The Lindsay Clancy Jury Gets It Tomorrow, an FBI Psychiatrist Says the Voice Stopped When the Killing Did, the Bridegan Jury Is Out
The Commonwealth rested its case against Lindsay Clancy after FBI Behavioral Analysis Unit psychiatrist Dr. Gregory Saathoff testified he does not believe her account that a voice ordered her to kill her three children. Saathoff, who interviewed Clancy for roughly eleven hours, called it unusual that she reported never hearing a voice before or after that day, that she described it as constant rather than intermittent, and that it stopped once the killings were done: "Committing the act is not curative of the voice. I've not ever seen that." Under questioning from prosecutor Jennifer Sprague, he said the voice gave no instruction on where, how, or in what order — and that executing all of it without direction was surprising. Saathoff also testified financial pressure and a belief that her brain was damaged had left Clancy with a sense of being a burden. Clancy, 36, has pleaded not guilty to three counts of first-degree murder in the deaths of Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months, and argues she was not criminally responsible. Closing arguments are expected today, with deliberations likely Friday. Also: the jury in the Mario Fernandez Saldana murder-for-hire trial began deliberating Wednesday in the killing of Jared Bridegan. And in Las Vegas, Outlawz member Malcolm "E.D.I. Mean" Greenidge testified under a court order in the Duane Davis trial.
Join our new FB groups page here. Take the poll!
Join the Daily Crime & Justice community on social media! We're building a passionate group of true crime enthusiasts who love diving deep into the most shocking cases in America.
Follow us on Facebook and Instagram by searching "Daily Crime & Justice" on either platform.
You'll get exclusive behind-the-scenes content, breaking news updates on cases we're covering, and early alerts when new episodes drop. Our social media is where Garret Fisher's hottest takes live, including reactions that don't make it into the show.
But more importantly, it's where YOU come in. Share your theories, debate the verdicts, and connect with fellow listeners who are just as obsessed with justice as you are. Did the jury get it right? What questions do you still have? Your comments and insights often shape future episodes.
We cover the trials that matter, but our community makes the conversation unforgettable. Come for Garret's signature cynical commentary, stay for the incredible discussions with thousands of true crime fans who get it.
Speaker 1: Calaroga Shark Media. Good morning.
Speaker 2: This is Daily Crime and Justice from Calaroga Shark Media,
powered by AI. I'm Garrett Fisher. It's Thursday, August 27th, 2026.
The evidence is over in Plymouth. Five weeks, 21 days
of testimony, more than 40 witnesses, and yesterday afternoon, the
Commonwealth rested. Today, the lawyers argue. Judge Sullivan has told
the jury that deliberations are unlikely to start before tomorrow,
so 12 people will carry Lindsay Clancy's case into a weekend.
In Jacksonville, a jury has had the Mario Fernandez-Saldana case
since yesterday morning. As we recorded this, they were still out.
If that verdict came in after we stopped recording, you
have already heard about it, and we will have it
in full tomorrow. And in Las Vegas, a man who
called Tupac Shakur his big brother told a jury he
did not want to be there and only showed up
because a California court ordered him to. Then he described
the last thing Tupac ever said to him. Let's get
into it. On the evening of January 24th, 2023, Lindsay
Clancy strangled her three children in the Cora was five,
Dawson was three, Callan was eight months old. Clancy then
attempted to take her own life and has been paralyzed
ever since. She has pleaded not guilty to three counts
of first-degree murder. She does not deny killing them. The
question is criminal responsibility, and the burden is on the Commonwealth.
The state saved its most credentialed witness for last, and
I want to walk you through what he said, because
it is the most specific attack anyone has made on
the center of the defense case.
Speaker 1: Dr.
Speaker 2: Gregory Sethoff is a forensic psychiatrist at the University of
Virginia and a senior psychiatrist for the FBI's Behavioral Analysis
Unit at Quantico. He interviewed Lindsay Clancy for about 11
hours across two sessions in May and June of this year.
He told the jury he has treated thousands of patients
with psychosis. And he started with a distinction that matters. Psychosis,
he said, is not a disease. It is a symptom,
a state produced by different underlying conditions. That framing does
a lot of work for the prosecution because it turns
the question from what does she have into what actually
happened in that house. Then he took apart the voice
piece by piece. Clancy has said she heard a male
voice telling her that this was her last chance, that
she had to kill her children and then kill herself.
Satov called several features of that account unusual. First, she
reported never hearing a voice before that day and never
hearing one after. He found no record of her reporting
voices to any medical provider in the months of treatment beforehand.
A hallucination that arrives once in a person with no
history of them and never returns. Second, she described the
voice as constant rather than coming and going. Third, And
this is the one that will end up in the
closing argument. She told him the voice stopped once the
children were dead. And Sathoff said he has never seen
that in his career. Committing the act, he told the jury,
is not curative of the voice. He said he has
not ever seen that. Then he laid out the inconsistencies.
Clancy told another psychiatrist the voice started as soon as
her husband left the house. She told Sathoff it started
right after her phone call with Patrick. Those are about
20 minutes apart, and there is a smaller one that
is somehow worse. Patrick Clancy has said the children were
already eating chicken nuggets when he walked out the door.
Lindsay Clancy has said she was still preparing the chicken
nuggets when she heard the voice. Then on Wednesday morning,
prosecutor Jennifer Sprague asked him one more question, and it
was a good one. Did the voice tell her where
to do it? Did it tell her how? Sathoff said
it did not, and that he found that significant. A
command hallucination that issues an order and no instructions. So
that is the state's case, distilled. Not that Lindsay Clancy
was well. That the specific story she tells about that
specific evening does not behave the way psychosis behaves. And
Sathoff offered the jury something else, which is the state's
alternative explanation for why a mother would do this. He
testified that Clancy had repeatedly delayed going back to work
as a labor and delivery nurse because she did not
feel mentally healthy enough to do it. He said she
listed finances as a stressor in her own records. He
said she believed her brain had been damaged, that she
could no longer do the job she loved or help
support her family. And what that left her with, in
his account, was a sense of being a burden. That
is a genuinely dark theory and you should understand what
it is doing. The prosecution is not arguing Lindsay Clancy
was fine and chose to kill her children out of malice.
They are arguing something more uncomfortable. That a profoundly depressed
woman who had decided she was worthless and wanted to
die also decided her children should not be left behind
without her.
Speaker 1: Depressed, suicidal, and responsible. Not psychotic.
Speaker 2: Because here's the thing that gets lost. Under Massachusetts law,
being severely mentally ill does not get you an acquittal.
Wanting to die does not get you an acquittal. The
illness has to be the specific kind that took away
your ability to know it was wrong, or your ability
to stop. That is a much narrower door than most
people assume. Now here is the defense answer, and Kevin
Reddington did not waste time. He opened his cross by
pointing out that Sathoff did not interview Clancy until more
than three years after the children died.
Speaker 1: Three years.
Speaker 2: Then he went through the man's resume line by line
and landed on this. Zathoff has written a lot about terrorism.
He has not written much about postpartum depression. And that
is the same move Reddington has run on every prosecution
expert this week because it keeps working.
Speaker 1: He got Dr.
Speaker 2: Mack to admit he had testified on criminal responsibility maybe.
Speaker 1: Three times in his entire career. He got Dr.
Speaker 2: Heilbrun on his lack of experience actually treating postpartum psychosis.
and now he has the FBI's man conceding his published
work is mostly about a different subject entirely. Look, I'm
going to be honest with you about what I think
Reddington is building, because it is smarter than it looks.
He is not trying to prove these three men are frauds.
They obviously are not. He is trying to get 12
people to a much smaller conclusion. That the Commonwealth's experts
are generalists who came late, met her briefly, and are
describing a condition none of them has spent a career inside.
And if the jury lands there, the burden does the
rest of the work for him. Because that is the
whole thing. The Commonwealth has to prove criminal responsibility. Reddington
does not have to prove postpartum psychosis. He has to
make 12 people unsure. So step back and look at
what this jury is actually holding. On one side, Dr.
Philip Resnick, who testified for the defense in both Andrea
Yates' trials, telling them Clancy was in a dream state,
a puppet with someone else pulling the strings, that she
genuinely believed she was doing her children a kindness by
sending them somewhere better rather than leaving them behind without
a mother. On the other, three prosecution experts, a psychiatrist
who says major depressive episode, a psychologist who says parts
of her account resemble fabricated hallucinations, and an FBI psychiatrist
who says the voice does not behave like any voice
he has encountered in thousands of patients. Somebody will tell
you those cancel out. I do not think that is
quite right. And here is why it matters. When a
case turns entirely on competing experts, the side carrying the
burden has the harder job. The Commonwealth does not need
this jury to find the defense experts unconvincing. It needs
them convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that a woman who
strangled her three children and then went out a second
story window was in full possession of the ability to
stop herself. That is a lot to be sure about.
So today, both sides argue. Then Sullivan instructs the jury.
The 18 who have been sitting there since July get
narrowed to 12 at random, and it goes to a room,
most likely tomorrow. The standard is two-pronged, and the defense
only needs one prong. Either she could not appreciate the
wrongfulness of what she was doing, or she could not
conform her conduct to the law. Could not know, or
could not stop. Guilty of first-degree murder is life without parole.
Not criminally responsible is a state psychiatric facility under a
commitment that can be renewed for the rest of her life.
And keep an eye on the charge conference, which happened
after the jury went home yesterday, because that is where
Sullivan decides what options actually appear on the verdict slip.
Reddington has been pushing to get involuntary manslaughter on there,
built on the theory that Clancy was overprescribed and that
abruptly changing her medications altered her mind in a way
she did not choose.
Speaker 1: If it makes the slip, this.
Speaker 2: Jury has somewhere to land when they cannot all agree.
If it does not, they are choosing between a prison
and a hospital with nothing in between. And that choice
is where hung juries come from. Cora Clancy was five
and in kindergarten. Dawson Clancy was three. Callan Clancy was
eight months old. For five weeks, grown professionals have argued
about diagnostic manuals and chicken nuggets and the exact minute
a voice star Underneath all of it are three small
people who are not coming back.
Speaker 1: Someone has to say their names.
Speaker 2: When we come back, a jury in Jacksonville is deciding
whether a man who never went near that street is
guilty of murder anyway. On the night of February 16th, 2022,
Jared Breidigan dropped his twins, Abby and Liam, at their
mother's house in Jacksonville Beach and drove toward home with
his two-year-old daughter Bexley in the backseat. A tire was
lying across a dark one-way street. He stopped, got out
to move it, and was shot four times. Bexley was
strapped into her car seat a few feet away. She
was not hit. Jared Breidigan was 33, a senior design
manager at Microsoft and a father of four. Mario Fernandez
Saldana is the estranged husband of Bridegan's ex-wife. He is
charged with first-degree murder and solicitation to commit a capital felony.
He is pleaded not guilty, and he is presumed innocent.
The jury got his case yesterday morning after Judge London
Kite finished reading the instructions. And the shape of the
end of this trial tells you a great deal. The
state rested Monday. The defense then put on its entire
case in about half a day. Two witnesses, both of
them staffed from the private school the twins attended, who
testified that Fernandez Saldana was an involved, friendly parent who
came to events and picked the children up, that everyone
knew the marriage was ending in 2022, and that he
stopped being involved with those kids entirely after the murder.
Speaker 1: That is it. Two teachers.
Speaker 2: And Mario Fernandez Saldana did not take the stand. I
said this yesterday and I will say it again because
it matters. That is his absolute constitutional right. The jury
will be instructed they cannot hold it against him. And
it is very often the correct call. Putting your client
on the stand in a circumstantial case hands the prosecution
a chance to cross-examine the one person alive who can
explain three checks. It is not evidence of anything. But
it does tell you the strategy. The defense is not
trying to win by explaining. They are trying to win
by pointing at what is missing. Both sides closed Tuesday afternoon,
and Kite gave them more time than he had allotted.
The state's rebuttal ran until nearly 6 o'clock. Here is
how each side ended. Assistant State Attorney Christina Stifler told
the jury that Fernandez-Saldana is the thread connecting the whole tapestry,
and that under Florida law, it does not matter that
he did not pull the trigger. If the jury finds
he encouraged, assisted, advised, or hired the gunman, He is
as guilty as the man who fired. She told them
their verdict will forever define the death of Jared Breidgen.
James Hill told them the state had wholly failed to
carry its burden and asked for not guilty on both counts.
His case is the whole. No murder weapon ever anywhere.
No DNA belonging to his client on anything tested. No surveillance,
no fingerprints, no hair putting him in that truck or
in Jacksonville Beach that night. The lead detective conceded every
bit of that on the stand. And then Assistant State
Attorney Alan Mizrahi stood up for rebuttal and made the
argument that I suspect decides this case. He told the
jury that the absence of physical evidence is not a hole.
Speaker 1: It is the point.
Speaker 2: That is why you hire somebody else. A man who
pays another man to commit a murder is buying distance
from the scene. And then the defense stands up and
asks you to acquit him because he successfully bought it.
He told them the law does not require certainty, that
jurors are permitted and in fact required to use common sense,
and that Fernandez Saldana is the only hub connecting Henry
Tennant to Jared Breidgen. Tennant was his tenant. The tire
matching the one in the road was found at his
rental property. Dozens of phone contacts, a practice run down
Breidgen's route, $ 10, 000 in checks afterward, one with a memo
line reading Kickstarter, good luck. And then Mizrahi gave them
the line, He said this defendant is not the unluckiest
man on the face of the earth.
Speaker 1: He is just guilty.
Speaker 2: That is a hell of a closing and it is
also the entire risk of this prosecution in one sentence.
Because a jury can hear that and think, yes, obviously.
Or a jury can hear it and think, you just
told me you have no physical evidence and asked me
to use common sense instead. And common sense is not
proof beyond a reasonable doubt. There's a playbook for this.
When you cannot put a defendant at the scene, you
put his money there and you ask the jury to
draw the line themselves. It works more often than people think.
It also produces some of the worst wrongful convictions in
this country. Both of those things are true at the
same time, and 12 people in Duval County are sitting
with it right now. And there is the motive fight
underneath all of it, which the jury has to resolve
on its own. The state's story is money and custody.
Breidegen and Shanna Gardner divorced in 2015 and spent years
fighting in family court over the twins, over support, over schooling.
Prosecutors told the jury the marriage between Gardner and Fernandez
Saldana was one of convenience, that her family had set
up a trust with him as trustee, and that after
Breidegen was killed, he moved $ 50, 000 out of it into
his own account and sold off what they had built together.
The defense turns the same facts around. If that marriage
was ending anyway, if he was already scheduled to move
out over spring break, why would he orchestrate a murder
over his soon-to-be ex-wife's custody dispute? And James Hill told
the jury early on that a man with access to
hundreds of thousands of dollars who had just arranged a
killing does not take a road trip to Pennsylvania and
come back. He leaves the country. One procedural note that
matters more than it sounds. Judge Kite ruled earlier that
this verdict will not be sealed. Some judges would have
held it back until the co-defendant's trial was over. Kite
said no. Whenever that jury comes back, we all find
out immediately. And that is significant because jury selection in
Shanna Gardner's trial begins Monday, four days from now. Gardner
has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder and related charges,
and she is presumed innocent. And she is about to
try to seat a jury in the same county days
after that. County learns what happened to her husband. Henry
Tenen goes to trial in 2027. Jared Breidegen was 33
years old. He had four children and the youngest was
two and in the car. His widow Kirsten has been
in that courtroom every day of this, including the day
they played the video of an evidence technician walking up
to the scene in the dark and finding him on
the asphalt. Four and a half years to get one jury.
Someone has to say his name. When we come back,
They had to get a court order to make Tupac
Shakur's friend come and testify. As always, we are running
Las Vegas a day behind because court out there is
often still in session when we record. This is where
the Dwayne Davis trial stood as of Tuesday. Quick reset.
Tupac Shakur was shot at an intersection off the Las
Vegas Strip on September 7th, 1996, and died six days
later at 25. Dwayne Davis, known as Kefi D, is 63,
has pleaded not guilty, and is the only person ever charged.
His defense is that everything he has said about that
night across two decades was invented to sell books and
get on television. Six witnesses Tuesday, and the state has
now put more than 20 people on that stand. And
the through line of the whole day was a single problem.
Almost nobody in this case has ever.
Speaker 1: Wanted to talk.
Speaker 2: The one you need to hear about is Malcolm Greenidge.
Speaker 1: You may know him as E.D. I mean. He was
a member of the.
Speaker 2: Outlaws, the group that recorded with Shakur, and he told
the jury Tupac was his childhood friend, family, a big brother,
a mentor. And he did not want to be in
that courtroom. Greenidge testified that he was resistant to coming
and that he ultimately appeared only because a California court
ordered him to. That is what it took. 30 years
after his friend was murdered, in the only trial that
has ever been held about it, a judge in another
state had to compel him, I want to be careful
about how I read that, because there is a cheap
version of this observation, and I do not want to
make it. Greenidge was 20-something when he watched his friend
get shot. He has spent three decades since being asked
about the worst night of his life by people who
mostly wanted content out of it. If he does not
want to relive it in front of cameras for a jury,
I understand that completely. But it does tell you something
true about why this case took 30 years. A former
Compton police officer named Robert Ladd testified Tuesday about exactly
that problem. Ladd worked the gang unit. He described a
38 residence operation in which police located Orlando Anderson but
could not find Dwayne Davis. And he told the jury, plainly,
that gang homicide investigations were uniquely difficult because witnesses and
gang members would not talk to police out of fear
of being called a snitch. That is the whole answer
to the question people have been asking since 1996. Why
did nobody ever get charged? It was not that nobody knew.
It was that knowing and saying are different things, and
the cost of saying it was your life, which is
why this trial is built the way it is. The
state does not have cooperating witnesses. It has Dwayne Davis
on tape telling the story himself again and again for money.
Think about how strange that is. In an ordinary murder prosecution,
the state builds a case and the defendant stays quiet. Here,
the state spent a week playing recordings of the defendant
filling in his own case file, a 1998 interview, a
2008 proffer with Los Angeles detectives, a 2009 session with
Las Vegas police, A BET docu-series in 2017. A memoir
in 2019. Everyone else in that Cadillac is dead. The
one man who could have been prosecuted talked his way
into the chair, and he did it because talking paid.
And Michael Samft's answer has been consistent from the first day.
That is exactly the point. A man who monetizes a
story has every reason to make the story bigger. Saf
put the word up on a slide in his opening statement,
in capital letters, and it was not a polite word.
His position is that 20 years of Dwayne Davis running
his mouth is 20 years of fiction, and that the
state has confused a performance for a confession. Greenidge did
give the jury one thing, and it is the kind
of detail that cuts through 30 years of mythology. He
described the moments around the shooting, and he told them
what Shakur said to him. Get on the ground, they're
gonna shoot you. Then Greenidge turned around and there was
a shotgun in his face. It was being held by
a police officer. Sit with the whole picture of that
for a second. The last thing Tupac Shakur says to
his friend is a warning to take cover. And when
the friend turns around, the gun pointed at him belongs
to the police. The rest of Tuesday was evidence from
the search of Davis' home in September of 2023. a
crime scene analyst named Stevie Felebaum walked jurors through photographs.
A homicide detective named Justine Gaddis described what was hauled
back to headquarters. And here's what they found in that house.
Copies of his own book, Compton Street Legend, and newspaper
clippings about the shooting, including articles mentioning Orlando Anderson and
Christopher Wallace. Prosecutors also put in documents recovered from search warrants,
including a bill from the Monte Carlo Resort, though the
date on it was not clear. That is the state
still trying, 30 years on, to put Dwayne Davis in
Las Vegas that week, because Davis has maintained he was
not even in the city the night Tupac Shakur was shot.
And that is worth pausing on. The man's own recorded
statements have him in the back of that Cadillac describing
who fired. His public position now is that he was
never there. Both of those cannot be true, and the
defense is asking the jury to believe the second one.
which requires believing the first one was invented. The state
is not showing you that because a man owning his
own book is a crime. They are showing you a
man who kept a collection about the murder he is
accused of orchestrating. Whether that is a killer's trophy case
or a man archiving the story he has been publicly
selling for 20 years is exactly the argument, and Michael
Sanft will make the second one. Tupac Shakur was 25
years old. 30 years later, the people who loved him
have to be ordered into a courtroom to talk about it.
Someone has to say his name. That's the show for Thursday,
August 27th. If this was useful, send it to one person.
That is the whole engine on a show like this.
And if you're listening on Spotify, drop a comment. Today
is Closing Arguments Day in Plymouth, so tell me this.
After five weeks of experts contradicting each other, Do you
think that jury has any idea what to do? Because
I'm not sure I would. Two juries out or about
to be. We will be here for both. I'm Garrett Fisher.
Speaker 1: Do better. A few notes on sourcing and timing.
Speaker 2: This episode was recorded before court opened Thursday morning. Closing
arguments in the Lindsay Clancy trial were expected Thursday, with
Judge Sullivan telling jurors deliberations were unlikely to begin before Friday.
As of recording, Sullivan had not announced the outcome of
the charge conference or whether involuntary manslaughter would appear as
a verdict option. Nothing here should be taken as a
report on what happened in that courtroom today. In Jacksonville,
the jury began deliberating Wednesday morning and had not returned
a verdict as of recording. If a verdict was reached
after we recorded, this episode does not reflect it. On
the Jacksonville case, Mario Fernandez Saldana has pleaded not guilty
and is presumed innocent. as are Shauna Gardner and Henry Tennant,
who faced separate trials. Henry Tennant pleaded guilty in 2023
and later withdrew that plea, telling the court his statements
under it were false. So nothing he said under that
agreement is treated as fact or used as evidence against anyone.
During the trial, testimony from an inmate witness was offered
outside the presence of the jury.
Speaker 1: Those jurors never heard it.
Speaker 2: It has not been tested by cross-examination in front of them.
And it concerns a defendant whose own jury selection begins
in days, so we have not repeated it. Our accounts
of courtroom exchanges come from reporters present in the room
rather than from transcripts we have reviewed. Outlets differ on
the running witness count in the Las Vegas trial and
on how testimony days are numbered in Plymouth. On Las Vegas,
allegations Dwayne Davis has made in recorded interviews about living
people who have never been charged in this case are
claims made by a man whose own attorney has told
the jury he cannot be corroborated. The jury has been
instructed there is no indication Davis had anything to do
with the murder of Christopher Wallace. This episode discusses child deaths, suicide,
and postpartum mental illness. If you are struggling, you can
call or text 988 in the United States to reach
the Suicide and Crisis Lifeline. For postpartum mental health specifically,
the National Maternal Mental Health Hotline is available by call
or text at 1-833-TLC-MAMA. Postpartum psychosis is rare, it is
a medical emergency, and it is treatable when it is caught.
The overwhelming majority of people who experience postpartum mental illness
never harm anyone.