Lindsay Clancy jury wraps day 6 with bombshell one-juror standoff, deliberations to resume Friday

Jury Deadlock Leaves Lindsay Clancy’s Trial Undetermined, Court to Reopen on Friday

A jury that has deliberated for six days has again been unable to reach a verdict in the murder trial of Lindsay Clancy, the 36‑year‑old accused of strangling three of her children in their Duxbury, Massachusetts, home in January 2023. The panel, composed of nine women and three men, concluded Thursday’s session with no decision, and deliberations are scheduled to resume Friday.

Judge William Sullivan, presiding over the case in Plymouth County, has announced that he will address the issue of a holdout juror who allegedly refused to follow the court’s instructions on reasonable doubt. Defense attorney Kevin Reddington, who has urged the removal of the juror, said the case could end in a mistrial if unanimity is again not achieved. He described the situation as a “sensitive undertaking” and stated that the court cannot take sides in the jury’s private deliberations.

“We’re all set. Dr. Resnick is ready. We’ve got all our evidence. Witnesses are available, so let’s go,” Reddington told reporters after court. “Bring it.” He added that he expects the discussion over the juror dispute to take place in open court rather than on a sidebar.

The jury’s inability to agree has been attributed to a single juror who, according to a note from Judge Sullivan, “has made a decision and one juror will not apply reasonable doubt.” Reddington said the note did not reveal which verdict the 11 other jurors favored or how the remaining juror was leaning. He later described the note as showing an “11‑to‑1 divide,” but the specific positions remain undisclosed.

Prosecutors have objected to removing a juror, arguing that it would require examining the jury’s private deliberations and could improperly influence the outcome. They contended that Sullivan had acted appropriately by asking the jurors whether they could follow the law and reiterating the standard of reasonable doubt.

“If a note that the judge already has says that there are 11 jurors that have made a decision and one juror will not apply reasonable doubt,” Reddington told the media, “the note does not reveal which verdict the 11 jurors favor or how the remaining juror is leaning.”

Clancy faces three counts of first‑degree murder for the deaths of her children, Cora, Dawson and Callan, all of whom were under the age of six when they were found strangled. She does not contest that she killed them; the jury must decide whether she was criminally responsible at the time of the killings. The defense argues that postpartum psychosis rendered her unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions or to conform her conduct to the law.

The jury is weighing a range of outcomes, from first‑degree murder to not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility. Prosecutors maintain that Clancy understood what she was doing and should be held responsible, while the defense contends otherwise.

Judge Sullivan is expected to hold an inquiry at 9 a.m. Friday. If the jury again declares that it cannot reach a unanimous decision, the case could end in a mistrial. Reddington said he is prepared for a retrial and that prosecutors might try to postpone it for six months to a year. He left open the possibility of a plea agreement, stating, “Let’s see what Mr. Cruz wants to do, and then we’ll talk about our options.”

The outcome of the jury’s second attempt to decide remains uncertain, and the trial’s resolution will hinge on whether the panel can ultimately reconcile the diverging views that have kept it from delivering a verdict.