The Toll of Jury Duty: The Lindsay Clancy Trial

Shanelle Kaul (0:00)

As a warning, some of this content contains graphic and disturbing details, including references to the killing of children. So please listen or watch with care. We'll have resources for you at the end of the episode.

You know, I remember the moment the 911 call played in court. I don't think there was a single person who didn't feel or look emotional. What was that like for you?

Paula Devlin (0:26)

It was heartbreaking, heart-wrenching.

It was devastating too. And it hurt physically to hear somebody have that much pain and know why they had that pain. And it was something that, you know, we weren't expecting it to be like that. It wasn't a sound that anybody ever had heard before. You know, that was so deep. The anguish, the pain. And it's, you know, people scream all the time. And this was completely different. And it was difficult. And we had hoped that we would never have to hear it again.

And we did.

Shanelle Kaul (1:21)

That was Paula Devlin, a juror who served on the Commonwealth versus Lindsay Clancy. I sat down with Paula to better understand the complexity of deliberating on such a high profile and highly contested case. But there was something else that came through in my conversation with her. The mental and emotional sacrifice of serving on a jury like this. I'm CBS News correspondent, Shanelle Kaul. And in this special episode of Case by Case, we're really getting into what it takes to serve on a high stakes jury.

Lindsay Clancy, of course, is the Duxbury mother tried for killing her three young children, Cora, Dawson and Callan. This case ended in a mistrial, and it was marked by some pretty intense testimonies and graphic evidence. This includes autopsy photos of eight-month-old Callan Clancy and that chilly 911 call that Lindsay's ex-husband Patrick made on the night of the killings. If Paula's experience here is any indication, the details of this case will stick with everyone in the courtroom for a very long time.

Now, each year, about 15 million people here in the US are summoned for jury duty. This act of civic responsibility can really expose everyday Americans to some disturbing evidence from some of the most brutal crimes across the country.

We've seen what grueling trials can really do to witnesses, the families of victims, and sometimes even those on trial themselves. But what about the jurors who also experience some of the darkest details? Today, we're joined by Dr. Michelle DiBlasi, the Chief of Inpatient Psychiatry at Tufts Medical Center in Boston. Dr. DiBlasi monitored the Clancy case closely, just like a lot of us, and she offered her expertise to this growing conversation around mental health. Dr. DiBlasi, thank you so much for being here with us today.

Michelle DiBlasi (3:09)

Thanks for having me, Shanelle.

Shanelle Kaul (3:11)

There's so much that I want to get into here, but being a Boston-based psychiatrist, I can only imagine how often the Clancy case was discussed in your professional circles, around the water cooler, in your group chats. I mean, what has it been like for you following this case?

Michelle DiBlasi (3:26)

Yeah, I think a lot of people have been talking about it in the professional offices, just like they are outside of it. I mean, this is a really horrific crime, but it's something that involves mental health. And so a lot of people have been talking about it, talking about the case and discussing those things. It's also a rare situation where, you know, in psychiatry, we don't often see a lot of violent crimes. In fact, we know that people with serious mental illness oftentimes are actually more the victims of crimes versus the perpetrators. And so this is a very rare situation, and so it's causing a lot of people to be talking about it.

Shanelle Kaul (4:11)

That's so interesting to me. So from a mental health perspective, like I wonder how those conversations were going, because I remember going into this story on day one of the trial. I don't think anybody anticipated that people were going to be so sympathetic and compassionate in large part to a woman who admitted to killing her children.

Michelle DiBlasi (4:31)

I think that it's brought in a lot of polarizing views, because a lot of people are talking about mental health and having compassion now for people with mental health issues, especially women who are post-partum. In some ways, it's positive in terms that people are talking now about mental health and what resources we have available, and how many women, for example, are impacted by post-partum mental health issues. In that way, it is positive despite such a horrific situation and horrific crime.