NEW YORK (AP) — Pretty much everyone on stage at the Metropolitan Opera in New York must audition — even the snake who will briefly take center stage in an upcoming adaptation of a Mozart classic.

In charge of deciding who gets the s-s-s-s-starring reptilian role is Zoe Ziegfeld, a carnival performer-turned-opera actor cast as the snake handler in the Met’s version of “Così fan tutte,” inspired by Coney Island in the 1950s.

Ziegfeld takes each snake, lets it slither and wrap around, then hoists the animal over their head, rehearsing what they will do under the bright lights at center stage for each performance. Ziegfeld looks each one in the eye, almost face-to-face as they evaluate the snake’s demeanor.

“I need to know that the animal is comfortable with people and with what we are doing,” Ziegfeld said.

In the cold-blooded competition, a boa constrictor named Princess won. She is a larger snake with a better visual presence on stage.

“We will be moving forward with Princess (the big sun-glow boa constrictor who is yellow-peach) in rehearsals on a trial basis! She is a wonderful snake, and the trial is not about her, but rather about me and my strength,” Ziegfeld wrote in an email after the auditions were over.

A slightly smaller brown boa constrictor named Nala from a second audition will be Princess’ understudy.

This is the third time Ziegfeld has played the role of the snake charmer in the Met’s adaptation of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s 1790 opera.

In Mozart’s original, two Italian soldiers decide to test their lovers’ fidelity by pretending to head off to war. They then disguise themselves and try to seduce each other’s girlfriends. In this version, the plot remains mostly the same, but the setting is a 1950s Coney Island carnival complete with vibrant scenery and sideshow performers.

Ziegfeld came to the role honestly. They spent a couple of seasons on Coney Island doing eight snake-charming shows a day.

When they tried out several years ago, live snakes weren’t allowed in the audition space. So instead, Ziegfeld brought video of their snake-charming act, then hammered home their carnival sideshow bona fides by knocking a nail into their own nasal cavity in what was called the Human Blockhead act.

“The music’s different. The money is different. It’s a pleasure to entertain. And with snakes, it’s a delight to know that there are people watching who are in awe and people who are terrified. And those things happen at the Met and at Coney — so I would say they are more alike than different, to be honest,” Ziegfeld said.

The snakes came to their audition thanks to Nancy Novograd and her company All Tame Animals.

She got into the business when her horse appeared onstage at the Met in a production of “Carmen,” and now she provides the opera house with everything from elephants to insects.

The first two snakes to audition were a bit small. One might have clashed with Ziegfeld’s top. But the key is personality, Novograd said.

“Animals have to perform as do human talent. Sometimes they have a set type of behaviors that they have to demonstrate. And sometimes they just have to get along with the talent,” Novograd said. “So in this case, they have to be the right color, size, and Zoe has to like them.”

___

Collins reported from Columbia, South Carolina.

One shaped and delivered the language of feminism. The other rejected the label but showed how feminism can be done: with a microphone dusted in rhinestones, and without apology.

Gloria Steinem and Dolly Parton embodied two towering versions of the same idea: that women should know themselves well enough to make their own choices about matters intimate and societal. Their deaths eight days apart sent a double dose of grief around the world and across generations as many women (and some men!) asked who would take their places at the forefront of women’s rights.

Steinem, overtly political, went undercover as a Playboy bunny to deliver an exposé, founded Ms. Magazine and spent the rest of her life urging women to support each other. Parton, on the other hand, defined herself as a larger-than-life daughter of the American South who told stories with music and included everybody — but refused to play politics or call herself a feminist.

“Dolly taught us to dream big. Gloria taught us to speak up,” wrote DeMond B Nason, a New York City singer. “Both reminded us that a woman could walk into a world that told her who she was supposed to be — and simply decide to become something else.”

Parton didn’t say so, but Steinem insisted more than three decades ago that the pair fit together under the same feminist flag.

“If feminism means each of us finding your unique power, and helping other women do the same, Dolly Parton certainly has done both,” Steinem wrote in 1987, when Ms. Magazine named the singer one of its “Women of the Year.”

Many shared the sense that Steinem and Parton belonged together.

“Both believed in women: in our ability to decide who we are, make our own choices, take care of one another and shape the world around us,” wrote Swati Narayan in a column for American Kahani, an online news outlet for Indian and South Asian Americans.

Between Parton’s death on Aug. 25 and Steinem’s on Sept. 2, Ms. Magazine re-ran Steinem’s essay with an editor’s note: “Steinem celebrated Parton not only as a gifted songwriter and magnetic performer, but as a shrewd businessperson who transformed femininity into a source of humor and power — and used her success to lift up working women, poor communities and the mountain people of her native Tennessee.”

The embrace wasn’t mutual, at least not publicly. And that, Parton acknowledged, was by design.

“I don’t do politics. I have too many fans on both sides of the fence,” she said in 2019 on “Dolly Parton’s America,” Radiolab’s podcast. “Of course,” she added, “I have my opinion about everything, but I learned years ago to keep your mouth shut about things.”

The star was asked directly whether she thought of herself as a feminist.

“No, I do not,” she said flatly, later explaining that she did not want to be associated with what she viewed as political extremes even as she advocated for women and their opportunities.

“I do not like extreme things,” she said. “I don’t believe in crucifying a whole group just because a few people have made mistakes. To me when you say just the word ‘feminist’ is like, ‘I hate all men.’”

Parton was clear, though, that her lyrics were intended to shine light on women’s hardships and the realities of a world that the superstar agreed was dominated by men. She wrote about teenage pregnancy, abortion and adoption in “Down from Dover.” She supported equal pay (See: “9 to 5,” the movie and the song). One of her most famous songs is called, “Just Because I’m a Woman.”

“People say to me, ‘Well, wasn’t it a man’s world back when you got in the business.’ I said, ‘It sure was, and honey, I had a ball,’” she said at a 2019 awards show. “I have never met a man that I didn’t like, and I’ve never met a man whose ass I couldn’t kick if he didn’t treat me with the right respect.”

She just didn’t use words like “oppression” or “patriarchy.” And unlike Steinem, Parton didn’t endorse political candidates. Asked on CNN during the 2016 presidential campaign whether she preferred Republican Donald Trump or Democrat Hillary Clinton, she replied: “I think they’re both nuts.”

Onstage at the 2017 Emmys, Parton demurred when fellow “9 to 5” costars Lily Tomlin and Jane Fonda took a thinly veiled shot at Trump. Parton pivoted to humor.

“They’re Lily and they’re Jane and I’m Dolly,” she said later. “So they did their thing, I did mine.”

Feminism splintered under the pressure of public policy debates over such issues as abortion and the rejection of Clinton in the 2016 elections, the rise of Trump and the modern-day emergence of identity politics.

Steinem’s version of feminism today is more aligned with Democrats at a time when, at least for now, the country has swung Republican. Steinem lived to see the Supreme Court overturn the 1973 ruling Roe v. Wade, eliminating the constitutional right to abortion, a pillar of the 1960s feminist movement she embodied. The Equal Rights Amendment remains unratified. And Americans have yet to elect a woman president.

So if you’re an opponent of abortion rights or if you voted for Trump, can you still be a feminist in 2026? And would you want to be called that in public or on social media? To the end, Steinem insisted it wasn’t the label that mattered. What counted as feminist was whether a woman knew herself well enough to make her own choices rather than be defined as the daughter or wife of a man.

But partisanship surfaced even in the ritual public mourning for the two women.

Parton’s passing touched off an immediate expression of grief from sources ranging from Trump to her fans in the LGBTQ+ community. Trump ordered flags to be flown at half-staff as a show of “respect” for her.

In contrast, there was no such rush to recognize Steinem beyond her liberal and centrist constituency, even from conservatives who had expressed respect for her accomplishments as an influential historical figure.

Their silence two days after Steinem’s death contrasted with the outpouring of grief, thanks and respect for Steinem from leading figures on the left, particularly of her generation. Hillary Clinton, who also saluted Parton, said Steinem’s activism was built on optimism despite abundant roadblocks for women.

“The lived experience became much more real and applicable to our entire society when Gloria began to point it out,” Clinton posted.

For her part, Steinem said for years that she’s using her torch to light others. “If we each have a torch, there’s a lot more light,” she told the National Press Club in 2013.

Social media offered evidence that supporters of both women would pass it on. Liz Webster, an American hair and makeup artist living in Germany, called Steinem and Parton “two very different women who shaped the way I saw what a woman could be.”

“Feminism will never be just a word to me. The freedoms we have are incredibly new,” she wrote on Facebook. “So be the example. Use your freedom. Protect it. And make damn sure the women coming after us have even more.”

___

Kellman reported from London; Barrow reported from Atlanta.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Missouri appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday to allow the use of new congressional districts backed by President Donald Trump in the fast-approaching midterm election.

The appeal comes after Missouri’s highest court blocked the new map and ordered a statewide vote in November on whether to keep or reject it.

It’s part of a national redistricting battle that Trump launched last year. Missouri’s new congressional boundaries were drawn to help Republicans win an additional seat and hold onto their slim House majority in November’s midterm elections.

The Missouri Supreme Court weighed in after redistricting opponents submitted over 300,000 petition signatures seeking to put the map to a vote of the people. Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins rejected the petition on primary Election Day, asserting that Missouri’s constitution doesn’t allow referendum petitions on congressional redistricting. He successfully defended his decision in a lower court, but on Thursday lost in front of the state’s highest court.

The court said the referendum petition effectively suspended the new districts, retroactive to last December, pending voter approval. Although the new districts were used in the August primary, Missouri’s top court said the previous districts enacted after the 2020 census must be used in the general election.

Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway said no other court has ordered congressional maps after a primary but before a general election.

“No court in American history has ever given such an extraordinary remedy, which inflicts unprecedented chaos on Missouri,” her office wrote in the appeal. “Looking forwards, the State is genuinely unsure whether it can switch its governing congressional map in time to run a timely federal election.”

She asked the Supreme Court to halt the state court’s decision immediately.

State law sets a Tuesday deadline to make changes to the November ballot. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who hears appeals of case from the region, asked critics of the new map to respond to the appeal by Monday.

Backers of the referendum have said a statewide vote would give the state’s residents a voice in the process.

Missouri currently has six Republicans and two Democrats in the U.S. House. The new maps reconfigured a Kansas City-based district held by longtime Democratic Rep. Emanuel Cleaver.

Congressional districts typically are redrawn at the start of each decade, based on new census data. But Trump’s quest for a midterm election advantage triggered an unusual mid-decade redistricting battle that spread to more than a dozen states led by Democrats and Republicans.

___

Lieb reported from Jefferson City, Missouri.

The closely watched case of the Massachusetts mother who killed her three young children was on the verge of being declared a mistrial Friday — but there was still one more dramatic moment to come.

After weeks of grueling testimony, the jury could not get beyond an impasse on the seventh day of deliberations on murder charges against Lindsay Clancy. An audible gasp was heard in the courtroom as Judge William F. Sullivan said he was going to to end their deliberations without reaching a verdict.

But just as the jurors were about to come back to the courtroom, Lindsay Clancy’s lawyer asked to make a last-minute request for a higher court to stave off the mistrial. That kicked off a tense wait while a judge on the state’s top court considered the ask.

The whiplash moment was one last piece of courtroom drama in a livestreamed trial that captivated and divided many across the nation. And now prosecutors must decide whether to do it all over again with a second trial.

Ultimately on Friday, the high court denied the defense attorney’s appeal and the judge formally declared a mistrial later in the afternoon. Clancy’s attorney, Kevin Reddington, blamed a lone juror for the impasse. Defense attorneys argued in their written petition that the person had revealed a possible bias against those dealing with mental illness.

Clancy, a 36-year-old former labor and delivery nurse, never disputed that she killed her children, but her attorney said she was experiencing a rare condition called postpartum psychosis when she strangled her kids, the youngest just 8 months old, and then tried to take her own life in 2023. Prosecutors said Clancy knew what she was doing and should be held criminally responsible.

The jury foreperson had previously told Sullivan that a single juror wouldn’t follow the court’s instruction about reasonable doubt, according to Reddington.

In their last-minute appeal, Clancy’s lawyers had argued the juror should, at minimum, be questioned more thoroughly by the judge, or even dismissed outright before a mistrial was declared. Prosecutors responded that there was nothing in the jury’s notes indicating the juror in question had “a lack of impartiality, bias, extraneous influence, or inability to deliberate.”

Jurors had heard competing expert testimony about Clancy’s mental health.

Massachusetts defense attorney Joseph Perullo, who was not involved in the case, said it was “clear cut” for him, but he acknowledged that jurors could have difficulties.

“It’s clear that Lindsay had a psychotic break, and the psychotic break led her to kill her children,” he said. “But the prosecution can tell you that she sent her husband off for errands and therefore she is criminally responsible.”

Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz said after the mistrial was declared there would not be an immediate decision on whether to go forward with a second trial.

Perullo said he is hopeful prosecutors will speak to Patrick Clancy, the children’s father, and other family.

“It is a tremendous stress on them to do it again, and it’s going to be an even bigger circus,” he said.

But Crystal Lyons, a former prosecutor in Massachusetts, believes prosecutors don’t have the option not to retry Lindsay Clancy.

“At the end of the day, it was a tragedy where there were three young children who lost their lives,” she said.

The trial to decide if Lindsay Clancy was criminally responsible when she strangled her three children in 2023 ended in a mistrial Friday after jurors were unable to reach a consensus after weeks of conflicting testimony about her post-pregnancy mental health and seven days of deliberations.

What happens now?

Clancy, a 36-year-old former labor and delivery nurse, remains charged with murder and will continue to be held in a psychiatric hospital until the case is resolved. Attorneys on both sides have a few options when it comes to the next steps.

Judge William Sullivan set a hearing for Sept. 29. During that proceeding, defense attorney Kevin Reddington will likely ask the judge to declare Clancy not guilty. It’s a long shot move and very unlikely to succeed.

That hearing could also reveal whether prosecutors will move to put Clancy on trial for a second time. They could also choose to seek a plea deal or even drop the case entirely, though that option is unlikely.

Sullivan suggested that everyone involved in the case, from attorneys to witnesses to court administrators, would need to look at their calendars to find a suitable time for a new trial, if one is held.

___

EDITOR’S NOTE: This story includes discussion of suicide. If you or someone you know needs help, the national suicide and crisis lifeline in the U.S. is available by calling or texting 988.

___

Clancy doesn’t deny strangling her children at their home south of Boston, but says postpartum psychosis led to her actions. After the killings, her husband found her badly injured in the yard, where she landed after jumping from a second-story window. She was left paralyzed from the waist down.

Prosecutors argue she knew what she was doing.

Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz said there would not be an immediate decision about a second trial, but he emphasized that his goal was always “getting justice for those three little babies.”

“This case was about Lindsay Clancy and what she did … the cruel and calculated killing of three innocents,” Cruz said shortly after court ended on Friday. He later continued, “Children were murdered and it’s our job to seek justice.”

Still, prosecutors typically consider a lot of things when determining whether to retry a case, said New York Law School Professor Heather Ellis Cucolo, including the potential expense and the likely outcome.

“I know the prosecutor stated openly that he would not allow public opinion to sway his decision, which is accurate, but the prosecution serves the public,” Cucolo said. “If it is believed that justice must be served by another trial, that is something the prosecutor’s office will take into account and weigh very heavily.”

A conviction could mean life in prison for Clancy, while an acquittal might lead to confinement in a mental health facility.

Cucolo said the defense attorney will likely push for the charges to be dropped entirely, and might also be open to a plea deal.

“But if the prosecution chooses to move forward with a trial, there’s no way to prevent that from happening,” Cucolo said.

Reddington said in court that he believed Clancy’s constitutional rights were violated when the judge declined to remove one juror after the other jurors suggested that he was not following the judge’s instructions on reasonable doubt. But a mistrial isn’t subject to an appeal, Cucolo said, because it’s not a final judgment.

The impact on family members is another consideration, said Randy Gioia, a Boston-based defense lawyer who formerly supervised public defenders across the state.

Gioia said prosecutors should not put Clancy through another trial. He said he accepts Reddington’s disclosure that Clancy was extremely close to an acquittal, based on a note presented to the judge by the jury foreperson.

“Why put everyone through the trauma again: 16 to 18 jurors, all the witnesses, Patrick Clancy,” Gioia said, referring to Lindsay Clancy’s former husband. “What’s to be served here when we’ve had a long trial and long deliberations? You don’t have a strong case. You almost lost the case.”

It’s not clear exactly how the jury reached an impasse, but Reddington suggested that just one juror stood in the way of an acquittal, and said the other jurors were “robbed.”

“They know they were robbed by one man, for whatever his agenda was, who stole seven weeks of the life of these other jurors that were so attentive, so beautiful, so wonderful,” he said outside the courthouse. “You could see how defeated they were sitting there. I got a funny feeling they would have gone on for another week if they had to. So I hope that guy can sleep well at night.”

Jurors are under no obligation to speak to attorneys on either side of the case, but it’s common for the attorneys to see if any are open to talking about their experience, Cucolo said. Prosecutors can then use any information they get to reassess and fine-tune their approach, she said, perhaps focusing more on specific evidence or witnesses.

David Meier, a lawyer who represents Patrick Clancy in a lawsuit over her mental health treatment, released a statement about the emotional burden of the case, saying “there will never be closure” from the loss of the children.

“The prospect of reliving this tragedy through another trial is extraordinarily painful — for Patrick, for his family, and for all of us,” Meier said.

The statement didn’t indicate whether Patrick Clancy would support a second trial.

Lindsay Clancy has also filed a lawsuit over her mental health treatment. A retrial would likely force those civil cases to be put on hold, Cucolo said.

“They would not be able to move forward for now because of concerns of possible Fifth Amendment violations,” Cucolo said, because anything Clancy says in a civil case could potentially be used against her in the criminal case. That means the lawsuits could remain in legal limbo for a year or more, she said.

___ Associated Press reporters Dave Collins, Michael Casey, Ed White and Leah Willingham contributed.

WASHINGTON, Sept 4 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump granted clemency this week to 30 people, including Emory Jones, a longtime associate of rap mogul Jay-Z, White House “pardon czar” Alice Marie Johnson posted on Friday.

• Jones served nearly 16 years in federal prison on drug charges, Johnson wrote in a social media post announcing the clemency actions.

• The president took the action on Thursday, according to Johnson, the White House official responsible for organizing clemency efforts.

• Jones was released in 2010 after Jay-Z wrote a letter to a judge on his behalf, seeking a sentence reduction.

• Jones has worked as an executive at Jay-Z’s Roc Nation entertainment company and co-founded the Paper Planes clothing brand.

• The New York Times reported that other clemency recipients include a former Philadelphia union boss convicted of bribery and an ex-Navy sailor imprisoned for firearms offenses.

• Trump has granted pardons of criminal convictions and commutations shortening sentences for more than 1,700 people since his second White House term began in January 2025.

(Reporting by Steve Gorman in Washington; Editing by Sergio Non and William Mallard)

NEW YORK, Sept 4 (Reuters) – U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr acknowledged on Friday that measles caused the recent death of an infant in Pennsylvania, citing information from a county coroner, but suggested the federal government would not yet recognize the fatality in official data amid a fast-growing national outbreak.

Last month, Kennedy asked for two measles-related deaths reported by Pennsylvania’s health department to be removed from the CDC’s national tally of measles, questioning whether the virus was the cause, Reuters reported. CDC staffers had already accepted the state’s characterization of the deaths as linked to measles before Kennedy’s request.

Public health experts said the move amounted to extraordinary political interference in the authority of a state health department and an effort to minimize the risks of the highly infectious virus.

Kennedy posted on X on Friday that he was relying on information from the coroner in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, where the two deaths occurred.

“The Lancaster County Coroner has now publicly stated that measles caused only the second infant’s death and has also publicly stated that the infant had Amish lethal microcephaly,” Kennedy wrote on X. He said that babies with that condition typically live about 6 months and the infant was approximately 2-months-old at death.

The Lancaster coroner rejected the determination of the statewide health department that a second infant also died from measles, Kennedy said.

Kennedy said the CDC’s health statistics agency still needed to receive and review records on measles deaths. At the moment, the national data does not reflect any measles deaths in 2026, he said. 

The CDC updated its website on Friday with a note explaining that it was re-evaluating how it classified measles deaths. “This work is intended to promote consistent classification and reporting of measles deaths across jurisdictions,” the CDC website said without providing details on why reevaluation was required.

A spokesperson for the Health and Human Services Department, which oversees CDC, did not immediately respond to questions about recording either of the Pennsylvania deaths.

Neil Ruhland, a spokesman for the Pennsylvania Department of Health, reiterated on Friday that the state had confirmed two measles-related deaths in the state’s outbreak. He did not provide details on the deaths or comment on Kennedy’s remarks. The Lancaster coroner’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.     

U.S. measles cases have hit their highest level in more than three decades under President Donald Trump and Kennedy, his top health official and a long-time anti-vaccine activist. Kennedy has promoted the idea that vaccines, including the combined measles, mumps and rubella shot, are more dangerous than the diseases they prevent, despite decades of scientific evidence that the shots save lives. 

Leading medical organizations say that Kennedy’s statements about vaccines and his policies as health secretary, including efforts to reduce the number of government-recommended childhood immunizations, have increased vaccine hesitancy, making outbreaks harder to curb.

(Reporting by Yasmeen Abutaleb; Writing by Michele Gershberg; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

PLYMOUTH, Mass. (AP) — A mistrial was declared in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial on Friday after jurors failed to reach a verdict on whether she was criminally responsible for killing her three young children at her Massachusetts home.

Judge William Sullivan declared the mistrial on the seventh day of deliberations after jurors sent a note saying: “It is with a heavy heart that we report we are unable to come to a unanimous decision and will not be able to.”

The emotionally charged case has sharply divided many Americans and generated intense interest for over a month as it’s drawn attention to issues around maternal mental health after childbirth.

Clancy, 36, never disputed that she killed her children. But her attorney said she had a rare condition called postpartum psychosis when she strangled her kids, the youngest just 8 months old, then tried to take her own life in 2023. Prosecutors said Clancy knew what she was doing.

Here are some key moments from the trial:

___

EDITOR’S NOTE: This story includes discussion of suicide. If you or someone you know needs help, the national suicide and crisis lifeline in the U.S. is available by calling or texting 988.

___

Clancy’s former husband, Patrick Clancy, was first to take the stand.

In emotional testimony, he described the day he found his wife after she tried to kill herself.

Lindsay Clancy had sent him out to get takeout food and medication for their daughter, which prosecutors argue was an excuse to get him out of the house.

He came home to find the house unusually silent, before finding blood throughout the main bedroom and a window open.

Jurors listened to the 911 call he made after finding his wife outside in the snow. She had jumped from a second-story window. Clancy can be heard speaking with his wife, then telling the dispatcher he’s going to check on the children.

Moments later, he howls and cries after finding his children in the basement. The confused dispatcher repeatedly asks what happened.

“She killed the kids!” he yells.

Clancy’s mother, mother-in-law, sister, friends and co-workers testified that Clancy struggled with her mental health after giving birth to Callan, the youngest of her three children.

Clancy’s mother-in-law, Susan Clancy, said she and her former daughter-in-law were close. Both worked as labor and delivery nurses. She described Lindsay as a wonderful mother.

But she testified that Lindsay had become anxious, paranoid and suicidal, and that the psychiatric care she was getting wasn’t helping.

“She felt unwell. She had insomnia. She was losing her appetite. She was very anxious and sad,” Susan Clancy said. “She was begging for help.”

Lindsay Clancy’s mother, Paula Musgrove, testified that her daughter was scared to sleep alone, became paranoid and believed the medications she was taking “were destroying her mind.”

Clancy saw several doctors about her declining mental health, and eventually checked herself into a psychiatric hospital.

Her lawyer, Kevin Reddington, argued that she was misdiagnosed and overmedicated.

As he cross-examined one of her psychiatrists, Dr. Jennifer Tufts, Reddington questioned her expertise, decisions about prescriptions and use of 25-minute video appointments with limited time for talk therapy.

At one point, Reddington implied that Tufts was a box-checking “robot.”

“What did you do?” he asked as they discussed an appointment about two months before the killings. “You had a woman who was telling you she felt hopeless.”

“I told her that this was something we could address, that there was hope, that there are treatments, that there are different types of programs,” Tufts said, “so she knew that she still had options and a reason to hope.”

Paul Zeizel, a clinical and forensic psychologist who visited Lindsay Clancy in the hospital after she killed the children, testified that he overheard her saying that a disembodied male voice had told her she had no choice but to kill her children and then herself. Zeizel said he believed Clancy wasn’t responsible for her actions because of her deep mental illness.

Prosecutors called a rebuttal witness, forensic psychologist Kirk Heilbrun, who said he didn’t believe Clancy had hallucinated voices.

“One of the things that she said when I asked about what happened, is that in the course of strangling each child, she said, ‘Go to God, baby. Go to God,’” he testified. “That was part of her expectation — that she and the children would be together in heaven with God.”

Dr. Gregory Saathoff, a senior psychiatrist for the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit, testified for prosecutors that Clancy “had the capacity to know right from wrong.”

After testimony was complete, each side got about an hour to make their closing argument to the jury.

Reddington showed the jury a photograph of the Clancy family, looking happy, and a second one of Lindsay Clancy in the hospital.

“How does this turn into this?” Reddington asked. “How? Because of the damn medicine and the lousy medical care that she got.”

Prosecutor Jennifer Sprague said criticizing the mental health system was “a distraction.” She said Clancy chose to kill her children because doing so would make it easier to kill herself.

“She was depressed. She was exhausted. She was done. She didn’t want to try anymore. She felt damaged,” Sprague said. “But those kids, those kids were her protective factor. Those kids were keeping her from ending her misery.”

Starting Tuesday, the fourth day of deliberations, jurors said they couldn’t unanimously agree. The judge asked them to keep deliberating. On Wednesday, they told him they were still at an impasse. He told them again to keep trying.

Then, on Thursday, the jury’s foreperson told the judge that a single juror wouldn’t follow the court’s instructions about reasonable doubt.

The judge brought in each juror individually and questioned them in private. He then reread his instructions on reasonable doubt before sending them back to continue deliberating.

Jurors returned Friday for their seventh day of deliberations, but not long after resuming they told the judge again they were unable to agree.

The judge said he didn’t feel he had any choice but to declare a mistrial. That prompted an audible gasp in the courtroom.

But after several minutes, Reddington requested he be allowed to file an emergency appeal to the state’s highest court. Sullivan told Reddington he’d give him an hour.

Less than three hours later, the judge confirmed Reddington’s high court appeal had been denied and formally declared a mistrial.

Outside the courthouse, Reddington blasted the sole juror who he believed stood in the others’ way of an acquittal.

“They know they were robbed by one man, for whatever his agenda was, who stole seven weeks of the life of these other jurors that were so attentive, so beautiful, so wonderful,” he said.

The prosecutor who originally decided to charge Clancy said there would not be an immediate decision about a second trial.

BOULDER, Colo. (AP) — A man in Colorado who had been free on $3 million bond in his wife’s alleged killing was arrested Friday after prosecutors said he got in a hit-and-run crash with two other vehicles in Denver.

Barry Morphew was booked into the Boulder County Jail. Alamosa County District Judge Amanda Hopkins set a hearing to discuss Morphew’s bond Tuesday, online records show.

Under the terms of his bond set last year, Morphew was not supposed to travel away from home in southern Colorado except for work and other limited circumstances.

He got into the crash involving two other vehicles during a trip to Denver International Airport on Aug. 28, possibly to pick up his daughter, prosecutors said in a court filing.

“To go to the airport for any purpose other than work constitutes a breach of his bond,” read the filing by District Attorney Anne Kelly.

Morphew’s attorneys didn’t immediately respond to phone and email messages seeking comment Friday.

Morphew has pleaded not guilty and faces trial next summer in the death of his wife, who disappeared in 2020.

Suzanne Morphew’s skeletal remains were found off a dirt road in southern Colorado in 2023. By then, charges against Barry Morphew had been dropped, but he was charged again with first-degree murder in his wife’s death and arrested.

Investigators found no sign of trauma in Suzanne Morphew’s remains but allegedly found traces in her bone marrow of a drug cocktail used to tranquilize wildlife. Barry Morphew was the only person in the area other than wildlife officials with authorization to use the chemicals, prosecutors allege.

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) — A former high-ranking Democratic legislator in New Mexico accused of diverting millions of dollars meant for vocational education in the state’s largest school district to businesses and charities in which she had an interest has pleaded guilty to state charges that include fraud and money laundering.

Sheryl Williams Stapleton changed her plea during a hearing Friday, just three weeks after a federal jury convicted her of dozens of similar charges stemming from what prosecutors described as a yearslong scheme.

State prosecutors filed money laundering, racketeering and other charges against Williams Stapleton in 2021. She was set to go to trial in October. Under the plea agreement, all but four of the charges were dropped, and the agreement calls for a 10 1/2-year prison sentence and more than $1.8 million in restitution.

“Today’s guilty plea holds Sheryl Williams Stapleton accountable for defrauding New Mexico taxpayers and abusing the public trust,” said Lauren Rodriguez, a spokesperson for the New Mexico Department of Justice.

Rodriguez added that state prosecutors are pleased that the federal sentencing range “will provide a significant period of incarceration beyond what the state system could impose on its own.”

An attorney for Williams Stapleton did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment Friday.

A former state House majority leader and an administrator with Albuquerque Public Schools, Williams Stapleton was first elected in 1994. She resigned from the House two days after search warrants were served at her home during summer 2021, and the school district fired her.

In the federal case, prosecutors said that the district paid more than $3 million to Robotics Management Learning Systems LLC, a Washington, D.C.-based company at the center of both the state and federal cases. Most of that money came from federal funds meant for vocational education programs.

As the school district’s career and technical education director, Williams Stapleton made sure money for those programs went to Robotics, which was owned by her friend and federal co-defendant Joseph Johnson, prosecutors said.

Williams Stapleton was accused of ushering the company’s invoices through the procurement process. Johnson was accused of providing blank checks to Williams Stapleton.

During the federal trial, prosecutors also presented evidence that Williams Stapleton and Johnson failed to report thousands of dollars in payments from Robotics on their federal income tax returns.

Jurors also convicted Johnson in the federal case. He and Williams Stapleton have yet to be sentenced, and their attorneys previously indicated they would appeal the federal verdicts.