PLYMOUTH, Mass. (WPRI) — Patrick Clancy, Lindsay’s former husband who has since remarried, has filed a motion with the judge requesting that the public, including the media, be barred from viewing and sharing certain sensitive evidence that is scheduled to be presented during the start of Lindsay’s triple-murder trial.

In particular, Patrick is seeking to keep the public from hearing the 911 call he placed right after he discovered his three children unresponsive in the basement of their home on Summer Street in January 2023.

He also wants the court to prevent the public from seeing or sharing photos of his three children. These would include pictures taken before the children’s deaths, images captured at the crime scene, and photos taken during the autopsies. He is asking this restriction to remain in place throughout the entire trial.

“The potential harmful and everlasting emotional impact to Mr. Clancy and his family of any public dissemination of such graphic and sensational evidence and exhibits related to his three children is immeasurable,” Patrick’s attorney, David Meier, stated in the motion. “Likewise, the disrespect for the dignity and memory of the three child victims that would inherently be occasioned by such dissemination speaks for itself.”

Meier added that Patrick is “not seeking to close the courtroom” or prevent the public and media from hearing witness testimony.

“Mr. Clancy seeks a narrowly circumscribed order limiting the recording, display, and disclosure by the media (or any other persons) of certain graphic and sensational items of evidence related to his three young children, which, if disseminated, would only serve to perpetuate the already severe emotional harm to Mr. Clancy and his family,” he continued.

Jury selection is expected to finish soon, with Judge William Sullivan having seated 17 jurors by Wednesday afternoon. His target is to pick the final, 18th juror on Thursday before ruling on Patrick’s motion.

The prosecution and defense plan to call more than 200 witnesses in total, including Patrick himself, during Lindsay’s trial, which is expected to last at least six weeks.

Lindsay, 35, is accused of strangling her three children with exercise bands before attempting to take her own life by jumping from a second-story window at the family home.

Her two older children, 5-year-old Cora Clancy and 3-year-old Dawson Clancy, were rushed to the hospital and later pronounced dead. Her youngest child, 7-month-old Callan Clancy, spent several days in the hospital before dying from his injuries.

Although Lindsay survived the fall, she suffered a severe spinal cord injury and is now paralyzed from the waist down. She continues to receive treatment at Tewksbury Hospital.

Prosecutors have argued that Lindsay planned to kill her three children by arranging for her husband to pick up takeout from a restaurant they did not normally visit. She is also said to have used Apple Maps to figure out how long it would take him to return home.

Her attorney, Kevin Reddington, has repeatedly claimed that Lindsay was seeking treatment for postpartum depression and was overprescribed psychiatric medication. Reddington plans to argue lack of criminal responsibility, which was previously known as an insanity defense.

Lindsay pleaded not guilty to three counts of murder in October 2023. She was also charged with three counts of strangulation; however, those charges were dismissed last week after the Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office determined they were redundant.

This motion comes amid intense pre-trial efforts by both sides to control how graphic and emotional evidence is handled. Prosecutors have pushed to introduce the 911 call Patrick made after finding his wife injured and the children unresponsive, along with autopsy and crime-scene photographs of the children and even a jury visit to the former family home. Defense lawyers, including Meier, are now fighting for restrictions specifically on Patrick’s own emotional outburst on the call and the visual depictions of his late children.

In the broader context of the case, Lindsay has maintained she was struggling with severe postpartum mental illness that caused her to hear commanding voices. Her lawyers argue she lacked the mental capacity to form the intent required for murder. They have not disputed that she was the one who placed the exercise bands around her children’s necks and jumped from the window, but they seek to establish she was not responsible under the law because of the conditions she was experiencing after the birth of Callan.

The trial is one of the most closely watched in Massachusetts in recent years due to its combination of high-profile allegations, young victims, and competing legal theories about criminal responsibility. With more than 200 potential witnesses expected to be called—ranging from first responders to medical experts—the courtroom is preparing for a lengthy proceeding that could stretch into weeks.

Jury selection has moved quickly. By mid-July, 12 jurors had been seated, and by Wednesday, 17 had been chosen. The judge’s aim is to finalize the panel on Thursday so that opening statements can begin shortly afterward. Each side has already filed motions to limit or prioritize certain testimony, including efforts to reduce the number of first responders called and to manage the use of any expert witnesses.

The heart of the case rests on whether Lindsay acted with full awareness and intent or whether she was operating under a mental state that the law does not hold accountable. Prosecutors point to the deliberate planning they believe she undertook—sending Patrick on an errand to a restaurant he rarely visited and using maps to time his return—as evidence of conscious decision-making. They also highlight the 911 call as a raw, unscripted record that captures the moment of horror and underscores the timeline of events.

For Patrick, the emotional toll of losing three young children in such a brutal manner has been described as immeasurable. Allowing the public, especially through media outlets, to see and share autopsy images or hear his initial reaction on the phone could prolong that suffering for him and his current family. Defense attorneys argue that such material, while potentially relevant, should be kept out of the public eye to protect the dignity of the victims and avoid causing further harm.

The judge will weigh these competing interests carefully. Courtroom closures are rarely granted, but narrowly tailored orders limiting media access to specific exhibits—such as the 911 recording or photographs—are sometimes approved when the potential harm clearly outweighs the public’s right to information.

Lindsay herself remains in a wheelchair, a permanent consequence of her own injuries from the fall. Her condition has drawn public sympathy from some observers who believe her struggles with postpartum depression were genuine and that any overmedication may have played a role. Others see the case differently, viewing the deaths as calculated.

Either way, the trial is now entering its evidentiary phase. Whatever ruling comes down on Patrick’s motion will shape how the jury first encounters the raw details of what happened that January day in 2023. The outcome could determine not only Lindsay’s fate but also how similar cases involving mental-health issues and infanticide are understood in the future.

As the clock ticks toward jury selection’s end and the start of trial, everyone involved—attorneys, parties, and observers—recognizes that this is far more than a criminal case. It is a deeply personal tragedy unfolding in a public setting, one where the boundaries between justice, media rights, and compassion will be tested in real time.