By GB News (World News) | Created at 2026-09-03 22:30:43 | Updated at 2026-09-03 23:26:49
1 hour ago
The murder trial of Lindsay Clancy moved closer to a mistrial this evening after jurors remained unable to reach a unanimous verdict for a third consecutive day, while a moment of chaos saw defense attorneys seek the removal of a juror.
The nine-woman, three-man jury has now spent six days deliberating the case.
On Wednesday, jurors delivered their second notice to Judge William Sullivan that they were deadlocked, having first reported an impasse on Tuesday morning.
The stalemate continued over yesterday and today, where after lunch, jurors sent Judge Sullivan a written question that appeared to concern the legal standard of reasonable doubt.
Rather than disclose the contents of the note in open court, the judge reiterated his instructions, telling jurors that a charge is proven beyond a reasonable doubt when, after weighing the evidence, they have an “abiding conviction to a moral certainty” that the charge is true.
Jurors were then sent back to continue deliberating.
Once the panel left the courtroom, defense attorney Kevin Reddington argued that at least one juror was refusing to apply the law as instructed.
He asked Judge Sullivan to remove the juror, saying the judge’s response to the panel’s question had not gone far enough.
The jury is deciding whether Clancy was criminally responsible for the deaths of her three children
Prosecutor Jennifer Sprague opposed the request, arguing that the court had no way of knowing what was occurring inside the jury room, and that the judge had properly handled the situation - who in turn declined to intervene.
"I don’t feel that it is proper for me to side with one side or the other of the deliberations,” Judge Sullivan said, adding that jurors had previously been questioned individually about whether they could follow his instructions, and had all indicated that they could.
The exchange followed a private discussion between Judge Sullivan and the attorneys.
During the sidebar, Mr Reddington appeared visibly frustrated, waving documents as he argued his position before walking over to Clancy - who appeared distressed - and bringing her into the discussion.
The jury deliberated for roughly another half-hour before being dismissed shortly after 4pm.
Under Massachusetts procedure, Judge Sullivan can send the jury back to deliberate twice after deadlock notices before declaring a mistrial, unless the jurors agree to continue beyond that point.
After the second deadlock notice, he gave the panel so-called Tuey-Rodriguez instructions, urging jurors to make another effort to reach a unanimous verdict.
A third deadlock notice could therefore result in a mistrial.
Mr Reddington has said he would be prepared to defend Clancy in a second trial if necessary
Mr Reddington has said he would be prepared to defend Clancy in a second trial if necessary, and speaking outside the Plymouth courthouse yesterday, said he could be ready as soon as next week.
However he later said: “I don’t want a mistrial. Why would I want a mistrial? I kicked the s*** out of their case."
The jury is deciding whether Clancy was criminally responsible for the deaths of her three children - 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson and 8-month-old Callan - on January 24 2023.
The defense maintains that Clancy was suffering from postpartum psychosis, and acted while experiencing auditory hallucinations commanding her to kill her children.
She has already admitted responsibility for the killing, but prosecution is seeking first-degree murder convictions - which she denies, and could result in life imprisonment.
Jurors also have the option of lesser murder convictions, manslaughter, or a finding that Clancy was not criminally responsible for the deaths.
