Psychiatrist Testifies Lindsay Clancy Knew Right From Wrong When She Killed Her Children

A forensic psychiatrist called by prosecutors in Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial testified Friday that he believes she understood the difference between right and wrong when she killed her three children, directly challenging the defense’s argument that she was experiencing postpartum psychosis.

Dr. Avram Mack took the stand on Aug. 21 as the prosecution’s first rebuttal witness after the defense concluded its case. His testimony focused on Clancy’s mental state around the time of the January 2023 killings and on whether she was legally responsible for her actions.

 

Clancy, a former labor and delivery nurse, is charged in the deaths of her children, 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson and 8-month-old Callan. Prosecutors allege that she strangled the three children before attempting to take her own life.

She has pleaded not guilty by lack of criminal responsibility. Her defense has centered on the argument that she was suffering from severe postpartum psychosis at the time.

Throughout the trial, defense witnesses have described a dramatic deterioration in Clancy’s mental health in the months leading up to the killings.

On Friday morning, psychiatrist Dr. Phillip Resnick, the defense’s final witness, testified that Clancy was experiencing what he described as “command hallucinations” that instructed her to kill her children and herself.

Resnick said Clancy appeared to be “frankly psychotic” and compared her experience to being controlled by someone else.

“It was almost like she was a puppet and someone else was pulling the strings,” Resnick testified.

Prosecutors sought to counter that conclusion with Mack, who said his review of the evidence led him to a different assessment.

Mack acknowledged that Clancy appeared to have been experiencing a major depressive episode around the time of the killings and her subsequent suicide attempt. However, he testified that he did not believe she was psychotic.

 

According to Mack, Clancy demonstrated an ability to behave normally shortly before the killings.

He pointed to the fact that she interacted appropriately with other people and had taken her daughter Cora to a medical appointment only hours before the child was killed.

“There was the ability to act normally,” Mack told the jury.

Mack also focused on something Clancy allegedly said while killing her children.

According to his testimony, Clancy told them, “Go to God.”

Mack interpreted the statement as evidence that Clancy understood what she was doing and recognized that her children were innocent. He testified that, in his opinion, the killings were carried out in a methodical manner rather than during a state in which Clancy had completely lost touch with reality.

His testimony directly conflicts with the defense’s portrayal of Clancy’s mental state.

During cross-examination, defense attorney Kevin Reddington challenged Mack’s qualifications and questioned the basis of his conclusions.

At one point, Reddington highlighted that Mack specializes in working with adolescents. Mack responded that he has broader psychiatric expertise and said he had worked with approximately 10 women experiencing postpartum psychosis since 2001.

Reddington also questioned Mack about the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, commonly known as the DSM, noting that postpartum psychosis is not currently classified as a separate disorder in the manual.

The exchange was at times tense as the defense attempted to undermine the prosecution’s rebuttal testimony.

The competing psychiatric opinions are central to the case because the defense is not simply disputing whether Clancy committed the killings. Her attorneys are arguing that her mental state rendered her criminally responsible for her actions.

Earlier in the day, Resnick testified that Clancy experienced hallucinations that commanded her to kill her children and then herself. His testimony supported the defense theory that she was acting under the influence of a severe psychotic disorder rather than making a conscious decision to commit the killings.

 

Mack, however, reached the opposite conclusion after reviewing the available evidence.

The prosecution’s rebuttal is expected to continue after Mack’s testimony. Two witnesses who had appeared on Friday’s witness list were not called, and prosecutors are expected to present additional rebuttal evidence Monday.

Once the rebuttal phase is complete, attorneys are expected to deliver their closing arguments before the case is submitted to the jury.

The conflicting testimony from Mack and Resnick leaves the jury with two dramatically different interpretations of Clancy’s state of mind: one portraying her as a mother overwhelmed by psychosis and unable to control her actions, and the other arguing that despite serious depression, she remained capable of understanding the consequences and moral significance of what she was doing.