Lindsay Clancy Murder Trial: Day 7 of Testimony in Murder of Cora, Dawson and Callan Clancy

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: day seven incoming of live testimony in the Lindsay Clancy trial. This is the second week and again the seventh day of testimony coming to you from here in Miami Beach but the trial is coming to you from Plymouth, Massachusetts from the courthouse in the great commonwealth of Massachusetts and the debate continues. Was Lindsay Clancy mentally responsible or not at the time of these triple murders? Should she go to a state prison or should she go into a state hospital where a judge ultimately decides her fate? Either way she's not going [00:00:46] Speaker 2: home anytime soon. Welcome to the global phenomenon surviving the survivor. Here's your host Emmy [00:00:52] Speaker 1: award-winning journalist Joel Waldman. What's up SDS Nation? Welcome to surviving the survivor. This is the global phenomenon bringing you the very best guests in all of true crime. Seeing a bunch of countries coming to us and amazing states like Indiana. I was shocked to wake up to the Perez Hilton news. Much of the world is and it's particularly poignant in light of the trial we are covering. It was about 10 o'clock last night when I first saw an ex post. If you do not know what happened last night, if you do not know who Perez Hilton is, he is the original, arguably the original influencer before social media was he is really a thing. Let me just say hello here to Northern Ireland. I love it. Welcome in Northern Ireland. Funny accents and all. We love you. And Orlando is here as well. So from Orlando to Ireland, you can't get much more global than that. Do you ever sleep? Someone asked. Not last night. I did not. Luckily, today is a half day of court. But for those who do not know who Perez Hilton is or what happened last night, he is the original influencer. He and Harvey Levin, he and Harvey Levin, you know, who started TMZ, they're really among the first sort of individuals to cover celebrity news and celebrity gossip. And Perez Hilton made a huge name for himself. And I'll be honest, I don't know his entire story. He had a downfall. He disappeared for a while. He came back and he was stronger than ever. He had well over a million TikTok followers. And while on a live last night, sometime around 10 o'clock Eastern time. He apparently suffered a very severe mental breakdown. He was seen on TikTok on a live, completely naked for the world to see all. And he was literally just slathered in blood. He was also holding, and this is a trigger warning, but he was holding a butcher's knife and threatening harm to himself, essentially saying that it was for his three children. Now he is an openly gay man who spent most of his career in Hollywood California, but he is originally from Miami, which I didn't know. And his real name is Mario Lavendera Jr. So last night, he recently moved back to Miami. He is living with his mother and his three children who he has through a surrogacy. And last night, everything went wrong that could possibly go wrong. I strongly urge you not to watch the videos. I've seen just about everything over a 30-year period and also being the child of a psychiatrist and a social worker. This is something that you don't want to see, and it will stay seared on your brain forever. So I highly recommend that you don't do that. Lisa Cox, thank you. And thank you to South Africa for being here. And also, for those around the world who don't know, this is a very famous town, Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania. It is the home of that little, what is it? Is it a hedgehog? What is that? What is that thing? Anyway, he decides whether I just, I'm blanking because I didn't sleep last night. It's a big fat squirrel, but it's not a squirrel. And it tells you, it's maybe a stunt to gain followers. If that is where you're at with your head, you're not in a healthy place either. By all intents and purposes, it was all very real. The COE and I were debating back and forth because it's not typically what we discuss or do or our style for surviving the survivor. And then we both said, well, listen, it's a groundhog. That's what it is. Fill the groundhog. Well, we were talking and we were saying, look, whatever your feelings are on the Lindsay Clancy trial, it is also devastatingly sad. And a lot of people do believe that it was some sort of psychotic break that caused her to take her three children's lives. And so we were talking about it and I said, you know, it's important to illuminate this. So when I figured out where in Miami he is, which was not so easy, I decided, let me go down there. I used to work in Miami for the CBS station, which I did twice. And I worked, as I think a lot of you know, for Fox News Channel, and I used to spend a lot of time. So I know people and I figured, let me go down there and see what, if anything, I can find out because details were very sketchy. The first person I bumped into was a public information officer whose job is literally to inform the public. And he is a Miami-Dade County Sheriff's deputy. And he confirmed to me, because at the time it was not confirmed that it was Perez Hilton. I don't even know that they've actually confirmed that yet because now there are HIPAA laws. So he confirmed to me that in fact, it was Perez Hilton. The long story short is there is a YouTube video up on our channel that is about 16 or 17 minutes under the video tab. And if you want to see what it was like last night with all this happening, feel free to go to our video tab and you can watch it there. You know, I get the usual assortment of comments after something along these lines. Great job. Thank you for covering. Also, there are people who are really suffering with their mental health. I ended that video saying that you're out here to help you. And as bad as the world seems, sometimes there are far more good people than bad people in this world. And if you're feeling alone or not loved or you're at a breaking point, um, I tell my kids, uh, train your brain. The brain is a very powerful thing. Um, and you're not alone. And even if you feel like it's it and you're in your breaking, uh, there'll be someone there to catch you. So that's why we decided to go out and cover this to just kind of hopefully raise some awareness about that. I really appreciate this comment. Uh, I always feel STS is the most passionate and trustworthy channel. Keep well and look after each other STS family. Uh, thank you. And I really do feel by the way, like we are a family here, uh, at STS. I really, I really do feel that way. Um, so we should all be here, uh, to take care of each other. Carm Carmelo. Uh, she is, uh, the mother, the matriarch of this, uh, amazing community, and there's no stronger woman. You guys know my mom is a child Holocaust survivor, a licensed therapist. Um, she would kick the crap out of most people physically, but certainly verbally. Uh, and so she's a good matriarch for our community. Um, I told her what happened and, uh, she had not heard about it. She is 8,000 miles away. And, uh, she said she was sad, sad to hear about it, but the video is up, um, for full disclosure. Uh, the COE and I did not sleep last night. Um, I fell asleep for about an hour and had a very bizarre dream and which I will spare you the details involving my childhood friends. Um, too weird from, for me to even share, but, um, Perez Hilton, again, he, he was, he is supporting, uh, his mother, I found out and his sister, and he's also supporting his three children. And he had had sepsis recently and was hospitalized. And for those who don't don't know, that is basically a blood infection and a poisoning. And many people die from that when they get it, there's no coming back from it, but it can also, I've been told, uh, trigger, um, you know, mental health conditions. Um, your brain is not a hundred percent right after having sepsis. And so is that a factor? Uh, I don't know. Um, by the way, you cannot hear this, but I can, and I will call the C, C O E or, or, uh, space coast, but there is a little faint, the din of the little, um, um, uh, like a bell. What's the word? I can't think this morning cause I didn't sleep, but a little like alarm, not an alarm and alert and alert. That's what I'm looking for. There's a little alert. And I think it's going off on my iPad. And if you see me distracted, which I am right now, it is because it is driving me insane and it's a very faint alert. And so it's almost hard to tell. I have a little mini fridge here and I don't know if it's coming from the mini fridge, but why would it come from a mini fridge? It is coming from my iPad, but Glasgow, Scotland is in the house. Um, and Kelly McLellan is here with a super chat. If he was in Pennsylvania, they would send him home in 72 hours, regardless. And that's what's wrong with the system. My, my mom died from sepsis. I'm so sorry to hear that. So, uh, in a lot of states, it's called a 5150. And in, um, Florida, it is known as being Baker acted. So it's an involuntary hold at a hospital. I also went by the hospital. So I was at his home last night outside, obviously. And, um, then it is a literally, uh, maybe a two and a half minute drive, uh, from his home, uh, to the hospital. Uh, there were a lot of sheriff's deputies out front, um, just sort of, you know, consoling each other. Listen, when you're a first responder and you respond to a scene like that, it is difficult in front of his house. There were detectives, a good amount of detectives. I'd say five, six, seven detectives speaking, uh, presumably to his relatives, maybe even his mother. Um, but he had this bout with sepsis. Um, he also recently moved to Miami moving as a big life change. He also apparently recently found God, uh, and was getting much more religious. And there's a video where he arrives in Miami and he's got a very large, uh, cross or crucifix around his neck. And, um, you know, he was really leaning on, uh, his spirituality and belief in God. And then all of this went south last night on a live tick tock. And, uh, the internet, uh, went nuts and we are here and we've been doing the Lindsey Clancy story and life is tough. Life is difficult. Life is unrelenting. Uh, and, um, because we're doing the Lindsey Clancy thing, I said to the COE, um, let me, you know, head down there. Um, it's about a 30 minute drive from where we live. Miami is fairly large. And, um, sure enough, I bumped into people that I had worked with, bumped into the public information officer. And, uh, anytime you cover news, if you can get on the scene, uh, then you're on scene. And incidentally speaking of that, apparently, uh, this Monday, Courtney Clancy, the so-called only fans model, uh, she has cut a plea deal and she's going to be in court here in Miami. So we're going to bring you this trial, but I'm also going to head to court that day and try to bring you some Courtney Clancy, uh, trial or plea deal, uh, uh, video. And, uh, we'll run both streams simultaneously. Now, if the biggest, uh, you know, witness for the state is testifying Monday, maybe I won't go, but I think I will go and we'll figure all that out. Texas or Texas donkey saying Patty Duke died of sepsis. It is, you don't want to ever get sepsis. Uh, it's a literally a poisoning of the blood. Um, it's me bunny saying the mother has the children. Uh, if anything, uh, again, good came out of this is the children are unharmed. The mother's unharmed. The extent of his injuries are really unknown unless there's some sort of news that has come out, but this is now also, uh, under the category of HIPAA. Uh, so, um, it's going to be all protected, um, as it should be through privacy acts, uh, with, with the medical field. If you're hearing that faint din of an alert, please let me know. I don't think that, uh, uh, I don't think that you can hear it, but it is driving me, uh, literally insane. Uh, as an empath, STS is the only channel I would watch this trial. Thank you, Joel, for being so compassionate and wearing your heart in your sleep. Uh, thank you to RV ready. Um, I mean, what can I tell you? I can try to sugarcoat it, but, uh, you literally saw a guy in real time breaking down mentally and it was very, uh, very, uh, frightening to watch. And I, again, I highly recommend not watching that video, but if you want to see sort of what happened and you want to hear, uh, how the scene was set and played out last night, uh, we did put together, um, a video that is under the surviving the survivor video tab for, uh, all to see. Uh, someone is saying my audio is breaking up. Let me bounce out and come back in. Um, I just saw a hiccup. Uh, there's storms out here again. I'll be right back and, um, let's keep keep the, uh, trial, uh, shot up. I'll be right back. Let me know if that's any better. I saw a little hiccup there on the wifi, uh, by the way, when we're officially, uh, in the new studio, [00:16:31] Speaker ?: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [00:19:01] Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm doing what I do to ground myself so I don't lose my mind and that is taking my son to see Messi play soccer today as in Leo Messi. And so we are doing it. And so we are doing it. I'll be here for the first half of the day. Now, if there is court, in other words, there is court in the second half of the day today, if it will be streamed, and we don't know yet, because I don't know what they're discussing, there will not be a jury present. But if court is streaming, I don't know if they're going to have court in the court is streaming, but I don't know if they're going to have it streamed in court dog, Daniel, if you're watching or listening, by the way, court dog, Daniel has become a very good friend of the show. And so he's got an RV and he's offered to do some reporting for us at lunch, but today I'm out of here, but maybe tomorrow we'll have court dog, Daniel debut. So I appreciate his help. And that's what makes STS Nation STS Nation, which is great. Yesterday, I believe there was eight witnesses who testified. And one of the more, I guess, interesting things is that there were several stipulations, a.k.a. agreements between the Commonwealth and the defense made having to do with the defense basically agreeing that the Commonwealth doesn't have to prove certain facts. And that is in an effort to sort of expedite the witness list a little bit and move the trial along. So several different stipulations were made in court yesterday and the judge, you know, basically publicly acknowledged them, made them, and then both sides agreed to them. Just real quickly, back to the Perez Hilton thing. So we did decide to cover that last night. I was at his home that he lives at with his mother. And the video is now available on YouTube as a video. [00:22:49] Speaker 3: Good morning, Your Honor. May I proceed? Yes, please. Your Honor, before the court today, we have the matter of Commonwealth versus Lindsay Clancy. Ms. Clancy is present. She is represented by attorney Kevin Reddington. The Commonwealth is represented by assistant district attorney Jennifer Sprague and assistant district attorney Shannon Buckingham. [00:23:04] Speaker 4: All right. Well, good morning, counsel. Good morning. Good morning, Ms. Clancy. [00:23:07] Speaker ?: Good morning, Your Honor. [00:23:07] Speaker 4: All right. Before we bring the jury, can I speak to counsel just for a couple of minutes? [00:23:14] Speaker 1: This is a pattern that we have seen over and over. We come court convenes. It is in session. And within a matter of seconds, there is a sidebar. There we go. Hockey mom predicting immediate sidebar. And there it is. I am telling you guys, Mandy Kirk, this is like don't look at the accent. And then you look at the accent. But trust me on this. Don't watch the Perez Hilton video. It's going to accomplish nothing for you other than putting a really bad image in your mind for the rest of your life. That's it. And it's not worth it for the three second dopamine hit that you get off of watching it. It also, you know, it just brings me to another issue, which is this world that we're living in is so different now. And it's so, so much scarier, in my opinion. I mean, I'm old enough that when I was growing up, I remember the first day we ever got cable TV in manliest New York in like 1977. I remember sort of vividly the first time I ever saw a cable box with the turn dial. Now, it's funny. I was having a conversation with a good friend, Bill, of mine. We are the exact same age. We grew up. We played high school tennis together. And both of us were hysterically laughing on the phone because he teaches law students. He's a lawyer. And he says, you know, I always tell my students I've been doing this for 31 years. And I wait always for one of my students to say, oh, there's no way you don't look that old. There's no way. And he said, no one's ever done that. And when I tell people I was alive in 1977, when you turned to TV like this, I want people to say, Joe, you don't look that old. But no one ever says that. And that is depressing as hell because it means you're getting old. And people actually are like, oh, yeah, that makes perfect sense. This guy was alive when you could turn a television dial. So if someone wants to tell me that I don't look old enough to have lived during that time period, I would greatly appreciate it. But you bounce forward to today. I mean, take karma as an example. In Serbia, she literally, it was horse and buggy. And look where we are in 2026. But what's going on now, there is such a fight for attention. And these influencers, celebrity influencers in particular, it is next level, the fight for attention. And I don't know if that's part of what broke. Millennia mama. This is not what I want. Do I really look like my late 50s? Am I just in complete denial? Look at this. This makes me feel happier. Michelle, thank you, Michelle. And with that pretty smile of yours, Joel looks 33 max. Now that makes me like you even more. Age is just a number. So I just think also it's just this unbelievable pressure that society is under. We're all under this pressure to perform, to make money, and to keep up with the Joneses, whoever the Joneses are. I think everyone's feeling that way. I feel that way a lot. And if you don't know how to manage it, which I quite frankly don't know how to manage it, but obviously Perez Hilton doesn't know how to manage it. And it's like money. Everyone's like, why does Elon Musk work? If I had a trillion dollars? No, that's not the case. He needs to keep going. Billionaires, they're some of the most miserable human beings. You get 200,000 subscribers and you want 2 million subscribers. You get 2 million subscribers and you want 5 million subscribers. And then the pressure builds and the pressure mounts. And I honestly think that that is a big part also of what happened with Perez Hilton. We're just living in this world, the attention economy as it's known, where people are just fighting for attention. And every day I'm just grateful that I've got a beautiful wife, the COE, and kids who keep me grounded. And certainly Carmelo, who I just talked to. Perez Hilton? Who is this, Joy? I have never heard of this person. Who is this Perez Hilton, Joy? I had to explain to her who it was and she was going to check it out. But we live in a difficult society and a difficult, I think it was a much easier time. I mean, when I was growing up in Highland Park, New Jersey in the 80s, there was no lock on our door. I would walk around town. Were there sick people around at that time? Yes. Did our little league coach do things that you should never do to young children? Yes. Did bad things happen? Yes. But it was not so much in your face. It wasn't as prevalent in the mind. You know, it was kind of something that happened. Were there creepy white vans? Yes. But still, your parents let you out. Here, it's a weird thing. Like, my kids say to me, I don't want to go out. Like, they're trained almost to not want to go out alone. I'm like, what are you talking about? You live in a pretty safe neighborhood. Just go with your friends. Go for a walk. It's like I have to force them to go out. It's just a different time. And the long and short of it is Perez Hilton is in the middle of this celebrity culture and is trying to keep up. And between that and the kids and the mother and the sepsis, I think the pressure, and he has previous mental health issues, the pressure just was too much for him. And the result was last night. Court appears to be back in session. They should be bringing the jury in. What kind of bombshell could happen in court today? Let's wait and see. That faint din of an alert doesn't disappear in the next three seconds. I don't know what I'm going to do. [00:30:04] Speaker ?: I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. [00:31:08] Speaker 5: I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. [00:31:14] Speaker ?: I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. [00:31:17] Speaker 6: Hey, hey, hey. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. [00:31:53] Speaker ?: I don't know what I'm going to do. [00:31:53] Speaker 6: I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. I don't know what I'm going to do. [00:32:00] Speaker 3: I don't know what I'm going to do. Yes, please. Before the court today, we have the continuation of the jury trial on the matter of Commonwealth versus Lindsay Clancy. Ms. Clancy is present. She is represented by attorney Kevin Reddington. The Commonwealth is represented by assistant district attorney Jennifer Sprague and assistant district attorney Shannon Buckingham. All right. [00:32:18] Speaker 4: Well, good morning again. Nice to see everyone. Thank you for being here. What I'm going to do is I'm going to ask you those questions again, and then go over the schedule. Forget we are not, or you are not, sitting this afternoon. Okay? And that's not going to change. So you can count on that. So let me ask you, at this point, has any member of the jury read, seen, heard, or overheard anything from any source, about any aspect of this case, that would affect your ability to be fair and impartial as a juror? [00:32:52] Speaker ?: All right. [00:32:53] Speaker 4: Next. Is there any other serious matter or concern bearing on your service as a juror in this case? Anybody needs to bring to my attention? [00:33:02] Speaker ?: Great. [00:33:03] Speaker 4: Thank you again for following those instructions. And what we're going to do is we're going to return to the Commonwealth's case. And like I said, we are not going to be, you're not going to be sitting this afternoon. The plan, and I'll double check when we get to that point, would be to return tomorrow at nine o'clock, and pretty much relatively full day tomorrow, and probably Friday as well. But I'll double check as we go through that. All right? And I'll let you know as soon as I can if there's any changes to that schedule. So with that, I'm going to ask the Commonwealth to call their next witness. Commonwealth? [00:33:43] Speaker 7: Thank you. Thank you. The criminal calls Etan Negri. [00:34:01] Speaker 5: Good morning. You stop right here. Raise your right hand for the clerk. Good morning, sir. [00:34:06] Speaker ?: Good morning, sir. [00:34:06] Speaker 8: Good morning, sir. [00:34:07] Speaker 5: Good morning, sir. I just asked you to speak into that microphone. Sure. All right. Turn your butt in, please. Thank you. Good morning, sir. Good morning. All right. Good morning, sir. Good morning, sir. Good morning, sir. Good morning, sir. [00:34:21] Speaker ?: Good morning, sir. I just asked you to speak into that microphone. [00:34:23] Speaker 4: Sure. All right. All right. Turn your butt in, please. Thank you. Good morning, sir. Good morning. [00:34:30] Speaker 7: Could you please tell the jurors your first and last name? My first name is Etan. Last name is Negri. Can you spell your first name for the record? E-I-T-A-N. [00:34:36] Speaker 9: And your last name? N-E-G-R-I. [00:34:38] Speaker 7: And what do you do for work? Thank you. [00:34:40] Speaker 9: Thank you. Can I just ask you to speak into that microphone? [00:34:42] Speaker 7: Sure. [00:34:43] Speaker 9: All right. E-G-R-I. [00:34:45] Speaker 7: And what do you do for work? [00:34:46] Speaker 9: I'm a physician associate, physician assistant. [00:34:49] Speaker 7: And did you go to school for that? Yes. Can you tell us about your educational background? [00:34:54] Speaker 9: I did my undergraduate at City College of New York, and I did a post-bac at Brooklyn College, followed by a PA program at Torrey University in Manhattan. [00:35:03] Speaker 7: And do you currently work as a physician's assistant? [00:35:06] Speaker 9: Yes. [00:35:07] Speaker 7: And do you currently work in the state of Massachusetts? No, ma'am. Are you licensed in the state of Massachusetts? Yes, ma'am. Are you licensed in any other states? New York State. [00:35:16] Speaker 9: Okay. [00:35:17] Speaker 7: I'm going to go back to January of 2023. Were you working in Massachusetts then? Yes. And where were you working? Brigham and Women's Hospital. And were you in that same role as a physician's assistant? Yes. And what were you doing? What were your general duties in that role working at Brigham and Women's? [00:35:36] Speaker 9: Generally, you assess a patient, you diagnose, you formulate a plan with an attending physician, and you execute that plan throughout the day. It encompasses various things. [00:35:47] Speaker 7: Were you working in any particular department at Brigham and Women's back in January of 2023? [00:35:52] Speaker 9: A trauma burn surgical ICU. [00:35:54] Speaker 7: Now, I'm going to draw your attention to a particular patient that came into the Brigham and Women's Hospital on January 24th of 2023. That patient was Lindsay Clancy. Do you recall encountering this patient on January 25th of 2023? Yes. And what did you do as it pertained to the care and treatment of this patient? [00:36:17] Speaker 9: I received the information from the shift before me, formulated a plan, examined her, assessed her, staffed that plan with the attending physician, and executed that plan throughout the day. [00:36:28] Speaker 7: And fair to say this particular patient had injuries that you were directed to observe, review, form that plan on? Correct. What were the injuries? [00:36:39] Speaker 9: She had multiple injuries. The most acute were injuries that were requiring consultation with other services. And the ones that I directly managed were the lacerations to her wrists and just her wrists, actually. [00:36:53] Speaker 7: And as far as when you say she had other acute injuries, you were not involved in the care of her for those, correct? [00:36:59] Speaker 9: I was involved in the care that involved consulting other services to manage those things, yes. [00:37:05] Speaker 7: Okay. And as far as any sort of repair work that you were doing as a physician's assistant working with the trauma surgeons, what repair work were you assigned to do? Laceration repair. And on this particular patient, where were the injuries or lacerations that you were going to repair? [00:37:24] Speaker 9: She had multiple lacerations on both of her wrists. She had superficial on her neck, which I did not repair. [00:37:31] Speaker 7: Okay. And as it pertained to the wrists, did you go through that process of observing, reviewing, coming up with a plan, and then repairing those injuries? Yes. And were you directed to do that by any particular doctor? [00:37:47] Speaker 9: Not necessarily directed. A lot of those things fall within my scope. And since they were less acute, they kind of fell down the chain to me. [00:37:56] Speaker 7: Okay. And you're aware that she was being seen and treated by a host of other doctors, nurses, an entire team? Yes. Okay. As it pertains to the wrist injuries, what did you do to examine those areas? [00:38:16] Speaker 9: The first thing I do is assess the location. Then I assess the severity, whether it requires intervention by someone other than myself. In this instance, it did not. So then I proceed with just kind of protocol of laceration repair. [00:38:33] Speaker 7: When would it be a situation where you'd need somebody else to intervene? [00:38:38] Speaker 9: If it required surgical intervention or suture and repair beyond my skill set. In this instance, it did not. [00:38:46] Speaker 7: Okay. And so, referring to these particular injuries, when you observed them, did you observe any areas of active bleeding? No. And fair to say they had been treated by nurses and other staff prior to you encountering these injuries, correct? Yes. They were dressed and covered before I got there. Okay. Now, when you assessed them, you noted that they were bilateral, correct? Yes. What does that mean? [00:39:10] Speaker 9: It means on both sides of the body. So both wrists. [00:39:13] Speaker 7: Okay. And so, referring to the right wrist, what were your observations of the injuries to the right wrist? [00:39:22] Speaker 9: The right wrist, as far as my reference to the note, is that she had a few lacerations, one of which was severe and deep enough to require repair. [00:39:33] Speaker 7: And fair to say that that right wrist injury was, the one that you repaired, was three centimeters deep? [00:39:46] Speaker 9: Approximately, if that's what my note says, then that's what it was. [00:39:50] Speaker 7: Okay. And on a wrist, or this area of the wrist where you observed the injuries, that depth of three centimeters, did that require further surgical intervention? Or were you able to suture that area? [00:40:03] Speaker 9: I was able to suture that area. As far as what happened subsequent to that, I wasn't there, so I'm not sure. [00:40:08] Speaker 7: Okay. And how many sutures did you use to repair that injury? I believe three. And in relation to any other cuts or lacerations that were on that right wrist, did any other of those lacerations require suturing? No. How did you treat those other injuries? [00:40:25] Speaker 9: Just irrigation, meaning cleaning them out, and then using a type of tape to close them shut. [00:40:30] Speaker 7: And that's generally referred to as a steristrip, correct? Correct. Okay. May I approach the witness? May I approach the witness? May. I'm showing you two photographs. Did those photographs depict the repairs or the sutures that you did on the right wrist of Lindsay Glancy? Yes. I admit to that these as the next two exhibits. [00:40:56] Speaker 4: All right. Those may be admitted. [00:40:58] Speaker 7: And I'm just going to show on the screen what's now been marked as Exhibit 201, and you should be able to see it, sir, on the screen in front of you. Can you see that? [00:41:21] Speaker 9: Yes. Okay. [00:41:23] Speaker 7: And so this is the right wrist, correct? [00:41:26] Speaker 9: Correct. [00:41:27] Speaker 7: And those black lines in the middle of the photograph are those the sutures that you did? [00:41:32] Speaker 9: Correct. [00:41:33] Speaker 7: And just showing you 202, exhibit 202, these white strips that are all around the injury, are those the steristrips? Correct. Now, on the left wrist, do you recall what you observed to be the injuries on that wrist? [00:41:56] Speaker 9: I believe there was a similar laceration, just shorter in length that required fewer sutures. Okay. [00:42:04] Speaker 7: And fair to say, if your notes reflect that the left wrist had one, meaning just a singular, two centimeter deep linear cut, that that would have been what your observations were of the injury that you repaired? Correct. And how many sutures did that injury require? One suture. And were there other areas that you observed that had some sort of laceration? [00:42:29] Speaker 9: I believe similarly just superficial ones that needed a steristrips. [00:42:34] Speaker ?: Okay. [00:42:35] Speaker 7: And again, in treating this particular injury when you came upon it, was there active bleeding or any concern that you needed more intervention other than a suture? At that time, no. [00:42:45] Speaker 9: No. [00:42:46] Speaker ?: I'm just going to show you two more photos. Are those familiar to you? [00:42:48] Speaker 10: Yes. [00:42:49] Speaker 7: And are those the suture that you did on the left wrist of Lindsey Quincy? Yes, ma'am. I move to admit these as an S-2 exhibit. All right. They may be admitted. They may be admitted. [00:43:11] Speaker 4: They may be admitted. [00:43:12] Speaker ?: They may be admitted. [00:43:12] Speaker 4: Are there 203 and 204? [00:43:13] Speaker ?: Thank you. [00:43:14] Speaker 7: And now again, just showing what's been now marked as exhibit Q03, and you see the injury there on the wrist near the ruler in the photograph? [00:43:43] Speaker 1: Yes. [00:43:44] Speaker 7: And exhibit 204, which is just a closer upshot of that. Is that correct? [00:43:50] Speaker 9: Yes. [00:43:51] Speaker 7: And again, you see the white strips. Those are also steristrips that were applied. [00:43:57] Speaker 9: Correct. [00:43:58] Speaker 7: Now, in relation to any of these ones on the right or the left wrist, did you observe the lacerations to go any deeper than the subcutaneous tissue? [00:44:09] Speaker 9: On my observation, no. Okay. [00:44:11] Speaker 7: And when we talk subcutaneous tissue, we're talking about that fatty tissue underneath your skin, correct? Correct. And did you have to return at any point, to your knowledge, to readdress these issues or do any further laceration repair as it pertained to this patient? On that shift, no. On that shift, no. Do you recall if you did on any other shift? No. I have no further questions. Thank you. [00:44:32] Speaker ?: Mr. Rankin. Is it Mr. Negri? Agri, yes, sir. And you're not a doctor. You're a physician assistant. [00:44:37] Speaker 7: Is that what it is? That's correct, yes. Okay. [00:44:40] Speaker 2: And how long had you worked for Brigham and Women's prior to seeing Lindsay Clancy that, on January 24 or 23? I believe I was in my second year of employment with Brigham and Women's. Okay. I believe I was in my second year of employment at Brigham and Women's. I believe I was in my second year of employment at Brigham and Women's. I believe I was in my second year of employment at Brigham and Women's. Okay. And you've got to keep your voice up, because people back here have to be obligated to, okay? [00:45:08] Speaker 9: I believe I was in my second year of employment at Brigham and Women's. [00:45:12] Speaker 2: You're not suggesting for one minute that after you did your butterfly stitches, Lindsay could have got up and walked out the door of the hospital, right? No, sir. And would you agree with me that, in fact, she was critically ill when you saw her, right? Yes, sir. And she certainly wasn't critically ill from COVID or a flu or something like that, right? [00:45:34] Speaker 9: No, not to my knowledge. [00:45:36] Speaker 2: You know that there are notes that are prepared for the records from the hospital. For example, on January 24, 2023, hospital admission form is filled out. Do you know it, Dr. Jeffrey Andrew Anderson? Yes. And he was, what was his position that night? [00:45:59] Speaker 9: He was one of the trauma surgeons and also one of the intensivists, the attending physicians in the ICU. All right. [00:46:06] Speaker 2: And you've had a chance to review a number of records and photographs with the DAs, I imagine, right? [00:46:13] Speaker 9: I've reviewed my own procedure note. Okay. So what does that mean? It means I reviewed the note that I wrote myself regarding the laceration repairs. [00:46:23] Speaker 2: Okay. Is that the note that indicates that it appears as though, for example, on the right upper extremity, there's a three and a half centimeter deep laceration on the volar aspect of the wrist? [00:46:36] Speaker 9: I don't believe that I commented saying volar specifically, so I don't know if that's in regards to my note, but I believe my note did say about three centimeters deep, yes. [00:46:45] Speaker 2: Okay. So do you recall indicating in your note that it was superficial laceration or did you indicate that it was a deep laceration? [00:46:53] Speaker 9: I indicated that some of them were superficial and the one that I repaired in particular was three centimeters deep. [00:47:00] Speaker 2: And you've had occasion to speak to the prosecutors on this case and they've asked you about the superficial, superficial, superficial injury to a wrist, right? Correct. In addition to the, as indicated on page 75 of the Brigham and the Woman's Hospital record that I have, and we can fix that with other records if it doesn't coincide. There's a note from Dr. Anderson that the right upper extremity 3.5 centimeter deep laceration volar aspect of the wrist, left upper extremity 2 centimeter deep laceration on the volar aspect of the wrist. Do you agree with that assessment? Yes, sir. All right. And then you were able to, as you say, clean it up with saline or whatever and then you stitched up what you had to stitch up, right? Yes, sir. Did you have anything to do with the massive transfusion that she had? No, sir. Do you have anything to do with the treatment of the transected spine that she had, the shattered spine? No, sir. Do you have anything whatsoever to do with the insertion of tubes on both sides of her body and the draining of the blood that had pooled in her middle cavity? Just the management of those tubes after, but not the placement. [00:48:08] Speaker 9: Okay. So you were there while that was done? I was there managing once they had been placed, but I was not there for the placement. Okay. But you knew that they were in there, that they were draining the blood. [00:48:18] Speaker 2: Correct. Okay. And do you know where the blood came from? It was in her middle extremity? I don't know specifically. I'd have to refer back to the imaging reports. [00:48:28] Speaker 9: Okay. [00:48:29] Speaker 2: In any event, you know that shortly thereafter she coded, right? Yes. Were you there for that? No, sir. And basically that means that the patient has, in effect, died from cardiac arrest, right? Not necessarily died, but their heart has stopped beating for that question. And then there's crash teams and everybody hopefully revives the person, right? Correct. And you guys did that, or they did, and they were successful reviving her, correct? So, without going through everything, you'd agree with me, sir, that your observations would be of the wrist, the repair, and taking care of the tubes after they were inserted into both sides of her chest? [00:49:08] Speaker 9: That's correct. [00:49:09] Speaker 2: And that was your involvement extended, correct? [00:49:12] Speaker 9: You were all done after that? I was involved in the ongoing management of her care throughout the day, but just as you stated, not the things that you asked me about. Okay, thank you, sir. Sure. They're part of the record. [00:49:22] Speaker 2: I would object if we could approach. [00:49:23] Speaker ?: I don't want to have a jury that would go through 10 minutes. [00:49:24] Speaker 7: I know that. Listen, mark them for identification, and then we can address that. Thank you, sir. [00:49:27] Speaker 2: Okay. [00:49:28] Speaker 7: May I just put a few questions? Sure. Thank you. [00:49:31] Speaker 2: Thank you. [00:49:32] Speaker ?: Mr. Negra, I'm just going to approach and show you. [00:49:32] Speaker 2: We'll go on and see you. [00:49:33] Speaker 4: Is that Mark? Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you. I'll just show you the page from the records. That's labeled. Brigham and Women's, page 76. [00:49:42] Speaker ?: Okay. [00:49:43] Speaker 7: I don't want to have a jury that would go through 10 minutes. I know that. Listen, mark them for identification, and then we can address that. [00:49:46] Speaker ?: Thank you, sir. [00:49:47] Speaker 7: Okay. May I just put a few questions? Sure. [00:49:50] Speaker 4: Thank you. Mr. Negra, I'm just going to approach and show you. We'll go on and see you. Is that Mark? [00:49:54] Speaker ?: Okay. [00:49:55] Speaker 7: Thank you. All right. Thank you. All right. Brigham and Women's, page 76. Can you just, you can hold it in. [00:50:04] Speaker 9: Specifically the title reader? [00:50:06] Speaker 7: Yeah. I would direct your attention to the bottom paragraph where it says exam. That's not your note from the record, correct? Correct. And when it's noted that the right upper extremity, left upper extremity, has three and a half centimeter deep laceration, two centimeter deep laceration. Deep in the medical notes is not an adjective of it, correct? It's more of a directionality of the injury. [00:50:41] Speaker 9: It's a description of, yeah, basically an objective unit of measure. [00:50:46] Speaker 7: Okay. But when we say deep, it means that it goes down into the skin as opposed to across the skin. [00:50:51] Speaker 2: It doesn't matter what we say. It's what the records say. All right. [00:50:54] Speaker 4: Just, you could ask that question again. [00:50:57] Speaker 7: As far as your assessment of injuries, deep goes down in the skin as opposed to across the skin. Correct. Okay. As far as Dr. Anderson goes, you knew that him to be one of the attendings and a trauma surgeon in this case. Were you aware that on January 24th, he had examined these injuries and indicated they did not require repair at that time? [00:51:22] Speaker 9: I don't recall specifically. I'm sorry. [00:51:24] Speaker 7: But you came in to repair these on January 25th? Yes. Okay. Thank you. [00:51:30] Speaker 4: Sure. Anything on that? All right. Thank you, sir. [00:51:34] Speaker 1: Thank you. You're all set. Thanks for the day on day seven of testimony. His name is Eitan Negri. He's a physician's assistant. Now they are vacuuming in the hall on top of my alert thing game. [00:51:46] Speaker 7: The Commonwealth would call Nicholas Roberts as its next place, please. [00:51:49] Speaker 1: The Commonwealth obviously trying to make it a point that the injuries were somewhat superficial. I mean, I don't know how many witnesses have come up to say this and Kevin Reddington getting frustrated saying essentially this is why we stipulated so we don't have to keep hearing over and over. I've already told you my client committed these crimes. So we need to get to the mental health aspect of it in the trial. But here comes and witness number two on the day. I like Kevin Reddington style. He's curmudgeoning. I am a little bit, but a lot of people are having an issue. [00:52:23] Speaker 3: Good morning. You solemnly swear that the testimony and the evidence you shall give to the court. The amateur in the matter now coming between the Commonwealth and the Senate of the class shall be the truth, the whole truth. Have a seat. [00:52:34] Speaker 4: Watch the stop, please. Good morning, sir. Thank you. [00:52:42] Speaker 7: Good morning. Good morning. Could you please tell the jurors your first and last name? [00:52:46] Speaker 10: It's Nicholas Roberts. [00:52:48] Speaker 7: And where do you currently work? [00:52:50] Speaker 10: I work for a company called Thermo Fisher. What is that? [00:52:53] Speaker 7: What do they do? [00:52:54] Speaker 10: They sell plenty of laboratory based products including refrigeration. They sell solvents. They do instruments as well. [00:53:03] Speaker 7: Prior to working for that company, did you work for the Massachusetts State Police Crime Lab? [00:53:08] Speaker 10: I did. [00:53:09] Speaker 7: And in what unit did you work for the crime lab? [00:53:11] Speaker 10: I was in the toxicology unit. [00:53:13] Speaker 7: How long did you work for the crime lab? [00:53:15] Speaker 10: For about nine years. [00:53:16] Speaker 7: And in working for the crime lab, what kind of training and experience did you have to work in the toxicology unit? [00:53:23] Speaker 10: So, prior to being hired, I have both a bachelor's and a master's degree in applied forensic science with a concentration in chemistry and toxicology. I also have the master's is in forensic toxicology. While being hired on the job, they provide training for all the in-house stuff that we test for, which includes not only a theory based training, but also practical stuff so that you can analyze and run all the tests that we do in-house. [00:54:01] Speaker 7: And as far as your work in the toxicology unit, fair to say in January of 2023 or February of 2023, you were what's referred to as a forensic scientist too, correct? Yes. And throughout your time at the Massachusetts State Police Crime Lab, did you have to undergo competency tests and proficiency tests? Yes. And why is that? Why do you have to do that? [00:54:26] Speaker 10: So, mainly it's the... [00:54:28] Speaker 4: Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. One at a time. Okay. [00:54:33] Speaker 2: I'm just saying, I know he's qualified and I have no problem with his credentials and his testimony. All right. All right. Counsel? [00:54:40] Speaker 7: Thank you. Sir, in working at the State Police Crime Lab, did you just work in the toxicology unit or did you work in any other units in your time there? [00:54:51] Speaker 10: No, only in toxicology. [00:54:53] Speaker 7: Okay. Now, as it pertains to the toxicology unit, fair to say the State Police Crime Lab has a specific set of protocols and procedures that are followed in every case? [00:55:03] Speaker 10: Yes. [00:55:04] Speaker 7: Okay. And at that time in February of 2023, was the State Police Crime Lab using the batch review process? Yes. And so, when the State Police use this process, there are a number of different technicians or forensic scientists that work on any given case. Is that fair to say? Yes. And at the end of it, one analyst is responsible for reviewing all the data and authoring a report? Yes. And based on your training experience, if you're that person reviewing the data and authoring the report, do you have the ability to interpret some of the data in the report? Yes. Or data in the testing, I should say? [00:55:41] Speaker 10: Yes. We review all the data that is provided within the case file. [00:55:45] Speaker 7: And did you, during your time at the crime lab in the toxicology unit, stay up to date on various types of drugs and quantifications of those drugs and what that could mean for levels in a person's blood or urine? [00:56:02] Speaker ?: Yes. [00:56:03] Speaker 10: They keep us up to date on drugs that are commonly used. [00:56:09] Speaker 7: So, one of the roles in the toxicology unit is for you to report whether substances are detected in blood and urine. Is that fair to say? [00:56:20] Speaker 10: Yes. [00:56:21] Speaker 7: And at some point, are you also called on how to interpret the levels of those drugs? [00:56:28] Speaker 10: So, in blood we report values, so we get concentrations of the different drugs and we mainly report them in blood. Okay. [00:56:37] Speaker 7: And as far as the concentration levels themselves, did you have training and experience on interpreting those levels? [00:56:43] Speaker 10: We usually get training on the effects of the drugs. It's hard to say with some drugs, as well as some people, what one level might mean for one person. It might differ and you have different effects on another. [00:57:00] Speaker 7: Okay. And fair to say that's a limitation of just reviewing blood and not knowing anything else about a case, right? Yes. [00:57:07] Speaker 10: Okay. [00:57:08] Speaker 7: At the toxicology unit, at the crime lab, is there a limitation as to how or what types of drugs can actually be quantified or given concentration levels? Yes. [00:57:23] Speaker 10: We only quantify certain drugs. [00:57:26] Speaker 7: And what happens if there are other drugs present and there's a request for quantification or concentration levels? What does your lab do with that? [00:57:33] Speaker 10: Usually they're sent out to another lab in order for testing. [00:57:36] Speaker 7: And are you familiar with the NMS lab? Yes. Is that or was that at that time a common lab that would be sent drugs that you could not quantify in your lab? Oh, yes. [00:57:47] Speaker 10: Okay. [00:57:48] Speaker 7: I'm going to direct your attention to the lab number of 23-01723. It's a case that you were the reporting analyst on, correct? Yes. And fair to say that there were several items that were submitted to the toxicology unit as specimens. Yes. Including blood, plasma, and urine. Yes. And did you work with other members of the toxicology unit to have those specimens screened and then further tested? Yes. [00:58:29] Speaker 10: The batch process was followed. [00:58:31] Speaker 7: And as far as any screening tests, did you yourself do any screening tests on these items? [00:58:37] Speaker 10: Yes. [00:58:38] Speaker 7: What screening tests did you do? [00:58:39] Speaker 10: The screening for the alcohol. [00:58:41] Speaker 7: And was there any alcohol present? No. And in this screening for alcohol, does it just tell you whether it was detected or not detected? [00:58:49] Speaker 10: Yes. [00:58:50] Speaker 7: Okay. And so when you don't have a result, there's nothing further to do? [00:58:53] Speaker 10: Correct. [00:58:54] Speaker 7: Now, as far as the blood that was tested in this case, in the urine, you were aware that there were screening tests done for what's called the ELISA screen, benzodiazepines, and general unknown screens for these samples, correct? [00:59:13] Speaker 10: Yes. [00:59:14] Speaker 7: That's usually our protocol. And in any of those circumstances, were there positive results? [00:59:19] Speaker 10: Yes. [00:59:20] Speaker 7: And as it pertained to the positive results, what's your understanding of what was positive? [00:59:26] Speaker 10: So to my knowledge, it was positive for the benzodiazepine panel in ELISA. That would have gotten further confirmatory testing done on it to see the levels as well as the individual types of benzos that were present in the blood. And the same was for the urine as well. We also identified a few substances via our general unknown screen, which was confirmed in blood and urine. [00:59:53] Speaker 4: Now, as far as -- Councilor, is there an agreement as to whose blood is being tested at this point instead of just by the number? [01:00:03] Speaker 2: Yes. [01:00:04] Speaker 4: It might be easier for everybody -- for the jury to follow. [01:00:08] Speaker 7: So would your honor just like you to read the results? [01:00:14] Speaker 4: No. Just instead of referring to it by a number. Well, let me see inside. [01:00:21] Speaker 1: That was interesting. That's the first time I saw Judge William Sullivan look a little annoyed at the Commonwealth. The witness right now, Nicholas Roberts with Thermal Fisher. He's a former forensic scientist. You have seen Thermal Fisher. If you've ever been to a doctor's office, they make the refrigeration. I'm sure some of the vials, things of that nature. And they're just going over some of the details that we've heard over and over about the condition of Lindsay Clancy, what was happening that day. Interesting. Michelle Mitchell, one of the few, saying, "I'm not a fan of this judge." The judge unhappy for the first time. And then, Christine, thank you, Your Honor. Judges do not have -- oh, boy. At least it's not my beeping. Judges have a tough job. But snark is my preferred language. Okay, Joel, now I'm hearing beeping. Well, that beeping is the sidebar beeping. You're not hearing the faint beeping that is driving me closer and closer to insanity this morning that is driving me nuts. So here we are at a sidebar. The judge is so nice, but sometimes nice guys finish last. I like the judge, but right now he's taking a stance. He was annoyed at the Commonwealth, who is referring to stuff by, like, exhibit number, and he doesn't want her to do that. So he's now talking to her. Kevin Reddington interrupted on the last witness to essentially, in so many words, say, "I thought we stipulated to all this. What is going on?" Look at law. Her name is a law nerd, but yet she's a nurse at Thermo Fisher. Shouldn't you be a nurse nerd and not a law nerd? Something to condor today. [01:02:23] Speaker ?: You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. You're not going to be a nurse nerd. [01:03:00] Speaker 7: I tell you that your report was previously entered as Exhibit 183. Have you had the opportunity to review your report before coming today? Yes. And so the lab number that we've been referring to, you're aware that the person associated with that lab number was actually a woman by the name of Lindsey Clancy? Yes. Okay. Now, as far as the testing that was done, you received results to the positive benzodiazepines in the screen, and then it was confirmed, correct? Correct. How many benzodiazepines were present? [01:03:55] Speaker 10: There were at least four or five. Okay. [01:04:01] Speaker 7: And were you able to get concentration levels from the blood samples after that screen and the confirmatory tests? Yes. And again, already in evidence, but the toxicology report for item 10-101 on the blood with those benzodiazepines. There's diazepam, correct? [01:04:24] Speaker 10: Yes. [01:04:25] Speaker 7: Norodiazepam. Yes. [01:04:27] Speaker 10: Oxazepam. [01:04:28] Speaker 7: Yep. Temazepam. Yes. And lorazepam. And lorazepam. Yes. And as far as your review of the testing on those substances and the concentration levels, did anything about any of those levels stand out to you as far as based on your training and experience? [01:04:48] Speaker 10: Only that they were reportable. [01:04:51] Speaker 7: Okay. Are you familiar whether they're in any sort of therapeutic level for any of those drugs? [01:04:58] Speaker 10: I'm not sure. Okay. [01:05:00] Speaker 7: You mentioned there were also other substances that were detected in the general unknown screen, correct? Yes. And that would have been mirtazepine, lomatrogen, ketiopine, ketiopine metabolite, and trazodone. Yes. And was your lab able to get concentration levels for those? [01:05:24] Speaker 10: No. No. [01:05:26] Speaker 7: And so what did you do or what was done with the samples or the specimens as it pertained to those substances? [01:05:34] Speaker 10: To my knowledge, it was sent to NMS Labs. [01:05:39] Speaker 7: Okay. And you've previously stated that you are trained on effects of certain types of drugs, but your limitation is you don't know how it affects a particular individual, correct? Correct. These particular five benzodiazepines, do you know where they fall in the type of drug, what the general effects of those drugs are? [01:06:04] Speaker 10: So, benzos tend to be central nervous system depressants. Okay. [01:06:09] Speaker 7: And the ones that were detected but you don't have the levels for mirtazepine and the list I read, what category are those drugs? [01:06:19] Speaker 10: Those tend to also be central nervous system depressants. Quetiopine in particular is usually known to treat bipolar disorder or schizophrenia. [01:06:31] Speaker 7: And as it pertains to the presence of the five benzodiazepines, your testing is limited in that you don't know whether that was from one medication or multiple medications, correct? [01:06:45] Speaker 10: Correct. Because the nordiazepam, oxazepam, and timazamab tend to be metabolized of diazepam. Okay. [01:06:53] Speaker ?: I have no further questions. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. How are you doing? That's about yourself. All right. [01:06:59] Speaker 7: Just a couple of brief questions. First of all, would you, this would be a blood sample that was taken from Lindsay on a particular, like, one day. [01:07:07] Speaker 2: This is not a panel of a bunch of different samples, right? [01:07:23] Speaker 10: To my knowledge, there would have been a few different test tubes submitted to us. Okay. [01:07:29] Speaker 2: Test tubes, but when you draw the blood, it would basically be the same time that they put it in different test tubes. Yes. [01:07:37] Speaker 10: I'm not familiar with these specific ones, like if they were done over a span of time, but usually... That's fair. [01:07:44] Speaker 2: That's fair enough. I mean, but you have the test tubes and you know that it's Lindsay Clancy's blood, right? Yes. And you'd agree with me that that's a fairly large number of drugs and metabolites that are in that particular blood sample, right? I have seen more. I'm sure. But nevertheless, that's still a large number of drugs though, right? Yes. That's quite a few. And you don't know, as working your job for the state police at that time, you don't know how many of these drugs are coming from scripts, prescriptions, and things of that nature, right? [01:08:15] Speaker 10: No. [01:08:16] Speaker 2: One of the things that you had mentioned were metabolites and you said that because the district attorney asked you about different benzodiazepines, this Pam, that Pam, this Pam, that Pam. And then you responded and said, yeah, but there's a lot of metabolites involved in that, right? What does that mean? [01:08:34] Speaker 10: So a metabolite is just a breakdown of anything usually by the body. So you have what we call a parent drug and the body, if you ingest that, the body would then break it down or put it into a more digestible form in order to get rid of it. [01:08:51] Speaker 2: Okay. So when you have a number of metabolites, for example, someone may have a prescription for amitriptyline or a prescription for Zoloft or Ativan or something. And they take the pill and it's in their system and then over time it would metabolize and there'd be different PAMs or whatever it is that would break down into the blood. Is that right? Yes. Um, how about, uh, um, tetrahydrocannabinols, THC, uh, marijuana, what was the level on that? Ah, to my knowledge, you didn't find any. No marijuana, right? Correct. Thank you very much, sir. All right. [01:09:29] Speaker 4: Do you bucking any redirect? No, thank you. [01:09:31] Speaker ?: All right. [01:09:32] Speaker 4: Thank you, sir. Sit down there. [01:09:34] Speaker 1: So, uh, just reviewing some of the tox reports that came back on Lindsay Clancy, what was in her system, what was not in her system again. It's Robert, uh, now an employee with, uh, science and giant thermal. Come on. [01:09:50] Speaker 7: At this time, uh, upon agreement, I'd ask to admit as the next exhibit, um, just a chart that the parties have agreed upon that lists the brand names of some of the drugs that have been, um, spoken about throughout the course of the trial as well as what they were also known as for the ease of the jurors. All right. That's by agreement, Judge. [01:10:07] Speaker 2: All right. [01:10:08] Speaker 4: All right. So by, by agreement, that may be admitted. [01:10:11] Speaker 7: The Commonwealth would call Dr. Jonathan Brower as its next witness. [01:10:24] Speaker 1: Uh, Kathy Rustin with Long Crime is reporting that the Commonwealth is going to wrap, uh, their case in chief, uh, this week. Good morning, sir. Today is Wednesday. Uh, then the defense will present their insanity witnesses, in lack of better phrase, and then they're going to do a rebuttal. So there's still a ways to go, but, uh, interesting to hear from Chats. We've lost a long time. Watch your stuff, please. The Commonwealth is set to wrap. Good morning, Doug. [01:10:52] Speaker 4: Good morning. [01:10:53] Speaker 5: All right. [01:10:54] Speaker 4: I ask you to keep your voice up so the jury can hear you. Uh, and with that, uh... Thank you, AR. [01:11:00] Speaker 7: Thank you. Um, good morning, sir. Can you please tell the jurors your first and last name? [01:11:05] Speaker 11: It's Justin Brower. B-R-O-W-E-R. [01:11:09] Speaker 7: And, um, what do you do for work, sir? [01:11:12] Speaker 11: I'm a forensic toxicologist for NMS laboratories. [01:11:15] Speaker 7: And where is that laboratory located? [01:11:17] Speaker 11: The laboratory is located in Horsham, Pennsylvania, just north of Philadelphia. [01:11:21] Speaker 7: And what, um, does your laboratory do? [01:11:24] Speaker 11: We are a reference laboratory. We, uh, do post-mortem work, clinical work, and, um, forensic drug work. So, primarily, my role is, uh, on the forensic side. I'm a forensic toxicologist. [01:11:39] Speaker 7: And, um, does your lab receive specimens from all across the country? We do. [01:11:44] Speaker 11: We have clients in all 50 states. We do approximately half of the post-mortem work in the United States, as well as a large number of, um, clinical clients. [01:11:54] Speaker 7: And, um, is your lab accredited across several states and across the country? [01:12:00] Speaker 11: We are, because we deal with, um, you know, all the states in the United States, all the states in the country. Uh, we are accredited by just about every accrediting body that I'm aware of in the clinical and forensic aspects, as well as a lot of state certifications. So, a lot of states have their own requirements. Uh, the most notable one is, like, New York State. So, we are accredited by, again, every accrediting body that I'm aware of. Okay. [01:12:25] Speaker 7: And how long have you worked for NMS Laboratory? [01:12:27] Speaker 11: Uh, four years, as of August 1st. Okay. [01:12:30] Speaker 7: And what's your educational background as a forensic, uh, toxicologist? [01:12:33] Speaker 11: I have a PhD in organic chemistry. [01:12:36] Speaker 7: Where did you get that from? [01:12:37] Speaker 11: Uh, the University of Nevada. [01:12:39] Speaker 7: And do you have, um, any other professional experience in this field prior to working for NMS? [01:12:45] Speaker 11: I do. Uh, before joining NMS Laboratories, I was a laboratory supervisor and then forensic toxicologist for the North Carolina Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, which is a statewide system. So, we did the post-mortem toxicology work for all 100 counties of the state of North Carolina. [01:13:03] Speaker 7: And, um, when it comes to your role in the forensic area, um, of, of doing the toxicology testing, what is your role in the NMS lab when it comes to cases that come to the laboratory for forensic analysis? [01:13:21] Speaker 11: So, when a case comes into NMS and is logged in and the assigned, or the requested test assigned, and then run and reviewed multiple times in the laboratory, when all that testing is completed, it comes to the toxicology department. And my role is to review every aspect of that case. So, I'm, um, making sure that everything on the toxicology report is complete and accurate, such as all the demographic information that we have available to us. You know, the name of the decedent or the patient, uh, date of birth, where it's from, uh, the specimen that we received. And then also that all of the, everything that is reported is complete and accurate. Uh, making sure that all the drugs that were tested for, um, are reported. And that the reported concentrations are correct and accurate. And looking at every piece of raw data accumulated from the laboratory, um, with that case, associated with that case. [01:14:15] Speaker 7: Fair to say the NMS laboratory uses a batch, um, review workflow. [01:14:21] Speaker 11: Uh, that is correct. So we not only, uh, run the cases in, in batches. So we don't run it one case at a time. That's not very efficient. I don't really know of any laboratory that does that anymore. Um, so we will run cases, you know, 10, 15, you know, 30 or 40 at a time. [01:14:41] Speaker 7: So as far as running a particular tested tests and getting the raw data, that's usually done by other people in the laboratory, correct? That is correct. And then you come in at the end and review everything and have the ability to interpret the data. [01:14:56] Speaker 11: That is correct. [01:14:57] Speaker 7: Your training and experience, um, as a forensic tech psychologist, does that allow you to interpret concentration levels of particular types of drugs? It does. Okay. Um, now as far as the testing done at NMS laboratories, um, the traditional testing is kind of the drug testing, the panels for different common drugs, correct? [01:15:19] Speaker 11: And typically we have a, uh, a client's request panels to be run where we're looking for, you know, multiple drugs and classes of drugs at a time. [01:15:28] Speaker 7: But are there circumstances when, um, outside laboratories or outside, um, individuals retain your lab in order to run specific tests? [01:15:37] Speaker 11: Oh, absolutely. [01:15:39] Speaker 7: Now, I'm going to draw your attention to this particular case. Where, was your laboratory provided, um, a blood sample from the Massachusetts State Police Crime Lab in April of 2023? I believe so. [01:15:53] Speaker 11: I'd really like to see the toxicology report so I can just confirm all of that, please. Sure. [01:15:58] Speaker 6: I have no question for that. [01:15:59] Speaker 11: No. [01:16:00] Speaker ?: Sure. Thank you so much. You can, um, hang on to that. That's fine. Okay. [01:16:05] Speaker 11: Correct. We received the specimens on April 7th, 2023. [01:16:17] Speaker 7: Okay. And it came from the Massachusetts State Police Crime Lab? [01:16:21] Speaker 11: Um, no. I don't know where they were initially sent from, uh, but the client or the submitting agency is the District Attorney's Office of Playa. [01:16:32] Speaker 7: Okay. Um, now, as it pertains to the requested testing that was done, was it that panel that you described, or was it more specific, uh, testing? [01:16:41] Speaker 11: This is what we call direct testing, where they requested just four specific drugs to be tested for. [01:16:48] Speaker 7: And what were the four specific tests requested? [01:16:50] Speaker 11: Lamotrigine, mirtazapine, cateapine, and trazodone. [01:16:55] Speaker 7: Are you familiar with those substances or those drugs? Yes, ma'am. Okay. And you reviewed all of the data and information done at your lab in regards to these tests, correct? Yes, ma'am. Were they able to identify concentration levels in the sample that was submitted for each one of those four substances? [01:17:14] Speaker 11: Yes, ma'am. [01:17:15] Speaker 7: And for the first, can you tell us what the result was? [01:17:19] Speaker 11: Uh, would you like me to just run down the list? Sure. Okay. Uh, we detected lamotrigine in a concentration of 6.1 micrograms per milliliter. Mirtazapine at a concentration of 200 milligrams, I'm sorry, 200 nanograms per milliliter. Cateapine at a concentration of 1,800 nanograms per milliliter. And trazodone at a concentration of 0.44 micrograms per milliliter. And these were all in blood. In blood. [01:17:50] Speaker 7: And so, um, with each, each drug that you just listed, are you familiar with, um, what the common name is for the drugs? [01:18:00] Speaker 11: Um, I'm not always that great with common names, but I can wing it. [01:18:04] Speaker 7: Okay. Um, well, the, uh, lamotrigine, and forgive me if I botched the pronunciation. That's okay. That's also referred, um, to commonly as, um, Lamectol. It is correct. Lamectol. What kind of drug is that? [01:18:19] Speaker 11: Uh, it's typically used as an anti-seizure medication. So if somebody has a seizure disorder, it can be, uh, prescribed to alleviate seizures, but it is also used for, um, bipolar disorder as well. [01:18:33] Speaker 7: And mirtazapine, um, fair to say that's commonly referred to as Remeron. Correct. And what kind of drug is that? [01:18:41] Speaker 11: Um, that is typically an anti-depressant. [01:18:44] Speaker 7: Um, and ketiapine, what's, what's that common drug? [01:18:48] Speaker 11: Um, ketiapine is known as Seroquel. [01:18:50] Speaker 7: And, um, fair to say that's an anti-psychotic as well for bipolar? Yes. [01:18:55] Speaker 11: Yes ma'am. [01:18:56] Speaker 7: Uh, are you familiar with whether that often can be prescribed in low doses for sleep? [01:19:02] Speaker 11: It is. It can be for insomnia. [01:19:05] Speaker 7: And trazodone, um, what's the common name for trazodone if you know? [01:19:10] Speaker 11: I am drawing a blank on the trazodone. [01:19:14] Speaker 7: Uh, if I suggest, uh, trazamine, is that familiar? [01:19:20] Speaker 11: Not the one that I'm most familiar with and I apologize. [01:19:23] Speaker 7: That's okay, but you're familiar with trazodone. [01:19:25] Speaker 11: Correct. [01:19:26] Speaker 7: And what class of drug is that? [01:19:27] Speaker 11: Uh, that's an anti-depressant. [01:19:29] Speaker ?: Okay. [01:19:30] Speaker 7: Now, in your review of the levels that were detected, um, in these four tests for each of these substances, um, do any of these levels appear to be, um, outside therapeutic concentration levels? [01:19:44] Speaker 11: The only one that's, um, a little elevated would be the ketiapine. Okay. [01:19:48] Speaker 4: Um. We're gonna, we're gonna take a very short break at this time. Alright? Um, so, this will be a short break and we'll come right back. [01:19:56] Speaker 5: Alright. Please go to the notebook and make some of the chairs. [01:20:02] Speaker 1: Very odd there, once again. This is Dr. Dr. Justin Brower on the stand who works for a lab, uh, outside of Philadelphia and he's on the stand talking about the different medications. And again, I'm not sure why or what, but, uh, just very abruptly, Judge William Sullivan says we're taking a short break. Um, I don't know if something was said that the jurors shouldn't have heard. It's hard to see what's going on in the gallery. Uh, but again, just sort of an odd, uh, interruption into trial coverage here. Obviously, he's the judge. He's the boss. Let's see what he says here. Alright. [01:20:40] Speaker 6: We'll be right. This will be a short break. [01:20:42] Speaker 4: Just for a short recess. We'll come right back up. Half hour? Hopefully not. Uh, so the judge there says short break. Kevin Reddington goes half hour. That's my Boston accent. And, uh, he laughs. The judge doesn't laugh and says, hopefully not. [01:20:51] Speaker 1: Um, short breaks with this judge aren't always so short, uh, to Kevin Reddington's point, but it is now 10:13 AM on the Eastern seaboard of the United States of America. And, uh, if you're just joining us. Uh, life can get heavy, man. [01:21:05] Speaker ?: Uh, people are like, how dare you conflate, uh, Lindsey Clancy with Perez Hilton. [01:21:05] Speaker 1: No one really knows what happened with Lindsey Clancy. That's why we're having a trial. Um, and we're having a trial. Um, and we're having a trial. Um, and we're having a trial. Uh, we're having a trial. Um, and we're having a trial. Um, and we're having a trial. Um, and we're having a trial. Um, and we're having a trial. Um, and we're having a trial. Um, and we're having a trial. Um, and we're having a trial. Um, and we're having a trial. Um, and we're having a trial. [01:21:20] Speaker ?: Um, and we're having a trial. [01:21:21] Speaker 1: Um, life can get heavy, man. Uh, people are like, how dare you conflate, uh, Lindsey Clancy with Perez Hilton. No one really knows what happened with Lindsey Clancy. That's why we're having a trial. No one really knows what happened with Perez Hilton. Uh, both at some point appeared to have some sort of mental breakdown. Um, so, uh, mental health, I think it's fair to say is at issue here, which is about the only thing tying the two of them together. Uh, which was my point last night. So, uh, no one's conflating anything. Uh, two separate people, uh, dealing, uh, with two separate and distinct issues in their life. The point I was making earlier, uh, is that the COE and I who live in Miami and all of this unfolded with Perez Hilton. If you don't know who Perez Hilton is, people can drive you crazy. Uh, I also called him, uh, sort of an original influencer. He's technically not an, how do you define influencer? I mean, the guy was doing this before there was really social media, but he is an influencer. He's a blogger. Does everyone have to pick on everything I say constantly? Okay. I mean, can you guys just kind of in general, can some people just sort of go with the flow? Most of you do. Uh, anyway, I didn't get any sleep. So, and I just had my coffee. So I'm a little wired. I need more coffee though. Uh, shout out, special shout out to the COE. Um, by the way, I got back from doing all of that last night and she's like, you know, you shot this vertically. And I'm like, you know, I'm a total moron with everything tech related, uh, would have been nice if you told me to shoot it horizontally. And, uh, she's like, well, you work on YouTube. And I was like, I know, but I'm a moron. And she's like, you should know better. And this is at like four in the morning. Uh, so not everything is, uh, rainbows and unicorns. Even the COE and I sometimes, uh, go at it, but it was a boneheaded move on my part to shoot it vertically. I now know that if I'm ever doing anything for YouTube to shoot it horizontally, AKA landscape wise. So forgive it, uh, this time around, but, uh, if you want to see where I was overnight, uh, you can go to our YouTube page, surviving the survivor. And you can, uh, click the video tab. Uh, incidentally, I have a book about my beautiful mother with the same title. So it's easy to remember surviving the survivor. Go buy it. It'll change your life, especially during these dark times. My mom is, uh, an eternal optimist, despite all that she went through, but it is available on audible. That is the clean version. Also, um, there was something else I was just going to say. Um, and I have lost my train of thought. Uh, as you can tell, the air conditioning has been kicking in, in Miami. Henceforth the sweatshirt the last couple of days. It was so hot the last couple of weeks that, uh, AC was not even putting a dent into, uh, the air temperature, uh, in here. So it was so hot, but, uh, last couple of days, uh, by Miami standards, it has cooled off probably into the mid eighties. And now the AC is keeping it very cool, but we are now on a, uh, on a break here, uh, in court. And, uh, I am going to go, uh, run and use the restroom. Do you know that in Canada, it is a washroom here is, uh, something to ponder. Why in America is it a bathroom or a restroom, but in Canada, it is a washroom. Is it because Canadians are just more refined? Uh, it sounds better than bathroom. Uh, if you know the answer to that, let me know. And, uh, let me know, um, what, you know, in England, it's a loo. It's a loo. Um, I don't know what you call a bathroom or a restroom in Ireland or in Australia or in New Zealand or in Tasmania or in, uh, I guess in, uh, Argentina, it would be a banio. Uh, but let me know. Um, this is an interesting question. I've never pondered a bathroom in Australia. Let me take a couple of looks at these. We also say bathroom in Canada. I've never heard it called, uh, Canadians are far too refined. I believe, uh, to say, uh, but here's the explanation. We go wash our hands in there. Hence a washroom. Um, look at this from Linda. Linda. I read a lot of books. Joel's is a really good one. In fairness to me. And even though I am the author, um, I do believe it should be, uh, among the best books. Um, of 2024. It's hard to believe it's already that old. Uh, go check it out. It will change how you look at life. I promise you that. I don't know why I'm harping on it today. I've got a framed book cover in my office. I'm staring at. Maybe that's why. Uh, you could say the loo. In France, it's a water closet. In Europe altogether. It's a water closet. It sounds scary. You go to a water closet. I feel like I'm going to drown in there. UK. It's a toilet. Lou in Northern Ireland. The head. Why is it called the head? I've never understood that. I mean, I've heard that obviously. Uh, but I have no idea. Uh, Melissa Navone. OMG, Joel. Uh, Joel. It could be worse. It could be an outhouse. Um, these are the things that I ponder. Uh, between my ears. I wonder about, um, I know I'm not the most normal person, but, um, I do wonder about certain things when they come up. Um, my oldest daughter, uh, Vida, uh, which means life in Espanol. Uh, one of the more beautiful souls you will ever meet a sweetheart and a very talented fashion designer. Um, I'm actually trying to convince her to drop out of middle school and just go into fashion design. She makes her own handbags. She makes her own, uh, dresses. Um, I'm telling her that school is overrated. I'm being a bad parent probably, but I'm trying to convince her to just go into, uh, the fashion design business at, uh, 12. Um, why did I just bring her up? Oh, she asked a lot of questions that I ask and when they're being asked of you every 1.3 seconds, you know, a lot of times my dad and I'm working on a book on him called surviving the psychiatrist. Um, and may he rest in peace. Uh, and I love the guy, but a lot of times, you know, he was burned out as a psychiatrist. And I would ask them, uh, how did they build a bridge? I don't know, Joel. Uh, so Carmen greened in me. Don't ever say, I don't know, Joel, uh, or I don't know Vita. Uh, so I always try to answer her. Uh, but she has a question for everything. Absolutely everything. And I love it. Uh, it just gets exhausting, especially if there's no sleep involved. Uh, so today Vita, uh, back off with the questions. Uh, my son who, uh, asked an interesting question, uh, yesterday after a certain period of time at night, um, all of a sudden the kids started to stay up really late. Um, I, I, I say to Judah Mac get lost. And he said to me, what is get lost? Where'd you get that from? And I said, got it from my dad. Uh, you inherit a lot of things. My dad used to use two phrases with me, get lost and scram. Such a Bronx word from like the 1940s, scram, scram. Uh, so I'm using those now. And he asked me, why do I say get lost? And I said, it's your grandfather taught it to me. Uh, and get lost. And then I, uh, threaten him. And I say, if you don't get lost, uh, this is like, I don't know. Right before I left last night, 11 o'clock at night. If you don't get lost, you're not going to the soccer game tomorrow. And I put on a serious voice and then he tries to squeeze out one more thing from me. Like, can I just give you a hug? You know, they always go for that. Or can I give you a kiss goodnight? And I say, yeah, this is the last one. Now scram, get lost. Um, in Australia, this is a, I never, I've never heard this word in my life. Call me ignorant, shallow, naive. In Australia, it is a dunny. We are back to discussing what restrooms are called in different. Where else could you get this other than that surviving the survivor? I mean, I try to make sure that, uh, everyone is learning something new every day. Uh, Diana Ward, restroom is a, uh, kind of conventional world. Uh, look at this. Look at this. A Yushi in China. Thank you to Montessori mindset. Uh, Montessori mindset. Um, I'm curious, how are you born in China? Did you move to China? Um, and do you teach at a Montessori school in China? Uh, I have not visited, I have not visited Asia yet. I have a very good friend who's in Japan as we speak. And, um, I have to go there and I have to go there soon. Uh, very soon. All this true crime and it makes you realize you just don't know. You just don't know. And, uh, I don't care. Not completely true. I'm becoming less and less interested in, uh, material, uh, objects and much more interested in experiences like travel. Um, I would love to do like an STS world tour. Maybe start here in Cambodia with joy, dog, diva cat, and then head over to China. Um, space coast chiming in here, dropping out of school for fashion is the worst possible advice. You could give your child. I never said it was good advice. Um, she is unbelievably talented. What the hell? What is she going to do in school? I mean, what is she going to do? She's going to learn how to count. She can count to 10. That's enough. You can figure out the rest. Uh, when you're, when you're there. Um, look at this from Nancy Stout. I appreciate this very much. I like that. You're crazy. No, she says, I liked it. You're real. Uh, just subscribed recently. Welcome. Uh, please hit the light. By the way, I always forget to say that I'm supposed to say it. Um, this is funny. I thought this was the name of the town. I was going to be like, wow, I've never heard of a restroom, Pennsylvania, but in Pennsylvania, I guess they call it a restroom. If it is the name of the town, let me know. Um, please, uh, hit the like and subscribe button. It's easy to do. You just have to pick up an index finger and drop it down on a mouse. If that's how you do it. Or, you know, I don't know if you can like while you're watching on a TV. And that's a real problem that, you know, this YouTube thing, they've got a lot of issues and I'm down to, uh, file a class action lawsuit. The space goes, can they hear me? Like when I say that, like, will they, will they shadow ban me? If I keep saying that I should probably stop, uh, saying stuff like that, but they annoy me when they start buffering and stuff. Uh, fashion merch, Wendy Klarman, uh, fashion merchandising, and she will need a bachelor's degree. Ah, degrees are overrated. Uh, there was so much emphasis in my world. Uh, I grew up in Highland Park, New Jersey, a stone's throw from Rutgers University. Every one of my friends, their parents were these academic academics. Uh, they were professors. Uh, they weren't professors. They were doctors or lawyers or teachers. And there was so much emphasis put on, uh, academics. Then I got into the real world and realized that it's all about the hustle, the work ethic, and has basically nothing to do with academics. Uh, those who are quote unquote successful. But I guess if you want to be a PhD in neuroscience, education is pretty important. Shout out to my friend, Rob, who's a PhD in neuroscience. I always wondered what they called it in Tampa, Tampa girl 23. We say bathroom. Do you know my friend Josh Benson? He is the main anchor at NBC in, uh, I would not reveal his last name normally, but he's the main anchor, uh, in Tampa on the NBC station. If you ever see Josh Benson say hello to him. Um, this is a, uh, ringing endorsement, Joel. You're fine. I think, I think you're fine. Uh, lest you think we are not the future of podcasting is actually the next day in Australia, 1230 in the morning. They're 14 hours ahead of the East coast. I presume having done the math. That's why you have to go to school so you can do math real quick. So you can figure out what time it is in Australia when you live in Miami. That's really the reason to go to school. Uh, my kids, uh, the two youngest just got their list of friends. Um, they're happy with it for the upcoming school year. The classrooms that they're in, you remember going to school. I distinctly remember like in fifth grade, especially growing up in New Jersey, especially like in February and I had a dog. Uh, and as I was leaving for school, she slept under a desk on a little dog bed. And she'd be rolled up into this little tight ball. And she was so warm. And I distinctly remember being jealous of my dog that she did not have to get up and go to school. Have any of you ever been jealous of your dogs or cats? Uh, they can just lie there in a ball of warm, uh, especially when you live in a cold area and you have to go out into the cold. Uh, 7:27 AM in Spokane. We're thinking of you. How are the wildfires? Let us know. Um, I really do love this community that we have built here at surviving the survivor and, uh, continue to build. Uh, aside from, uh, liking and subscribing, the absolute best thing that, uh, anyone in here could do is tell a friend. Uh, whether you love them or hate them, if you hate the friend, tell them to watch it. Cause some people get aggravated with me. Uh, but if you like the friend, tell them to watch surviving the survivor. Word of mouth is, uh, how it, uh, how it all gets done. My partner is from Toronto and they say bath restroom. They say washroom to coffee time for D. Uh, well, this is true, uh, from Sharon, uh, Curland, a brain surgeon must go to school. It would be hard to be a brain surgeon and not have, uh, any academic, uh, background. Joy dog. Diva cat is back. I see court coming back here. 9:28 PM in Cambodia. I would love to get to Cambodia. I might even retire in Cambodia. Pull a page out of the Donna Adelson, uh, playbook there. Uh, from Denise almost just choked on my, uh, thank you for your coverage. Lindsay and family were all failed. And this is so beyond tragic for the entire family. I appreciate you COE mods and your best guests, not just a tagline. It is not just a tagline. Uh, best guests. Uh, it is our reality. This is very true. I do need to use the restroom and I'm going to do that right. Uh, Tampa. [01:37:56] Speaker 4: You're right. Josh Benson. He's been following the Jody. [01:37:59] Speaker ?: He's in truth. I don't know how to pronounce it. Uh, case for many years. [01:38:02] Speaker 1: She's a news anchor that went missing. And I should get Josh on here to discuss that case. Uh, if you ever see Josh, tell him I say hello. I think if you turn this on and watch it too. [01:38:29] Speaker ?: I love this. Thanks. Thanks. Oh, all right. Joe is entered. Uh, all right. Joe is entered. [01:38:36] Speaker 5: Uh, all right. Joe is entered. Uh, all right. [01:38:39] Speaker ?: Joe is entered. [01:38:39] Speaker 5: Uh, all right. Joe is entered. Uh, all right. [01:38:42] Speaker ?: Joe is entered. Uh, all right. Joe is entered. Uh, all right. Joe is entered. Uh, all right. Joe is entered. Uh, all right. Joe is entered. Uh, all right. Joe is entered. [01:38:53] Speaker 3: there's course now a session please be seated all right for the purpose of the record we return back to the trial of common law for us as lindsay clancy all parties are present including ms clancy and including the 18 jurors all right all right counsel thank you um dr. Brower before [01:39:23] Speaker 11: we broke um we mentioned the term therapeutic concentration are you familiar with that term correct what does that mean it's the typical concentration that one would achieve when they're taking the medication or drug as indicated by their prescriber and are you familiar with um toxic concentrations or suicidal concentrations i am and what does that mean those are concentrations that could lead to adverse events and potentially [01:39:53] Speaker 7: death now in relation to the four substances that were tested at the nms laboratory um you uh identified the levels for each of the four substances were any of those um subs or levels excuse me concentration levels uh considered within therapeutic concentration [01:40:13] Speaker 11: um it would all be in what i would say therapeutic concentration except maybe the keteapine which is [01:40:20] Speaker 7: slightly elevated okay and in your experience as a forensic toxicologist have you had the occasion to review cases um post-mortem cases in which suicide was um a mechanism of death where the person consumed medication absolutely yes and so um that level of the keteapine keteapine at the 800 nanograms per milliliter um was would that have been in that toxic or suicidal level no ma'am would you generally expect to see that um a significantly greater in a suicide case [01:40:58] Speaker 11: uh typically keteapines in suicide cases might be in the you know close to 10 000 nanograms per milliliter usually people take handfuls of pills when they're trying to harm themselves and take their own life [01:41:12] Speaker 7: and this is not consistent with that now are you also familiar in your training and experience with um the class of drugs called benzodiazepines yes ma'am and do you have the occasion to interpret data as it pertains to concentration levels for those every single day and um as far as the substances diazepam noradiazepam oxazepam tamazepam lorazepam you're familiar with those i am and um it's fair to say noradiazepam oxazepam tamazepam those are all metabolites of diazepam um typically yes ma'am and what's the um common name for diazepam um if i show you what's um been marked as exhibit 183 already can you see that on the screen beside you um i can yes okay [01:42:19] Speaker 11: right there [01:42:23] Speaker 7: can you see the levels [01:42:26] Speaker 11: they're all blurry yep hold on there we go my site's not great too so okay so that's perfect [01:42:33] Speaker 7: that's the best i can do with the auto focus don't touch it any um anything about the levels that you observed here regarding those substances those vendors benzodiazepines that tell you that they're outside therapeutic concentration levels [01:42:49] Speaker 11: the diazepam and the nordazepam oxazepam and tamazepam metabolites the diazepam looks to be sub therapeutic meaning lower than what is typically expected from a therapeutic dose most therapeutic doses of diazepam which isn't which is an anxiolytic drug or an anti-anxiety drug or typically you know 200 250 thereabouts nanogram per milliliter the lorazepam depending upon the dose could be a therapeutic concentration if not maybe a little bit lower than expected [01:43:29] Speaker 7: now when you're um reviewing these cases um as the reporting forensic toxicologist are there limitations on what you can say about the effects of these types of medications we can [01:43:43] Speaker 11: speak as to the the general effects that drugs can have on the general population but we try to restrict ourselves from saying with absolute certainty that a drug will have this effect on this specific person um because we just aren't there to witness their behavior okay so that was [01:44:01] Speaker 7: kind of the follow-up so i'm sorry what are the things what are the things that you are the unknowns for you when you're just looking at data uh we did when we say that we can't do toxicology in [01:44:14] Speaker 11: a vacuum you can't know everything about the case just by looking at numbers on the toxicology report and drugs on toxicology report you need other information to form have an informed opinion in the post-mortem world that would be the investigation itself the history of the case the scene findings um you know interviews with you know families and friends of the decedent uh as all as well as autopsy findings as well um in a case like this where it's not a decedent and the person is alive you still need to know some facts of the case uh some sort of history of the case like what what happened uh so just numbers on a page you can just make very generalized um types of opinions such as that looks to be therapeutic it looks to be high it looks to be low and then again just the general effects on the drugs on people and [01:45:09] Speaker 7: in this particular instance you were not provided any further information about the case or the investigation in order to make any more opinions about effects i knew nothing about this case until we [01:45:19] Speaker 11: spoke i think it was probably a few weeks ago and as far as the information available to you you only [01:45:24] Speaker 7: had the data from the specimen that was tested correct that is correct just these four drugs that were requested to be tested for and as far as the drugs of the four drugs that were tested by your lab what are the general characteristics of some of those drugs [01:45:38] Speaker 11: uh so these are generally antidepressants and antipsychotic medications so if somebody had um well the lamotrigine if somebody has say bipolar disorder like wide uh wild mood swings um depressive episodes or anti-psychotic episodes these drugs could be prescribed um they also have depressant um effects so they could make people become you know lethargic or or sleepy [01:46:09] Speaker 7: okay and um would any of the combination of these drugs cause a person to stop breathing [01:46:16] Speaker 11: um it is possible uh the especially the mirtazapine the teapine the trazadone and then the two other benzodiazepines those are all central nervous system depressants so they could um in large combinations or large concentrations and in combination with each other cause central nervous system depression uh which could uh reduce people's respiration rates but in the levels that you [01:46:43] Speaker 7: observed in the testing um that your lab did as well as what i just showed you from exhibit 183 is there anything about those concentration levels that would um give you a sense that the person could have stopped [01:46:55] Speaker 11: breathing as a result of these not necessarily but if i have the information that you know a patient a patient presented to an emergency department and they had labored breathing and you know weren't breathing adequately and i had this information then you could probably tie all that together but without that extra information then generally no based on the levels alone you can't give any sort of [01:47:17] Speaker 7: opinion i would like to not um and finally um are you familiar with the the drug narcan i am and what kind of effect does the drug narcan have on a person who has consumed these drugs if any um just these drugs that we've talked about here today absolutely nothing can you explain to us why it is that narcan wouldn't [01:47:49] Speaker 11: have an effect narcan is an opioid overdose reversal agent it is an opioid antagonist so it binds to the opioid receptors uh so it doesn't allow other opioids like say fentanyl or oxycodone to bind to those receptors to have um to exert its effects so it only works on opioids uh none of these drugs work on the opioid receptors so narcan would have no effect whatsoever on these drugs okay thank you [01:48:21] Speaker 2: good morning um dr brauer um so one of the things that you had mentioned is that you and i and i think i would quote you i would like not to give an opinion without the the end of basically the underlying facts uh in other words what you're saying is that the numbers alone do not tell the tale of what happened to a particular individual right correct they don't tell the entire story right and you're um for nms laboratory you were retained or working for the da's office these people here right that was the submitting agency correct and um they certainly were not constrained from picking up the phone and calling you and telling you that this is blood from a woman that threw herself out a window and tried to kill herself after cutting her wrists in the neck they they could have told you that right um it [01:49:17] Speaker 11: is possible that does happen in rare occasions in high profile cases right and uh so that would [01:49:26] Speaker 2: have been something for example that the facts that you wanted to know that you would have liked to have known to to kind of round out your opinion about the actual level of the drugs and the blood that you examined right it's not necessary um well it's not necessary but you did indicate that you would like to not give an opinion without the facts uh correct okay today from the witness stand correct i don't have all the information of course um and the word therapeutic is that consistent with in other words the treatment level of a particular narcotic in or drug in the blood correct it's the concentration [01:50:10] Speaker 11: of the drug in of the drug in the body to elicit in effect or the desired effect [01:50:24] Speaker 2: the evidence that i introduced the micro id the message oh um she's trying to find the record um as it relates to the therapeutic level sir um is it your understanding that um the lorazepam yeah perazepam clonazepam the council had asked you about the benzodiazepines were within therapeutical thank you in therapeutic level i'm i'm sorry i had trouble hearing you yeah i'm sorry they were they were within therapeutic level i'm sorry can you repeat [01:51:32] Speaker 11: the entire question sure uh what is lamatrigine uh lamatrigine is typically used as an anti-seizure [01:51:40] Speaker 2: medication and could also be used for bipolar disorder okay um do you have the results for your lab in front of you yes sir yeah you can read along just so you can refresh your memory if it helps um the [01:51:52] Speaker 11: the lamatrigine um it says 6.1 what does that mean uh 6.1 micrograms per milliliter so there were six six point one micrograms of lamatrigine per milliliter of blood all right um is that above therapeutic below therapeutic or therapeutic it's right in the middle of the therapeutic range so [01:52:15] Speaker 2: if somebody had a prescription for example for that narcotic or that drug then they were taking the drug according to the recommended dose right that's what it would appear to me if they were prescribed it [01:52:26] Speaker 11: correct how about the mirtazapine the mirtazapine also looks to be probably used appropriately as prescribed and you need a prescription for that don't you um yes you need a prescription for all three [01:52:39] Speaker 2: of all i'm sorry all four of these drugs okay and what is is there another name for mirtazapine um remeron remera all right and what is the purpose of what do you use remeron for it's an antidepressant [01:52:53] Speaker 11: how about the uh creatapine is the number three the cateapine is also known as seroquel and that is [01:53:01] Speaker 2: generally used as an anti-psychotic and what does that mean when you say an anti-psychotic what does that [01:53:07] Speaker 11: mean um to so somebody has psychotic episodes say like hallucinations or just not seeing reality like quote quote normal person would they could be prescribed uh cateapine to as an anti-psychotic to try to uh kind of level out their their brain chemistry and what was the result on the cateapine 1800 1800 nanograms per milliliter now is that within therapeutic is that below or high it looks high to me depending upon the dosage okay and trazodone is the next one what is that um trazodone is also an um antidepressant and is that what's the result on that oh i'm sorry 0.44 micrograms per milliliter okay and is that therapeutic below therapeutic or above [01:54:05] Speaker 2: therapeutic i would say that's um a therapeutic concentration okay so basically with the exception of the cateapine that was 1800 uh nanograms per what is a nanogram what does that mean nanograms [01:54:18] Speaker 11: per milliliter what does that mean it's a very very small amount it's um um [01:54:26] Speaker 2: one millionth of a milligram okay and that's how you measure the quantity of a particular substance that would be in in a person's blood correct in the blood correct so on the quiet quietapine uh at 1800 nanograms per milliliter um that's the only one that was not therapeutic that was a little higher [01:54:47] Speaker 11: than therapeutic is that correct correct it's approximately maybe double what you might expect um so it's when i say it's a little elevated it's not in a concentration that i would consider to be necessarily toxic or or lethal okay [01:55:11] Speaker 2: and you don't know working for nms labs or whether or not a person had a prescription for these drugs or when they got the prescription or who gave them the prescription you don't know that right i have none of that information no you could have known that if somebody told you that but you don't know it from looking at the numbers that we have here right correct it's possible if they would have [01:55:30] Speaker 11: given us that information we don't always need to have it though sure all right this is what i have [01:55:39] Speaker 7: can i see it again if we can just approach it virtually yeah yeah [01:55:58] Speaker ?: yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah [01:56:02] Speaker 1: yeah [01:56:15] Speaker ?: yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah [01:56:15] Speaker 1: yeah [01:56:29] Speaker ?: yeah [01:56:29] Speaker 1: yeah [01:56:42] Speaker ?: yeah yeah [01:56:42] Speaker 1: we're talking about how these medications are supposed to help level out the brain chemistry commonwealth essentially arguing nothing to see here the defense the defense is going to say it was way too many drugs it was disorganized and convoluted and uh a crazy cocktail and concoction of drugs that partially drove her to do what she did which is we know uh taking the lives of her three children there is no debating that the defense has come out and said our client did this but she is not criminally responsible that is the legal threshold in here in in this case and the commonwealth is saying she is criminally responsible and it is going to be for the 18 jurors um 12 women and six men and we don't know the alternate makeup yet i mean six alternates there will be we don't know who the actual jurors deliberating will be but it's going to be up to them uh to figure all this uh out uh doc v 411 here this was a serious self unaliving attempt uh and then you go to lanky psychosis is not to blame a very divided chat and that is why tim jansen the famed tallahassee criminal defense attorney has said from day one he believes this is going to end in a hung jury and then the question would be do they try this again and tim said that's going to depend on a jury poll and what they come back with in other in other words if it was six and six uh they likely won't try it again and she'll probably just end up in a psych hospital if it was 11 to convict and one uh that she's not criminally responsible then yeah they probably will uh try it again so uh we will have to see um lanky also saying uh i like that name lanky not a serious attempt she would know what to do she saved herself after uh she is a labor and delivery nurse uh lindsey clancy is so that adds to it um perez was one of the first online celebrity gossip bloggers i remember going to his website daily for the t if you haven't heard perez hilton who is exactly as boomer uh sooner ou described him um he had uh an obvious mental uh health episode a breakdown last night while uh on a live tick tock uh sts we were uh on scene there overnight as that unfolded and there is a video under the video tab on our page with our report they are coming back here from this very short break probably to break going to longer break i introduce [01:59:38] Speaker 2: that exhibit at this time thank you so just if i may excuse me which basically is a uh an nms lab report same as this one same numbers on the top right where the square is correct same [01:59:54] Speaker 1: numbers correct thank you sir that's all i have what do you all think of this comment women jurors will [01:59:59] Speaker 7: not be as friendly as one thinks the women going to be tougher you in fact um once got this case for review you authored a corrected report um in in regards to this case correct correct at this point i would move to admit the report all right that may be admitted as well thank you [02:00:23] Speaker 4: further thank you sir all right all right thank you doctor am i released to ross thank you thank you [02:00:37] Speaker 12: your honor prior to the next witness the commonwealth would move to submit um four stipulations the party parties have entered into uh the first being a stipulation regarding dna known standard samples the second being a stipulation regarding dna evidence for the blue exercise band and the red brown stain on the basement floor the third being the stipulation regarding dna evidence for the yellow exercise band and the black exercise band and the fourth being the stipulation regarding dna comparisons for the blue exercise band in the red brown stain in the basement that's right we don't need [02:01:13] Speaker 2: to have all those witnesses all right all right so those stipulations may be [02:01:19] Speaker 1: entered as exhibits once again uh stipulating to known dna samples including the three bands including some of the brown uh staining which is believed those uh published or read to the jury [02:01:36] Speaker 4: are satisfied that they'll have those the parties can the parties can refer to the contents of the of the stipulations the only um one we would like to have checked right to the jury uh i'm sorry have you are [02:01:50] Speaker 1: you lost that if anyone knows lindsey clance is doing with her eyes are kind of fluttering let me know if you're a medical professional uh her eyes appear to be uh out of sorts at the moment [02:02:04] Speaker 12: the exhibit 211 stipulations regarding comparisons for the blue band and the red brown stain [02:02:17] Speaker 2: yeah i don't if she if she wants you to read it i don't have a problem yeah [02:02:22] Speaker 4: well you know what i want to read it all right so that's what we'll do all right so if you remember i think it was yesterday or the day before i talked a little bit about those stipulations uh so the same instructions i think these are facts that we're going to read that the parties agreed to you can rely on in arriving at your um verdict at the end of this case these stipulations one of four that was just introduced you'll have all four more than contact lenses back in the jury room when you're deliberating but uh so let me just read this one stipulation this doesn't mean this stipulation is any more important than any of the other ones but uh the parties would like me to just read this one here all right so this is a stipulation regarding the dna comparisons for the blue exercise band and the red brown stain it was my a now in the above captioned matter the parties agree to the following facts as it pertains to the dna comparisons for the blue exercise band and the red brown stain a in the basement number one forensic scientist emily oliver reviewed and interpreted the data relating to the question items paragraph parentheses item 2-4 blue exercise band and item 3-3 the red brown stain a from the basement floor close parentheses parenthesis and conducted comparison analysis to the known standards in this case number two the parties agreed to the following conclusions regarding comparison analysis of these items a item 2-4.1.1 sample from the ends of the blue exercise band the dna profile was interpreted as a mixture of three contributors of three contributors there are five individuals who have a likelihood ratio that indicates an inclusion in the profile they are dawson clancy callen clancy cora clancy lindsay lindsay clancy and patrick clancy b item 2-4.2.1 sample from the middle of the blue exercise band the dna profile was interpreted as a mixture of three contributors mixture of three contributors. Callan Clancy is included as a major contributor. And C, item 3-3.1, sample of swabs from the red-brown stain A on the basement floor. The DNA profile was interpreted as originating from a single contributor. Cora Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. So that's the stipulation that the parties have agreed to. And one last stipulation [02:05:13] Speaker 12: to be marked as the next exhibit, the stipulation regarding the batch work done at NMS Labs. We're not asking let this be read at this time. Okay, all right. And the Commonwealth would call Katerina Stashen. [02:05:47] Speaker 5: Good morning, ma'am. [02:05:47] Speaker 8: Good morning. Do you follow Ms. Wether the testimony and the evidence you should get to the court and the jury that I'm not having between the Commonwealth and the defendant to Basha? Yes. Thank you. You may have a seat, ma'am. Watch your step, please. Thank you. [02:06:05] Speaker 4: Good morning. [02:06:06] Speaker 12: Good morning. [02:06:08] Speaker 4: All right. Attorney Sprague, please. [02:06:10] Speaker 12: Thank you, Your Honor. [02:06:11] Speaker 13: Good morning. Can you please state and spell your name for the record? Good morning. My name is Katerina Stashen. My first name is spelled K-A-T-A-R-I-N-A. Last name is spelled S-T-A-S-H-Y-N. And can you describe for us your educational background? I have a bachelor's and master's degree in biotechnology from the University of Nevada, Reno. And what is your occupation? I'm currently employed by the Washoe County Sheriff's Office Forensic Science Division, which is located in Reno, Nevada. I'm a criminalist in the biology and forensic investigation sections. [02:06:48] Speaker 12: Back in January of 2023, where were you working? [02:06:54] Speaker 13: I previously worked for the Massachusetts State Police Crime Laboratory as a forensic scientist in the DNA unit, which is functionally the same role that I currently have in the biology section. [02:07:05] Speaker 2: I'm sorry. We agreed to the DNA. I'm just letting you know that. [02:07:10] Speaker 12: Okay. All right. And I'm just giving that evidence to the jury. Go ahead. So, when did you start working for the state police? [02:07:19] Speaker 13: I worked for the Massachusetts State Police from June 2021 to February of 2025. [02:07:26] Speaker 12: And what was the nature of your work for the lab at that time? [02:07:33] Speaker 13: As a DNA analyst, I processed evidence items obtained either from a crime scene or from an individual associated with a criminal investigation. These items of evidence would be processed through the laboratory. I then would perform interpretations, comparisons as needed, write reports. I also could perform administrative reviews of other analysts' work and provide expert witness testimony as needed. [02:07:58] Speaker 12: And part of your employment at the Massachusetts State Police Crime Lab, did you take competency tests and proficiency tests to guarantee that you were capable and proficient in the areas you were working? [02:08:11] Speaker 13: Yes. I took both competency tests after my training and proficiency tests throughout my career at Massachusetts and at my current role. And have you passed all of those tests? Yes. I have passed all competency and proficiency tests that I've taken so far in my career. Can you tell us, what is DNA? DNA stands for deoxyribonucleic acid. And this is genetic information that is stored in our cells. This is information that makes us who we are, determines how we develop and grow. A person's DNA is inherited approximately half from their mom and half from their dad. DNA is forensically relevant because it is expected that no two individuals will have the same forensic DNA profile. [02:08:53] Speaker 12: And is DNA the same in every single cell in a person's body? [02:08:58] Speaker 13: Yes. The DNA profile obtained from different cells, different cell types like a blood cell or from a saliva cell or cell in your saliva would have the same DNA profile barring your mutation. [02:09:11] Speaker 12: And can you explain generally the process used to analyze evidence in this case, the testing involving the defendant, Lindsay Clancy? [02:09:23] Speaker 13: The items tested in this case and in all cases will go through a four-step laboratory process of extraction, quantification, amplification, and detection. And then profiles developed from that laboratory process will be interpreted and compared. [02:09:38] Speaker 12: Can you just briefly explain what is extraction and how it's done? [02:09:43] Speaker 13: Extraction is the first step of that laboratory process that involves applying a variation of heat and chemicals to a sample. This breaks open cells that are present and releases the DNA and then isolates that DNA. [02:09:56] Speaker 12: And was the next step quantification? Yes. [02:10:00] Speaker 13: And what is that and how do you do that? Quantification is the second step when we determine a reliable estimate for the amount of DNA in those samples that were extracted and those values are then used to optimize the rest of the process with the goal to obtain a quality profile for that sample. And the third step, amplification, can you explain that? Amplification is when we make millions and millions of copies of certain areas of DNA to make it able to be detected and visualized. And then detection, what is that? And then the fourth step is separation or detection. This is where we separate out all those millions and millions of copies that we made to make them visual. This produces a DNA profile that an analyst is then able to review and interpret. [02:10:48] Speaker 12: And when you worked at the Massachusetts State Police Crime Lab, were there certain standardized protocols and procedures that you used at that lab? Yes. And were there controls used in your testing? Yes. What does that mean? [02:11:02] Speaker 13: So there are two different types of controls that were used in our testing. The first is a positive control. This is a sample that contains a known DNA profile and it is processed alongside evidence samples. So when that known DNA profile is obtained at the end of the process, it confirms that the process is working appropriately. The second type of control is a negative control. And this is a sample that contains no DNA that is also processed alongside evidence samples. And this is able to monitor any contamination and confirm that clean technique is used during testing. [02:11:35] Speaker 12: And does your work undergo a review process at the lab or did it? [02:11:39] Speaker 13: Yes. All work goes through two stages of review, technical review and administrative review. Technical review is when another qualified analyst reviews all of the work done in the file and in the report. They confirm that all protocols were followed and that correct conclusions were drawn. And then administrative review is when another analyst reviews that file, all of the documentation in the report for overall clerical accuracy and completeness. [02:12:06] Speaker 12: And when you worked on lab number 23-01723, evidence involved in the deaths of Cora Clancy, Dawson Clancy, and Callan Clancy, did you follow the standardized protocols and procedures? Yes. Were there any issues with the controls that were present when you did this testing? [02:12:28] Speaker 13: All controls were acceptable per the laboratory protocols. [02:12:31] Speaker 12: And did your work undergo and pass that review process you just described? Yes. All work went through both technical and administrative review. And if we could talk specifically about the work that you did in this case, first, I'd like to talk, or I'd like you to talk about, your work done on the yellow exercise band and the black exercise band. Now, you didn't actually handle those items, correct? [02:13:00] Speaker 13: I did a portion of the laboratory work for those samples, but I did not handle the actual bands themselves. I handled swabs of those bands. [02:13:09] Speaker 12: So at some point in time in the lab, someone took swabs from those bands, and then that was forwarded to the DNA unit, the swabs? Yes. Okay. And specifically, there was item 2-2.1.1 swabs from the ends of the yellow exercise band, and item 2-2.2.1 swabs from the middle of the yellow exercise band, correct? Could I refer to my report to confirm that? [02:13:38] Speaker 4: Any objection? [02:13:39] Speaker ?: Of course. [02:13:39] Speaker 13: Thank you. Thank you. [02:13:47] Speaker 12: Yes. And when doing your comparison work, did you also use some DNA profiles that had been generated in the lab for Dawson Clancy, Cora Clancy, Callan Clancy, Patrick Clancy, and Lindsay Clancy? [02:14:04] Speaker 13: Yes. I utilized known standards that were developed from those individuals. [02:14:08] Speaker 12: And known standards, are those basically the DNA profiles for each of those individuals? [02:14:13] Speaker 13: Yes. Known standards are samples collected directly from a known individual for comparison purposes. [02:14:20] Speaker 12: And going to item 2-2.1.1, the swabs from the ends of the yellow exercise band, what were your findings? [02:14:39] Speaker 13: So, I'm going to start with a general statement for this report as a whole. The presence of multiple first-degree relatives in a mixture DNA profile can impact overall interpretation, including the determination of the number of contributors and likelihood ratios. Relatedness was considered for the following results. For item 2-2.1.1, sample from ends of yellow exercise band, located in basement office, 47 Summer Street. The DNA profile is a mixture, including male DNA. Due to the possible relatedness of low-level contributors to this profile, an alternate number of contributors was considered. First, assuming two contributors. The DNA profile is a mixture of at least two contributors, including male DNA. Contributors 1 and 2 are suitable for comparison. The DNA profile was interpreted as a mixture of two contributors. The DNA profile from this item is at least 1.7 non-million times more likely if it originated from Dawson-Clancy and an unknown individual than if it originated from two unknown, unrelated individuals. This provides support that Dawson-Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. Cora Clancy, Callan Clancy, Patrick Clancy, and Lindsay Clancy are excluded from this DNA profile. Assuming three contributors. The DNA profile was interpreted as a mixture of three contributors. Contributor 1 is suitable for comparison. Due to limited information and possible relatedness of contributors, contributors 2 and 3 are not suitable for comparison. The DNA profile from this item is at least 920 octillion times more likely if it originated from Dawson-Clancy and two unknown individuals than if it originated from three unknown, unrelated individuals. This provides support that Dawson-Clancy is included to this DNA profile. Cora Clancy, Callan Clancy, Patrick Clancy, and Lindsay Clancy are excluded from Contributor 1 of this DNA profile. [02:16:43] Speaker 12: I'm going to ask you a few questions about what you've just told us. You mentioned the effect of relatedness. What does that mean? [02:16:51] Speaker 13: So as I mentioned, an individual's DNA is inherited approximately one half from their mom and one half from their dad. So this means that there's a lot of DNA shared between relatives, including between parent and children and between siblings. So this can affect the determination of the number of contributors. So when I review the profile to see how many people are in that profile because there's so much DNA that is shared. So taking that into account, I did two different interpretations. First, assuming two contributors, and the second, assuming three contributors. Again, just due to the complexity of relatedness and its effect on this profile, especially low-level contributors. [02:17:37] Speaker 12: And would it be correct to state that when there is this level of relatedness where you have two parents and three siblings, that you can have false exclusions? [02:17:46] Speaker 13: If there is an underassignment of the number of contributors, meaning that the number of contributors is incorrectly assigned lower than it actually is, which is a possibility with relatedness because you're working with less information because that information is shared, the underassigning could lead to false exclusions of true contributors. [02:18:09] Speaker 12: Could you also miss some people to include? [02:18:15] Speaker 13: Due to the effects of relatedness, it could be difficult to determine number of contributors simply because so much information is shared. Therefore, it is more complex when assigning this number. [02:18:27] Speaker 12: And for item 2-2.1.1, the ends of the yellow exercise band, whether you considered two contributors or three contributors, both of your findings find that Dawson-Clancy was a contributor, a potential contributor? [02:18:41] Speaker 13: Both propositions, either two contributors or three contributors, had high inclusionary stats for Dawson-Clancy, correct. [02:18:51] Speaker 12: What's a non-nillion? A non-nillion is a very large number. Do you know how many people are on earth? I know it's... [02:19:05] Speaker 2: This is typical DNA gobbledygook at this point, Judge. I object to his objections. [02:19:12] Speaker 12: That's ridiculous. Okay. [02:19:13] Speaker 2: You can ask. That's it. [02:19:21] Speaker 1: He dropped the word. Gobbledygook. Kevin Reddington and ADA Spray going at it. They did stipulate a few moments ago to all this DNA testing. And I'm not an attorney, so I'm having a hard time understanding the point of these stipulations. If then they get into the minutiae of all this, when the point, from what I understand of the stipulations, is to reduce some of the witness time to move the trial along. Again, the defense is not saying our client did not do this. The defense is saying our client murdered her three children. She should just not be held criminally responsible because she was out of her right mind. And now the Commonwealth kind of going into acute detail about, you know, the toxicology, the amount of drugs, the DNA issue now, and immediately Kevin Reddington... Thank you, Your Honor. Here we go. [02:20:29] Speaker 12: 1.7 million. Is that more than there are people on the earth? [02:20:33] Speaker 13: That is more individuals that are on the earth. But I would like to clarify that a likelihood ratio is not a random match probability or a rarity of that profile. A likelihood ratio is a ratio that describes the probability of observing the DNA profile if a certain person is included versus the probability of observing that DNA profile if a certain person is excluded or if it is another unknown, unrelated individual. [02:21:02] Speaker 12: And you said a million is a very high number, correct? [02:21:05] Speaker 13: Yes, that's a very large number in my opinion. [02:21:07] Speaker 12: So it's a very large probability that Dawson-Clancy is a contributor to that mixture. [02:21:14] Speaker 13: It is a large likelihood ratio that provides support for the inclusion of Dawson-Clancy to the profile. [02:21:22] Speaker 12: And then going to item 2-2.2.1, the swabs from the middle of the exercise band, what were your findings for that? [02:21:34] Speaker 13: The DNA profile was interpreted as a mixture of two contributors, including male DNA. The DNA profile from this item is at least 1.5 non-million times more likely if it originated from Dawson-Clancy and an unknown individual than if it originated from two unknown, unrelated individuals. This provides support that Dawson-Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. The DNA profile from this item is at least 3.6 million times more likely if it originated from Callon-Clancy and an unknown individual than if it originated from two unknown, unrelated individuals. This provides support that Callon-Clancy is included as a contributor to this profile. The DNA profile from this item is at least 1.4 billion times more likely if it originated from Patrick-Clancy Clancy and an unknown individual than if it originated from two unknown, unrelated individuals. This provides support that Patrick-Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. Cora-Clancy and Lindsay-Clancy are excluded from this DNA profile. The mixture DNA profile from this item is consistent with having originated from two individuals. There are three individuals who have a likelihood ratio that indicates an inclusion. Though there is support for the individual inclusions of Dawson-Clancy, Callon-Clancy, and Patrick-Clancy to the mixture DNA profile, under the stated assumptions, these individuals cannot be present in the mixture together. Assuming one, two contributors, and two, Dawson-Clancy is one of the contributors, Callon-Clancy and Patrick-Clancy cannot be present in the mixture together. Support for inclusion may be impacted by mixtures which contain relative, especially first-degree relatives. Refer to the independent inclusionary statistics above. [02:23:24] Speaker 12: So this swab from the middle of the yellow exercise band, you stated was a mixture of two contributors, two people, correct? [02:23:34] Speaker 13: Yes, I determined using my training and experience that the profile was a mixture of two contributors. [02:23:40] Speaker 12: And then you had three possible contributors, Dawson, Callon, and Patrick, for the two-person mixture. So is it accurate that that relatedness issue was having an effect on that data or that result? [02:23:58] Speaker 13: That's relatedness of potential contributors was having an effect on this profile. And that is because so much DNA is shared between potential contributors. [02:24:08] Speaker 12: And what you stated at the end, that if Dawson-Clancy is one of the contributors, then Callon-Clancy and Patrick-Clancy cannot be present together in that mixture, correct? Correct. And Dawson-Clancy was the one who had the 1.5 non-million times more likely if it originated from him, correct? [02:24:29] Speaker 13: Yes, the likelihood ratio for Dawson was 1.5 non-million. [02:24:34] Speaker 12: And would it be accurate to state that with male relatives, they share the same YSTR profile? [02:24:49] Speaker 13: Yes, male relatives will share the same YSTR profile, barring rare mutation, but YSTR analysis was not done in this case. Okay. [02:24:58] Speaker 12: And does that fact, when you have male relatives, does that affect the relatedness complications of your evaluation? [02:25:07] Speaker 13: The fact that they're male doesn't necessarily have an effect, but just in general, relatedness has an effect in this case because so much DNA is shared between potential contributors. [02:25:16] Speaker 12: And then going to item 2-3.1.1, the swabs from the ends of the black exercise band, you found that that sample was a mixture but wasn't suitable for comparison, correct? Correct. And what does it mean to be not suitable for comparison? [02:25:36] Speaker 13: I'll read the statement in the report and then I'll clarify as needed. The DNA profile is a mixture, including male DNA, and is not suitable for comparison due to the complexity of the profile, the possibility of at least five contributors, and the relatedness of potential contributors. [02:25:53] Speaker 12: So was it not suitable for comparison because there were so many potential contributors, many of them who were related? [02:26:01] Speaker 13: Yes, there were multiple factors that made this profile not suitable, relatedness was definitely one of those factors, and per laboratory protocols and validation, if there is any indication of a fifth contributor or more, a profile is not suitable for comparison due to limitations of our technology and software used. [02:26:19] Speaker 12: So basically, if you're examining a profile and it looks like there's five or more, your work stops because of the limitations of your equipment? Correct. And then going to item 2-3.2.1, the swabs from the middle of the exercise band, what was your, what were your findings there? [02:26:40] Speaker 13: The DNA profile was interpreted as a mixture of three contributors, including male DNA. The DNA profile from this item is at least 870 trillion times more likely if it originated from Dawson-Clancy and two unknown individuals than if it originated from three unknown unrelated individuals. This provides support that Dawson-Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. The DNA profile from this item is at least 1.6 non-million times more likely if it originated from Cora-Clancy and two unknown individuals than if it originated from three unknown unrelated individuals. This provides support that Cora-Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. The DNA profile from this item is at least 2,600 times more likely if it originated from Callan-Clancy and two unknown individuals than if it originated from three unknown unrelated individuals. This provides support that Callan-Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. The DNA profile from this item is at least 220,000 times more likely if it originated from Patrick-Clancy and two unknown individuals than if it originated from three unknown unrelated individuals. This provides support that Patrick-Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. The DNA profile from this item is at least 11 times more likely if it originated from Lindsay-Clancy and two unknown individuals than if it originated from three unknown unrelated individuals. This provides limited support that Lindsay-Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. The Massachusetts State Police Crime Lab DNA Unit validation studies showed inclusions for known non-contributors in the likelihood ratio range of at least 2,000 to 1,000 adventitious support could be attributed to this conclusion. The mixture DNA profile from this item is consistent with having originated from three individuals. There are five individuals who have a likelihood ratio that indicate an inclusion. Though there is support for the individual inclusions of Dawson-Clancy, Cora-Clancy, Callan-Clancy, Patrick-Clancy, and Lindsey-Clancy to the mixture DNA profile, under the stated assumptions, these individuals cannot be present in the mixture together. Assuming 1, 3 contributors and 2, Cora-Clancy is one of the contributors, Dawson-Clancy, Callan-Clancy, Patrick-Clancy, and Lindsey-Clancy cannot be present in the mixture together. Support for inclusion may be impacted by mixtures which contain relatives, especially first-degree relatives. Refer to the independent inclusionary statistics above. [02:29:27] Speaker 12: And so, again here, you're dealing with the effect of the relatedness of the parties, correct? [02:29:32] Speaker 13: Correct. Relatedness is having an effect on potential contributors, again, to this profile. I'd just like to say that likelihood ratios are calculated independently for each person. They are not to show a likelihood ratio for more than one person or multiple people together in a profile. And again, because so much DNA is shared between potential contributors, that is why we're seeing some of the things we're seeing in this report. [02:30:00] Speaker 12: And for this item, the middle of the black exercise band, the highest number of possible inclusion was the 1.6 million times more likely if it originated from Cora-Clancy and 2 unknown individuals, correct? [02:30:16] Speaker 13: Yes, the highest statistic for this item was a likelihood ratio of 1.6 million for Cora-Clancy. [02:30:23] Speaker 12: And based on your analysis of the data that you had, you determined it was a mixture of 3 contributors, correct? Correct. And so when you have the 3 contributors and Cora-Clancy has the highest likelihood of being a contributor, if you include her in the mixture, the other 4 members of the family are excluded, correct? [02:30:47] Speaker 13: Assuming, one, 3 contributors, and two, Cora-Clancy is one of the contributors, Dawson-Clancy, Callan-Clancy, Patrick-Clancy, and Lindsey-Clancy cannot be present in the mixture together. Again, those statistics are all calculated independently and don't say anything about those people being in the mixture together. [02:31:09] Speaker 12: And moving on to some other work you did in this case, specifically some swabs from the back side of the house, some shingles on 47 Summer Street in Duxbury, items 14-1, 14-2, and 14-3. Did you do work on those samples as well and compare them to the known profiles of Dawson-Clancy, Cora-Clancy, Callan-Clancy, Patrick-Clancy, and Lindsey Clancy? [02:31:42] Speaker 13: Your Honor, may I refer to my second report for these items? Thank you. Yes, I did work on those items in my second report. [02:31:55] Speaker 12: And direct your attention to item 14-1, a swab from stain B on the back side of the house, 47 Summer Street. What were your findings regarding that swab? [02:32:06] Speaker 13: The female DNA profile was interpreted as originating from a single contributor. The DNA profile from this item is at least 18 octillion times more likely if it originated from Lindsey Clancy than if it originated from an unknown, unrelated individual. This provides support that Lindsey Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. Dawson-Clancy, Cora-Clancy, Callan-Clancy, and Patrick Clancy are excluded from this DNA profile. [02:32:34] Speaker 12: And so unlike the samples and profiles we talked about earlier, this sample, 14-1, the swab from stain B, wasn't a mixture, correct? It was just one person's DNA? [02:32:46] Speaker 13: Correct. This was a single contributor profile. [02:32:49] Speaker 12: And your findings was that Lindsey Clancy is at least 18 octillion times more likely if it originated from Lindsey Clancy than an unknown, unrelated individual. [02:32:59] Speaker 13: The DNA profile from this item is at least 18 octillion times more likely if it originated from Lindsey Clancy than if it originated from an unknown, unrelated individual. This provides support that Lindsey Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. [02:33:14] Speaker 12: And so it's support that she's included as a contributor to this profile of one person, correct? [02:33:21] Speaker 13: Yes, they're a support with a likelihood ratio of 18 octillion for Lindsey Clancy. [02:33:28] Speaker 12: And the other members of the family were excluded, correct? Correct. And then item 14-2, the swab from stain C on the backside of the house, 47 Summer Street. That profile was a mixture and not suitable for comparison, correct? Correct. [02:33:43] Speaker 13: The DNA profile is a mixture and is not suitable for comparison due to the quality of the profile. And what does it mean when something is not suitable due to the quality of the profile? This was a low-level profile with not enough information to be interpreted. [02:33:56] Speaker 12: Do you have to have a certain level of information in the data to make findings based on your protocols and procedures at the lab? [02:34:05] Speaker 13: Yes, there are protocols and procedures that determine how we can determine our number of contributors and therefore if there's not enough information, a profile is not suitable for interpretation or comparisons. [02:34:18] Speaker 12: And then item 14-3, the swab from stain D on the back of the home, 47 Summer Street. What were your findings for that swab? [02:34:27] Speaker 13: The female DNA profile was interpreted as originating from a single contributor. The DNA profile from this item is at least 96 trillion times more likely if originated from Lindsey Clancy than if it originated from an unknown, unrelated individual. This provides support that Lindsey Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. Dawson Clancy, Cora Clancy, Callan Clancy, and Patrick Clancy are excluded from this DNA profile. [02:34:53] Speaker 12: And again, this is a single contributor, so the DNA profile of one person was found on the swab, correct? Correct. I have nothing further, thank you. [02:35:08] Speaker 4: Mr. Brayton? [02:35:10] Speaker ?: No. [02:35:12] Speaker 4: All right. Thank you, Ms. Stiftel. [02:35:14] Speaker 13: Thank you. Thank you. [02:35:16] Speaker 1: uh criminalists katarina stash in uh she knows her science talking about and other big numbers um kevin reddington looking all the part of a curmudgeon uh battle against the ada what about our stipulations and i don't get it what about those stipulations why are they going into the minutiae if they have stipulated um kathy russon meanwhile law and crime again saying that the commonwealth is likely gonna wrap their uh case in chief this week and then we'll have a rebuttal after that comes the uh the next witness here a lot of people coming into the courtroom as we speak [02:36:13] Speaker 8: good morning [02:36:33] Speaker 4: good morning good morning good morning thank you bye council thank you [02:36:40] Speaker 7: good morning good morning could you please tell the jurors your first and last name my first name is elaine rossi can you spell your last name for the record r-o-s-s-i and what city or town do you live in i live in kingston um what do you do for work i'm a nanny how long have you been a nanny uh for about 15 years now uh in july of 2022 did you become familiar with the clancy family i did how did you [02:37:06] Speaker 14: become involved with their family i answered a facebook uh advertisement seeking a part-time [02:37:12] Speaker 7: nanny position and who posted that advertisement lindsay did and um did she respond to your message i responded to her message right and so you said you were interested right i did and then did she respond to you she did so did you have been communication back and forth with her about um possibly taking taking on a nannying position for their family yes we did okay um that was on july 22nd of 2022 that um that initial uh back and forth occurred correct correct and as a result of your initial communication with her did you end up setting up a time to come meet their family we did and how did that happen where did [02:37:56] Speaker 14: you meet them uh i met at their residence um in the backyard of their home and that would be uh 47 [02:38:04] Speaker 7: summer street in duxbury correct and when you went to their home were you able to meet the children yes and how many children were there uh three and who were they cora dawson and callan and present at that meeting that you had in their backyard were also patrick and lindsay clancy yes and what was the purpose of kind of meeting at their home in the backyard it was uh to get familiar with the kids [02:38:27] Speaker 14: just for an introductory meeting um i got to hold callan and play with cora and dawson a little bit [02:38:34] Speaker 7: and talk to lindsay and patrick and so at that time cora was four right yes and dawson was three yes and and callan was um an infant yes now um as a result of your kind of interview or interaction with them um what eventually happened with your relationship with the clancy's did you become their nanny i did and did you communicate with um lindsay about what the expectations of the job were going to be i did so what were what were your what was your role or your expectations of the role uh my role was to take care of callan when she went back to work okay and um did you know when that was expected to happen i believe um right around thanksgiving and uh did you start working for them prior to that [02:39:26] Speaker 14: prior to november yes i did i started first week in september of 2022. [02:39:32] Speaker 7: and so while the original terms were for you to primarily watch callan did you take on a slightly different role in between um september and november i did and so what were the responsibilities or what did the clancy's ask you to do for the family during the time of september um through essentially when [02:39:51] Speaker 14: you stopped working for them it was to get to know the family to get to know how they worked as a family to get to know their schedule and essentially mostly to take care of callan occasionally cora and dawson [02:40:04] Speaker 7: would be home and i would interact with them as well um so going into it you knew that you would sometimes be spending time with cora and dawson yes but to your understanding were they at the home all the time no they were at school um and other than caring for callan did you agree to take on some other [02:40:24] Speaker 14: responsibilities in the household i did and what were those responsible it was uh food prep um light [02:40:31] Speaker 7: housekeeping laundry things like that was that something that you offered to do as part of your [02:40:37] Speaker 14: services or were you asked to do it um i offered initially i said those were things i did as a nanny for [02:40:44] Speaker 7: previous families and what was your expected schedule going to be for the clancy's it was three days a week i [02:40:52] Speaker 14: believe it was um 8 30 a.m to 1 30 p.m and was the three days a set schedule or was the expectation [02:41:02] Speaker 7: that it might um change uh initially it was set and then it changed um as far as your original expectation fair to say um you were originally asked to do monday tuesdays and thursdays correct and then um as you started work for working for them um you were asked to kind of adjust some of the days yes and was that something that you could do if i could i would and how about the time you said um from 8 30 to 1 30 were the times flexible too yeah sometimes it was 9 to 1 30. [02:41:39] Speaker 14: um that that was about the only difference okay it's about a half hour and how would you communicate with lindsay um so we communicated via text a lot lindsay also had a notebook in her kitchen that we communicated she would leave notes for me for the the activities or the instructions for me for [02:42:01] Speaker 7: the day okay and um you started you said the week of labor day uh that was your first week with the clancy family right and um primarily during that week did you care for calen yes i did um did they come to call you something particular um as far as like a nickname they called me laney okay and that was something the kids called you as well as um patrick and yes so so i'm going to just show you what's been marked as exhibit 150 okay if you want to just take a quick look inside of it you can flip through the pages if that's helpful okay does the handwriting in that notebook look familiar to you it does and um fair to say there's two different handwritings right um do you did you come to know one of the [02:43:23] Speaker 14: handwritings as lindsay's handwriting um i thought all of it was lindsay's okay but as [02:43:30] Speaker 7: far as the second um set of handwriting do you recognize oh it's mine okay i'm sorry no it's okay and so um is this the notebook that you would kind of communicate with her back and forth about calen and his schedule it is and fair to say she uh left you pretty detailed instructions she did on his care yes she did and you were aware that um she was very particular about sleep and food and keeping on a schedule right yes and so that's the purpose of this when you would come to the household in the morning would you often interact with lindsay prior to taking care of taking the baby uh sometimes if she was there i would interact with her some morning she wasn't there if she wasn't there was patrick home yes and did you know where she was [02:44:29] Speaker 14: when she wasn't there um sometimes she'd leave in the notebook that she was in the basement working [02:44:34] Speaker 7: out um sometimes she'd drop the kids off to school and would you often see her throughout the day when you were there from your nine to one shift yes um but there would be times when you see her come back to the home yes and in those times when she left sometimes she had the other two children with her correct correct correct and sometimes she did not no at times were you left with all three children [02:45:02] Speaker 14: um i think on one occasion i was [02:45:07] Speaker 7: and would you get there before or after cora and dawson would be off to school usually most times i would [02:45:14] Speaker 14: be pulling in the driveway and they would be waiting to say goodbye to me or hello to me [02:45:20] Speaker 7: and you're aware that they um did not have school on tuesdays right were you aware i i don't remember sorry okay um when you started working for um the clancy family was there a conversation with lindsay about um callan not taking a bottle i don't remember that did you often feed him a bottle when you were caring for him i did and um do you recall at one point that you actually um made video to callan taking a bottle and sent it to lindsay oh yes i did yes and um that would have been on september 9th correct yes at this point your honor um i'd like to just play a short video really i object i don't have a [02:46:11] Speaker 1: uh this is the nanny uh elaine otherwise known as to the kids laney rossi uh take me back to new jersey in the 1980s a beautiful woman and i love that hair um she says she answered facebook posts regarding uh nanny work uh she met i was put up there by lindsay clancy she met them at the home she met the kids uh started her first week uh september of 2022 uh this all happens uh the murders in january of 2023 so it's just a few months beforehand uh she primarily was hired to help with the the then infant callan um and occasionally with cora and dawson cora being the oldest and dawson the middle child and also did some uh food prep and light housekeeping uh her schedule was 8 30 in the morning to 1 30 in the afternoons with some flexibility uh there's a video in question now that is why they are on a brief uh break right now a little recess it is 11 40 a.m right now um on the east coast it looks like they're not taking that 11 because they've taken a couple breaks but they're not taking the official 11 a.m break and uh keep in mind it is just a half day with the jurors today uh they will be um excused uh for the day at lunch time which is technically one o'clock i have a feeling it might come earlier uh today i'm not 100 sure what's going on after that i don't know if after lunch if there will be a live courtroom stream if there is we'll bring it to you uh that will just be lawyers lawyering uh if that is not uh available on a stream obviously we won't bring it to you uh no wrap-up show today we will bring you a wrap-up show tomorrow and our coverage will continue uh tomorrow as well but for now uh we are in a temporary uh recess here as the judge the commonwealth and defense attorney kevin reddington are discussing a video uh the commonwealth wants to show uh to the jurors uh in this case you are watching continuing coverage of lindsey clancy day seven of testimony the coe up overnight for the second time this week uh helping me last night with some coverage of uh original uh entertainment blogger perez hilton who had uh what appeared to be a mental health breakdown uh i went out to the scene uh we put up a video on uh youtube of what uh i saw overnight uh both at his home and at the hospital and you can find that again under the video uh tab on our youtube page um we are kelly mcclellan here uh are we gonna have paige back on yes paige bellenbaum was on she's an expert in uh maternal mental health and a reminder here stay hydrated [02:49:43] Speaker 7: miss rossi is that the video that you took account taking the bottle yes it's fair to say you sent that video to um lindsey clancy on september 9th of 2022. yes i did at this point i'd move to admit a copy of that clip next with no objection that may be admitted in your care of the children were you ever permitted to take them outside of the household like to the [02:50:12] Speaker 14: park or the library or anything um i took calen for a walk on one occasion and i took cora and dawson [02:50:21] Speaker 7: to a tumble fun gymnastics class okay and that would have been in october of 2022 that you took core and dawson correct um when you went to tumble fun um what is that it's a a toddler like a gymnastics place indoor gymnastics place did you only take cora and dawson or did you also take calen uh just cora and dawson okay and um why was it that you took them on this particular day [02:50:51] Speaker 14: lindsey had mentioned to me that they had tumble fun but they they wouldn't be they wouldn't be going because she couldn't drive okay so i offered to take them did she tell you why she couldn't drive at [02:51:02] Speaker 7: that time she didn't um so you took them did you drive her car or your own car i drove her car and um you were able to bring them home correct correct um did you notice anything different when you came back to the home on that day i didn't um during the course of the time in in which you um were at the clancy's house fair to say from september to early december is the time that you were there three days a week yes um did you come to find out that lindsey was having some issues i did did she talk to you about that she did and what did she tell you about her issues uh she shared with me that she was suffering from postpartum um now when she shared this information with you had you noticed anything different about her demeanor or her presentation around the house i didn't at all had her trips out of the house when you were there stopped or decreased during that time period no and did she tell you that at that time that she was seeing some doctors she did what about medication did you have any conversations with her about her taking medication during that time period um i think [02:52:20] Speaker 14: we talked about she was going to stop a medication because she was trying to um stop nursing that she [02:52:30] Speaker 7: was going to stop medication or she was going to start medication uh she was i think she was trying to [02:52:35] Speaker 14: stop something because she was going to oh i'm sorry uh that's okay take your time um she was not going to nurse count anymore because she was going to be starting a new medication did she ever give you [02:52:50] Speaker 7: any details about the medication she didn't do you recall seeing um prescription bottles around the house i did um did you ever learn from lindsey that she had gone to the emergency room in november of 2020 22. no how about um going to the emergency room in december of 2022. no um did anything about your arrangements with um coming on the three days caring for calen and sometimes core did any of that ever change um because of what she reported to you about having postpartum um only at the end of my time with them okay we'll get there in a second but um did you have the occasion to observe her interacting with the children i did and did you have any concerns about her interacting with the children not at all she was a wonderful mom did she have any further conversation with you about maybe more specific sleep um or sleep issues that she had been having during the time period you were nannying for [02:53:57] Speaker 14: them yeah and what did she tell you about that uh she told me she was having difficulties sleeping and [02:54:03] Speaker 7: that she was sleeping in the basement now when you would watch calen and um she would be in the basement would you often see her in the basement no and one of the things you said that you sometimes did was do some laundry right and where was the laundry in the in the clancy house it was in the basement and so you'd have to go through that uh living room area down there where the couch was to get back to the laundry room yes it was in the back okay how about um working out in the basement uh do you recall if you went down the basement stairs to the right that there'd be like a little area where there'd be weights and that kind of thing did you ever see her working out there i don't recall if i did okay as far as the medications do you recall where you observed the medications in the house yes they were in um to the right of the refrigerator i believe in a cabinet and you uh um had to go into the clancy patrick and lindsey's bedroom right i did i'm afraid to say calen's crib was in there it was so do you recall ever seeing medications in the bedroom i didn't now you had mentioned that um you knew lindsey to go be going back to work in november correct were you advised or did you know that she was originally scheduled to go back in october but then bumped it back to november i didn't know that um but as you began working for them um that that november date was in mind right um moving to thanksgiving of 2022 did something change about the plan for her [02:55:57] Speaker 14: to go back to work yes i came in i think it was a few days after thanksgiving uh maybe the day after thanksgiving and lindsey was in the kitchen and i had expected her to be asleep um because why was that because i thought she was working um that shift that thanksgiving shift and um she told me that she [02:56:19] Speaker 7: wouldn't be going back to work okay and um was there any further conversation of what the plan was for you and the family um during that time period no i think i mentioned if she wasn't going back to work and that if they didn't need me if they could let me know okay and so um do you recall being at the home at one point where patrick and lindsey left the house and came back yes can you tell us about [02:56:45] Speaker 14: that uh interaction of course patrick and lindsey went for a walk and when they returned i was in the living room on the floor with calen and they came in and told me that they would um have to let me go because lindsey would not be going back to work and the two of them would be home to care for [02:57:03] Speaker 7: the children okay and so um did they give you anything else any other information about why lindsey wasn't going back to work during that meeting no okay and did they give you some time um to kind of make other arrangements after that they did i believe they gave me two weeks and during that time after thanksgiving um did you have the occasion to see lindsey interacting with the kids in the home i did and was anything about your observations of her different nothing um now the the kids themselves um you had the occasion to spend some time with cora and how would you describe cora oh cora was a girly [02:57:55] Speaker 14: girl who loved her babies very much she was very sweet and she loved arts and crafts and loved playing with her fresh mart which was a little children's supermarket um she was lovely and dawson how about him how would you describe him oh dawson was uh full of energy rambunctious funny silly did you ever [02:58:18] Speaker 7: have any um problem watching dawson or uh keeping him under control or not at all i was only with him uh on a handful of occasions um did you ever see dawson kind of interacting with his siblings with cora or with calen i did and did you see anything um or could you tell us a little bit about dawson's [02:58:39] Speaker 14: interactions with them um corin dawson played well i uh there was one occasion in the kitchen where they were playing and i think cora took one of his uh play-doh something he was playing with play-doh and his reaction he was frustrated and he's reached out and slapped calen now were you alone with the [02:59:01] Speaker 7: kids during this interaction or was lindsey present too lindsey was i think in the kitchen at the same time did you see her react to that when she saw that behavior she did and what it what was the reaction [02:59:12] Speaker 14: what did she do went over and removed calen um sorry she removed dawson from the room and came back and [02:59:18] Speaker 7: consoled calen okay and eventually did you see her go back and kind of talk to dawson about his behavior and address it okay and was that appropriate in your opinion of course yes um how about your how you would describe calen how would you describe him he you spent the most time with him correct uh he was [02:59:38] Speaker 14: the happiest sweetest easiest baby he was just a love thank you [02:59:49] Speaker 1: uh lindsey clancy visibly upset and crying uh as testimony comes out from the nanny young children [02:59:57] Speaker 7: if lindsey had told you in one of these exchanges and again you exchanged mostly either in this notebook or via text right correct um if she told you about working out do you know if she wasn't in the basement where she would go to work out um i think it was the kingsbury club okay and um as far as um when you stopped working for them do you remember exactly when it was you said maybe two weeks after thanksgiving [03:00:25] Speaker 14: it was um december 8th or december 10th [03:00:30] Speaker 7: and in the time that you were with the clancys in their households caring for their kids um you know interacting with patrick and lindsey did you ever have any concerns that the children were not safe no thank you all right cross [03:00:57] Speaker 2: morning good morning so you first um met lindsey and patrick and the kids in was it july of 22 yes um and then you were hired obviously um and and you then took over as a nanny yes you also you get a lot of years of experience as a nanny don't you i do um and this was that you wanted to kind of pick up some more hours and that's why you fortunately reached out to the two of them and ended up taking care of those kids so from july until uh what was it november after thanksgiving or was it early december that they had to walk and then they came in and told you that she was going to early december early december um and and you all left on good terms right oh wonderful terms yeah i mean you guys stayed in touch with each other you texted them christmas things of that nature right i did reach out to lindsey to wish her a merry christmas did she respond she did um would you agree that on march 1st of 2023 the state police interviewed you for about a half hour or longer about your observations of the clancy family yes do you recall that the trooper were there one or two of them if you remember i believe there were two yeah um do you recall the trooper asking you questions about your observations of the clancy family with particular focus on lindsey they were asking you about your how well you knew her what you thought of her what she did as far as a mother in your presence i'm sorry i i can't really hear you i i apologize um they wanted to know what kind of a mother she was right yes and and you were able to respond to that right they also wanted to know any observations that you had about her use of prescription drugs right yes and you were forthcoming on that as well right they also wanted to know whether or not you observed or she made any statements about any symptomology or symptoms that she might have been having that were causing her difficulty right yes um do you recall indicating to the troopers that in your opinion that she was a loving and a doting mother yes can you tell the jury what that means i mean what what did you observe about what what did you observe about her as a mother [03:03:24] Speaker 14: interacting with her kids i observed a wonderful mom who loved her kids who was she was very concerned with um their safety she was very uh concerned with callens eating and sleeping she was a wonderful mother [03:03:40] Speaker 2: and the district attorney asked you questions about what apparently is exhibit 150 in this case and that's the book that she would write notes to you on and then you would on occasion write notes back to her is that right yes so when the district attorney asked you to identify her writing um so like also they were like photographs like that in the book as well right now who would draw that would she draw that or would you draw that i think i drew that yeah i think so um and for example thursday september 29th it says callen last fed the time put him down for a nap at 9 35 with a smiley face we will be home clean the clothes and the dryer if you get to it uh and then up killing up at 10 45 and then some scribbling mark on the bottom um that's an indication of the type of notes that she would leave for you correct would she also leave notes for you to the effect of cutting up uh sweet potatoes and cutting cutting up uh celery and things in one inch squares so that the kids to eat yes food prep yes did you find that to be overbearing or well not at all you didn't find that to be controlling that she was trying to exert control over you did you not at all you felt that was appropriate for her to tell you about cutting up of the vegetables and squares and things yes she also told you during that period of time that she was unable to sleep isn't that right correct told you that uh lack of sleep was becoming a significant impact on her life uh and that she had to see doctors and was on medication for that right correct um again the troopers were questioning you and directing you on your on your questions or your answers and at one point do you recall saying to the trooper i i loved my lindsay uh i loved my lindsay [03:05:53] Speaker 14: yeah i don't recall saying that okay did you do i love lindsay yeah i did love lindsay yes now when she [03:06:02] Speaker 2: when was she sleeping in the basement do you remember that do i know when or why when when was she sleeping in the basement um i i honestly don't remember okay do you remember um if i suggest to you that it was around the end of november mid-december that she was sleeping in the basement for a period of time if you remember i don't remember i'm sorry um did she indicate to you why she was sleeping in the basement she i don't think she did would you agree that she was uh forthright with you as far as telling you what was going on in her life as far as her concentration and her inability to sleep and things of that nature yes sustained um would she tell you about those problems that she was suffering [03:06:52] Speaker 14: she shared with me that she had postpartum and that she couldn't sleep and as a result of that you were pretty concerned for her weren't you i really don't know much about postpartum but i was i would always ask her how she was right or how she was doing and in fact you noted that in addition to the [03:07:08] Speaker 2: inability to sleep that she would speak about that she was unable to focus do you recall her ever saying she had difficulty focusing on things i don't recall her saying that to me how about finn did you notice that she appeared to be losing significant weight i did and i commented to her about that okay and you had occasion to see her as a mother um playing with the children obviously right yes um would the two of you stay in touch with each other by text even when she was out and you were home in their home with the kids yes fair to say that you would take many many videos of the kids and send them to uh lindsey on her phone right i did and um fair to say that during that period of time from your involvement miss rossi as a nanny that you sent her videos of the children playing and as we saw the baby taking a bottle and the baby eating and things of that nature right i did did she ever send you any videos or did she ever respond to your [03:08:18] Speaker 14: emails or videos uh yes she responded to every um most of my text she responded to she seemed to be [03:08:27] Speaker 2: appreciative of your work yes very much so and and in fact she was pretty vocal about that she thought the [03:08:35] Speaker 7: world of the world are you right yes thank you that's all i have uh redirect just one question in all that she told you about postpartum sleep and all that you observed in the house did you ever have any conversations with her about intrusive thoughts or thoughts of harming yourself no thank you okay [03:08:53] Speaker 4: anything on that no all right let me step down thank you thank you council can i see you [03:09:02] Speaker 1: another sidebar that was interesting uh this of course is the nanny we've been listening to looks like she is done testifying uh her name is elaine rossi the kids would call her uh laney she talked about how she met how lindsey was in need of help um you know talked about the children as well coral described as a girly girl who loved dolls and was simply lovely dawson full of energy rambunctious silly since that time uh you can see lindsey clancy is crying she's broken up uh she is obviously uh continues to be very upset about her um about her admitted actions on the day of january 24th 2023 uh the nanny goes on to describe callan is the happiest sweetest baby which is a gut punch to everybody watching this uh but then toward the end uh did you have any worries about the children no and that is what the commonwealth was trying to elicit from this witness this is a nanny a woman who takes care of children for a living and has been doing it a long time and uh yet uh she did not have any real concerns um about uh the care of the children in terms of lindsey the mother watching them but then on the cross i thought kevin reddington handled it uh quite well he talks about you know were you interviewed by the state police in march of 2023 uh yes uh she noted that uh lindsey was a loving and doting mother she says i observed a wonderful mom who loved her kids and then uh kevin reddington turning the commonwealth uh on its head saying was she forthright with you about her postpartum depression yes she was uh did she tell you she had trouble concentrating yes she did and her inability to sleep yes she did she shared with me about her postpartum uh how did you react well i didn't know much about postpartum i still don't uh but i knew that she was having some trouble and so i always asked how she was doing uh did you notice she was losing a significant amount of weight yes i did and i even asked her about it so kevin reddington taking the prosecution witness and once again in my opinion making it sort of a defense witness um again uh it is pretty evident that lindsey clancy made it known she was suffering that she had postpartum depression that she was having trouble sleeping uh that she was having trouble putting weight on or keeping weight on that she was preoccupied with this that it was a real concern that she was not going back to work uh that is uh how they basically gently informed uh elaine rossi that she would uh not be continuing uh in her role as a nanny and so uh look it's a prosecution witness but in a lot of ways a defense witness as this short recess is now over [03:12:13] Speaker ?: uh and without the sidebar being over there's another sidebar thank you to nancy stout for the super sticker [03:12:25] Speaker 1: lindsey clancy still has her uh head in her in her hands and appears to be uh quite distraught already um so uh we are seeing that uh you know for firsthand uh here uh what do you guys think do you think that um in this are we gonna have page back on we are we address that uh page bellenbaum who is an expert in postpartum uh depression and uh thank you to denise went through a lot of the super chats the coe here is catching up um jackie here's [03:13:18] Speaker 15: excuse me weight loss from severe depression and anxiety as i choked on my water um thank you lisa cox excuse me um [03:13:51] Speaker 1: what do you think that was my question uh now that i can speak again a great witness for the defense i agree this was supposed to be a commonwealth uh witness we're coming back from this sidebar agreed good witness for i presume the defense here this case is just terrible that sums it up right [03:14:11] Speaker 4: there break at this point all right and so i'm going to ask you to come back tomorrow at nine o'clock um and uh we'll start with the testimony tomorrow okay all right thank you very much all right all right all right you just heard this the jurors are going home for the day this is day seven of [03:14:30] Speaker 5: testimony which is now over i wonder if it has um something to do with lindsey clancy uh obviously [03:14:36] Speaker 1: very emotional very broken up and you know if you're the commonwealth uh do you object to this quietly i don't think you know they're going to publicly object to this uh but maybe went to the judge and said look this is uh prejudicial she's sitting here sobbing um uncontrollably um uncontrollably um and maybe that's why we're taking an early break we're going to go back to the judge and said look this is uh prejudicial she's sitting here sobbing um uncontrollably um and maybe that's why we're taking an early break what do you think about that all right counsel anything else we need to talk about you before tomorrow morning all right so this uh case will be in recess uh till tomorrow morning at nine o'clock thank you thank you [03:15:11] Speaker 4: all right now we're not coming there's nothing scheduled uh at two o'clock uh in this matter any further okay so we're this court on this case will be in recess we're not coming there's nothing scheduled uh at two o'clock uh in this matter any further okay so we're this court on this case will be in recess [03:15:39] Speaker 1: for tomorrow at nine o'clock okay so that is uh a deviation from what we had heard um another half day there have been a lot of half days if there weren't this many half days this trial be closer to the end again kathy russen crediting her from law and crime saying the commonwealth is going to wrap their case this week then the defense is going to bring uh their psych witnesses uh forward uh philip resnick who's a legendary and you heard what some of our guests say he testified in the timothy mcveigh trial he testified in the unabomber trial but he's also an expert in maternity mental health and so he's going to be an expert witness here as is a woman named dr margaret spinelli both of them uh kind of mavericks in their field uh in into their 80s so according to uh what i've seen from kathy russen with law and crime the commonwealth is going to finish this case this week then these big witnesses are going to come next week and then there'll be a rebuttal and we can expect those witnesses likely to be on the stand for the better part of a day if not more for uh both of them but previously the judge said hey we are coming back at um previously the judge said we are coming back at um two o'clock today to discuss matters between the attorneys between the commonwealth and uh defense attorney kevin reddington but as you just saw he called it the day is now over at 12 09 p.m eastern time and there will be no uh court back in session at uh 2 p.m eastern this is it for the day uh there is no wrap-up show today uh if you're just joining us please if you appreciate the content please just take a moment to like and subscribe uh i can't emphasize enough how much that helps our channel to be recognized and grown and seen please share with a friend uh we've got a patreon page last night when i went out to cover the perez hilton uh situation the coe was putting stuff into the patreon page those are for the die hard sts-ers um but you get a little extra uh with the patreon uh so please consider that um but we were going to bring you the stream this afternoon at two o'clock and uh it's not happening because uh there's not going to be any um reconvening of court today it is dismissed now uh till tomorrow at nine o'clock in the morning um i am not doing a wrap-up show today uh because i'm taking my son to see leonel messi with inter miami i hope he's playing he's a cool dude there was just a video of messi uh he took his kids to dick sporting goods in fort lauderdale and he just he looks like any other schmo with a leg tattoo when he comes out and uh someone spots him and says wow are you messy and he just raised his hand and goes yeah i'm messy um he could never do that in argentina he really he really can't do that in in miami and suddenly i'm hearing myself space so there we go um but he really can't do that in miami but he got away with it the other day the video is out and about my son could not believe that he was at dick sporting goods buying some soccer stuff for his own kids so i'll have to go and uh now stalk various dick sporting goods there's not one far from where we live uh but anyway i'm taking my son tonight to see uh leo messi play some soccer uh since the world cup just uh ended he might not play but my kid doesn't know that yet he sort of does so we'll see it uh look at this oc girl with some heavy uh thoughts on leo messi he and argentina suck in the pathetic way they played and behave when they lost it's one way to look at it everyone's got their own uh perspectives here whether on soccer or lindsey clancy or uh perez hilton uh there are the three children of lindsey clancy uh cora dawson and uh callan and um i was just reading a story about um perez hilton's three children uh if you don't know what happened google perez hilton uh please do not watch the video it will be seared on your brain it is awful i'm encouraging everyone uh to not watch that video but you can watch our video on youtube under the video tab and uh i'm gonna bounce out of here uh i love sts nation karm loves sts nation the coe loves sts nation space coast loves sts nation the mods love sts nation i love sts nation we've built an amazing community we are now at 230 000 youtube subscribers i said to my son you watch these michigan football games which doesn't watch but look at that stadium and our community is two and a half of those i can't believe that that is the case but we are growing uh tell a friend that is the best thing you can do for us let a friend know uh about sts and uh be kind uh that is the more the reason we covered um perez hilton yesterday is we're seeing a woman here where the defense is saying she had a psychotic episode no matter which way you slice it uh she was having some serious issues perez hilton no matter which way you look at it was having serious issues uh covered in blood last night um but as i said in in my video if you watch it there is far more good than bad in the world people are here to lift other people up we always hear about the terrorists and the evil in the world and the wars and the this and the that but uh ultimately good prevails and uh you don't know who is suffering and who is going through a tough time so as i always say as blockbuster once said please be kind rewind i say please be kind don't murder anyone uh just try to be nice do a nice thing uh to a person i need to be better at doing that as well final comment here justice for the victims cora dawson and callen there we go three years old uh rest in sweet peace little ones thank you commonwealth attorney shannon buckingham for fighting uh for the kids and uh everyone else who's working on this case uh with with that i will see you back here at uh about 8 50 in the morning tomorrow we will do a wrap-up show uh that steve cone is getting together and then friday it sounds like there's going to be all day testimony all day relative with this judge the honorable william sullivan but we'll be here all day friday and uh we will see you tomorrow love you america love you chile love you india love you china i saw them in the chat and uh see you on the flip side tomorrow be nice walter cronkite says be nice