Plymouth County Superior Court, Wednesday, August 26, 2026, Day 21. Kevin Reddington asked the FBI’s forensic psychiatrist whether sleep deprivation is a form of torture.
“It can be,” Dr. Gregory Saathoff said.
Then Reddington asked whether it can lead to psychosis. The reporters in the room noted a long pause before the answer came back.
“It’s possible.”
That exchange is the last thing the defense will get from a Commonwealth witness in this trial. Testimony is ending today, and closing arguments come tomorrow.
Where the case actually stands right now
One correction worth making, because it circulated widely this morning: the jury is not deliberating. At least one national outlet ran a headline today saying deliberations had begun. They have not. Saathoff was still under cross-examination through the morning, the Commonwealth has not rested its rebuttal case, and no closing argument has been given.
The schedule Judge William Sullivan has given the jury is unchanged: evidence concludes today, closing arguments Thursday with roughly thirty minutes per side, then his instructions on the law, then deliberations.
The cross that closed the Commonwealth’s case
Reddington spent the morning on three things, and none of them was the substance of Saathoff’s opinion.
The resume. He worked through the witness’s experience with postpartum psychosis specifically, as opposed to forensic psychiatry generally. It is the same line he ran against Dr. Kirk Heilbrun, who conceded he had last treated such a patient in 1982.
The calendar. The district attorney’s office first contacted Saathoff in January 2026. His contract was not finalized until April. He completed his evaluation on June 4, 2026, more than three years after the night in question, and he conducted his interviews with Clancy over Zoom. Reddington has hammered that gap with every Commonwealth expert: they are describing a mind they met years after it broke.
The records. He walked Saathoff through Clancy’s treatment history, including her texts to her mother saying the medication was making things “really scary” and worse, and her condition roughly three weeks into treatment with Dr. Jennifer Tufts.
He also pushed back on a piece of the Commonwealth’s framing directly. “You’re not going to say to this jury, that because she was past the four month cutoff, she was not a good candidate for postpartum treatment?” Saathoff said no, and clarified he had been describing his understanding of a hospital discharge. Reddington then established that Clancy followed the discharge instructions and attended her appointments.
Not everything landed. Asked whether he would agree that Clancy was a happy wife, mother and daughter before September 2022, Saathoff paused and said no.
Why the sleep-deprivation exchange matters
It is a small concession and it is aimed at a specific place in the law.
Under the standard from Commonwealth v. McHoul, the jury has two independent routes to a verdict of not criminally responsible. One is that Clancy lacked substantial capacity to appreciate that what she was doing was wrong. The other is that she lacked substantial capacity to conform her conduct to the law. A juror who believes she knew it was illegal can still acquit on the second prong.
Every Commonwealth expert has aimed at the first prong. Heilbrun told the jury she “retained an awareness of the illegality.” Saathoff has pointed to planning, sequencing and control. What Reddington got today was an acknowledgment from the prosecution’s own final witness that the thing Clancy indisputably suffered from, catastrophic sleep loss documented by her husband and her family, can produce psychosis. He does not need Saathoff to agree it did. He needs a juror to hold a reasonable doubt, and the burden of erasing that doubt belongs to the Commonwealth.
We explain how the two prongs work in this piece, and where all six experts agree and split in this one.
Outside the courtroom
The case is now dividing people faster than the evidence is coming in. USA Today published a piece today on why, describing supporters who gathered outside the courthouse in pink and shared their own postpartum experiences, with one rally organizer saying she believes the health care system belongs on trial rather than Clancy. Against that, prosecutors and commentators including Los Angeles child-abuse prosecutor Jonathan Hatami have argued the focus has drifted from Cora, Dawson and Callan, calling the shift disappointing.
Mother Jones ran a piece today asking whether the trial needed to happen at all. The New York Times published an explainer. Yesterday it was a guest essay in the Times arguing Clancy deserves mercy.
None of it reaches the jury, which is instructed to stay away from coverage. All of it will still be waiting when the verdict lands.
What happens next
Closing arguments Thursday. In Massachusetts the defense argues first, so Reddington speaks knowing prosecutors get the final word. Then Judge Sullivan instructs the jury on the McHoul standard and on the Commonwealth’s burden to prove criminal responsibility beyond a reasonable doubt, and the case goes to twelve people.
Our related coverage: a full review of Reddington’s career and his defense strategy, what each side is expected to argue in closings, the evidence for and against conviction, what a guilty verdict would mean, and the trial timeline.
Questions readers are asking today
Is the Lindsay Clancy jury deliberating?
No. As of Wednesday, August 26, testimony was still underway and the Commonwealth had not rested. Closing arguments are expected Thursday, August 27, with deliberations beginning after the judge instructs the jury.
Who was the last witness in the Lindsay Clancy trial?
Dr. Gregory Saathoff, a forensic psychiatrist with the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit and a professor at the University of Virginia, called by the Commonwealth in rebuttal.
When did Saathoff evaluate Lindsay Clancy?
He completed his evaluation on June 4, 2026, more than three years after the killings, conducting his interviews with her over Zoom.
When are closing arguments?
Thursday, August 27, 2026, with roughly thirty minutes per side. The defense closes first in Massachusetts.
Did Lindsay Clancy testify in her own defense?
No. Her account reached the jury through the psychiatric experts and the family members and chaplain who described what she told them.
Reporting current as of midday Wednesday, August 26, 2026.