New Yorker writer subpoenaed ahead of Massachusetts murder trial

New Yorker contributing writer Eren Orbey and the magazine’s publisher, Condé Nast, were subpoenaed on Dec. 18, 2024, for copies of on- and off-the-record interviews and communications in connection with a murder trial in Brockton, Massachusetts. The magazine has requested the order be struck down.

In 2023 and 2024, Orbey extensively interviewed Patrick Clancy, whose wife, Lindsay Clancy, stands charged for the murder of their three children in January 2023. Orbey also spoke with Patrick Clancy’s parents, sister and numerous family friends, ultimately authoring a lengthy October 2024 profile titled, “A husband in the aftermath of his wife’s unfathomable act.”

In December, prosecutors attempted to compel the disclosure of the journalist’s notes and recordings from all of the interviews he conducted for the piece, including those that were off the record. The Commonwealth also requested all emails, texts and voicemails between Orbey and the interviewees, according to court records reviewed by the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker.

“All of these individuals provided direct information to Orbey/Conde Nast related to how Lindsay’s demeanor, attitudes, and mental health appeared both before and after the murders,” Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Sprague wrote. “These statements and observations are directly relevant to the defendant’s criminal responsibility as the article itself was framed to portray the defendant as suffering a mental health crisis when she killed her children.”

Plymouth County Superior Court Judge William Sulivan granted the prosecution’s request on Feb. 7, 2025, and ordered Orbey or Condé Nast to provide the requested materials by March 14.

That day, Condé Nast instead filed a motion to quash the records request, arguing that not only does New York’s reporter shield law protect the magazine from disclosing newsgathering materials, but that the request itself is a clear “fishing expedition.”

“The New Yorker’s sympathies are not on trial here. In fact, even a cursory reading of the piece shows The New Yorker’s reporting is complex and nuanced, and is hardly ‘in support’ of the defense,” attorney Jonathan Albano wrote. “But even if it were, the notion that the government could seek presumptively privileged, unpublished information from any news outlet that expresses sympathy for a criminal defendant is chilling and directly contrary to the First Amendment.”

Albano also highlighted that while only some of the sources for the article were confidential, all of the sources Orbey spoke with were sensitive about speaking to the press, largely out of a concern for causing further emotional distress to distraught family members.

“The forced disclosure of confidential and unpublished journalistic work product not only would breach the trust of the sources here,” Albano wrote, “but also would significantly interfere with The New Yorker’s future reporting efforts by sending a signal to all sources that speaking to the magazine is the equivalent of speaking to the government, all to the detriment of the informing the public on matters of public concern.”

A hearing on Condé Nast’s motion is scheduled for May 28, according to the court docket.

In a statement shared with the Tracker, a New Yorker spokesperson said, “We’ve filed our opposition to this subpoena. These sorts of subpoenas that seek to turn independent journalists into tools of law enforcement violate basic First Amendment values.”