Lindsay Clancy’s closely watched trial in the deaths of her three young children has ended in a mistrial after jurors spent seven days deliberating but were unable to agree on a unanimous verdict.
Before the judge made that ruling, former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani, president of West Coast Trial Lawyers, spoke exclusively with Oxygen about what a hung jury could mean for Clancy’s case and the legal road ahead. Rahmani is not involved in the proceedings.
Rahmani said the outcome would not be entirely unexpected, given how “polarizing” the case has been and how difficult it could be for all 12 jurors to align on the question of criminal responsibility.
“People that are watching have very strong views of this case, even though the facts really aren’t in dispute,” he said. “Everyone agrees, except for a small vocal minority, that Lindsay Clancy did it. The question is, should she be held criminally responsible? It was a tough task.”
Could the Lindsay Clancy Trial Be Retried?
According to Rahmani, prosecutors have several possible options following a mistrial, though he believes the most likely next step is another trial.
“I firmly believe the prosecution is going to retry this case,” he said, “because there’s a lot of pressure on them to do so, and to hold someone accountable for these three children being dead.”
Rahmani said he does not expect prosecutors to drop the charges or resolve the case through a plea agreement, again pointing to the deaths of the three children. “You either put Lindsay Clancy away for her life, or the defense convinces another jury that she’s not criminally responsible,” he added.
Outside the courthouse, Plymouth County District Attorney Tim Cruz addressed the possibility of a retrial, emphasizing that officials have not yet decided what comes next.
“I will let you know that there will be no decisions made today regarding that,” he told the press. “I’m going to be meeting with our team, and we will address this case further at the appropriate time in the context of an official court proceeding. So, you will not get an answer on that question today.”
Clancy’s attorney Kevin Reddington said earlier in the week that he would be willing to retry the case, per CBS News. After the mistrial, he expressed confidence about the defense’s odds going into a potential retrial.
“If I was Tim Cruz,” he told the press outside the courthouse, “I would probably say I don’t think I want to do a retrial, because he’s going to lose.”
has reached out to both legal teams for comment on the outcome but did not receive an immediate reply.
What’s Next for Lindsay Clancy?
Until her potential retrial, Lindsay Clancy will remain in custody, Nahmani told Oxygen.
According to CBS News, she has returned to Tewksbury Hospital, the psychiatric facility where she has been held since the spring of 2023.
What Led to the Lindsay Clancy Mistrial?
The mistrial in Clancy’s case was formally declared by Judge William Sullivan on Sept. 4, which marked day seven of deliberations. It was on day four that jurors first submitted the first of several notes to the court confirming they were at an impasse.
“It is with a heavy heart that we report,” Sullivan read aloud from their final note, “that we’re unable to come to a unanimous decision and will not be able to.”
Ahead of the official declaration, Reddington asked for time to submit an emergency petition to the state’s Supreme Judicial Court, which was granted.
In the defense’s petition, which was obtained by MS NOW, Clancy’s attorneys asked the higher judge to look into one juror’s ability “to apply the law.” It argued that the juror was “identified by the jury foreperson as biased and refusing to follow the court’s instructions on reasonable doubt.”
While the petition was heard, the Supreme Judicial Court judge ultimately denied it, which allowed the mistrial to move forward.
The single juror’s alleged lack of adherence to reasonable doubt instructions came to light on Sept. 3 after the jury’s foreperson submitted a question to the judge on the matter.
In response to the note, Sullivan individually sidebarred with each juror, reemphasized to the group the rules he’d given them about reasonable doubt and asked them to resume their deliberations.
“I don’t feel that it is proper for me to side with one side or the other of the deliberations,” the judge explained when Reddington subsequently objected and moved for the juror’s dismissal. “I don’t feel it’s appropriate for me to say I agree with one juror or 11.”
Following the mistrial, Reddington spoke about the jury’s deadlock, sharing that he feels the 11 “were robbed by one man.”
“You could see how defeated they were sitting there,” he said of the other jurors at a press conference. “I’ve got a funny feeling that they would’ve gone on for another week if they could. So I hope that guy can sleep well at night.
