Trial Day 6

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.

All right. Well, good morning, counsel.

Morning.

Morning, Judge.

Good morning, Ms. Clancy. All right, can I see counsel sidebar, please?

Exhibit J for ID.

I'm sorry, Your Honor. Thank you.

All right, thank you. All right.

May I swear in Ms. Clancy?

Yeah. What we're going to do at this point, Ms. Clancy, my understanding is that you, through counsel, have offered to stipulate to certain facts that would be introduced during the course of this trial. So what I want to do is just ask you a series of questions to make sure that you understand the effect of stipulating to these facts. So I'm going to just ask you some brief questions at this point, and then we'll go from there. So if you could swear Ms. Clancy in, please.

Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear that [inaudible 00:01:40], so help you God?

[inaudible 00:01:46].

All right. Ms. Clancy, I have been shown a list or a summary of stipulations that's been marked as Exhibit J for identification. So it's my understanding that you are requesting or offering to stipulate to certain facts. Is that correct?

Yes, Your Honor.

All right. And before I accept that, I got to make sure, ask you some questions, make sure that your decision to do so is voluntary and that you understand the consequences. So I'm going to ask you some questions. If at any time you need to speak to Mr. Reddington or you have any questions or have problems understanding what I'm saying, just let me know, okay?

Okay.

All right. Now, do you understand that the Commonwealth in this case is required to prove each and every element of the case against you beyond a reasonable doubt? Do you understand that?

Yes, Your Honor.

All right. Do you understand that there are certain facts that could be introduced during the course of the trial that might support the Commonwealth's position regarding those elements? Do you understand that?

Yes, Your Honor.

All right. And do you understand that by signing the stipulation, you're agreeing that the Commonwealth does not have to prove these certain facts that are contained in the stipulation? Do you understand that?

Yes, Your Honor.

All right. And do you understand by signing or going along with that stipulation, you are basically relieving the Commonwealth of its burden to prove those certain facts? Do you understand that?

Yes, Your Honor.

All right. Is that what you want to do at this point?

Yes.

All right. Have you gone over this stipulation or the summary of the stipulations with Attorney Reddington?

Yes, I have.

All right. Need any more time to do that?

No, thank you.

All right. Now, by entering into this stipulation, you've given up some important rights, so I kind of want to go over those with you at this time. Do you understand by law you're presumed to be innocent of each charge against you, and you do not have to prove your innocence? All right, so instead, at trial, a Commonwealth, as I said before, has the burden of proving you are guilty of each element of the charges against you. And by entering into this stipulation, you're giving up your right to force the Commonwealth to prove the facts that are contained in these stipulations. Do you understand that?

Yes, Your Honor.

All right. You also, at trial, where we are now, you have the right to confront the witnesses that would testify about these facts. And by entering into this stipulation, you're giving up that right with respect to these stipulated facts. Do you understand that?

Yes, Your Honor.

All right. You also, if you wanted to, could call your own witnesses at the trial to contest these stipulated facts if you want to. You understand you'd be giving up that right by entering into this stipulation?

Yes, Your Honor.

All right. You also, at trial, have the right to remain silent and cannot be forced to testify at this. You understand by entering into this stipulation, you're giving up in a limited way that right with respect to just those facts?

Yes, Your Honor.

All right. Are you doing this willingly and voluntarily?

Yes, I am.

All right. Has anyone forced you or threatened you to enter into this stipulation?

No, Your Honor.

Have you had enough time to talk to counsel about this?

Yes, I have.

All right, I make the following findings. I find that Ms. Clancy is knowingly, intelligently, voluntarily, and willingly entered into the stipulation of the facts that are contained and summarized in Exhibit J for identification. I find that she is competent to enter into this stipulation, and I find she understands the consequences of entering into this stipulation. So accordingly, I now accept the proposed stipulation of facts. Thank you.

I just would like, Your Honor, for the record, to again, reiterate the fact that we have not been contesting the government's case in chief, if you will. Have been agreeing to evidence, and this stipulation basically relieves the government of having to bring in dozens, if not more, witnesses, to prove chain of custody of blood, fluids, the bands, DNA, all of that. Rather than have days of testimony, this stipulation will avoid that. So that's why we're stipulating to it.

All right. All right. Commonwealth, anything else you want to add?

No, Your Honor.

Okay, all right. So like I said, I have made those findings. I'm going to accept the stipulation that Ms. Clancy has agreed to and that the parties have agreed to consistent with J for identification. Counsel, are we ready for the jury then? Any further?

Yes, Your Honor.

All right, why don't we bring the jury in.

[inaudible 00:07:12]. Yeah, that's fine.

Counsel, while we're... I forgot to ask. While we wait for the jury, can I see very briefly?

[inaudible 00:08:46]. All rise. Jury [inaudible 00:08:48].

Hear ye, hear ye, hear ye, all persons having anything to do before the honorable William Sullivan, Justice of the Superior Court now sitting in Plymouth. But then for the Commonwealth, we're all here in attendance and you shall be heard. [inaudible 00:09:31] the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, this court is now in session. Please be seated.

Good morning, Your Honor. May I proceed?

Yes, please.

Your Honor, before the court today, we have the continuation of the jury trial in 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.

Well, good morning everyone. Sun's out today. A little nicer weather for us, so if it was nice for you coming in here today. So what I'm going to do is ask you those questions as I always do, and then I'll go over a little bit the schedule and then we'll return to the Commonwealth's case, all right? So the first question, everybody's probably got it memorized by now anyway, but let me ask it. 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?

No.

All right. Last question. Is there any other matter, serious matter or concern bearing on your service as a juror in this case that anybody needs to bring to my attention at this time? Again, thank you for following those instructions. Now, in regards to the schedule, if you remember, I said yesterday that sometimes we have to adjust on the fly and it's going to be my call. Well, we may have to do that a little bit, all right? So today we're going to go through some cases. Now, we may break a little bit early today, all right? And then tomorrow there is a matter I'm going to have to talk to counsel pretty much in the afternoon. So the thought is tomorrow, the plan for you should be pretty much 9:00 to 1:00, all right? And then in the afternoon I'm going to deal with counsel in regards to some other issues that will, I believe, keep this case going well on track, and that's kind of where we are. So I just kind of wanted to give you that update. So that's, like I said, the best we could do. Give you as much notice in regards to that. But you will not, I say we, you will not be sitting here tomorrow afternoon. We may be. [inaudible 00:11:49]. So with that, what we're going to do is continue with the Commonwealth's case. We're going to go back. Commonwealth, call your next witness, please.

Thank you. The Commonwealth would call Christina Carpio.

Good morning.

Good morning, sir.

Can you stop right there and raise your right hand for the clerk?

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony [inaudible 00:12:39] so help you God?

So help me God.

Thank you, you may be seated.

[inaudible 00:12:47] please.

Good morning.

Good morning, sir.

All right. Buckingham, please.

Thank you. Good morning.

Good morning.

Could you please tell the jury your first and last name?

Christina Carpio.

And can you spell your last name for the record?

C-A-R, P as in Peter, I-O.

And what do you do for work?

I am a general surgeon trained in trauma and critical care.

And where do you currently work?

I'm hired by Brigham, but I work at South Shore Hospital.

Can you tell us a little bit about your educational background?

I completed medical school and then went to general surgery residency for five years at Columbia Presbyterian. I then did two additional years of trauma and surgical critical care at Yale. And then I've been working for Brigham and South Shore Hospital since 2016.

And explain to us how it is that you work for both Brigham and South Shore Hospital as a trauma surgeon.

Brigham has many physicians of all specialties who are at South Shore Hospital. At one point, I think there was a merger attempted between the two institutions. Either way, my salary comes from Brigham, but I work only at South Shore Hospital.

Okay, so that was kind of my follow-up question. Generally, your day-to-day work is at the South Shore Hospital in Weymouth?

That's correct.

And what kind of hospital, what level hospital, trauma level hospital is the South Shore Hospital?

A level two.

And so if there are cases that come in that need more acute care, are they generally sent over to a hospital in Boston like the Brigham?

Yes, depending... Sometimes we get input from the subspecialist to guide that decision.

And as far as your role as a trauma surgeon, do you actually do surgeries at the South Shore Hospital?

Yes, that's correct.

I'm going to draw your attention to January 24th of 2023. Were you working at the South Shore Hospital that day?

Yes.

And what was your role that day?

I was the on-call surgeon. I was physically in the hospital working.

At some point in the evening hours, were you advised that a patient was being transported to the South Shore emergency room as a level one trauma?

Yes.

And so when you are advised of that level of trauma or you're advised of a critical patient coming into the emergency department, what do you do?

There are guidelines for how quickly we have to be present in the emergency room because I'm also operating. At times I may be in the operating room when that notification happens.

So in this particular case, when a patient, a female patient by the name of Lindsey Clancy was coming into the emergency department, were you able to go down to the emergency department as part of the assessment team?

Yes.

And who were you working with from the emergency department in this case?

Dr. Kelly McDonough.

Now, is that a common thing, that you collaborate with the emergency room doctors or nurses and technicians in a situation like this?

Yes.

Did you have information that came in through the EMS or the paramedics about the nature of the patient's condition?

I recall that we were told it was a fall of unclear mechanism from a height of about 20 feet.

And were you advised that there was the possibility of maybe neurological deficits or some serious spinal injury?

Yes.

And as a result of that information, did that inform your trauma assessment?

It was already activated as a level one. That's the highest mechanism when there is concern for a fall from a height of a certain level and with possible neurological injury.

So were members of the neurology department also part of that trauma assessment team?

No.

Okay. As far as your assessment, did you go and physically see the patient, make observations?

Yes.

And did you observe her in the emergency department to be intubated?

Shortly after arrival, she was intubated.

So that was done by the staff at South Shore Hospital, to your knowledge?

Yes.

And did you observe injuries to her neck and her wrists?

Yes.

Did you evaluate those to determine whether they needed an immediate surgical intervention?

Yes.

Did they?

No, they were superficial.

And as far as additional tests to assess whether there's any other surgical intervention that's needed, are you aware that CT scans were ordered?

Yes.

And are you aware what areas of the body they were ordered for?

We did a pan-scan, which means we scanned the head, the neck, the chest, and the abdomen pelvis.

As far as your physical observations of the patient, did you observe any obvious injuries to her head area, like abrasions, contusions, fractures?

There were lacerations to her neck.

Okay. But as far as the rest of her head or around her-

Not obvious, no.

... skull or face? So when those CT scans were done, were you able to review the information that came from them?

Yes.

And as far as those CT scans, you're aware that there was a head CT scan or two head CT scans, one with contrast and one without.

Mm-hmm.

And were you aware that the findings were there no definite acute intracranial findings on the non-contrast enhanced head CT?

Yes.

And there were no significant findings on the contrast head CT, correct?

The head CT with contrast was what we call an angiogram head and neck. So it's ordered in two parts and has two reports. At the time of the documentation that was performed, we had the report back on the head section, but the neck was not completed at that time.

Okay. Was there eventually a completed angiogram of the neck area at South Shore Hospital?

The images were done, the report was completed. I don't know the timeline of when the report came in compared to when the patient was transferred.

So as far as your initial assessment in that trauma assessment period, that wasn't information you had available to you about the neck findings, correct?

The angio neck findings, correct.

Okay. And that's different from other CT scans on the cervical spine and other areas of the spine. Is that fair to say?

Yes, that's correct.

Okay. As the trauma surgeon evaluating this case, did you identify that there were some serious spinal injuries to the cervical and thoracic areas?

Yes.

Did any of those require you to intervene with surgical intervention?

No.

Do you recall making note that while in the emergency department, the patient became hypertensive and that she was identified as being hypothermic to 82.1 degrees?

I remember that she was hypothermic when I reviewed my documentation. The two numbers I saw in my note were normal values of blood pressure, not high values, not hypertension.

Okay. If I may approach you just with one of the pages from the notes, read your review. And you could just tell me if I'm misinterpreting.

Oh, no problem. Which part?

It's towards the bottom, the second to last paragraph.

Oh, sorry. She was hypotensive, which means low blood pressure, different from hypertension, which is high blood pressure.

Okay, sorry.

Yeah, no, no, not at all.

But as far as the hypothermic, that you recall that she was at a very low core body temperature?

Yes, that's correct.

And do you know what was done to raise her body temperature?

We raised the temperature in the trauma room to be able to raise her body temperature. That's usually our first line of intervention.

And do you also have available to you at the South Shore Hospital what's called a bear hugger or some sort of blanket or wrappings that you can wrap around an individual to try to get their body temperature up?

Yes, we have that.

And at some point her body temperature did come up to 95.2 degrees, correct?

Yes.

And based on your observations of her, did anything change about those lacerations that you observed once her body temperature was up that warranted some surgical intervention of those injuries?

No.

What was the ultimate recommendation for the care of this patient?

She had complex fractures in her spine at the thoracic level. We conferred with our neurosurgery colleague who was on call who recommended transfer to a tertiary hospital.

And so where did this patient go?

Brigham.

Okay. Now you identified that your hospital is a level two trauma, correct?

Yes.

After fully reviewing this patient, did you agree that this was a level one trauma situation?

Yes.

Are you able to do surgical intervention for these particular injuries that you observed on this patient at South Shore Hospital?

The spinal injuries require input from our neurosurgical team.

And there was none available to you at the South Shore Hospital?

We did contact the on-call neurosurgeon. Because we are a level two trauma center, they are not required to be physically present in the hospital, but they were immediately available and they can remotely review images.

So I guess my question is why didn't you do any surgeries regarding those injuries at South Shore Hospital? Why did you recommend the care to a tertiary hospital?

The complex level of spinal injuries was deemed necessary for transfer by our neurosurgery colleague.

Okay. Thank you.

Are you ready to...

Morning.

Good morning.

Just a few questions. South Shore Hospital, and you made reference to as being a trauma hospital, and the injuries suffered by Lindsay were at level one. Is that what it was?

Yes, that's correct.

That would be the highest level, is that right?

Yes.

As far as risk or concern of the person's safety and health and survival?

Yes.

What time... If you remember, what time approximately was she admitted to South Shore Hospital?

The word admission means that she would've remained there as a patient, so she was never formally admitted. For the time that she was brought in by EMS, I would have to refer to that information from the record.

Do you have an idea as to how long she was at your hospital?

Likely several hours. But again, I would have to see the specifics in the charts of... There is documentation with EMS for arrival and for her when transfer occurred to Brigham.

Okay. And at some point it was decided that she would be transferred to Boston, right?

Yes.

Brigham and Women's Hospital?

Yes.

And it was decided by someone that they weren't going to put her in an ambulance for that transport, right?

I would have to look at the record for what was the method of transfer to Brigham.

Do you know how she was transferred? By helicopter? MedFlight?

I don't know because MedFlight covers two modes of transportation, MedFlight ambulance and MedFlight helicopter.

Do you know that she was MedFlight helicoptered to Boston?

I don't know that.

And the time that she left was after you all had provided the treatment that you were able to provide to Lindsay as a patient, right?

Yes.

And you reached the end of your rope. She had to be transferred because she needed immediate high level medical care, right?

She needed higher level of care, yes.

Higher level of care. And as a result, she was then brought to Brigham and Women's Hospital. Now, the treatment that you had given would include raising her, apparently, temperature, I guess, because she came in at a low temperature, right?

Yes.

And did you use IV fluids?

I would have to check the record, but that is a common intervention.

So your memory would be that you believe that you used IV fluids, but you'd have to have me get out of the box and check the record to ask that question, right?

Yes, correct.

Okay. It didn't really work out very well though, did it, because you know that when she was brought to Boston after all of the time that she was treated at your hospital, she was still core temperature of 82 when she hit Brigham and Women's?

Objection.

Allow it if she knows.

I did not look at the medical record from another institution. I only reviewed my note from South Shore Hospital.

Did you know that your patient had coded shortly after being brought to Brigham and Women's Hospital?

No.

Did you know that she had to have massive transfusions right after being brought to the hospital in Boston?

No.

Did anybody in South Shore Hospital make a determination that she had lost a lot of blood?

The EMS report did not share that there was a large volume of blood at the scene. She was evaluated to... Part of her CAT scans also help us evaluate for intraabdominal blood loss.

Okay. So when you raised the issue of the EMS, that would be the ambulance, right?

Yes.

And their report, their run sheet that they prepare, right, that's what you're talking about, right?

There's verbal report from EMS when a patient is brought in and also the run sheet of the details.

Okay. And when the people from the EMS came in, did they speak to you about the verbal report?

They address the entire room, so all the staff in the room is available to hear the details.

And you're able to look at the run sheet, correct?

No, the run sheet is not always immediately available.

So did the EMTs, to your knowledge as a treating surgeon physician in the trauma center, tell you that there was blood loss?

Not to my recollection.

Did anyone tell you that at the scene where she was being treated after coming out of the window and striking the ground, that there was blood in the snow and on the leaves and in the grass?

I cannot recall if they commented on that.

Is that important for you to know if there's blood loss on a patient?

If there is a large volume of blood loss, yes. The EMS will routinely comment on a patient being found. No,

But that's the EMS. You're the surgeon, right?

That is correct, sir. Yes.

Yeah. And one of the things would be blood pressure, right? What the person's blood pressure is, correct?

Yes.

And she had, if I understand your testimony correctly, low blood pressure?

She initially, when she came in, the note has a normal blood pressure, and then after intubation, her blood pressure dropped.

Okay. Do you know what caused the blood pressure to drop?

There were several factors at play. As we discovered from her CAT scan, she had an injury to her spinal cord in the thoracic region that very commonly causes issues with maintaining your blood pressure.

And do you know what her blood pressure was? I mean, if you don't, that's fine. You need the records.

Blood pressure at which point?

At the point I'm asking you about when you noted that she had low blood pressure.

No, I don't remember how hypotensive she was, no.

As far as being hypotensive, did you know that when she finally hit the Boston Hospital that she had massive transfusion of blood?

I thought I asked and answered.

Oh, did you?

You asked me before and I answered that no, I did not know that.

Okay. So how about did you know that they introduced pleural tubes in both sides of her chest and removed many, many CCs of blood from both the right and left pleural cavity?

Your Honor, I just object to the line of questioning. The witness has already indicated she hasn't reviewed those records. She's not aware of what happened at the Brigham. To go through each and every injury is [inaudible 00:29:33].

Oh, she can answer that.

No, I do not know that about the patient when she was not at South Shore Hospital.

How about the superficial cuts that you were talking about? Would you suggest or would you agree that on the right ulnar area and the left ulnar area of the upper extremities, right and left, that there were a deep cut noted in the skin?

The notes about her wrist injuries said that it was through the skin with exposed fat, but there was no exposed muscle or tendon. So those are more superficial.

So you would not agree that they were deep cuts on both arms? You wouldn't agree with that?

No, I would not.

And again, you're not aware of anything that was diagnosed in Brigham and Women's Hospital, right?

That is correct.

As far as the injury to her spine, what kind of injury was it? Do you remember?

It was at thoracic level T5-T6.

And what type of injury was there to the spine?

The report said that... The pattern of it indicated that there was instability of the spine, which is why we conferred with the neurosurgeon.

Right. And nothing much came out of that either, as far as conferring with the neurosurgeon, right?

I'm not sure what you mean by nothing much came of that.

Well he didn't show up to come to the hospital, right?

I'm not sure what-

Okay, the spine was transected at T5-T6, right?

The team, or rather the input you would need for further commentary on the spine would be a neurosurgery team. I am not a neurosurgeon. I am a general surgeon.

So you're not aware of the transection. You know what a transection is, don't you?

Yes.

Okay. And on your CAT scans or on your pictures that you were describing for the jury with no problem for the DA, did you notice that the spine was transected at T5 and T6?

There was compression of the bones. I would have to specifically look at the report to see if it used the word transection.

How about her thyroid? Did you notice anything about a thyroid?

It said that there was edema at the thyroid, concern for a contusion or laceration.

And that's the extent of your knowledge. You don't know whether or not the thyroid was destroyed or anything, do you?

Correct.

Okay. How about her ribs? You noticed that some of her ribs were broken?

I would have to look at her CAT scan report again.

Yeah. So coming in here today, you're not aware whether or not she had broken ribs because you haven't been able to look at your records. Is that right?

I did review my records. I would have to specifically state into the record what was the injuries. I would be happy to read from my note, which I know is part of the evidence.

Yeah. So who is it that decides that a patient is going to be MedFlighted into Boston from South Shore Hospital?

Some of it depends on the level of injury and the transport teams that are available at that moment. Sometimes a MedFlight ambulance is faster. Sometimes MedFlight is available. It all depends on the available resources at the time of the event.

So what I asked you is who decides whether or not somebody's getting MedFlighted out of South Shore Hospital?

Is collaborative between what resources are available for us to transport the patient. The decision to transfer the patient is made between the emergency room team and the trauma team and the input from the subspecialist.

Go ahead.

Let her finish.

Yeah, I know. I didn't know she was still talking. Go ahead.

I'm finished, sir.

All right.

Go ahead.

I'm finished, sir.

All right. So you as the trauma surgeon, would you agree that you had a little bit to do with whether or not she was in dire straits and had to be med-flighted to Boston?

I would be part of the decision to transfer her.

Do you remember that decision being made, and do you remember the meeting that you had to make that decision?

I remember conferring with the emergency room team that neurosurgery had said she needed transfer.

And it was by med flight, right?

Again-

You don't know whether it was an ambulance or a helicopter, but you know it was med flight?

It should have been med flight, yes.

Okay. That's all I have.

Commonwealth, any redirect?

Just very briefly. Doctor, it was very clear to you that this patient was suffering from multiple injuries.

Yes.

And is it the policy of the South Shore Hospital to make sure a patient is stable before they're transported?

Yes, that's correct.

And so that's what the emergency team and the entire team that's collaborating on her did, right?

Yes, correct. We would not put an unstable patient in any mode of transport to another facility.

So in the review of all the CT scans, the abdominal scans, the head scans, the chest x-rays, all of the things that were reviewed as identified that she was stable enough to be transported to another-

So I'm going to object because they think she's-

Yes, [inaudible 00:34:16].

... accosting the witness and this is leading, which I haven't objected to yet, but at this point I am on this witness.

I'll allow this question.

Okay.

I'm sorry, what was your answer?

Could you repeat the question please?

Sure. So after reviewing all of the imaging, the CT scans, the chest x-rays, everything, you and your team were comfortable that she was stable enough to be transported to another hospital, correct?

Yes.

And I think your testimony was that a large contributor to the decision to transport was the information that you got from the neurosurgery team?

Yes.

Thank you. Nothing further.

Anything on that?

No.

Ms. Brington?

All right, thank you, doctor.

All right. Thank you, sir.

[inaudible 00:34:55].

Okay.

Thank you.

All right, commonwealth?

Okay. The Commonwealth would call Joseph Rabbit to the stand.

Good morning, sir. Can you stop right here? Raise your right hand for the clerk.

Good morning. Do you solemnly swear and affirm the testimony you'll give [inaudible 00:35:51] whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

I do.

Thank you. You may have a seat.

[inaudible 00:36:00], please.

All right. Good morning, sir.

Morning, Your Honor.

Let me just have one moment, [inaudible 00:36:07].

Sure. Sure.

[inaudible 00:37:12]. Let me see.

[inaudible 00:37:15].

Oh, it's on the... See the one with the...

This one right here?

Yeah.

Thank you.

Good morning, sir.

Good morning.

Can you please tell the jury your first and last name?

Lieutenant Joseph Rabbitt, R-A-B-B-I-T-T.

And where do you work?

The Massachusetts State Police, currently assigned to the Cyber Crime Unit.

How long have you been with the State Police?

Since March of 2012.

And I'm going to draw your attention back to January of 2023. What was your assignment then?

I was a trooper assigned to the State Police Detective Unit for Plymouth County.

And do you recall how long you were a detective or trooper assigned to the detective unit in Plymouth County, approximately?

From February of 2017 to September of 2024.

Okay. I'm going to draw your attention to January 24th of 2023. Do you recall being involved in an investigation in the town of Duxbury that day?

I do, yes.

And do you recall where you went in Duxbury or where the investigation was unfolding out of?

I first went to Jordan Hospital, or Beth Israel Deaconess, Plymouth.

Okay. And so you didn't initially go to 47 Summer Street, correct?

Correct.

Fair to say you weren't the case officer in this case?

That is correct.

And in your experience, working with the detectives unit, fair to say when a investigation or a death investigation is ongoing, it's all hands on deck and everyone's kind of directed to do different things, correct?

That is correct.

And so in this circumstance, you were asked to go to the Beth Israel Deaconess or the old Jordan Hospital here in Plymouth, correct?

Correct.

Why did you get asked to go there?

Because three children had been transported there.

And so were you assigned to just go and check in on the status of the kids and what was going on at that hospital?

Check in on the status and have any potential victims documented by crime scene services.

Okay. And so while you were at the hospital, you did have the occasion to speak with Patrick Clancy, correct?

I did, yes.

Okay. And after you left the hospital, did you go to 47 Summer Street in Duxbury?

I did, yes.

And are you aware that other members in your unit had obtained a search warrant for that home?

I was, yes.

And so when you arrived at 47 Summer Street, were you there to assist with the execution of the warrant?

I was, yes.

And part of the warrant execution, is it fair to say that everyone's kind of asked to look at particular areas and search for potential evidence related to the offense?

That is correct.

Fair to say this search warrant was executed shortly after the incident occurred?

Fair to say, yes.

And so did you and other investigators have limited information about what had happened?

Yes.

Okay. At the home, were you in the kitchen area, assisting with the search?

I was, yes.

Okay. And I'm going to show you what's already been marked as Exhibit 144. If you could look at the screen. Are you familiar with that photograph or what's depicted in that photograph?

I am, yes.

And is that the kitchen area at 47 Summer Street?

It is, yes.

Were you there on January... Well, the early morning hours, I would say of January 25th?

I was, yes.

‍ And so fair to say you made observations while you were there, right?

Correct.

And what was an observation that you noted to other investigators in that kitchen area on the island?

A CVS bag.

Okay. I'm just going to show you exhibit number 40. That's a little bit of a closer view of the bag, correct?

That is correct.

And how about this larger paper bag? Did you observe that as well?

I did, yes.

And I'm going to just approach you with what's been already marked as Exhibit 31. Is that also familiar to you?

It is, yes.

There's a receipt that was not with that bag?

Correct.

And fair to say all of these things, the CVS bag, the receipt, were noted and certain things were collected, including the receipt, Exhibit 31, and the CVS bag?

Correct.

Do you recall what was inside the CVS bag?

I believe it was a bottle of PDLX.

You also observed other areas of the kitchen, correct?

Correct.

And so there was a particular cabinet in the kitchen. Did you open a cabinet and discover something that stood out to you?

I did, yes.

And what was the cabinet and what stood out?

An upper kitchen cabinet with medication bottles.

Okay. And fair to say that was pointed out and documented as well?

It was, yes.

Okay. If I may approach.

You may.

Okay. First photograph, is that familiar to you?

It is, yes.

And that's the cabinet that you opened and saw the items inside?

Correct.

Okay. And I'm just going to show you a second photograph. And is that fair to say just a closer of those top shelves?

It is, yes.

And what particularly stood out to you about the medication in the cabinet? Was it the spices or the generic medications or something else?

The prescription medications.

I would move to admit these as the next two exhibits.

All right. It may be admitted.

It's 152 and 153.

So just showing you now on the screen, Exhibit 152, and that's just the cabinet open and there looks to be like an air fryer below it, correct?

Correct.

And now showing you 153, which has those top two shelves. And it's the very top shelf has the prescription bottles, correct?

Correct.

What did you do with the prescription bottles?

I placed them on the island and notified other members that were searching, so they could be photographed by crime scene services.

Okay. So I'm just going to show you another photograph. Is that fair as to you placing those bottles on the island?

It is, yes.

I'm going to move to admit this as the next exhibit.

All right. It may be admitted.

Exhibit number 154? And how many bottles were there?

There were four.

I'm going to approach you with a bag. [inaudible 00:44:54] take a look at what's it's in the bag. Do those appear to be the four bottles that were in the cabinet?

They do, yes.

I would move to admit this as the next exhibit.

It may be admitted.

[inaudible 00:45:12] 155.

Thank you.

Now, other than pulling these four bottles out of the cabinet, lining them up on the counter and asking crime scene to photograph them, did you do anything further with these pills as far as inventorying them or examining them?

I did not, no.

And when a search warrant is executed, fair to say there is usually an evidence officer who kind of documents everything and collects everything to take back either to the crime lab or to the state police office?

That's correct.

Now, in addition to assisting with the execution of the warrant on the early morning hours of January 25th, were you asked to do something else on this case on February 6th of 2023?

I was, yes.

And on that day, did somebody come into the state police office, at the district attorney's office with some information or evidence?

They did, yes.

Who was that that came in?

Mr. Patrick Clancy.

And was he with an attorney, somebody by the name of David Meyer?

Yes.

And what did they bring to the state police?

Bottles of medication.

How was it transported to the state police, or how did you receive it?

In a CVS bag.

Okay. I'm just going to show you a photograph. Is that familiar to you?

It is, yes.

And is this fair as to the bag that was provided to you on February 6th?

Yes.

I move to move this as the next exhibit, please.

It may be admitted.

This is 156.

Thank you.

When Mr. Clancy and Attorney Meyer brought that bag in, did you do something or ask somebody to do something to memorialize what they were bringing to you?

Yes, I asked Crime Scene Services to digitally document them.

And so the photograph I just showed you of the bag, that was done by a trooper from Crime Scene Services that came to the office?

Yes.

Do you recall who that was?

I believe it was Trooper Rostauffers.

And fair to say that with the crime scene trooper present, you also examined their other contents in the bag, correct?

That is correct.

And there was a blank greeting card, some paperwork, and a kind of insert for CVS. Is that accurate?

Correct.

Just show me one more photo. Got it. Is that the other items that were in the bag other than the medication

Bottles? That is correct.

I move to admit this as the next exhibit.

That may be admitted.

[inaudible 00:48:28] 157. And again, as to the medications in that bag, when you saw that there were prescription bottles there, did you present them so that they could all be documented?

Yes.

And did you then inventory or examine each of the bottles?

I did, yes.

And is it fair to say that Patrick Clancy had indicated that the bag was in his truck and that he was bringing them to the state police as a result of everything that occurred on January 24th?

I can't recall where he said he got them from, but that is why he was bringing them in.

Okay. And I'm just going to approach with what's previously been marked as Exhibit number 2.

Okay.

You want to just take a look at that before we go through it. Does that appear to represent all the bottles that were provided to you on February 6th?

It does.

And that's nine, correct?

Correct.

Now, just as far as each bottle, just give me one moment. So when you are tasked with tracking or inventorying particular items like this that come in, what do you do?

Count out how many capsules or tablets are in there, the date that it would note it was filled, and the amount left in the bottle, and the amount that it said should have been there when filled.

Okay. And so referring first to this bottle that's labeled Lorazepam, one milligram, fair to say it says date filled 10/26/22, correct?

Correct.

And it says that originally it was filled with 30, quantity 30?

Correct.

And you counted what was left in this particular bottle and there were only 14 pills left in that bottle, correct?

Correct.

And so the next one, the bottle labeled Sertraline, brand name Zoloft, filled on 9/15/22, quantity 30. Did you count how many pills were left in this bottle?

I did, yes.

And fair to say there's 23 left?

Correct.

Now, buspirone, there were in fact two bottles labeled buspirone, correct?

That is correct.

And one of them with a date of 10/26/22 date filled, quantity 30. You counted how many pills are in this bottle, right?

Correct.

And there were 28 pills left in this bottle?

That is correct.

Hydroxyzine filled on 10/26/ 22. Quantity 30. You counted how many pills were in this?

That is correct.

And fair to say there were 27 left in that bottle?

Correct.

Clonazepam filled on 11/25/22 with 14 pills in the prescription. You counted how many were in this bottle?

Correct.

And there were actually 11 and a half, correct?

That is correct.

Fluoxetine filled on 11/21/22 with 56 in the prescription. You counted how many were left in this bottle?

I did, yes.

And there were 20... Or excuse me, 43?

Correct.

Correct. The second bottle of Lorazepam that was 0.5 milligrams filled on 11/2/22 with, it says 40 on the bottle, right?

Correct.

You counted what was left in this bottle and it was 18 and a half tablets.

That is correct.

And the second bottle of buspirone filled on 11/9/22, quantity 30, there were actually 30 in this bottle. Is that fair to say?

Correct, yes.

And Trazodone filled on November 16th, 2022 with a prescription for 30. You counted that there were 22.5 pills left in this bottle. Is that correct?

Correct.

And then once you identified and counted each and every one of the pills in these bottles, you handed this in for evidence?

That is correct.

Thank you. All right. Cross, counsel?

On the pills that you just counted or you went through the bottles that you seized, first of all, there's no doubt that you guys were executing a search warrant, right?

That is correct.

And to have a search warrant, you have to have a reason to seize something from a citizen's person or their home, right?

That is correct.

You have to have probable cause is what it's called, right?

Correct.

And then you have to itemize what you want to have the authority to seize, right?

Correct.

So I take it that when people went in executing the search warrant, that you had authority to seize the medical pill bottles that we've just gone through?

Correct.

And that was set forth right where it says you're therefore command did one of the things that you're entitled to seize, would be prescription medication, right?

Correct.

And that would be on January 25 of 13 that this affidavit was submitted to the clerk in this court, right?

Correct.

At 3:00 in the morning, warrant was issued on January 25, right?

I didn't write it, but that sounds right.

All right. But do you recall what time you went into the Clancy home to execute the warrant or serve the warrant?

It was very early morning hours, yes.

All right. So early morning hours, you're in there to look for and among other things like computers and things, seize any medication bottles that you saw?

Correct.

So it's not that it's a random search that some police officer just happened to grab bottles that he or she saw. There was a specific intent to seize prescription medication, correct?

It was on the affidavit, yes.

And that's what you all did when you went in to try to execute the warrant and seize the items, right?

I mean, for myself, what I found in the kitchen is what I seized, yes.

So were you the officer in charge of the warrant execution?

I was not, no.

Okay. Did you leave the kitchen and go elsewhere?

I did, yes.

And where did you go?

I believe I went to one of the children's bedrooms because somebody informed me there was a nest camera in there.

A camera?

Yes.

Okay. Did you go anywhere else, if you recall?

Not that I can recall.

Did you go in the master bedroom?

I can't recall if I did.

Do you recall whether or not anybody in your presence or anybody went into a drawer, a nightstand, and looked in the drawer and saw an Apple Watch, a bunch of pills, things to use to assist your sleeping, things of that nature? Do you remember anybody doing that?

I don't know if anybody did or not.

And there were one, two, three, four, five prescription bottles that were seized. Have you ever seen these?

I have not, no.

So you went through the pill count on the bottles with the district attorney, and you did that when you did inventory, apparently of these pill bottles that you already talked about, right? For the DA, she asked you to look and tell us how many pills were missing, right?

I did that for the ones that were turned in.

Right. And nobody ever looked at these bottles, right?

I don't know if they have or not.

Okay. And if I understand correctly, lorazepam, as counsel asked you, the dates that these scripts were written. The lorazepam, as you indicated, was October 26th, the buspirone was the same date, October 26th, the hydroxyzine was October 27th. Flonazepam was into November 25. Fluoxetine was November, lorazepam was the beginning of November, November 2nd, Buspirone. These were all pills that were issued on prescriptions in about a three week period of time. Is that correct?

Yeah, whatever the dates are when they would've been prescribed.

Would you say that Patrick Clancy was very cooperative with your investigation? Anything you needed, he was pretty much there to try to help you out?

I think I only dealt with him at the hospital, but he was very forthcoming.

Okay. Thank you, that's all I have, sir.

Commonwealth?

Nothing further. Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Your Honor.

Counsel, Commonwealth?

The Commonwealth would call Maureen Hartnett as its next witness.

You can go on [inaudible 00:59:22] the witness stand, [inaudible 00:59:31].

Good morning. Morning.

You

Can stop right here and raise your right hand for the clerk.

All right.

Good morning. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony and the evidence you shall give to the court, [inaudible 00:59:55]?

Yes, I do.

Thank you. You may have a seat.

Thank you.

[inaudible 00:59:55].

And good morning.

Morning. All right, counsel.

Thank you. Good morning. Could you please tell the jurors your first and last name?

Maureen Hartnett.

And how are you employed? What do you do for work?

I'm a Forensic Scientist II in the Criminalistics Unit, as well as the Crime Scene Response Unit at the Massachusetts State Police Crime Laboratory.

And how long have you worked for the crime lab?

Approximately a total of 10 years.

And what are your general responsibilities as a Forensic Scientist II?

In the Criminalistics Unit, I examine items of evidence for the possible presence of biological fluids such as blood, semen, and saliva. And those items would include clothing, weapons, or sexual assault kits among other items. I also collect and identify trace materials such as hairs and fibers. I perform damage analysis on clothing and collect gunshot residues.

Do you have to undergo some specific training and education in order to perform those tasks at the crime lab?

Yes. I have a bachelor's degree in biology as well as a master's degree in forensic science. In addition, I received approximately nine months of training in the crime laboratory as well.

Do you have to take proficiency or competency tests on a regular basis?

Yeah. So a competency test is taken after each module in the training. They address certain things like blood identification, semen identification. And after each of those modules, I took a competency test to move on to the next portion of the training. Yearly, I also take multiple proficiency tests in biological fluid identification, as well as trace identification and crime scene response.

I'd like to talk a little bit first about the crime scene response. So you as a forensic scientist are a civilian, correct?

Yes, that's correct.

Do you often work in tandem with a trooper from the crime scene services section?

Yes. Generally I work alongside law enforcement as well as crime scene services when processing a crime scene.

And when you go to a crime scene to process with the crime scene response unit, what's the goal or what are you looking to do there?

My focus generally is on biological evidence, such as blood, semen, saliva, as well as documentation through sketches and diagrams.

And the trooper from the crime scene services section that is usually there, the law enforcement, are they also documenting the scene as well and reviewing those same areas, but through photographs?

Yeah. So I can't speak for all of their responsibilities. I do know they take photographs, video, and they also take their own diagrams on occasion.

Now, in addition to locating biological evidence, do you sometimes perform what's called screening tests at crime scenes?

Yes, I do.

And what are the common screening tests that you can do at a crime scene?

I perform screening tests for blood as well as screening tests for semen, depending on the case history and what the forensic relevant evidence is.

And does that help inform you on what to collect from a crime scene sometimes?

Yes, that's correct.

Okay. Fair to say if there's a pool of blood on a floor, you can't collect that all and take it back to the lab, correct?

Yes, that's correct.

So how do you collect a sampling of it in order to then later process something like a red-brown stain or some sort of biological spot or stain that you observe?

Depending on the substrate on which the biological fluid is located, I'll take a swabbing of the item, which is generally something like a Q-tip to swab up the stain. Or if it's on a soft surface, I could potentially take a cutting to preserve that biological evidence for future testing.

And in some instances, do you actually take the whole object if it's possible?

In some instances, yes, that's correct, we would take the whole object ,depending on what it is.

Okay. I'm going to draw your attention to January 24th of 2023. Do you recall being asked to come out with the crime scene response unit on that day or that evening?

Yes, I do.

And where was the first place that you went in this response?

I responded to South Shore Hospital, the emergency department.

And fair to say that Trooper Rostauffers was also dispatched to that location as well?

Yes, that's correct.

And did you make observations of a person who was identified as Lindsay Clancy at South Shore Hospital?

Yes, I did.

And did you observe her to have red brown stains on her body?

I noted red brown stains on her hands. I did not have the opportunity to examine her entire body. She was mostly covered with blankets and other types of medical equipment, but I did note red brown stains on her hands.

And clearly she was there for some sort of treatment, right? So why was your focus on her hands as a crime scene response technician and a criminalist?

At that point in time, I was collecting samples from her hands for potential biological evidence relating to the crime. So when I noted the red brown stains, I collected samples from her hands.

And while at South Shore Hospital, you were also aware that she had come into the hospital with clothing that was cut off, correct?

Yes, that's correct.

And that clothing was bagged up and collected?

Yes. I returned that clothing to the crime laboratory.

Who did you receive the clothing from? Do you recall?

I believe it was Trooper Dan Lawler.

At some point after being at South Shore Hospital, did you then respond to 47 Summer Street in Duxbury?

Yes, I did.

Did you have somebody with you that day?

I had a forensic scientist trainee at that time.

Okay. At 47 Summer Street, were you directed to a particular area to examine first?

I first entered the home through the main floor and then was directed into the basement of the home.

And when you came into the basement, or I guess this could be true of when you respond to most crime scenes, is it the best practice to be one of the first in the home to examine the home as it is, or the scene as it is?

Generally, crime scene services would enter first to photograph and video...

Generally, crime scene services would enter first to photograph and video so that there's no personnel in those photos or videos. Then I would normally enter or the crime scene response unit would enter next so that nothing is disturbed and that we can mark and test and collect evidence as is prior to the detective unit coming in. And then once our things are marked and documented, then the detective unit would also enter the residence.

So when you came into the basement at 47 Summer Street, did you observe some areas of the basement that were of significance to you as the crime scene response?

Yes, I did.

And did you observe a red brown stain on the floor?

Yes, I did.

Once you observe it, what do you do with that stain?

I marked the stain using a piece of ruler tape and I designated that stain as Stain A so that I can properly refer to it in my report.

Okay. I'm going to approach with the photo. Is that familiar to you?

Yes, it is.

And is that Stain A that you just told us about?

Yes, that's correct.

I move to admit this as the next exhibit.

It may be admitted.

Exhibit 158.

Thank you.

I'm showing you now on the screen what's been marked as Exhibit 158. Obviously this appears to be on carpet, correct?

Yes, that's correct.

What did you do to collect sampling of that? Well, I guess, what is the first thing you did with that stain?

So once I marked it, I then requested it be photographed, and that is a resulting photograph from that request. I then performed a screening test for the presence of blood on that stain. The screening test was positive. And at that point, once I documented that result in my notes, I then took two swabs of that stain for further testing.

Now, when you're at a scene and you see something that is a red brown stain, you don't refer to it as blood, correct?

That's correct.

And even after a screening test, you don't refer to it as blood, do you?

That's correct.

Those preliminary tests are just screens. And so what do you do to then later confirm it?

Once the swab is collected and then submitted to the lab, later when I'm assigned to the case in the criminalistics unit in the lab, I'll then perform a confirmatory test on any swabs that they're interested in that need to be tested further.

And so as it pertains to the stain, Stain A, how do you take the swab? What do you do?

I apply deionized water to two Q-tips and apply it to the stain. And then the red brown stain is then transferred to the Q-tips. I then package those, seal them, and enter them into our laboratory system and store them in a cold storage unit until they're ready to be further tested.

And fair to say with this particular investigation, the swabbing from that stain, Stain A on the basement floor was labeled as Item 3-3 for this case?

That's correct.

Did you also go to another area of the house?

Yes, I did.

And what other areas did you go?

I went up to the master bedroom on the second floor of the house.

Did you observe additional red brown stains in that master bedroom?

Yes, I did.

And so again, when you observe stains, you then note them, mark them, document them, correct?

That's correct.

And how many stains did you document in the master bedroom?

Four.

Okay. And again, just like the stain on the basement where you labeled A, do you kind of start over with the stains in the other bedroom or do you continue to label them in sequence?

I continue to label them in sequence, so they were B through E.

Okay. So first referring to Stain B, do you recall where that was in the master bedroom?