It’s been five days since a mistrial was declared in the case of Lindsay Clancy, the Massachusetts woman who killed her three children in 2023 and whose case has made women’s healthcare a talking point for people across the country.
After seven days of juror deliberations, Judge William Sullivan prematurely ended the trial after jurors said they couldn’t come to a unanimous decision on whether Clancy should be held criminally responsible for the deaths of her children.
Since the mistrial, Clancy’s defense attorney, a few jurors and her ex-husband’s attorney have spoken out about the case and what they hope happens next.
Here’s everything we’ve learned since the trial ended, and what might come next.
One holdout juror refused to apply reasonable doubt to the verdict.
Three of the jurors told NBC10 Boston that they were unable to come to a unanimous decision because of one holdout juror who refused to say Clancy was not guilty, even though he admitted he had reasonable doubt that she should be held criminally responsible for the deaths of her children.
“He was very arrogant,” juror Paula Devlin told the outlet on Tuesday. “He really did not take anything that anybody said.”
Kellie Farina, another juror, added, “He had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children.”
Greg Derr/The Patriot Ledger via Associated Press
Some jurors couldn’t hear the 911 call again.
The jurors also spoke about hearing the 911 call that her then-husband, Patrick Clancy, made when he discovered his dead children in the basement of his home. The 911 call was played for the court but not broadcast, so the general public has not heard it.
“It’s something that I will never not hear if I think about it,” Farina said. “It was the most horrific thing and when we heard it again in the jury room, we were crying again. The desperation, the despair in his voice, again, it’s something that will stick with me.”
Roni Carlson, the foreperson of the jury, said other jurors had to put on headphones because they “could not hear it again.”
“They had to turn up their music because it was too much,” she said. “Once was enough.”
Patrick Clancy’s attorney is fighting back at conspiracy theories.
Clancy’s ex-husband has been the subject of relentless conspiracy theories suggesting that he actually killed the children. Her defense team has never denied she killed the children; they have just argued she shouldn’t be held criminally responsible for the deaths because she was experiencing postpartum psychosis when she killed them.
Still, online conspiracy theorists have taken testimony and evidence out of context and accused her ex-husband, who has remarried since the deaths, of killing his children. His attorney, Howard Cooper, said in a statement Tuesday that “there will be consequences.”
“Enough is enough ― this spread of blatant and baseless falsehoods must stop,” Cooper said Tuesday in a statement provided to media outlets. “Those responsible should understand that there will be consequences, and every appropriate measure will be pursued to hold them accountable, including legally. Law enforcement has been notified.”
Lindsay Clancy’s defense attorney is pursuing multiple options.
Lindsay Clancy’s defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, made a public plea to Donald Trump on Tuesday, asking the president to pardon his client. Even though her case is at the state level, Reddington said he believes Trump is aware of the case and hopes he can make some calls and convince the district attorney to drop the charges.
If that doesn’t work, Reddington said he would argue at the end of the month in front of the judge to have the case dismissed. A status hearing regarding the case is scheduled for Sept. 29.
Here’s what a new trial would look like.
If Reddington is unsuccessful at getting the case dismissed, the prosecution might retry Clancy.
Jack Lu, a retired judge and adjunct professor at Boston College Law School, told WBUR there would likely be a “more intense jury selection process” because it would be difficult finding people who aren’t now aware of Clancy and her case.
“I expect it would be a more intense jury selection process — more questions, more follow-up, a more intense process that might even take twice as long,” Lu said. “I don’t see a problem with a slow but steady jury process in which you ask the potential jurors a lot of questions.”
Reddington said Wednesday on “CBS Mornings” that he is open to a plea deal, noting Plymouth County District Attorney Tim Cruz could reduce the charges to second-degree murder or waive the jury trial, letting a judge decide the verdict instead.
“I know enough to know it doesn’t matter what I’d like,” Reddington said. “All I know is that I’m not going to ever agree that this young lady do a day in jail.”