Lindsay Clancy's Defense Has An Option That Changes Everything

**Tony Brueski** (0:01)
This is Hidden Killers Live with Tony Brueski and Robin Dre.

**Tony Brueski** (0:08)
The Lindsay Clancy trial is reaching its climax. A hung jury appears to be increasingly likely. A mistrial would mean the charges remain, the evidence remains, and the woman at the center of all of it is still sitting at Tewksbury Hospital, waiting to find out what the Commonwealth of Massachusetts plans to do. It looks like nobody is going to get a clear verdict from this trial, if that's where it goes. Not the public, not the families, not Lindsay Clancy herself. Today, we're joined by defense attorney and former prosecutor Eric Faddis to walk us through the potential road ahead if a mistrial is, in fact, declared. How quickly we'd know if there's a second trial, whether the defense has options nobody's talking about, and what a plea deal even looks like in a case where the whole argument is that the defendant wasn't responsible for what she did. Eric, if a mistrial is officially declared and the jury is sent home, what happens to Lindsay Clancy? Is it true to just go back to Tewksbury and they figure out what happens next or until the next hearing or trial?
What are the possibilities there? How quick does a DA decide, we're going to try this again, go back to the hospital or you're free? Sure.

**Eric Faddis** (1:24)
I don't think it's going to be a you're free outcome. I think what's going to happen if there is a mistrial, there are a number of steps that are going to take place. First, the judge is, unless the prosecution has already made the decision as to whether or not to retry, the judge would probably set a hearing like a week after the mistrial. Say, hey, prosecutor, you got a week. Think about this. Are you going to seek a retrial or not? If a retrial is sought, then Lindsay Clancy throughout that week and throughout the pendency of the retrial would probably remain in custody. My understanding is that she's at some mental health facility, but under law enforcement supervision.
So she could risk for a bond.
She could absolutely ask for a bond. Reddington could go to the judge and say, hey, look, this case shows how many weaknesses there are in this case. They had all of this time. They couldn't bring it together. They couldn't get a conviction. Because of these weaknesses, you should have less concern about Lindsay Clancy. She is probably going to prevail in the second trial, as Reddington would argue. Therefore, you should give her a bond. You should let her be out of custody. She's already gone through this crucible. That's what defense would argue. I think a judge would be hard pressed to release Lindsay Clancy pending a new trial. Now, if no new trial is sought, then there is no case pending. In that instance, Lindsay might be free.

**Tony Brueski** (2:49)
But what about her care, I guess, is the question. She's already stated before this trial, I want to be essentially in state care or in a mental hospital for the rest of my life. That's where that sits. Let me ask you this from a strategic standpoint. If we do have a hung jury, yes, Reddington could come say and ask for bond. That could get Lindsay out of Tewksbury. I don't know that Lindsay wants to be out of Tewksbury, or at least out of a environment where she is getting that round-the-clock care.
Right now, it's state sanctioned, it's state paid for. If you're out of that, guess what? You better have the money to pay for that care for the rest of your life.
And the optics, because if this does go to another trial and she's out on bond, half of the argument has been, look, she doesn't want to leave the mental hospital. If she left the mental hospital between trials, that kind of takes that argument away that actually does play in her favor. Wouldn't she be better off remaining in the psychiatric facility, at least through some sort of determination here in a legal sense, versus bonding out for a time being if we were to go to a second trial?

**Eric Faddis** (4:14)
I think absolutely it would be in her best legal interest to be there. In part because it preserves that argument that, hey, she's doing everything she could. She's seeking all the treatments she can seek. She's trying her darndest to get a grasp on this. It preserves that argument for defense later on.
If she were released from the facility but wanted additional care, you can always seek to commit yourself. You can say, hey, I think I'm a danger to myself and others. State, help me. Sometimes you will be accepted into programs, sometimes not. There are ways for her to remain in there if she wants to, but probably not forever unless that is the result of a legal proceeding.