Livestream: Lindsay Clancy murder trial enters second week after jurors hear from more first responders 18%

By Abby Patkin36%

8/3/2026, 6:00:24 AM

Topics: Crime, Trial

BS Summary: This article contains 13 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Appeal to Emotion, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 30% saturation with 113 hits. Analysis detected 551 faulty-reasoning hits from 377 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 26.7% and a BS Rank of 18% (23,249 of 28,112 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 82.70% of the article peer group.

Testimony resumes Monday following an emotional first week in the Duxbury mother’s trial. 
Clancy, now 35, does not deny that she killed 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson, and 8-month-old Callan at home in Duxbury on Jan. 
24, 2023. 
However, she has pleaded not guilty under what’s commonly known as an insanity defense as she argues she was wracked by postpartum mental illness and heard a voice in her head that instructed her to kill. 
Prosecutors, meanwhile, argue Clancy no longer liked her life as a mother and “deliberately and meticulously” strangled her children with exercise bands before attempting suicide  an act that left her paralyzed. 
After visiting the Clancy family’s former home Friday morning during a view, jurors heard from two Duxbury police officers who testified that Clancy seemed to be “sedated and unconscious” in the hospital the night of Jan. 24, with several cuts to her arms and neck. 
One of them, Officer Richard Lippard, told jurors Clancy experienced a life-threatening medical emergency known as a “code blue” while under his guard at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston. 
“That kind of amped up the bedlam at that point, didn’t it?” 
defense attorney Kevin Reddington asked. 
“Yes, sir,” Lippard replied. 
“There were people running from all over and you could hear on the [overhead] microphone, ‘code blue,’ with the room being identified, right?” 
Reddington questioned. 
“And that meant that she was dead or dying, right?” 
Lippard answered “yes” to both questions. 
Separately, two doctors who treated Dawson and Callan Clancy at Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital-Plymouth testified about their resuscitation efforts. 
Former emergency physician Dr. 
Mark Tenerowicz recalled that hospital staff worked on Dawson for about 40 minutes before realizing his heart would likely never restart. 
He said he declared the boy dead at about 7:28 p.m. 
Emergency physician Dr. 
Benjamin Kaufman testified that hospital staff were able to regain a pulse for Callan and continued life-saving efforts as they prepared to transfer him to Boston Children’s Hospital. 
“At no point did he exhibit any brain function,” Kaufman testified. 
Callan ultimately died days later at Boston Children’s Hospital. 
Across the courtroom, Clancy covered her face as she wept during the doctors’ testimony. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.8%Abby Patkin: 3.3%Boston.com: 1.9%Confirmation Bias5.8%This article: 8.5%Abby Patkin: 2.4%Boston.com: 0.8%Anchoring Bias8.5%This article: 14.9%Abby Patkin: 2.3%Boston.com: 2.3%Availability Heuristic14.9%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 1.3%Boston.com: 0.6%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 2.4%Abby Patkin: 0.1%Boston.com: 0.4%Hindsight Bias2.4%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.5%Boston.com: 1.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 12.7%Abby Patkin: 4.2%Boston.com: 4.6%Framing Effect12.7%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 1.4%Boston.com: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.4%Boston.com: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.5%Boston.com: 1.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 1.5%Boston.com: 0.9%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 24.1%Abby Patkin: 9.7%Boston.com: 4.9%Negativity Bias24.1%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.5%Boston.com: 1.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 1.5%Boston.com: 0.4%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 3.7%Abby Patkin: 0.1%Boston.com: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias3.7%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.7%Boston.com: 2.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.4%Abby Patkin: 0.7%Boston.com: 1.1%Recency Bias3.4%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.5%Boston.com: 0.2%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.2%Boston.com: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 16.4%Abby Patkin: 2.1%Boston.com: 2.7%Appeal to Authority16.4%This article: 2.7%Abby Patkin: 2.0%Boston.com: 0.8%False Dilemma2.7%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.4%Boston.com: 0.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 3.2%Boston.com: 2.4%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.6%Boston.com: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.1%Boston.com: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 15.4%Abby Patkin: 6.7%Boston.com: 4.4%Appeal to Emotion15.4%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.1%Boston.com: 0.3%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.7%Boston.com: 1.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.2%Boston.com: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.2%Boston.com: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 1.1%Boston.com: 1.8%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.6%Boston.com: 0.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.1%Boston.com: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 6.1%Abby Patkin: 1.5%Boston.com: 0.9%Unattributed Quote6.1%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 1.5%Boston.com: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 30.0%Abby Patkin: 4.0%Boston.com: 3.3%Biased Writer Voice30.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.2%Boston.com: 1.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 0.0%Boston.com: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Abby Patkin: 1.1%Boston.com: 1.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

377 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers39%attributed speech231writer words
Selected voice

Kevin Reddington

94%flagged-word coverage
35 attributed words24% of attributed speech79% writer coverage
0%35.0%70.0%Unattributed Quote+65.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%Kevin Reddington: 65.7%65.7%Biased Writer Voice-48.9 ptsWriter: 48.9%Kevin 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.