A journalist attending Lindsay Clancy’s triple murder trial has faced intense online criticism after courtroom footage appeared to show her smiling and winking toward a camera during Monday’s proceedings.
Brittany Romano, who was seated in the front row of the gallery at Plymouth Superior Court with a Vanity Fair press credential, was captured on the courtroom camera as it moved across the room.
The footage showed Romano looking from side to side before turning toward the camera and appearing to wink.
The moment quickly spread online, with critics accusing the journalist of behaving inappropriately during a trial involving the deaths of three young children.
Romano Explains Why She Was Smiling
Romano later addressed the incident outside the courthouse, where she was confronted about what viewers had seen.
Wearing a teal dress and her Vanity Fair press pass, she said her smile had been directed toward Clancy, whom she said she knew while growing up.
“I was laughing because I grew up with Lindsay,” Romano said, explaining that Clancy had looked toward her in court.
She also offered another explanation for her appearance, saying her father had previously criticized how she looked in courtroom coverage.
According to Romano, a friend who works as a celebrity stylist, including with actress Hilary Duff, advised her to pull her hair back and smile when appearing on camera.
“My dad had saw [me] previously on CourtTV and he said I looked bad,” Romano said.
Vanity Fair Cuts Ties With Journalist
The controversy quickly had professional consequences.
Conde Nast, Vanity Fair’s parent company, confirmed that Romano’s press credential was revoked following Monday’s proceedings.
A Vanity Fair spokesperson said the publication had initially been interested in a personal essay from Romano about her experience growing up with Clancy.
However, the magazine decided not to proceed after what it described as conflicts with its editorial standards and processes.
The spokesperson said Romano was informed that Vanity Fair would not move forward with the essay and that the court was notified she was no longer credentialed by the publication.
Social Media Users Turn Their Anger on Romano
The courtroom footage generated a flood of criticism directed at Romano across social media.
Messages shared by the journalist included accusations that she had been disrespectful and lacked appropriate courtroom decorum.
Some commenters told her they were disgusted by her conduct, while others attacked her character personally.
Romano also said the backlash had crossed into abusive territory, claiming that some people had urged her to kill herself or harm herself.
Those threats are separate from legitimate criticism of courtroom behavior and have drawn attention to the increasingly hostile nature of online reactions surrounding high-profile criminal trials.
Romano Says She Is Proud of Her Response
Rather than backing away from the controversy, Romano said she was proud of how she had responded to the criticism.
In a Threads post shared through her Instagram stories, she said online trolls had subjected her to extremely personal attacks while blaming the trial for their behavior.
She also appeared to respond sarcastically to the sudden increase in attention, thanking commenters for helping boost her social media following.
“All for smiling at a camera?! love it!” she wrote alongside a screenshot showing an increase in followers.
Romano subsequently urged critics to channel their anger into advocacy surrounding postpartum depression and postpartum mental health rather than sending abusive messages to her.
Journalist Has Openly Discussed Her Connection to Clancy
Romano’s connection to Clancy has been a recurring feature of her social media coverage of the case.
The New York City-based editor and writer has openly discussed knowing Clancy while growing up and has criticized what she described as media attempts to exploit their childhood neighborhood for information about the defendant.
She has also regularly posted about the trial and its participants.
Last Thursday, Romano posted a photograph on X showing herself with Clancy’s defense attorney and three other journalists.
The image was captioned with a lighthearted reference to the group, adding another layer of scrutiny given the seriousness of the proceedings.
Clancy Faces Three Murder Charges
Lindsay Clancy, 36, has pleaded not guilty to charges stemming from the January 2023 deaths of her three children, Callan, Dawson and Cora.
The children were between eight months and five years old when they died at the family’s Massachusetts home.
The trial has focused heavily on Clancy’s mental state at the time of the killings, particularly the defense argument that she was experiencing postpartum psychosis.
Defense medical experts have testified that Clancy had lost contact with reality and should not be held responsible for her actions because of the severe psychiatric condition.
Clancy had sought treatment from multiple mental health providers before the killings and had also admitted herself to a psychiatric hospital.
Prosecutors Present a Different Account
Prosecutors have argued that Clancy’s actions were deliberate and planned.
They allege that the former labor and delivery nurse arranged for her husband to leave the house by sending him out to collect medication for one of their children and food for the family.
After the children were killed, Clancy jumped from a second-floor window and survived but was left paralyzed from the waist down.
The prosecution’s case therefore directly challenges the defense’s claim that she was acting during an episode of postpartum psychosis.
Final Witnesses Prepare to Testify
After almost a month of testimony, the trial is entering its final stages.
Jurors are expected to hear from the last witnesses as prosecutors and defense attorneys continue presenting expert evidence about Clancy’s psychiatric condition.
A forensic psychologist hired by prosecutors has testified about Clancy’s psychiatric history and the defense’s postpartum psychosis argument.
Defense attorney Kevin Reddington is expected to question the psychologist about his conclusions, while prosecutors are also expected to call at least one additional expert witness.
Closing arguments could follow shortly afterward, although they were not expected before Wednesday.
What Happens Next?
The jury will ultimately have to weigh competing accounts of Clancy’s mental state and determine whether the prosecution has proved the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.
Meanwhile, the controversy surrounding Romano has become a separate flashpoint surrounding the trial’s media coverage.
Her removal from the Vanity Fair press list underscores the heightened scrutiny journalists face when reporting from emotionally charged criminal proceedings, particularly when they have personal connections to people involved in the case.
Summary
Brittany Romano has faced widespread criticism after courtroom footage appeared to show her smiling and winking toward a camera while attending Lindsay Clancy’s triple murder trial.
Romano said she was smiling because of her personal connection to Clancy and later explained that a stylist friend had encouraged her to smile for cameras.
Vanity Fair subsequently withdrew her press credential and abandoned plans for a personal essay about her connection to the defendant.
As the controversy continues online, Clancy’s trial is moving toward its final witnesses.
The central legal question remains whether Clancy was suffering from postpartum psychosis when her three children were killed or whether, as prosecutors allege, she deliberately planned the deaths.
