Judge rejects bid to remove juror as deadlock deepens in Massachusetts triple-murder trial
PLYMOUTH, Massachusetts, — Jurors in Lindsay Clancy’s closely watched murder trial ended a sixth day of deliberations without a verdict on Thursday after an extraordinary courtroom dispute over whether one member of the panel was following the judge’s instructions on reasonable doubt, intensifying the possibility that the case could end in a mistrial.
The dramatic turn came after the jury sent Superior Court Judge William Sullivan another note Thursday afternoon. The note was not publicly read in court, but defense attorney Kevin Reddington later said the foreperson had indicated that one juror was refusing to follow the court’s instructions concerning reasonable doubt.
Sullivan questioned the 12 jurors individually at sidebar before bringing the panel back into the courtroom. He reminded them that they were required to follow his instructions on the law and again explained that prosecutors bear the burden of proving the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. The jury was then sent back to deliberate.
Reddington subsequently asked Sullivan to remove the juror he said was preventing the panel from reaching a verdict. The judge refused, saying it would be improper for him to take the side of either the single juror or the other 11 members of the panel. The decision kept the full jury intact as deliberations continued.
Less than an hour later, the jurors were dismissed for the evening without reaching a verdict. They have now deliberated for more than 35 hours over six days and are scheduled to return Friday morning.
The latest dispute follows two previous declarations of deadlock. Jurors told Sullivan on both Tuesday and Wednesday that they were unable to reach a unanimous decision. On Wednesday, Sullivan delivered what Massachusetts courts call a Tuey-Rodriguez instruction, sometimes described as a “dynamite charge,” urging jurors to reconsider their positions, listen carefully to opposing views and make another effort to reach unanimity without abandoning their individual judgment.
The increasingly difficult deliberations follow a six-week trial involving more than 80 witnesses and over 300 exhibits. Clancy, 36, has admitted killing her three children — Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and 8-month-old Callan — at the family’s Duxbury home on Jan. 24, 2023. The central issue for the jury is therefore not whether the children died at their mother’s hands, but whether prosecutors proved she was criminally responsible for the killings.
Clancy’s lawyers contend she was experiencing postpartum psychosis and was incapable of appreciating the wrongfulness of her actions. During the trial, the defense presented evidence about her deteriorating mental health following the birth of her third child, her repeated attempts to obtain psychiatric treatment and the numerous medications prescribed to her.
Prosecutors acknowledge that Clancy experienced mental-health problems but reject the contention that she lacked criminal responsibility. They argue that she understood what she was doing and intentionally killed the children before attempting to take her own life. Clancy survived after jumping from a second-story window and is now paralyzed.
If convicted of first-degree murder, Clancy faces life imprisonment without parole. If jurors find her not guilty because of lack of criminal responsibility, she could instead be committed to a state psychiatric facility for evaluation.
Thursday’s events substantially increased attention on the possibility of a mistrial, but Sullivan has not declared one. If the jury ultimately remains unable to reach a unanimous verdict and the judge ends the proceedings, prosecutors would then have to decide whether to try Clancy again. Asked Thursday whether his office would pursue another trial in that situation, Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz declined to say what prosecutors would do until the current proceedings are over.
The case now moves into an unusual seventh day of deliberations with the fundamental disagreement inside the jury room still unresolved. After two formal reports of deadlock, an additional judicial instruction and Thursday’s dispute over a single juror, Friday could become the most consequential day yet in a trial that has drawn national attention to the intersection of criminal responsibility and severe postpartum mental illness.