Lindsay Clancy’s true feelings on conspiracy theories about ex Patrick as bombshell development sparks plan to clear her

LINDSAY Clancy has revealed her true feelings about wild conspiracy theories targeting her ex-husband Patrick as her lawyer launches a bombshell bid to clear her. The mom, whose murder trial ended in a dramatic 11-1 deadlock last week, is said to be well aware of the online storm that has engulfed the case. Lindsay Clancy rejects conspiracy theories targeting her ex-husband Patrick, according to her attorney Credit: Getty Her lawyer, Kevin Reddington, also plans to file a motion to prevent a retrial for Clancy Credit: X/CBSMornings Patrick’s lawyers have hit back at the online speculation, branding it a ‘campaign of misinformation’ Credit: Reuters Lindsay Clancy, 36, has admitted killing her three children – Cora, five, Dawson, three, and eight-month-old Callan Credit: Facebook But despite claims pushed by internet sleuths accusing Patrick of being involved in the deaths of their three young children, Clancy rejects the theories, according to her attorney Kevin Reddington. “She knows, and it’s readily apparent that Patrick has been set upon and his life has been turned upside down into a nightmare that he doesn’t deserve. Period. Full stop,” Reddington told NBC News. Sign up for The Sun newsletter Thank you! The lawyer said Clancy knows her blockbuster trial has exploded across social media, where amateur sleuths have picked apart evidence and testimony. But he insisted she does not share their suspicions about Patrick. Read more on Lindsay CLancy Reddington also mounted a full-throated defense of Clancy’s ex during an interview with CBS Mornings. He said: “It’s obvious that Patrick was a man who stood by his wife through all of the difficulty of the medical issues, the psychiatric issues, the pharmaceutical issues, and even up to the time of trial and even afterwards, and the man ought to be able to move on with his life and stop with the speculation. “And horrific conspiracy allegations that he was involved with some massive conspiracy to kill his children.” Asked what he would say to those still pushing the theories, Reddington added: “As I’ve said before, I think that it’s horrific what this man has been going through, and he’s entitled to move on with his life. Most read in The Sun “And the fact that he’s moved on with his life. “And still is standing by Lindsay as far as the legal issues tells the tale.” Patrick’s lawyers have also hit back at the online speculation, branding it a “campaign of misinformation.” They accused true-crime creators of “publishing what they know to be outright falsehoods that Patrick was somehow involved in the death of his young children and other vile claims.” Lindsay Clancy timeline: What happened on January 24, 2023? On January 24, 2023, Patrick Clancy returned home from running errands to find his then-wife Lindsay on the ground in the backyard of their home. Lindsay had jumped from their second-story bedroom window after cutting herself and crushing up pills. Just minutes before, she had strangled their three children – Cora, Dawson and Callan – to death with exercise bands in the basement of their home. Read the full timeline of January 24, 2023 here. Read the full timeline of Patrick Clancy’s steps here. Read about the kids’ final hours before their deaths here. Read about what happened in the four months leading up to January 24, 2023, here. His legal team warned that “every appropriate measure will be pursued to hold them accountable, including legally,” adding that “law enforcement has been notified.” It comes as Reddington revealed a fresh plan that could potentially end Clancy’s prosecution without another trial. He told CBS Mornings he intends to file a motion seeking to bar prosecutors from trying the 36-year-old again on double jeopardy grounds. The dramatic move follows revelations from jurors about what allegedly unfolded behind closed doors during 38 hours of deliberations. Clancy was accused of killing her three children – Cora, five, Dawson, three, and eight-month-old Callan – at the family home in Duxbury, Massachusetts, in January 2023. Both sides agreed Clancy killed the youngsters, but the six-week trial centered on whether she was criminally responsible for her actions. Her defense argued she was suffering from postpartum psychosis and experiencing auditory hallucinations that compelled her to kill the children. Prosecutors argued she knew right from wrong and had planned the killings. Jurors could have convicted her of first-degree murder, second-degree murder or manslaughter, or found her not guilty because of a lack of criminal responsibility. But Judge William Sullivan declared a mistrial on Friday after the panel repeatedly said it was hopelessly deadlocked. Three jurors have since told NBC Boston that the final split was 11-1, with the majority favoring a finding of not guilty by reason of a lack of criminal responsibility. They claimed the sole holdout wanted to convict Clancy despite allegedly acknowledging there was reasonable doubt. Reddington now believes what happened during those deliberations could provide grounds to stop a retrial. Asked whether he would file a motion to bar another trial following the jurors’ revelations, he said: “Yeah, and we’re going to be arguing it in front of Judge Sullivan on the 29th along with the other motion.” He explained: “That motion, it’ll be a motion to dismiss based on what’s called double jeopardy grounds because there’s no, the term is manifest necessity. “You have to have a Manifest necessity to declare a mistrial for obvious reasons.” Reddington had furiously complained about the holdout juror before the mistrial was declared. He has since stressed he would defend anyone’s right to disagree with the rest of a jury — but claimed the issue was an alleged refusal to follow the law. “I would defend that person’s right to be a holdout for a month,” he told CBS. “I mean that’s what the system is based on.” But he added: “But when the poor lady indicated clearly and unequivocally in the jury question. “That this person had doubt, reasonable doubt, as we know now, and just refused to listen to the judge’s instruction on the law, that’s when I was upset because that’s why I used the expressions and the terms that I did about it just wasn’t right.” Prosecutors must now decide whether to put Clancy through a second trial, with the next hearing scheduled for September 29. Reddington has even appealed to President Donald Trump for help despite acknowledging that Trump cannot pardon Clancy because she faces state, rather than federal, charges. He hopes the President, who has commented on the case, could instead encourage someone to look into it and potentially reach Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz. “I’d love to have Donald call Tim,” Reddington said. Asked if presidential intervention would be appropriate, he replied: “If it helps resolve this tragic case, I don’t really care.” Comment now