Clancy jurors describe doubt after Massachusetts mistrial

A juror in Lindsay Clancy’s Massachusetts murder trial said there was “so much doubt” in the case that she could not support a guilty verdict, offering a rare look inside deliberations that ended Friday with a hung jury and mistrial.

Clancy, a Massachusetts mother, was accused of murdering her three young children in January 2023. She strangled them before attempting to kill herself by jumping from her bedroom window, leaving her paralyzed, The Guardian reported. Her defense did not deny that she killed the children, but argued she had suffered a psychotic break after seeking help for worsening mental health. Prosecutors argued she intentionally killed them.

The jury split 11-1, according to a note sent to the judge by the foreperson. Prosecutors have not said whether they will retry the case. Clancy remains held at a psychiatric hospital, and a status hearing is scheduled for Sept. 29.

A woman identified as juror No. 5, who asked WBZ-TV to keep her anonymous, said the prosecution failed to remove uncertainty from the case.

“At the end of the day, there was so much doubt,” she said. “The prosecution didn’t have a figurative smoking gun. There was not a single moment throughout the presentation of that case where you could say ‘Yup, 100% I’m certain she did it’ or that she didn’t do it. There was too much gray area.”

She said she initially believed Clancy should be found guilty and criminally responsible, but struggled with the evidence about Clancy’s mental state.

“I think that this is a woman who was not mentally healthy. She was someone who was in the throes of a significant mental health crisis,” the juror said. “I really just felt like she was so deep in it that she couldn’t see her way out.”

Roni Carlson, the jury foreperson, told NBC10 Boston that the lone holdout would not agree to acquit Clancy by reason of insanity even after acknowledging reasonable doubt.

“He admitted he had reasonable doubt and I started filling out the forms. I was so excited,” said Carlson, a retired elementary school teacher. According to Carlson, the juror then said: “But I’m still not going to say that she’s not guilty by reason of insanity.”

Another juror, Paula Devlin, told NBC10 the holdout was “very arrogant” and said, “He really did not take anything that anybody said.” The holdout juror has not spoken publicly.

Juror No. 5 told WBZ-TV that the divisions in the jury room were not limited to one person. “The majority of people, it doesn’t matter what side they were on, were very firm in their stance and their belief from the beginning,” she said. “There were some big personalities in that room. But at the end of the day, it just came down to an inability to move past your convictions.”

Clancy’s attorney sought to have the holdout juror removed, arguing the juror was refusing to apply the law on reasonable doubt. The judge, William Sullivan, ultimately declared a mistrial after the jury could not reach a verdict.

The jurors who spoke to NBC10 said trial evidence showed Clancy loved her children. “Everything proved she loved her children, from her journals to her mother-in-law, everything proved that she loved her children,” Carlson said. “So she had to have snapped and not known what she was doing.”

Juror No. 5 said one of the most devastating moments was hearing the 911 call from Patrick Clancy, Lindsay Clancy’s now ex-husband, after he found the children. The call was played in court but not broadcast.

“I will never be the same after that 911 call,” she said. “It was horrifying.”