Lindsay Clancy trial jurors excused again after defense blames one for deadlock
The Hill · C · trust 67/100
Comments: by Sarah Davis - 09/03/26 5:29 PM ET Comments: Link copied by Sarah Davis - 09/03/26 5:29 PM ET Comments: Link copied NOW PLAYING The jury in the Lindsay Clancy trial was sent home again Thursday afternoon after her defense attorney blamed one “spurned” juror for causing deliberations to extend into Friday, which would be their seventh consecutive day.
Jurors appear to be split 11-1 and will return to court Friday morning for another day of discussions, seeking to reach a verdict on whether or not Clancy is criminally liable for the murders of her three children.
In a tense exchange on Thursday, before the jury was sent home, Clancy’s defense attorney Kevin Reddington asked Judge William Sullivan to eject one juror who he claimed “refuses to listen to the law.” Sullivan had earlier in the day spoken to jurors about the legal definition of “reasonable doubt.”
“If we come back here in a half an hour with a mistrial because of a juror that has just spurned the instructions of this court, it’s a shame. It’s a real shame,” Reddington said.
Clancy is facing three counts of first-degree murder for the fatal strangulations of 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson and 8-month-old Callan in the basement of her Duxbury, Mass., home.
Clancy’s attorneys say she was struggling with postpartum psychosis when she strangled her kids, rendering her not criminally responsible for her actions. Prosecutors argue Clancy willfully planned these killings while her husband was out of the house.
The judge has repeatedly urged the jury to keep trying to reach a unanimous decision to avoid a mistrial. The jury — which consists of nine women and three men — can convict Clancy of first-degree murder, rule in favor of a reduced charge such as manslaughter or find her not guilty due to insanity.
Sullivan spoke to the jurors collectively on Thursday about the legal definition of reasonable doubt after swearing each in one by one. They were then sent back to continue their deliberations before the judge later excused them for the day.
The prosecution told Sullivan they had no objection to the jury’s questions or the judge’s redirection.
Sullivan said he did not “feel that it was proper” for him to comply with Reddington’s request to remove this jury member, noting this was a “sensitive undertaking.”
“I don’t feel it’s appropriate for me to say I agree with one juror or the 11,” the judge said. “At this point, I’ve asked if they are able to follow my instructions ... They swore earlier that they could. They’ve said at this point that they can.”
If acquitted, Clancy would be sent to a state psychiatric hospital instead of facing jail time, where she would be reviewed periodically to determine if she can safely live in a community, The Boston Globe reported .
Read the original at The Hill →
Open in TruthVane →