Long before Janette MacAusland appeared in a Vermont police report and long before prosecutors asked a court to continue holding her without bail, her family was already involved in a complicated legal dispute. Court records cited by news organizations show that MacAusland and her husband were going through divorce and custody proceedings in the months before their two children died. Those proceedings now form an important part of the background to a case that has generated intense public interest.

MacAusland, 49, is charged with two counts of first-degree murder in connection with the deaths of her children, Kai, 7, and Ella, 6. The children were found ᴅᴇᴀᴅ inside the family’s Wellesley home on April 24. According to police accounts reported by multiple outlets, MacAusland later went to her aunt’s home in Bennington, Vermont, where authorities became involved after she arrived with an injury to her neck. Investigators subsequently went to the Mᴀssachusetts residence.

The family’s legal situation had already become complicated. Samuel MacAusland filed for divorce in October 2025, according to court records cited in reporting. The couple were involved in a custody dispute, and a guardian had been appointed to make recommendations regarding custody shortly before the children’s deaths. The timing has inevitably become a subject of attention, but the existence of a custody dispute does not by itself establish why the deaths occurred or what happened inside the home.

The legal case has now reached a different kind of crossroads. On September 10, defense attorney Joseph Krowski Jr. asked a judge to dismiss the charges or, alternatively, release MacAusland on bail. His argument was partly based on the prosecution’s continuing wait for the official cause and manner of death from the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner. Prosecutors said the medical examiner had not completed that determination and that the grand jury would need to reconvene after the findings became available.

The judge rejected the defense request and ordered MacAusland to remain jailed without bail. Court TV reported that a probable-cause hearing was scheduled for October 29. That hearing could become an important procedural milestone because prosecutors are expected to have more information by then, although the exact course of the case will depend on the evidence and decisions made by the court and prosecution.

Mental health has also emerged as a major issue in the defense’s public arguments. Krowski has described MacAusland as having a history of mental illness and has asked prosecutors to reconsider the way they are approaching the case. At the same time, he has explicitly distinguished MacAusland’s circumstances from those of Lindsay Clancy, whose Mᴀssachusetts trial recently ended in a mistrial after jurors could not reach unanimous agreement concerning criminal responsibility.

The comparison has drawn attention because both cases involve Mᴀssachusetts mothers accused of killing their children and attempting suicide, but the similarities have limits. CBS Boston reported that Krowski emphasized that MacAusland’s children were older and that this was not a postpartum situation. He said he was not prepared to identify a particular defense until he had all relevant information.

That distinction may become increasingly important as the case progresses. Criminal responsibility depends on the evidence and applicable law, not simply on similarities between two high-profile cases. For now, the court has not made a final determination concerning MacAusland’s guilt or criminal responsibility.

The next developments are likely to revolve around the medical examiner’s findings, the prosecution’s grand-jury process and the defense’s continuing efforts to challenge the charges and MacAusland’s detention. Until those steps occur, many questions surrounding the family’s final weeks remain unresolved.

Source: https://nypost.com/2026/09/10/us-news/janette-macauslands-attorney-requests-child-murder-case-be-dismissed/?utm_campaign=nypost&utm_medium=referral