Lindsay Clancy Juror Cited Reasonable Doubt but Blocked Insanity Verdict

Three jurors from the Lindsay Clancy murder trial are speaking out for the first time since last week’s mistrial, saying the panel was blocked from reaching a unanimous decision by a single holdout.

In interviews with NBC10 Boston, the jurors — including the foreperson — said the holdout acknowledged there was reasonable doubt but still would not agree to find Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity.

The mistrial followed several days of deliberations in the high-profile case involving Clancy, a Massachusetts mother accused of killing her three young children in January 2023.

Clancy has admitted to the killings, but she pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, with her defense arguing she was experiencing severe mental illness at the time. Prosecutors argued she remained criminally responsible for the children’s deaths.

“He admitted he had reasonable doubt and I started filling out the forms, I was so excited,” the foreperson told NBC10 Boston.

According to the foreperson, the juror then said, “But I’m still not going to say that she’s not guilty by reason of insanity.”

The foreperson said she was the one who sent a note to the judge flagging concerns that a juror had acknowledged reasonable doubt but would not join a verdict. All three jurors told the station they grew frustrated during deliberations, saying the holdout would not seriously consider the rest of the panel’s views.

NBC10 Boston reported it attempted to contact the juror identified by the others as the holdout but had not received a response.

A judge declared a mistrial last week after jurors informed the court they were hopelessly deadlocked following several days of deliberations. 

It remains unclear whether prosecutors will seek to retry the case.