Lindsay Clancy judge indefinitely impounds juror names, citing safety and 'divisive' attention

Judge Seals Jury Names in Lindsay Clancy Murder Trial Amid Safety Concerns

BOSTON, MA – In a move that underscores the growing tension between transparency and juror safety, Judge William Sullivan of the Plymouth County District Court ordered that the names of all jurors involved in the Lindsay Clancy murder case be sealed indefinitely. The decision, announced on Monday, follows a mistrial declared on September 4 after the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict, with a split of 11‑1 on the 12‑person panel.

Sullivan wrote that while the court recognizes the public’s right to know who served on the jury, doing so poses a “real and present” risk of harm. He cited multiple instances of “identifications of jurors and their personal information without their permission,” and expressed concern that making the list public could result in “immediate and irreparable injury.” The order will remain in effect until the court issues another ruling.

The case itself centers on Lindsay Clancy, 36, who faces three counts of first‑degree murder for the deaths of her three children—five‑year‑old Cora, three‑year‑old Dawson and eight‑month‑old Callan—who were discovered strangled at their home in January 2023. The trial, which began in late 2025, was halted when the jury failed to agree on a verdict, prompting the mistrial. The judge’s order comes as the case moves toward a status hearing scheduled for September 29, during which the District Attorney’s Office will decide whether the matter will be retried.

One juror, 65‑year‑old Paula Devlin, has spoken publicly about the experience. In an interview with Fox News Digital, she emphasized her belief that the case “should spark a conversation about women’s mental health.” Devlin said she felt a responsibility to bring attention to the issue, stating, “We didn’t know what was going on outside of that room, but we had a chance to get a conversation started that could change something.” She also noted gaps she saw in the prosecution’s evidence, calling the case’s central premise “based on mental health,” and argued that “only women can go through postpartum depression or psychosis,” suggesting that this aspect of the case was not inherently biased.

While Devlin chose to speak to the media, most of the other jurors have remained anonymous, despite repeated requests from reporters for statements. The judge noted that a few jurors had already spoken to the press following the mistrial declaration, but the majority preferred to keep their identities private.

The decision to seal the jurors’ names has sparked debate among legal observers. Some argue that transparency is essential for public confidence in the justice system, while others point to the practical dangers faced by jurors in high‑profile cases. The judge’s ruling reflects a careful balance, aiming to protect individual safety without unduly restricting public access to court records.

Clancy’s upcoming status hearing will determine whether the case is rescheduled. The Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office has not yet issued a statement on whether a retrial will proceed. As the legal proceedings unfold, the court will likely continue to weigh the competing interests of openness and personal security.