True Crime Today | Daily True Crime News & Interviews

Nick Reiner and Lindsay Clancy are now sharing space in the same public argument: when does mental illness explain conduct, and when does the evidence still point toward criminal responsibility? Their cases reach that question through very different records. 
Reiner faces two murder charges for the deaths of his parents, Rob and Michele Reiner, and has pleaded not guilty. Prosecutors also allege special circumstances for multiple murders and lying in wait. Reiner had spoken publicly for years about addiction and recovery, describing repeated treatment, homelessness, relapses, and destructive behavior during drug use. Those statements provide history, but they do not establish his state of mind at the time of the charged killings. 
Clancy's state of mind was the central issue at her Massachusetts trial. Her lawyers argued postpartum psychosis made her not criminally responsible for the deaths of her three children. The prosecution presented experts who disputed that conclusion and argued she could understand that her actions were wrong. The jury deadlocked, producing a September 4 mistrial. Jurors later described an 11-1 split in favor of an insanity verdict. 
The public response has moved beyond legal standards. A TikTok creator claimed he called off a $200,000 wedding after his fiancee disagreed with him about Clancy and called her a monster. The dispute turned a murder trial into a test of whether compassion for a defendant reveals something unacceptable about the person expressing it. 
Psychotherapist Shavaun Scott, author of Nightbird, joins Tony Brueski to examine that leap. They compare what addiction can do to judgment with what psychosis can do to a person's perception of reality, while keeping the legal allegations separate. They also examine why audiences reach for simple labels when the actual question is whether a specific defendant had the capacity required for criminal responsibility at a specific moment. 
Reiner is scheduled to return to court September 15. Clancy still faces charges after the mistrial. 
Listen Anywhere You Get Podcasts: https://pod.link/1655749292 
Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod?sub_confirmation=1 
Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/ 
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ 
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ 
Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod 
X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod 
This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice. 
#NickReiner #LindsayClancy #TrueCrimeToday #ShavaunScott #RobReiner #MicheleReiner #MentalHealthDefense #PostpartumPsychosis #TrueCrime #CriminalResponsibility

Patrick Clancy's lawyer says there may be consequences for people spreading false claims that Patrick was involved in the deaths of his children. Howard Cooper's September 8 statement said law enforcement had been notified and described an escalating defamation campaign that had produced threats to Patrick's reputation, livelihood and life. The public record has not implicated Patrick in the deaths of Cora, Dawson and Callan. 
The warning arrived after Lindsay Clancy's trial ended in a mistrial on September 4. Patrick had testified as the Commonwealth's first witness and described Lindsay's decline, the errands that took him away from the house, his return home and the 911 call. Lindsay's lawyers acknowledged that she killed the children while arguing that severe mental illness left her without criminal responsibility. The prosecution argued the acts were deliberate. 
Outside court, another case was being built without charges, rules of evidence or a judge. Patrick's move to New York, his remarriage and his decision to forgive Lindsay were picked apart online. Kevin Reddington was then asked about the conspiracy theories and said Patrick had not been accused by him. He also said he did not dismiss internet investigators and praised social-media users for finding facts and doing investigations. 
Tony Brueski is joined by retired FBI behavioral analyst Robin Dreeke and psychotherapist Shavaun Scott to examine why unsupported accusations can feel persuasive once a community decides someone looks suspicious. Dreeke focuses on the behavioral shortcuts that make a theory self-reinforcing. Scott examines the expectation that grief must look permanent and publicly recognizable before strangers will accept it as genuine.
 
Patrick rebuilt parts of his life after losing three children. His attorney is now challenging people who turned that survival into suspicion. Where does true-crime discussion end and a real-world campaign against a private person begin? 
Listen Anywhere You Get Podcasts: https://pod.link/1655749292
 
Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod?sub_confirmation=1 
Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/ 
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ 
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ 
Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod 
X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod 
This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice. 
#LindsayClancy #PatrickClancy #TrueCrimeToday #RobinDreeke #ShavaunScott #TrueCrimePodcast #OnlineConspiracies #Defamation #LindsayClancyTrial #TonyBrueski

Timothy Hudson’s parents are fighting over child support while he waits for trial in the Anna Kepner cruise ship murder case. The new petition from Shauntel Hudson asks a Florida family court to address payments she says Thomas Hudson failed to make and to reconsider how much he should owe. 
Shauntel says Thomas once agreed to pay $2,129 each month for three children. The support amount later declined to $1,092 as fewer children remained covered. Her filing alleges that several months went unpaid and says Thomas earns more than the income reflected in the existing arrangement. Thomas disputes both assertions, and a judge has not decided the dispute. 
The money case is separate from Timothy’s federal prosecution, but the records expose the same fractured family environment his defense says it needs to investigate. His lawyers sought a continuance because they have not had the access to certain relatives they say is necessary to complete their work. They also must prepare for a Miller hearing, where the court examines a juvenile defendant’s background before a life-without-parole sentence could be imposed. 
U.S. District Judge Beth Bloom granted the unopposed request and moved the trial to November 2, 2026. The plea-agreement deadline is October 23. Timothy has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder and an additional serious federal charge in Anna’s death aboard the Carnival Horizon.

The federal case is asking for family history while the family case is producing allegations about money, parenting, and who was responsible for which child. The support dispute does not decide guilt or innocence. It documents another conflict among the relatives Timothy’s defense says it still needs to investigate before trial. 
Listen Anywhere You Get Podcasts: https://pod.link/1655749292 
Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod?sub_confirmation=1 
Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/ 
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ 
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ 
Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod 
X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod 
This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice. 
#AnnaKepner #TimothyHudson #TrueCrimeToday #ShauntelHudson #ThomasHudson #CarnivalHorizon #CruiseShipMurder #FederalTrial #ChildSupport #TrueCrimePodcast

Lindsay Clancy’s defense attorney says prosecutors never put a plea offer on the table before her first trial. Kevin Reddington’s claim matters because Clancy was indicted on three counts of first-degree murder, a charging decision that kept mandatory life without parole in play if jurors convicted her at that level.
The defense asked jurors to find that postpartum psychosis left Clancy without criminal responsibility. Prosecutors argued that mental illness did not prevent her from understanding that her actions were wrong or from choosing differently. After seven days of deliberations, Judge William Sullivan declared a mistrial on September 4, 2026. The charges remain unresolved, and the next status hearing is scheduled for September 29.
At the same time, Patrick Clancy and Lindsay Clancy are pursuing separate civil cases over the medical treatment that preceded the deaths of their three children. Patrick’s wrongful-death suit and Lindsay’s malpractice suit overlap on four defendants: Jennifer Tufts, Rebecca Jollotta, Aster Mental Health, and South Shore Health System. Lindsay’s case reaches further, naming additional clinicians and hospitals. Those filings allege poor coordination, missed warning signs, misdiagnosis, and a medication course that worsened her condition.
Patrick’s complaint says eight different medications were prescribed within three weeks. Tony Brueski, Bob Motta, and Robin Dreeke connect the criminal and civil sides of the case and separate the legal questions each track must answer. One asks whether Lindsay Clancy was criminally responsible.
The other asks whether providers failed in the care they delivered before the deaths. With a possible retrial still hanging over the case, which form of accountability should matter most?
Listen Anywhere You Get Podcasts: https://pod.link/1655749292
Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod?sub_confirmation=1
Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/
Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod
X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod
This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.
#LindsayClancy #PatrickClancy #HiddenKillers #KevinReddington #BobMotta #RobinDreeke #MedicalMalpractice #PostpartumPsychosis #MassachusettsCourt #TrueCrime

The Lindsay Clancy mistrial ended a weeks-long trial with no verdict, yet the defense says the final divide was one vote away from acquittal. Kevin Reddington said eleven jurors favored finding Clancy not criminally responsible and a single holdout prevented a unanimous result. 
The jury had deliberated for more than 38 hours over seven days. Its foreperson raised a specific concern about the holdout's treatment of reasonable doubt, but Judge William Sullivan said he would not remove or further interrogate a juror based on the dispute presented to him. Reddington then took the issue to a single justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. The emergency request failed, and Sullivan declared a mistrial. 
That did not end the defense effort to stop another prosecution. Reddington said he planned to seek a required finding of not guilty through a Rule 25 motion, asking Sullivan to dispose of the case without another jury. He pressed for a quick hearing and said he was ready to start over with jury selection if the judge denied the motion. Sullivan scheduled the next hearing for September 29, 2026, with any new trial dependent on the court's calendar and the prosecution's decision. 
Tony Brueski and criminal defense attorney Bob Motta trace what that sequence means in practical terms. Bob addresses whether an 11-1 defense-reported split weakens the case for a retrial and what prosecutors would have to reassess after the first jury. He also explains why a new panel can reach a completely different outcome on largely unchanged evidence. 
District Attorney Timothy Cruz said he would review the case with his team before deciding whether to try Clancy again. Patrick Clancy's attorney said another trial would be "extraordinarily painful" for Patrick and his family. The next fight is no longer over the first jury's verdict. There was none. It is over whether the Commonwealth should ask a second jury for one. 
Listen Anywhere You Get Podcasts: https://pod.link/1655749292 
Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod?sub_confirmation=1 
Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/ 
Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ 
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ 
Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod 
X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod 
This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice. 
#LindsayClancy #BobMotta #TrueCrimeToday #KevinReddington #Mistrial #HungJury #ClancyTrial #CriminalResponsibility #PatrickClancy #PossibleRetrial