Lindsey Clancy jurors speak about holdout, saying he had ‘reasonable doubt’

Three jurors in the Lindsey Clancy trial spoke out for the first time after a judge declared a mistrial, describing the frustration of trying to reach a unanimous verdict with one holdout juror who they said acknowledged having “reasonable doubt.”“He admitted he had reasonable doubt, and I started filling out the forms. I was so excited,” jury foreperson Roni Carlson told Boston NBC10 in an interview alongside two other female jurors.Carlson said she began filling out the paperwork required for the verdict after the holdout juror acknowledged having reasonable doubt. But before she could finish, she said, he clarified that he still would not find Clancy, a Massachusetts mother, not guilty by reason of insanity. “There were three forms I had to fill out, and I started filling them out. I wrote my signature on each one, and then he said, ‘But I’m still not going to say that she’s not guilty by reason of insanity.’”The 12-member jury, composed of nine women and three men, spent seven days deliberating over whether Clancy was criminally responsible for the deaths of her three children.Juror Kellie Farina described the holdout as unwilling to engage with the rest of the panel, saying jurors repeatedly reviewed Judge William Sullivan’s instructions on the legal definition of reasonable doubt with him.“He had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children,” Farina said.The jurors repeatedly pointed the holdout to Sullivan’s instructions, she said, but he continued to struggle with the distinction between Clancy’s actions and the question of whether she was legally responsible for them.“Every one of us, in the hours of our frustration, would get up and walk the room because you just couldn’t sit anymore,” Farina said. She added that the holdout rarely left his seat or interacted with the other jurors.The third juror, Paula Devlin, said the holdout also dismissed information provided by fellow jurors, including nurses on the panel, about Clancy’s toxicology report.“He was very arrogant,” Devlin said. “He really did not take anything that anybody said.”The jury ultimately deadlocked 11-1, prompting Sullivan to declare a mistrial. Defense attorney Kevin Reddington had urged the judge to remove the lone holdout, arguing that he was improperly siding with the prosecution, but Sullivan declined to do so.What happens next after mistrial in the Lindsay Clancy murder caseClancy had admitted to killing her three children but pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity. Her defense argued that she was experiencing severe psychosis when she killed young children in 2023.According to Clancy’s account, she had a brief phone call with her husband, Patrick Clancy, before experiencing what she described as a hallucinatory episode in which voices told her to kill her children. But prosecutors alleged that Clancy methodically planned the killings, strangling the children in the basement before throwing herself from a window.