Lindsay Clancy juror names sealed after mistrial as defense points to lone holdout

PLYMOUTH, MASSACHUSETTS: The identities of the jurors who decided Lindsay Clancy’s fate will remain shielded from the public for two weeks after her murder trial ended without a verdict. The decision comes as defense attorney Kevin Reddington has blamed one male juror for preventing the panel from reaching a unanimous decision.

Superior Court Judge William F Sullivan ordered the jury list impounded for 14 days, citing concerns about juror safety following the emotionally charged trial. The order came after the jury spent seven days and more than 38 hours deliberating before telling the judge it could not reach a unanimous decision.

Lindsay Clancy juror names remain sealed after mistrial

Sullivan's order applies to the official court list identifying the nine women and three men who served on the jury.

It does not prevent jurors from identifying themselves or speaking publicly about their experience if they choose to do so.

“Accordingly, the Court orders that the list identifying the names of empaneled jurors in this trial be impounded,” the order stated, adding that the restriction would expire 14 days after it was issued unless the court extends it for good cause.

The temporary protection comes as attention has focused heavily on the unidentified male juror following Reddington's public claims about the deliberations.

Reddington has said 11 of the 12 jurors were prepared to acquit Clancy, with one man refusing to join them.

If that account is accurate, all nine women on the panel would have supported acquittal.

Kevin Reddington blames one juror for Lindsay Clancy mistrial

The dispute became public when the jury foreperson sent Sullivan a note saying one juror was not following the court's instructions on reasonable doubt.

Reddington asked the judge to remove the panelist, but Sullivan declined.

The judge said the note did not establish that the juror had refused to follow the law.

He also explained that he could not simply side with one part of the jury because members disagreed about the evidence or the law.

After the mistrial, Reddington sharply criticized the unidentified juror outside the courthouse.

“[Clancy] was robbed by this man,” Reddington said, adding that he hoped the juror could “sleep at night.”

He also claimed the holdout had deprived the other jurors of a resolution after weeks of testimony.

“They know they were robbed by one man, for whatever his agenda was, who stole seven weeks of the life of these other jurors that were so attentive, so beautiful, so wonderful,” Reddington said.

The defense later pursued an emergency appeal to stop the mistrial, but the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court denied the request.

Lindsay Clancy jury ends deliberations without a verdict

The jury returned to court Friday after sending multiple notes during deliberations. Its final message made clear that the panel could not break the deadlock.

“It is with heavy heart we are still unable to come to a decision and will not be able to,” the jury told Sullivan.

Clancy is charged with killing her three children, Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months, inside their Duxbury, Massachusetts, home in January 2023.

Clancy does not dispute that she killed the children.

Her attorneys argued that postpartum psychosis left her unable to understand the wrongfulness of her actions, while prosecutors argued that she knew right from wrong and intentionally killed her children.

The trial also featured arguments over Clancy’s Google searches, journal entries, mental health treatment and the condition of her mental health before the killings.

During deliberations, jurors requested the knife connected to Clancy's suicide attempt as well as bags containing empty prescription pill bottles. 

Lindsay Clancy could face another trial

The mistrial means prosecutors have several options.

They could seek another trial, consider a plea agreement or decide not to proceed with the case.

Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz has not announced which path his office will take.

Clancy's defense has also faced scrutiny over its handling of the jury dispute, particularly after Reddington accused Sullivan of giving jurors a “soft” instruction on reasonable doubt.