Lindsay Clancy Juror Says Panel Saw Case as a Chance to “Make It Better for Other Women”

One of the 11 jurors who favored finding Massachusetts mother Lindsay Clancy not criminally responsible for the deaths of her three children said the panel saw the case as an opportunity to create change for women and families. A legal analyst, however, described that reasoning as “problematic.”

Paula Devlin, 65, told “CBS Saturday Morning” over the weekend that jurors understood the trial could become a “turning point,” even though they were isolated from developments outside the courtroom. “This would be something that could change something to make it better for other women in the future, for other families,” Devlin said. “Justice for those children is this never happening again.”

Devlin said the jury was divided 11-1 before the deadlock resulted in a mistrial. Eight jurors supported a finding that Clancy was not criminally responsible, two remained undecided, and the holdout juror and one other member were leaning toward a guilty verdict.

Neama Rahmani, a Los Angeles trial attorney and legal analyst who has followed the case, criticized Devlin’s comments. “Jurors are supposed to decide cases solely based on the facts of that case,” Rahmani said. In Clancy’s trial, he added, the question before the jury was whether she was criminally responsible.

Jurors are tasked with applying the law, Rahmani said, rather than shaping or changing it.

“It is not appropriate for the jurors to consider the impact of their decision on other women, children or cases,” Rahmani told News Outlet.

Still, Rahmani said, there is little that can be done at this stage.

Judge Sullivan has already declared a mistrial, and the law generally bars courts from probing jury deliberations, Rahmani said. One exception involves outside influences that could prejudice jurors. Any further review would have to determine whether jurors considered information from traditional or social media, or whether Devlin was simply explaining why she viewed the case as significant.

Several jurors and Clancy’s defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, have alleged that the final holdout failed to show other jurors evidence he believed established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

“If he had shown us some evidence, then we all would have been OK with that,” Devlin told CBS.

The holdout juror has not responded to News Outlet’s attempts to reach him and has not spoken publicly about the case as of Monday.

A GiveSendGo fundraiser to benefit him has raised over $115,000 in the past few days. According to the organizer, it is meant to cover “security, lawyers [and] lost work.”

Separately, Clancy’s husband Patrick Clancy vacationed in the Hamptons over the weekend, pictured with his new wife Rachel Danis at the Milk Pail farm stand on Montauk Highway in Water Mill, according to a photograph obtained by TMZ.

Lindsay Clancy has been accused of three counts of first-degree murder after the strangling deaths of her children, Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months. Her defense did not dispute that she killed them with exercise bands but instead argued that she was not criminally responsible due to postpartum psychosis.