Lindsay Clancy: Focus shifts to murder counts as trial nears 13%

By John R. Ellement2%

7/10/2026, 2:48:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 10 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Authority, and False Dilemma, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 31% saturation with 90 hits. Analysis detected 405 faulty-reasoning hits from 290 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 29.1% and a BS Rank of 13% (19,235 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 87.90% of the article peer group.

Attorney Kevin Reddington with his client Lindsay Clancy during a June hearing in Plymouth Superior Court. 
Lindsay Clancy appears in Plymouth Superior Court for a pretrial conference before her July trial for 
the murder of her three children in Duxbury 2023. 
Thursday June 18, 2026 
Greg Derr/The Patriot Ledger 
Prosecutors have dropped strangulation charges against Lindsay Clancy, a move to focus the jury’s attention on the three murder charges against her, court records show. 
Plymouth District Attorney Timothy J. 
Cruz’s office said the charges are duplicative since the basis of the murder charges is that Clancy killed her children by strangling them, court records said. 
The strangulation charges will “be subsumed into the murder charges” and are “therefore redundant,” prosecutors wrote Wednesday. 
The dropped charge comes as both prosecutors and Clancy’s defense prepare for the trial, slated to begin July 20. 
Her lawyer, Kevin J. 
Reddington, has indicated that he will pursue what’s commonly known as an insanity defense at trial. 
He has asserted that Clancy was overmedicated at the time of the killings, on 13 different drugs as she contended with postpartum issues, a regimen that he said led to “homicidal ideation, suicidal ideation.” 
Should jurors acquit Clancy under that scenario, she would not go free but would be sent to a state psychiatric hospital, where she’d come up for periodic reviews to determine whether she could live safely in the community. 
A conviction for first-degree murder carries an automatic life without parole sentence. 
Her trial will also be automatically reviewed by the Supreme Judicial Court. 
Information from previous Globe reporting was used in this report. 
John R. 
Ellement can be reached at john.ellement@globe.com . 
Follow him @JREbosglobe . 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 11.7%John R. Ellement: 2.1%Boston Globe: 3.0%Confirmation Bias11.7%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 1.0%Boston Globe: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 11.7%John R. Ellement: 2.0%Boston Globe: 3.3%Availability Heuristic11.7%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.2%Boston Globe: 1.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 31.0%John R. Ellement: 5.7%Boston Globe: 5.2%Framing Effect31.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 2.0%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 1.3%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 20.3%John R. Ellement: 3.0%Boston Globe: 7.9%Negativity Bias20.3%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 2.0%Boston Globe: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 1.3%Boston Globe: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 11.7%John R. Ellement: 1.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias11.7%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.8%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 4.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 1.4%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.7%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 18.6%John R. Ellement: 3.0%Boston Globe: 3.8%Appeal to Authority18.6%This article: 13.1%John R. Ellement: 1.1%Boston Globe: 1.1%False Dilemma13.1%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.5%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.8%Boston Globe: 2.8%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 4.4%Boston Globe: 5.5%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 5.9%John R. Ellement: 0.7%Boston Globe: 0.6%Begging the Question5.9%This article: 11.7%John R. Ellement: 1.0%Boston Globe: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)11.7%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 2.0%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.9%Boston Globe: 1.5%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.1%Boston Globe: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 2.1%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.7%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%John R. Ellement: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 3.8%John R. Ellement: 0.6%Boston Globe: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…3.8%

290 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers31%attributed speech199writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageGreg Derr • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coveragePlymouth District Attorney • 5 words • 0.0% coveragePlymouth District Attorney • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageKevin J. Reddington • 4 words • 0.0% coverageKevin J. Reddington • 16 words • 0.0% coverageKevin J. Reddington • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageJohn R. Ellement • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Kevin J. Reddington

93%flagged-word coverage
54 attributed words59% of attributed speech67% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -5.5 ptsWriter: 5.5%Kevin J. Reddington: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.