Lindsay Clancy's lawyer files to have her case THROWN OUT for good... arguing state failed to prove its case and she should not face a retrial

Lindsay Clancy is fighting to have her case thrown out for good, arguing that the state failed to prove she was in control of her actions when she strangled her three young children.In a new motion, filed in Plymouth County Superior Court on Thursday, Clancy's defense attorney Kevin Reddington argues that the Plymouth County District Attorney's Office should not be able to try the case for a second time.Instead, he is calling on the court to return a required finding of not guilty on all charges because the prosecution does not have sufficient evidence to prove the 36-year-old was criminally responsible for the killings. The renewed motion comes days after a mistrial was declared on Friday, when the jury of nine women and three men failed to reach a unanimous verdict.The outcome came down to a lone male holdout who refused to join the 11 other jurors in finding her not guilty by reason of insanity.In an unprecedented and contentious final 24 hours, the foreperson sent two messages to the judge accusing the holdout of expressing reasonable doubt, but of refusing to follow the law.Reddington called for the holdout to be struck from the case if they were not following the law.Judge William Sullivan declined and, just hours later, with the jury returning deadlocked once again, a mistrial was declared. Lindsay Clancy is now fighting to have her case thrown out arguing the state should not be able to try her a second time Clancy was charged with three counts of first-degree murder for killing Cora, five, Dawson, three, and Callan, eight months old, on January 24, 2023 But, in the new filing, the defense is not zeroing in on the alleged actions of the holdout juror.Instead, Reddington argues that prosecutors simply did not present sufficient evidence in their case.The motion asks the court to 'enter a finding of not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility on each indictment.'Reddington wants the motion to be argued at the next hearing in the case, scheduled for September 29. Clancy was 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 affluent suburb of Duxbury, Massachusetts, on January 24, 2023.The former delivery nurse strangled the children with exercise bands in the basement then tried to kill herself - cutting her wrists and neck before jumping from the second-floor bedroom window.It was a case where postpartum mental illness and criminal responsibility took center stage, with the trial being closely watched all across the globe.Prosecutors alleged that Clancy was of sound mind when she killed the children. Clancy, meanwhile, did not deny killing her children. Cora, five, Dawson, three, and eight-month-old Callan were strangled at the family home in January 2023But her defense argued she was not guilty by reason of insanity, because she was suffering from severe postpartum depression and psychosis at the time. During the trial, jurors heard that Clancy had heard a voice telling her to kill the children and herself - saying it was her 'last chance.' The jury was faced with determining whether or not Clancy was criminally responsible: whether or not she was suffering a mental defect or disease at the time, and whether or not she could still control her actions or conform to the law despite her mental illness.Could deaths have been prevented?Hi, I'm Rachel Sharp, US Editor of The Crime Desk. In our bonus podcast episode, we examine Lindsay Clancy's complex medical history and explore the questions at the heart of this case. Click here, subscribe and listen. In the new filing, Reddington argues that the prosecution failed to prove its case on both points.'The government did not present evidence that allows a juror earnestly seeking the truth to determine that the defendant's guilt on the crime was proved on each element of the offense,' the filing reads.The state's own witnesses struck down the first point, the filing argues, pointing out that every expert witness on both sides agreed that Clancy was seriously mentally ill at the time of the killings. 'The Commonwealth's case therefore rested entirely on the second route,' the defense argues, something 'it did not' prove beyond reasonable doubt. According to the defense, the prosecution used four pieces of evidence to try to prove she was still in control of her actions: that she 'could drive, place a call to a pediatrician, and send her husband on errands that day; that the killings involved a sequence of choices over roughly eighteen to twenty minutes; that she had searched the internet about medications, psychosis, and related topics in the preceding weeks; and that her later accounts of the voice she heard were inconsistent.''Taken at their strongest, these show that Ms. Clancy could perform familiar tasks and act in sequence. They do not show that she could appreciate her wrongfulness or conform her conduct to the law. That is the element. Nothing else counts,' the filing argues. Kevin Reddington wants the motion to be argued when the two sides return to court later this month The three-bedroom home in the wealthy suburb of Duxbury where Patrick and Lindsay Clancy lived with their childrenReddington argues that Dr Paul Zeizel, a psychiatrist working for the defense, gave 'unrebutted testimony' that someone in a state of psychosis can carry out familiar tasks such as driving and that hallucinations are intermittent not constant.He argues that the state's insufficient evidence is the basis of an acquittal on all charges - and should bar a retrial.In the filing, Reddington also makes it clear that this argument 'does not rest on the jury's division' - despite the claims that continue to emerge about the lone holdout.