly the point here. from the prosecution is this allegedly. persistent male voice never made it into. these notes. So that's the chap. Okay. The defense though isn't relying just on. her. They have another witness that we.

want to talk about. Someone who was. there for a phone call that cuts right. to the heart of this case. I'm talking. about Dr. Paul Zizle. He is a forensic. psychologist who's been involved in this. case since the very beginning. He was. brought in by Lindseay Clancy's defense. attorney, Kevin Readington, and he's. visited Clancy over 45 times. But the. first time he saw her was on February. 4th, 2023. So that's 11 days after the. killings. At that point, Clancy was. still in the ICU. She still had tubes,

wires everywhere. She was still. handcuffed to the bed. And Dr. Zizel. says she asked him for one thing, to. call her husband, Patrick. So she did. And while the first call went. unanswered, two days later, February 6, Patrick apparently picked up the phone. Here is what the doctor told the jury. about that call. Tell us what she said. to Patrick in your presence on the. speaker phone. At that point, >> she had told Patrick that she loved him. very much.

She was unable to express a lot of. emotion, but she expressed love for him. And she had said that she heard a male. voice. ordering her. telling her. that she didn't have any choice. But she had to kill. her children.

and then kill herself. Now, doctor, have in mind your your. background, your career, your. >> Did you tell Lindsay Clancy to lie or. make that up and pretend that she was. hearing voices? >> No. >> Do you have any conversation or any. suggestions to her at all that she. should say she heard voices or anything. like that?

>> Absolutely not. Why did you let her call. her husband on your cell phone? >> I let her call her husband out of human. compassion. >> Now, the prosecution tried to poke some. holes there, suggesting that the doctor. had planted the idea or that he coached. her into saying this. So, on. cross-examination, they really went after that one thing. that the doctor couldn't explain away, seemingly the records. Now, you've described in your testimony in.

this court auditory repeated auditory. hallucinations about um wanting to kill. herself or or that she should kill. herself and that she is damaged or her. brain is damaged. Right. >> That's correct. >> Now, did you have a conversation with. her in one of these 35 hours about that. particular voice or thought or belief? So when I meet with Miss Clansancy, it's. not as if I have one conversation.

on one of the 35 hours. to have thoroughess and exactitude, one. does what we call intra raider. reliability. In other words, over the. period of time to confirm what someone. says to you to help endorse the veracity. or accuracy of that, you'll ask that. question in a multitude of different. ways. So, I don't just ask once,

did you hear a voice on that date? We I. asked in different ways over time and. her answers pretty much remain the same. So, so when you quote in your report. when questioned about the nature and. content of these horrible thoughts, Miss. Clancy stated, quote, "Like a really bad. and intrusive thought that I didn't feel. like it was mine, telling me I should. kill myself. Your brain is damaged. You're never going to get better." End. quote. Where does the quote come from? >> Where does the quote come from?

>> Right. >> She had said that to me. >> To you at some point? >> Yes. >> Okay. And this is well after the. incident occurred, correct? >> Yes. >> And you reviewed all the records to know. that she did not endorse that she was. hearing a voice to any of her providers. between September. and January 23rd of 2023. So when. someone. >> a yes or no sir, >> that's a difficult question to say yes. or no from because sometimes if someone.

says something that's inaccurate, it's. not an affirmatory or or a negative. response that's misleading. My question. to you though was where in the records. from September to January 23rd or 2022. did she tell any of the providers she. saw that she heard a voice telling her. to kill herself? >> It's not in the records. >> Significant. Significant. So, here's. where we're at. Dr. Zizle says he heard. Lindseay Clancy tell Patrick about the.

voice. The chaplain claims that Lindseay. Clancy told her about the voice, but. Lindseay Clancy apparently never told. any of her doctors according to the. records. Now, the defense says she was. afraid to tell them because she was. afraid that she would lose her kids, that she was terrified that if she. admitted what was happening in her head, the state would take them away. But the. prosecution has a response to that, and. it comes from their expert, Dr. Kirk.

Halburn. Now, this doctor is a forensic. psychologist who's testified over 330. times. He was the one who evaluated. Lindseay Clancy in April of 2026. He. spent three days with her, reviewed. thousands of pages of records, and he. came to a very different conclusion. about that voice. >> Did you then consider evidence against. acute psychosis with um command. hallucinations? >> I did. Yes. >> And what did you see? Uh, one of the one.

of the reasons, well, the first bullet. point here is that the way she described. this as happening is that she heard a. voice that she'd never heard before, experienced it, an hallucination, and she's never experienced it since, but she only experienced it for the 18. minutes. or so that it took to kill the children. And to put it mildly, that would be a.

very very unusual. pattern or or manifestation of how this. kind of thing comes about. Uh very. unusual. I've been doing this kind of. evaluation for many many years and I'm. always very careful when someone tells. me that they experience a symptom only. during the course of committing an. offense. Uh. >> why is that doctor? Why why are you. careful when someone tells you that they.

only experience this voice during a. criminal offense? >> Well, because it provides a convenient. way of of lessening your own. culpability. Uh I mean it's always. possible, but as I said, I find it very. very rare. Whereas um. an explanation for um for why somebody.

uh did something uh somebody might look. at that and say uh it's it's a. convenient way of somebody looks at me. and and it's not I don't have the same. culpability that I would otherwise. >> That was yesterday. Today the defense. got their turn to cross-examine him and. as of this recording that. cross-examination is still ongoing. Now, we haven't heard the full picture yet, but defense attorney Kevin Readington. went right after the doctor's. credentials, pointing out that his. experience is largely in juvenile.

justice and violence risk assessment, not postpartum psychosis. He pressed the. doctor on the fact that he didn't. interview Lindseay Clancy until more. than three years after the killings. And. he highlighted the $54,000 the. prosecution has paid him for his work on. this case so far. You see that very. typically. Are you getting paid for your. testimony, your work? Are you hired gun? We see that a lot. Okay, here's the. thing. For all of the doctor's. skepticism about this voice, there is. one person who apparently heard that. voice before any defense lawyer ever got.

involved. And you know who that is? Patrick Clancy, her ex-husband. He was. the first person that Lindseay Clancy. told about the voice and the first. person to testify about it in this. courtroom. Here's what he said. She said. she heard a man's voice telling her that. if she didn't do it now, she would lose. her chance or something like that. >> And did she also tell you that she had. had a moment of psychosis? >> I don't recall.

Did she mention the children at all. during that call? I don't think so. I mean, not directly. >> Had she ever mentioned psychosis to you. before? >> No. I didn't know what psychosis was. until after this happened. >> Did she ever tell you she was hearing a.

man's voice before? >> No. >> And this is the clash at the heart of. the case, or at least part of it. And it. will very soon be up to the jury to. decide which explanation makes more. sense. I've said it before, I'll say it. again. I think that this is just one. component of a very complicated case. where you should not be surprised if. this jury takes a very long time to. deliberate. I do not think that there is.

an easy answer here. In my legal. opinion, looking at all the testimony. that we have so far, all the evidence, I. feel like this is going to be a battle. between the jurors, and there is a. question about whether or not they will. come to a consensus on guilt or not. So, now let me bring on somebody who knows. this case backwards and forwards, has. been covering it from the very. beginning, and is now live in. Massachusetts outside of that courtroom. We have with us the host of Scandal, Long Crimes, very own Sierra Gillespie. Sierra, thank you so much for coming on.

Uh, it's really good to see you. It's. great to have you on my show. I've been. going on your show so much. I'm glad I. get to have you on Sidebar. Um, first I. just want to start off. What is the. scene like outside that courtroom? Because the reporting from the last. several weeks, right, has been you see. an influx of of Lindsey Clancy uh. supporters. Um, is that what you're. seeing today? Yeah, Jesse, it's a crazy juxtaposition. to go from the last time I was here, which was jury selection, and it was.

pretty much only reporters. Now, I'm. here as we're inching closer to. closings, and it is crazy. I mean, the. amount of reporters has doubled, if not. tripled. The courtroom is packed. This. morning, there was a line for people who. are just spectators who want to get in. And I do think that there has been an. outpouring of support for Lindsay. These. spectators, by and large, the ones that. I've spoken to, say that they are in. favor of her. They realize that she was. going through postpartum psychosis. At. least that's what they believe. And so,

it's interesting to see and feel what. the courtroom energy is like now. >> And talking about the courtroom, what. happened today in court? Because. obviously, you know, we're coming on. I. was talking a little bit about what we. can expect. Uh what happened in court. today? Mhm. >> Okay. So, today the Commonwealth wrapped. up their direct of one of their rebuttal. witnesses. This is Dr. Kirk Hybrun, and. he was talking about Lindsay Clancy. You. know, the whole defense's argument is. that she was undergoing psychosis at the.

time, right? And I think this was a. pretty strong witness for the. Commonwealth because he said, "Hey, you. know what? She really did have mental. health issues. I truly believe that she. was trying to die by suicide." which is. interesting because in the past it. almost seemed like the Commonwealth was. insinuating that maybe perhaps she. really didn't want to commit suicide, but this witness says no. I do believe. she wanted to die by suicide. She was. undergoing terrible mental health and. yet I don't think she was undergoing. psychosis at the time. I do believe she.

was criminally responsible. So that's a. huge win for the Commonwealth, right? But on the opposite side of things, of. course, when the cross exam started. going, defense attorney Kevin Readington. really brought it, asking a lot of. pointed questions, trying to poke holes. in the argument here, and he did have a. couple of good things that were said by. this witness, but honestly, we can kind. of feel ourselves getting closer and. closer to those closings. We have one. more witness at the time of this. recording. So, I mean, who's to say when. we're going to have the jury.

deliberating on this verdict? Can you. just amplify a little bit more about. what the cross-examination of of Dr. Hoburn was? Um what the defense really. tried to poke in? I was telling our. viewers um that initially he was. focusing on uh his credentials, but in. terms of the substance of Halbrun's. conclusions, what was the defense trying. to argue here? Yeah, it's interesting you mentioned his. credentials because I think that came. back on cross and recross where Kevin.

Readington was like, "Okay, hold the. phone. You've never even reported on or. um commented on postpartum depression or. psychosis." And he said, "Admittedly, no, I have not." So, I think that was a. good way for him to say, "Okay, really, are you really an expert in all of. this?" And from there, I think he got. the witness to admit a couple of. positive things for the defense. I mean, on this cross exam, how Lindsay had an. adverse reaction to some of her. medications because this is something. we've heard throughout this entire. trial, right? The defense is saying that. Lindsay Clancy was allegedly.

overmedicated that could have. potentially led to what they say was. psychosis. And so, for this doctor, an. expert witness for the Commonwealth to. say, "Okay, yeah, she did admittedly. have adverse reactions to some of these. medications to manage her mental health. issues." I do think that that was. partially a win for the defense. A. >> a and one of the themes that we've been. focusing on here on this show is the. voice that Lindseay Clancy allegedly. heard this voice. >> Um I laid out a bunch of testimony we've. heard so far. Um in your opinion, as.

somebody who's been covering it, you. know, a criminal defendant, if the jury. believes they were hearing a voice. commanding them to kill, that's. significant. That is significant for a. mental health defense. Um, in your. opinion, how strong has that evidence. been uh presented by the defense and. also a little bit, you know, came up. during the prosecution zone witnesses? I. mean, Patrick Clancy talked about it. too, but like in general, how strong do. you think it is? Um, that evidence of. the voice.

>> I think this command hallucination, the. idea that she was hearing an external. voice, it kind of cuts both ways, right? Okay. So, if the defense says yes, she. did hear this voice, that's a red flag. anyone who hears any sort of voices like. this, we know that something's going on. with their mental health. That will lead. to the idea that she was going through. postpartum psychosis at the time, right? Okay. But on the Commonwealth side of. things, they continue to point out that. leading up to that day in question, January 24th, 2023, she never reported. to Dr. Jennifer Tus, nurse practitioner.

Rebecca Gelata. She never said, "Hey, I'm hearing voices." Not when she was at. Mass Gen or woman and infants in Rhode. Island. So, she never said any of those. things. And even the witness that was on. the stand today was saying, "I've never. had a case where the defendant only. heard voices one time." And it's an. interesting timing that she only heard. it one time the day of these killings. So if she did really hear the voices, yes, that's great for the defense, but. on the other side of things, if she only. heard them once, I mean, does that help.

them? So, back to your question, Jesse, though, if the jury if they believe. that, right? If they believe that she. really heard voices, I do think that. would lean more toward the defense, that. she wasn't criminally responsible, but. if they don't believe it, that's really. the question. Then, is she to be held. criminally responsible? >> Let me ask you this. You I don't know. where you were seated today in court, but did you get a view of Lindsay. Clancy? How's she appearing? >> Yes. Yeah. Yeah, I did. And it was. interesting too on cross- exam because.

at this point we know Kevin Readington, right? We feel like we know him and he's. very animated. He does a great job of. captivating the jury, which we can talk. about if you want to. But at one point. he even went over behind Lindsay and you. know was talking to the witness and. saying, "Are you telling me this woman. right here?" He had his hands on her. shoulders and she looked very stoic. She. is paying attention clearly. She's, you. know, following things. She's looking at. the defense attorney, the witness, whoever may be speaking. She's following. along. But she looks very somber. And I. will say the same thing for her family. today. I mean, when I saw them during.

jury selection, obviously this isn't a. happy time for anyone, but they almost. look exhausted. I mean, we're weeks and. weeks into this. It's very emotional. They kind of have their shoulders hung. They're kind of, oh my god. That's. that's kind of the feeling that I'm. getting from Lindsay and her family. >> You mentioned the jury. How are they. reacting to this? >> The jury, first of all, I don't envy the. jury, right, Jesse? I mean, the things. that they have to consider, the things. that they've seen with autopsy photos or. heard with the 911 call, very graphic.

and harrowing images that they'll have. probably for the rest of their lives. But what I will say about the jury is. that they're paying attention. I was. looking at their notebooks. It's like. cover to cover, page to page, all filled. out. They're writing things down. They're paying attention there. I didn't. see anybody who was zoning out or dozing. off. Nothing like that. But I mean, I do. think that the jurors are taking their. job very seriously and so I feel like. deliberations, it's going to be a pretty. big discussion. >> I think this is going to be one of the. longest deliberations that we've seen,

let alone if a jury can actually come to. a consensus on this. I know that there's. right. >> there's stats that say a jury already. makes up their mind um uh before closing. arguments. Uh that sometimes even after. opening statements, but I think once. they have an opportunity to debate this. and deliberate this and and go back and. forth with their fellow jurors, I think. it's going to take some time. Even I. have conversations with people about. this case completely divided on it. So. that's what I'm going to be looking out. for. Talk to me about scheduling. So. what is happening next? Do we know when.

closing arguments are going to be? Do we. know uh if the prosecution has any more. witnesses? Do we know when deliberations. are going to start? >> Okay. So here's the plan as we have it. right now at the time of this recording. After the lunch break, a third and final. rebuttal witness is going to be called. for the Commonwealth. And here's what's. we don't know factor is the fact that. the questioning recently on the cross of. all of these rebuttal witnesses has been. long. So it could be short, it could go.

long, it could trickle into tomorrow. because the court wraps at about 4:00. So if they are able to wrap up this. witness today, it's possible they take. tomorrow off to kind of prepare. The. judge has in the past said it's okay. you know, we can kind of discuss it and. talk about it if both sides want to prep. and have a day off before closings, which would mean closings would then be. on Thursday. It's possible though that. this witness trickles into tomorrow and. closings are tomorrow afternoon. So, at. this point, it looks like the jury would. likely have the case Thursday or maybe.

even Friday. >> Do we know if they're sequestered or. there's any conditions placed on when. they begin their deliberation? >> As of now, I haven't heard anything. about any sort of sequestration. And I. believe that they're still able to go. home or wherever they live. Just the. basic things of you can't discuss this. until it's time for deliberations. >> This is going to be fascinating. This is. going to be fascinating to see. Um we're. going to follow it here on Cybar. We're. following it every day with you on. Scandal. You've been doing tremendous.

reporting. I really appreciate you. taking the time, Sierra. Thank you so. much. >> Yeah, thanks for having me, Jesse. >> And that's all we have for you right now. here on Sidebar. Everybody, thank you so. much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple. Podcast, Spotify, wherever you should. get your podcasts. You can also check us. out on NBC's Peacock as well. If you. want to follow me, X Instagram, my. NewsNation show, Jesse Weber live, Monday through Friday, 11 pm Eastern. I'll see you next time, everybody.