Judge denies Lindsay Clancy’s motion to dismiss murder charges, paving the way for potential retrial
Published at
Lauren del Valle, CNN
PLYMOUTH, Mass. (CNN) — A judge in Massachusetts denied Lindsay Clancy’s motion to dismiss her murder charges, clearing the way for her to face a second trial for allegedly killing her three children.
Judge William Sullivan also ruled Monday against imposing a gag order on the parties as he tees up the next trial.
Last week, Sullivan heard arguments on Clancy’s motion to dismiss that said a retrial would violate her protections against double jeopardy. Sullivan also said he’s inclined to set a March 2027 trial date when the parties convene again next Monday.
RELATED | Lindsay Clancy’s judge eyes March 2027 for retrial – if there is one
The Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office has not definitively committed to retrying Clancy, remaining noncommittal at the hearing last week. The DA’s office declined to comment on the developments Monday. CNN has also reached out to Clancy’s defense team.
Defense attorney Kevin Reddington in court last week accused the prosecution of “(spinning) everyone in the breeze” and questioned why they hadn’t made a decision yet on a retrial or what charges his client may face.
The judge ruled Monday that a retrial will not violate Clancy’s double jeopardy rights because there was “manifest necessity” for the mistrial he declared in September. Manifest necessity is a high legal burden that means all other options to reach a verdict were exhausted.
RELATED | Mistrial is declared in Lindsay Clancy child killings case after jury deadlocks
The judge disagreed with Clancy’s defense claim that Sullivan didn’t exhaust all options to flesh out the jury’s deadlock before declaring her first trial a mistrial over a holdout juror.
Sullivan also disagreed with defense assertions that the holdout juror, who’s been broadly discussed in the media, refused to deliberate.
“The foreperson’s notes did not plausibly suggest that Juror Doe refused to consider the trial evidence or disagreed with the law as explained by the Court in its instructions,” Sullivan wrote in Monday’s ruling.
Information that’s come out about the juror since the trial ended “cannot serve to undermine” the mistrial decision, the judge also said.
Sullivan ruled in a third order Clancy’s legal team is not entitled to records related to the holdout juror, including his cellphone records and jury selection questionnaire, because it’s not relevant to Clancy’s dismissal motion or any retrial.
Sullivan said he also doesn’t see any justification for examining the juror under oath at this point.
The holdout juror, Michael Péguy Desronvil, who came forward after facing public scrutiny, has said his position was misrepresented by some of his fellow jurors who spoke to the press.
In a separate order Monday, Sullivan said prosecutors haven’t sufficiently demonstrated public statements made by Clancy’s defense team outside court pose a serious threat of harm to prejudice jury selection or the outcome of any retrial.
The judge said prosecutors may renew the request if circumstances change and reminded Clancy’s defense of their ethical obligations.
This story has been updated with additional information.