Lindsay Clancy's defense makes stunning argument there is NO EVIDENCE she killed her three children as retrial hangs in the balance

Lindsay Clancy's lawyer made the shocking argument that there is no evidence she killed her children, with her defense demanding the judge throw out the case.Inside Plymouth County Superior Court, Massachusetts, on Tuesday morning, the mom-of-three appeared for the first time since her high-profile murder case ended in a controversial mistrial earlier this month.Dressed in a pale plum short-sleeve blouse with her hair in loose waves, the former nurse sat wheelchair-bound at the defense table, watching as the defense and prosecution sparred over whether she should stand trial a second time and whether a lone holdout juror unfairly derailed the case.Defense attorney Kevin Reddington questioned the investigation into Clancy as he argued for a required finding of not guilty because the prosecution does not have sufficient evidence to prove the 36-year-old is criminally responsible for the killings.'Where is the evidence that she did this?' Reddington said.He asked why there isn't any blood on Clancy's socks after she cut herself, and he argued that she has no memory of killing her children but was told by police that she did it.'It wasn't even a horrendous investigation. There was no investigation,' the lawyer said.'This entire case is based on speculation. Where is the admission? Where did she say that she did this?' Lindsay Clancy appeared in court for the first time since her high-profile murder case ended in a controversial mistrial earlier this month Defense attorney Kevin Reddington questioned the investigation into Clancy as he argued for a required finding of not guiltyReddington pointed out two aspects of criminal responsibility and said laypeople struggle to understand it.When people hear that she admitted to it, they go off on a tangent.'She's a demon and possessed and should be executed,' he said people think.'This is coming from politicians, from President Trump, all the way down.'Reddington concluded: 'As this woman sits in front of you today, I suggest that they did not prove probable cause, and they certainly did not prove that she was not acting in a state of psychosis. She should be found not guilty.'Assistant District Attorney Shanan Buckingham argued against the defense's request for a required finding.She claimed that this is the first time the defense has argued that there is no evidence that Clancy killed the children.Buckingham also argued that case law shows a defendant who has mental illness can commit crimes and be criminally responsible. Judge William Sullivan said he will take the lawyers' arguments under advisement and rule on a required finding later Clancy was charged with murder after strangling her three children, Cora, five, Dawson, three, and eight-month-old Callan in 2023Judge William Sullivan said he will take the lawyers' arguments under advisement and later rule on a required finding.Clancy's hearing ended without a ruling on any motions or a trial date set.Sullivan told the lawyers to be prepared to schedule a trial at the November 2 hearing, where he intends to hear arguments on several other motions, including for an inquiry into the holdout juror, a motion to dismiss and a request for a gag order.'That's my goal to get this thing tried as soon as possible,' the judge said.Tuesday's hearing, which drew dozens of reporters to the courthouse, set the wheels in motion for the future of her case after a dramatic and uncertain three weeks since her first trial ended.Clancy went on trial in July, charged with three counts of first-degree murder for killing Cora, five, Dawson, three, and Callan, eight months old, inside the family home in the wealthy suburb of Duxbury, Massachusetts, on January 24, 2023.The 36-year-old labor and delivery nurse strangled the children with exercise bands in the basement after sending her husband, Patrick Clancy, out of the home to run errands.She then tried to kill herself, cutting her wrists and neck and jumping from the second-floor bedroom window. Clancy's trial ended in a mistrial after a lone holdout refused to join the other 11 jurors in finding her not guilty by reason of insanityClancy survived but was left paralyzed from the waist down.The mom-of-three did not deny killing her children but pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, saying she was suffering from severe postpartum depression and psychosis at the time.Over five weeks of testimony, jurors heard Patrick's devastating 911 call, saw graphic photos of the children's autopsies, learned details of Clancy's spiraling mental health in the months leading up to the killings, and listened to dueling diagnoses from psychiatrists and mental health experts.Outside the courthouse, the case also grew in magnitude.Pink-clad supporters staged rallies in the parking lot, a national conversation about postpartum mental illness began, and the media following ballooned into a mob of camera crews.But ultimately, after 38 hours of deliberations, the 12 jurors failed to reach a unanimous verdict and, on September 4, a mistrial was declared.It turned out that a lone holdout juror, identified as Michael Desronvil, refused to join the other 11 in finding her not guilty by reason of insanity.Desronvil's role in the trial was one of several matters that took center stage on Tuesday as the defense and prosecution faced off once again inside the courtroom, arguing a handful of motions filed by the defense since the mistrial – all aimed at avoiding a second trial.Reddington argued that Judge Sullivan failed to properly probe the holdout juror and the foreperson's claims before declaring a mistrial. Michael Desronvil finally broke his silence on Monday in a video statement shared with HannityHe argued that a thorough inquiry might have avoided a mistrial.The newest member of Clancy's legal team, former Karen Read attorney Martin Weinberg, argued that putting Clancy on trial a second time would violate double jeopardy laws, so the judge must dismiss the case altogether.Before the mistrial was declared, the jury foreperson sent two messages to the judge accusing the then-unidentified holdout of expressing reasonable doubt, but of refusing to apply it to the law.At the time, Reddington called for the holdout to be struck from the case or to at least face further questioning.Judge Sullivan refused, and hours later, when the jury returned deadlocked again, a mistrial was declared.Desronvil has said through his attorney Edward Paltzik that he has 'zero doubt' about Clancy's guilt, based on what was described as 'mountains of evidence.'Paltzik, who previously represented President Donald Trump, and Reddington have repeatedly traded barbs in recent weeks.The attorney for the holdout has branded Reddington 'Kevin "Shooter McGavin" Reddington.' He has responded by branding Paltzik a 'publicity-seeking opportunist.'The war of words came after questions mounted about Desronvil's actions in the jury room when several fellow jurors broke their silence in interviews with the media. Lindsay Clancy's defense attorney Kevin Reddington demanded the public stop with the 'horrific conspiracy allegations' about Patrick Clancy during an interview with CBS Mornings on WednesdaySeveral accused him of refusing to follow the law when it came to reasonable doubt, while one also claimed that he was scrolling on his phone during deliberations.It also emerged that Desronvil was arrested for domestic violence in 2021. The case was later dropped, but he still had an active restraining order against him while serving as a juror.Following the claims, Reddington called for an investigation into Desronvil to determine whether he was truthful during jury selection and to probe his phone use during the trial.The defense asked the court for his juror questionnaire, phone records, and records around his brushes with the law.In a statement on Monday, Reddington said that the defense and prosecution had agreed to continue that motion to investigate the juror to a later date at the request of a local attorney representing Desronvil.During Tuesday's hearing, the defense also argued a separate motion that Judge Sullivan should enter a finding of not guilty on all charges.According to Reddington, the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Clancy was in control of her actions at the time and could be held criminally responsible for her children's deaths.In an insanity case in Massachusetts, the state proves someone is criminally responsible through two points: whether the person was suffering a mental defect or disease at the time, and, if they were, whether they could still control their actions or conform to the law despite this mental illness.The state's own witnesses struck down the first point, with every expert witness on both sides agreeing that Clancy was seriously mentally ill at the time of the killings.On the second point, Reddington argued that the prosecution tried to prove she controlled her actions by presenting evidence that she could perform familiar tasks.But Reddington argued that psychiatrist Dr Paul Zeizel gave 'unrebutted testimony' that conducting familiar tasks is actually consistent with someone being in a state of psychosis. Clancy was charged with three counts of first-degree murder for killing Cora, five, Dawson, three, and Callan, eight months old, in 2023While Reddington filed several motions and sat for several TV interviews, the Plymouth County District Attorney's Office did not reveal the prosecution's plans for the case before the hearing.Patrick Clancy said in a statement earlier this month that the prospect of a second trial was 'extraordinarily painful.'In a sit-down with 60 Minutes following the mistrial, he shared that he had suffered a panic attack during a break in his testimony.Clancy's ex-husband has taken steps to rebuild his life, marrying his new wife, Dr Rachel Danis, this April.In the interview, they revealed that they are expecting their first child together.Clancy, meanwhile, remains in Tewksbury Hospital, where she receives round-the-clock care and is on suicide watch.