Lindsay Clancy's Prosecutor Called Her Injuries WHAT?!

**Tony Brueski** (0:00)
This is The Big Breakdown, a long look back at some of the biggest stories we're covering for you at the Hidden Killers Podcast and True Crime Today. This is Hidden Killers Live with Tony Brueski and Robin Drake.

**Robin Drake** (0:16)
Now let's go back to the case that everybody's loving talking about and can't wait for it to end. The prosecution has has rested its case in the Lindsay Clancy trial. The defense will be resting soon as well. After 14 days at Plymouth Superior Court, and some of what happened inside that courtroom, has legal analysts asking whether the Plymouth County DA's office is reading the room very well. Eric Faddis is a defense attorney and former prosecutor who can help us read what's been happening. One of the best. And we'd love for your thoughts in the comments section.
Let's start here. Lindsay Clancy's former mother-in-law, Susan Clancy, told the jury Lindsay was very nurturing, a very loving mother, a wonderful mother. On cross, I mean, again, this is mother-in-law. So, see, in many cases where the mother does horrible things to the grandchildren, mom-in-law is usually one of the most vitriolic, bitch-should-die people in the case. This ain't that at all. Very nurturing, very loving, wonderful mother, her words. On cross, the prosecutor asked Susan if she was an active member of the Catholic Church. She said yes. And then, so you're aware that murder is considered a mortal sin.
The judge struck it from the record pretty damn quick. Eric, help us understand.
Was that calculated? Was that someone overstepping their bounds? Well, what do you think was going on in the minds of the ADA at that moment in time?

**Eric Faddis** (1:51)
You know, in part, the prosecution has to prove that Lindsay Clancy knew right from wrong, among a lot of other elements they have to prove. And I think this question was sort of calculated to maybe touch on that.
But it doesn't make sense because it's Lindsay Clancy's mental state that is material. It's not the mother-in-law, whether the mother-in-law thinks it's some kind of mortal sin. And in fact, when you inject the religious judgment piece to this, I think it's prosecutorial misconduct. I think you're running the risk of trying to scare these jurists, perhaps some jurists who might be religiously oriented, and say, oh, this is– didn't you know this is a mortal sin? You better punish her for that. I think it is totally improper. The judge made the right call.

**Robin Drake** (2:40)
What really– there's so many striking things in this case. And as this recording, I was just watching before we started Dr. Resnick's testimony, who is the expert on postpartum psychosis, if in the country, if not the world, really doing an amazing job explaining what the– and really dismantling what the prosecution is accusing. We'll see what happens when the jury gets it. What I'm really curious about this, Eric, because this is a very unique case on so many fronts, but one of the behavior sides that I have found very unique. I'm curious what your thoughts are on how that hits home to, since we're talking about the prosecutors, to in there. When you have an entire room– now, I'm not the entire room, because I know they have their own witnesses coming in there. But when you have– when the courtroom is filled with family, friends, colleagues, people who lived and experienced Lindsay throughout their life, going back 15, 20 and her 30-plus years of life, all standing with her on the defense side, and you're the two prosecutors in there, and you come across in these moments being very tone-deaf, how does that resonate with– resonating with them? What do you think they're feeling? How do you think they're able to– is it affecting them as prosecutors, you think? I mean, it's a very unique situation that– because I was even thinking about this. You know, when it comes to– if she's convicted, if they find her guilty and they give victim-impact statements, who?
I mean, because they're all standing with Lindsay. So, I mean, it's just– it's a very unique situation. How does that resonate as a prosecutor to them, do you think?

**Eric Faddis** (4:17)
I think as a prosecutor, you're like, whoa, I'm outnumbered.
And I think you're also like, whoa, I thought going in this case was pretty strong and people would agree with me that Lindsay was in the wrong. But gosh, look at these rows and rows of human beings who have known Lindsay her entire life, who are sticking by her. And not only the effect on the prosecutor, Robin, the effect on the jury. The jury is watching who is in that courtroom, where they're sitting, whom they're sitting behind, whom they seem to be supporting. And that could go a long way. Even though it's not technically evidence the jury is allowed to consider, you better believe they're going to say, hey, they've got dozens of people here behind this person. If she was such a monster that the prosecution was making her out to be, these folks wouldn't be here.