Three Lindsay Clancy jurors said one juror admitted reasonable doubt but still would not agree to find Lindsay Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity. Their account came after a mistrial in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial, where the panel split after about 40 hours of deliberation over six and a half days.
Plymouth jurors speak
The foreperson said, "He admitted he had reasonable doubt and I started filling out the forms, I was so excited," and then, "But I'm still not going to say that she's not guilty by reason of insanity." The three jurors spoke publicly for the first time after the mistrial and described the holdout as the point where their talks broke down.
The foreperson said she wrote the note to the judge raising concerns that one juror had expressed reasonable doubt but would not agree to a verdict. The jurors said they became frustrated during deliberations because the holdout refused to consider the views of the rest of the panel.
Massachusetts mistrial last week
A judge declared a mistrial last week after jurors told the court they were hopelessly deadlocked. That left the case unresolved after Clancy had admitted to the killings and pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, the position her lawyers tied to severe mental illness at the time.
For now, the practical result is simple: the verdict that would have ended the case did not come. The deadlock also shows why the mistrial happened — one juror moved toward doubt on guilt, but not far enough to join the insanity finding the defense needed.
What happens next depends on whether prosecutors seek to retry the case. That choice will determine whether the dispute over Clancy’s responsibility returns to court or stays at the point where the jurors stopped.
