No Verdict After 6 Days: Jury Stalled in Lindsay Clancy Trial After Single Holdout Causes Courtroom Drama

Plymouth: PLYMOUTH, Mass. (AP) — A deadlocked jury returns Friday for the seventh day of deliberations in the Lindsay Clancy trial, a day after the jury’s foreperson told the judge a single juror won’t follow the court’s instructions about reasonable doubt.

The extraordinary disclosure made Thursday in the form of a note delivered to the judge offered the clearest glimpse yet of what may be keeping jurors from reaching a verdict on whether the Massachusetts mother is criminally responsible for killing her three children.

The jury has twice told Judge William Sullivan that it is unable to agree on a verdict. On Thursday, Sullivan brought in each juror individually and questioned them in private. The judge then reread his instructions on reasonable doubt before sending them back to continue deliberating.

Clancy’s lawyer, Kevin Reddington, then asked Sullivan to dismiss the juror from the case, arguing the person had refused to follow the judge’s instructions. Prosecutors objected, and Sullivan declined to remove the juror.

“I don’t feel it is proper for me to side with one side or the other of the deliberations,” the judge said. “I don’t feel it’s appropriate for me to say, ‘I agree with one juror or the 11.’ I have asked if they are able to follow my instructions. They swore earlier that they could.”

At one point and for the first time in the trial, Clancy was brought to join a sidebar conversation with the judge. Paralyzed from the waist down after her suicide attempt, Clancy uses a wheelchair, which Reddington pushed to the front of the courtroom.

“She has a right to know what’s going on,” he later told reporters.

Clancy, a 36-year-old former labor and delivery nurse, doesn’t deny strangling her children in the basement of their home in 2023 before trying to take her own life. Her attorney argues that postpartum psychosis led to her actions, while prosecutors say she knew what she was doing when she killed Cora, Dawson and Callan Clancy, ages 5, 3 and 8 months.

The prosecution argues she deliberately sent her then-husband on errands to get him out of the house, and prosecutors have questioned the seriousness of her suicide attempt.

Clancy’s livestreamed trial has generated intense interest, with reporters and spectators packing the courtroom. The case has also sparked deep public divisions over her culpability and the issues around maternal mental health after childbirth.

If the jury ultimately can’t agree on a verdict, the judge could declare a mistrial. Prosecutors would then have to decide whether to put Clancy on trial again, drop the charges or try to negotiate a plea deal with her lawyer.

If the jury decides Clancy was criminally responsible for her actions, it could convict her of either murder or manslaughter. If she is acquitted, a judge could still order her confined to a mental health facility if an evaluation determines that she poses a danger to the public.

As the jury deliberates, here are moments from the trial they may be considering:

Clancy's former husband made anguished 911 call

Clancy's former husband, Patrick Clancy, was first to take the stand. In emotional testimony, he described the day he found his wife after she tried to kill herself.

Lindsay Clancy had sent him out to get takeout food and medication for their daughter, which prosecutors argue was an excuse to get him out of the house.

He came home to find the house unusually silent, before finding blood throughout the main bedroom and a window open.

Jurors listened to the 911 call Patrick Clancy made after finding his wife outside in the snow. Clancy can be heard speaking with his wife, then tells the dispatcher he’s going to check on the children.

Moments later, he howls and cries after finding his children in the basement. The confused dispatcher repeatedly asks what happened. “She killed the kids!” he yells.

Everyone knew Clancy was struggling

Clancy's mother, mother-in-law, sister, friends and co-workers testified that Clancy struggled with her mental health after giving birth to Callan, the youngest of her three children.

Clancy's mother-in-law, Susan Clancy, said she and her former daughter-in-law were close. Both worked as labour and delivery nurses. She described Lindsay as a wonderful mother.

But Susan Clancy testified that Lindsay had become anxious, paranoid and suicidal, and that the psychiatric care she was getting wasn't helping.

“She felt unwell. She had insomnia. She was losing her appetite. She was very anxious and sad,” Susan Clancy said. “She was begging for help.”

Lindsay Clancy’s mother, Paula Musgrove, testified that her daughter was scared of sleeping alone, became paranoid and believed the medications she was taking “were destroying her mind.”

“Mom, will you please come up and stay with me for a bit? I’m really sick. Something is wrong,” Clancy wrote in an October 2022 text message that Paula Musgrove read in court. “I had horrible insomnia all night, and I just don’t know how I am going to get through the day. … It’s just really scary, and I don’t want to be alone.”

The defence questioned the quality of Clancy's medical care

Clancy saw several doctors about her declining mental health, and eventually checked herself into a psychiatric hospital.

Her lawyer, Kevin Reddington, argued that she was misdiagnosed and overmedicated.

As he cross-examined one of her psychiatrists, Dr. Jennifer Tufts, Reddington questioned her expertise, prescribing decisions and use of 25-minute video appointments with limited time for talk therapy.

At one point, Reddington implied that Tufts was a box-checking “robot.”“What did you do? You had a woman who was telling you she felt hopeless,” he asked as they discussed an appointment about two months before the killings.

“I told her that this was something we could address, that there was hope, that there are treatments, that there are different types of programs,” Tufts said, “so she knew that she still had options and a reason to hope.”

Clancy said she heard a voice telling her to kill

Paul Zeizel, a clinical and forensic psychologist who visited Lindsay Clancy in the hospital after she killed the children, testified that he overheard her saying that a disembodied male voice had told her she had no choice but to kill her children and then herself. Zeizel said he believed Clancy wasn't responsible for her actions because of her deep mental illness.

Prosecutors called a rebuttal witness, forensic psychologist Kirk Heilbrun, who said he didn’t believe Clancy had hallucinated voices.

“One of the things that she said when I asked about what happened is that in the course of strangling each child, she said, ‘Go to God, baby. Go to God,’” he said. “That was part of her expectation that she and the children would be together in heaven with God.”

Dr. Gregory Saathoff, a senior psychiatrist for the FBI’s Behavioural Analysis Unit, testified for prosecutors that Clancy “had the capacity to know right from wrong.”

The lawyers got the last word

After testimony was complete, each side got about an hour to make their closing argument to the jury.

Reddington showed the jury a photograph of the Clancy family, looking happy, and a second one of Lindsay Clancy in the hospital.

“How does this turn into this?” Reddington asked. “How? Because of the damn medicine and the lousy medical care that she got.”

Prosecutor Jennifer Sprague said criticising the mental health system was “a distraction.” She said Clancy chose to kill her children because doing so would make it easier to kill herself.

“She was depressed. She was exhausted. She was done. She didn’t want to try anymore. She felt damaged,” Sprague said. “But those kids, those kids were her protective factor. Those kids were keeping her from ending her misery.”

Jurors have struggled to agree on a verdict

The jury began deliberating Aug. 27 and worked entirely out of public view. On Tuesday, the fourth day of deliberations, jurors sent the judge a note in the morning saying they could not unanimously agree.

The note did not elaborate, and there were no clues as to whether a majority of jurors were leaning toward a conviction or acquittal. It also did not provide any insight into the tone of deliberations or whether they had been cordial or acrimonious.

Judge William Sullivan asked jurors to keep deliberating. On Wednesday, they sent the court another short note saying they were still at an impasse.

Sullivan again told them to keep trying and ultimately sent them home for the night, with deliberations to resume Thursday.