Susan Clancy
Defense
- Role
- The defendant's former mother-in-law, mother of Patrick Clancy. A nurse in labor and delivery for about 38 years; the outlets render her title differently — the Boston Globe calls her a registered nurse, Boston 25 a nurse practitioner at South Shore Hospital, ABC News a former labor-and-delivery nurse, and East Idaho News gives only the 38 years in labor and delivery. She had briefly supervised the defendant when the defendant was a student.
- Direct
- Reddington
- Cross
- Buckingham
- TESTIMONY COMPLETE. Called first, at about 09:34 to 09:42 depending on the outlet, and stepped down at about 10:08 to 10:11. Direct, cross-examination, redirect and a further round of prosecution questions all took place within roughly 35 minutes.
- The relationship. She described a very good relationship with the defendant and a beautiful relationship with the children, seeing the family a couple of times a month.
- Her view of the defendant as a mother. Very nurturing, very loving, a wonderful mother who loved all her children very much.
- November 2022. The defendant reached out saying she felt unwell, with insomnia, loss of appetite, and feeling very anxious and sad. Asked whether the defendant was seeking help, she said very much so — she was begging for help.
- The referral. She put the defendant in touch with colleagues running a perinatal program; ABC News names it as South Shore Health's Perinatal Behavioral Health Program, East Idaho News refers to colleagues at South Shore Medical Clinic, and the Boston Globe reports that she recommended the psychiatric nurse practitioner Julie Paul. East Idaho News adds that she is familiar with Dr. Margaret Spinelli, an expert in postpartum illness, but denied reaching out to her about this case.
- The text messages. The jury was shown messages between the two women, which East Idaho News describes as coming in through a device extraction report. In them the defendant said she had never been this depressed and that it had been brought on by the medication; that she feared she was becoming dependent on benzodiazepines but could not sleep without them, and that when Susan Clancy suggested stopping she said she could not; that no one was hearing that or addressing it; and, in a message boston.com dates to November 30, 2022, that she was not okay and was terrified of taking her medication that night.
- On the medication generally she said there were a lot of medications and that it seemed confusing, and that she and the defendant were in touch by text daily.
- REDIRECT (East Idaho News, at about 09:57). Reddington drew from her that the defendant had called suicide hotlines twice and been turned away, and had been declined admission to a mental-health clinic. She confirmed both.
- CROSS — the in-laws' distance from the household. She agreed the children never had sleepovers at her house; she and her husband never stayed overnight at the Clancy home; and the family had decided together that the children were best in their own beds with their own belongings, with the defendant's parents actively helping out. She had not attended the defendant's medical appointments.
- CROSS — what the defendant told her therapists. Buckingham put to her that the defendant had told therapists she was not close with her in-laws and did not generally allow them to watch the children, and that she had given no particular reason for it. Susan Clancy said she did not know any of that.
- CROSS — prior inconsistent statement. Buckingham read from Susan Clancy's grand jury testimony, in which she had said that things were better around Thanksgiving. She did not recall saying it (East Idaho News).
- CROSS — the civil suit. East Idaho News alone reports Buckingham asking whether she knew that Julie Paul, the provider she had recommended, is one of the few of the defendant's medical providers not named in the pending litigation. She was uncertain.
- CROSS — the November emergency room visit. She met the defendant at the South Shore Hospital emergency department, where the defendant had driven herself and stayed one to two hours before leaving in her own car. The defendant reported heart palpitations, sleep trouble and anxiety after taking a cannabis gummy. Asked whether THC or CBD could cause a faster heartbeat or anxiety, she said she did not know.
- CROSS — the mortal sin question, and the strike. Buckingham established that she is an active Catholic, that the family had a Christmas Day breakfast which she remembered as great and a church service she remembered as beautiful, and that the defendant had said she was glad she went. Buckingham then asked whether she was aware that murder is considered a mortal sin. Judge Sullivan called counsel to sidebar and struck the question, instructing the jury that they were not to consider it for any reason or any purpose. Boston 25 reports the question and answer both stricken at about 10:03.
- CROSS — January. Asked whether she was at the house much between January 7 and January 24 she answered that she did not remember, and Boston 25 records her answering in one or two words through this part of the cross. She was aware of the defendant's January hospital stay and of a Museum of Science visit.
- WHAT SHE COULD NOT SAY. She did not know what the defendant had told her therapists about the in-laws; did not recall her own grand jury answer about Thanksgiving; did not know whether cannabis could have produced the emergency-room symptoms; did not remember how often she was at the house in the weeks before January 24; and was not present at any of the defendant's appointments.