Reason why the 911 call and autopsy photos in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial won’t be released to the public

As the high-profile murder trial of Lindsay Clancy gets underway in Plymouth Superior Court, court observers and media outlets have noticed a key restriction: the dramatic 911 audio recording and sensitive autopsy photographs will not be broadcast or released to the public.

The decision follows a key pre-trial motion filed by Patrick Clancy—the ex-husband of Lindsay Clancy and father of the three young victims: 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson, and 8-month-old Callan.

Ahead of opening statements, Patrick’s legal team asked the court to limit public dissemination of the most traumatizing evidence in the case. Overseeing the trial, Plymouth Superior Court Judge William Sullivan granted the motion.

Here is a breakdown of why this evidence is being kept out of the public eye and how the ruling impacts the trial proceedings.

The Legal Reason: "Substantial Likelihood of Harm"

In his written order, Judge Sullivan strictly prohibited members of the press from recording, displaying, reproducing, or distributing the 911 call or any autopsy images.

The legal standard for restricting open-court access to evidence balances public interest against potential trauma and harm. In his ruling, Judge Sullivan concluded that broadcasting such agonizing material across television and online media:

“Will create a substantial likelihood of harm [to Patrick Clancy].”

Patrick Clancy was the first person to enter the family’s Duxbury home on January 24, 2023, discovering his children and calling emergency services while his ex-wife attempted suicide. Because releasing raw audio of a father's distress and explicit images of deceased children poses severe psychological harm, courts often exercise discretion to shield surviving victims from public exploitation.

Lindsay Clancy is accused of murdering her three children (Photo by Matt Stone/MediaNews Group/Boston Herald via Getty Images)

Will the Jury Still See and Hear the Evidence?

Yes. The judge's ruling applies specifically to media broadcast and public release, not to the judicial process inside the courtroom.

During trial proceedings, the 12 jurors and six alternates will listen to the 911 call and examine the autopsy photos as part of the formal evidence presented by prosecutors.

“The jury still gets to hear the evidence, see the evidence,” legal analyst Jennifer Roman explained to news outlets. “Touch and feel those photos when they go back to deliberate. It’s going to be treated like any other pieces of evidence at the trial.”

Balancing First Amendment Access with Victim Rights

While Massachusetts courts operate under a strong presumption of open public records and trial transparency, judges maintain broad authority to seal or redact specific pieces of evidence when public exposure would inflict unnecessary harm on victims or compromise a fair trial.

By allowing jurors to review the material in full while forbidding news agencies from streaming or publishing the media, the court aims to preserve trial integrity while protecting a grieving family from secondary trauma.