LIVE UPDATES: Attorneys address reporters outside the courthouse following Lindsay Clancy mistrial

Lindsay Clancy triple-murder trial in Massachusetts ended in mistrial on Friday. The 36-year-old woman is still charged with three counts of murder for the strangling deaths of her three children, ages 5, 3, and 8 months old. Clancy was present throughout the trial in a wheelchair after she was paralyzed by injuries she sustained when she jumped from her home’s second-story window in an alleged suicide attempt. Her defense lawyer claims she was insane at the time, suffering from postpartum psychosis, and could not appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions. We’ll continue to post important updates from the courthouse following the judge’s declaration of mistrial.

AFTERNOON UPDATES:

The following are live updates from the courtroom. Time notes are Eastern Daylight Time. Please forgive typos.

3:20 p.m. Defense attorney Kevin Reddington addresses the media outside the courthouse, praising Judge William Sullivan and the jury. He expresses anger toward the district attorney for even bringing this case to trial. Watch in the player above.

2:52 p.m. Plymouth County’s district attorney is addressing the media outside the courthouse. Watch in the player above.

2:30 p.m. Judge sets the next court date for Sept. 29

2:28 p.m. Judge: I want to compliment all 3 counsel. We should pick a status date, trial assignment date. Defense asks for a motion for reconsideration within five days. Judge considers a date later in the fall.

2:25 p.m. Judge to the jury: At this point I’m going to declare that the jury is deadlocked and I am declaring a mistrial. during world war 2, Churchill had to talk to the citizens.I recall him saying, ‘brace for duty’, all of you knew how long the trial was. I want to thank you so much. You performed that duty. Judge wants to the jury to stay so he can talk to them and thank them personally.

RELATED | Mistrial is declared in Lindsay Clancy child killings case after jury deadlocks

2:22 p.m. Defense asks again that the judge conduct a hearing. Judge denies the request and summons the jury into the courtroom.

2:21 p.m. Judge: It’s my understanding the SJC issued their order that relief is denied, and the temporary stay is lifted. It’s my intention to declare a mistrial.
Defense: Is citing federal law that would allow the judge to exercise his discretion to dismiss a juror if he/she refuses to follow the law.

2:15 p.m Parties are going back into the courtroom.

2 p.m. It was Associate Justice Dalila Argaez Wendlandt who heard argument from prosecutor Jennifer Sprague, representing the Commonwealth of Mass., and attorney Dana Goldblatt for the defense. Sprague went over the timeline of communications from the jury and the reasons why the judge elected not to voir dire the holdout juror. Defense argued that the SJC has the discretion to order the trial court to make the inquiry of the juror. Justice Wendlandt said she understood each sides’ argument and will take the matter under advisement. Court is in a holding pattern until the SJC renders its decision.

1:50 p.m. A justice from the Massachusetts Supreme Court just held a short hearing with the prosecution and defense. Attorneys were allowed to argue their reasoning for whether the juror who cannot agree with the rest of the jury should be replaced, or if this case should be declared a mistrial. The justice thanked the lawyers for joining the Zoom call on such short notice and then said she will take their arguments under advisement and make a decision. She gave no indication of when she will rule.

1:13 p.m. A lunch recess has been called. Court now expected to resume at 2 p.m. EST.

12:50 p.m. We are still waiting for court to resume. No word on what’s causing the delay.

12:15 p.m. Team Clancy, which includes Rosemary Scapiccio, who represents Lindsay Clancy in her civil lawsuit, says the team is working on the SJC petition to stay the proceedings. The judge has given them one hour. In the meantime, the trial is in a holding pattern.

MORNING UPDATES:

The following are live updates from the courtroom. Time notes are Eastern Daylight Time. Please forgive typos.

11:32 a.m. Court is in recess until 12 p.m. EDT.

11:30 a.m. The defense is making one last-ditch effort to avoid a mistrial.

11:29 a.m. Defense wants a chance to petition the Supreme Judicial Court for a stay. The judge says he will give the defense one hour.

11:28 a.m. Judge sends for the jury.

11:26 a.m. Defense attorney Reddington asks that the court poll the jury on which charges they are hung on. Prosecutor objects notes that the jury has come back on multiple occasions saying they are deadlocked.
Judge declares a mistrial over the objections of the defense.

11:24 a.m. Judge: question from the jury: It is a heavy heart that we are unable to come to a unanimous decision ad we are unable to.
Prosecutor requests the judge call a mistrial.
Defense opposes.

11:10 a.m. Jurors are being called back to court in the Lindsay Clancy trial. Will there be a verdict? We’ve got live updates from the courtroom coming.

9:30-11 a.m. Jury deliberates for roughly 75-90 minutes.

9:45 a.m. Jurors appeared resigned this morning: no smiles, but all responded to the judge’s greetings and questions amicably. It’s clear from what Reddington said in the motion this morning that the lone hold-out juror is a male.

9:25 a.m. Judge queries the jury.
Judge to the jury: Judge tells jurors that if there are any more notes, not to comment on where they stand. He proceeds to remind them that What I want to do is to remind you – its your duty as jurors to accept my instructions as I give it to you. You must apply the law whether you like it or not.

9:22 a.m. Jurors are in.

9:21 a.m. Judge: I am not glossing over the issue. I have given this a lot of thought. I will ask them to follow my instruction. I will not reiterate the reasonable doubt instruction. I will try to give this more pizazz.

9:18 a.m. Judge: This note does not indicate the juror refuses to deliberate, or indicate he refuses to follow the law, or any indication that the juror cannot physically continue. For those reasons I will not do further inquiry of this juror over the defense objection. It would be proper for me to tell the jurors to accept the law as I give it to them.

9:20 a.m. Defense: I do have an objection – citing constitutional law, we are elevating form over substance. I understand. If you do that I am concerned that it is coming down on the forewoman. I ask you to direct their attention to reasonable doubt. Judge: I did it yesterday.
What do you want me to do? Because I didn’t give it the inflection, I’m not an actor.
Defense: You’re glossing over the issue.

9:16 a.m. Judge: In this case here, I see no need to make inquiry of this particular jury. The note indicates that the juror has acknowledged doubt but refuses to apply it. Reading that note carefully, before I invade the province of the jury. That note does not indicate that the juror refuses to follow the law.

9:15 a.m. Prosecutor: There is no indication that this individual is lying to the court.

9:14 a.m. Defense: You have not one but 2 notes but refuses to apply the law. He has not been truthful, this individual will not allow this jury to return a verdict of ‘not guilty.’

9:13 a.m. Defense: Everyone is entitled to a juror who will apply the facts to the law. If a jury consists and if there is one person who refuses to apply the law for reasons not arising out of the case. If it’s personal to this individual, based on the first question. I have never seen a situation, where a foreperson is courageous enough to raise the matter. This person has indicated doubt but refuse to apply the law. That juror told you that he would be able to apply the law. based on the note, clearly indicates they are 11 to 1, and this person will not apply reasonable doubt to achieve a verdict.

9:10 a.m Prosecutor: Commonwealth asks that the judge instruct the jurors to resume deliberations without further instruction and cites case law. No indication of a lack of impartiality, and no indication of lack of deliberation. What we have here is a disagreement on how to weigh the evidence. Does not think individual voir dire is necessary. Juror should be instructed not to comment on deliberations.

9:08 a.m. Court is in session. Judge: Yesterday a note was sent in by the jury. Judge asks if the lawyers have had a chance to review the note. Judge asks to hear from the Commonwealth first.

ORIGINAL STORY:

The following was written by The Associated Press:

PLYMOUTH, Mass. (AP) — A deadlocked jury returns Friday for the seventh day of deliberations in the Lindsay Clancy trial, a day after the jury’s foreperson told the judge a single juror won’t follow the court’s instructions about reasonable doubt.

The extraordinary disclosure made Thursday in the form of a note delivered to the judge offered the clearest glimpse yet of what may be keeping jurors from reaching a verdict on whether Clancy is criminally responsible for killing her three children. If jurors ultimately cannot agree on a verdict, the judge could declare a mistrial.

Clancy, a 36-year-old former labor and delivery nurse, doesn’t deny strangling her children in the basement of their home in 2023. Her attorney argues that postpartum psychosis led to her actions, while prosecutors say she knew what she was doing.

Postpartum psychosis is estimated to afflict 1 to 2 per 1,000 women after delivery. Experts at the Cleveland Clinic describe it as a mental health emergency affecting someone’s sense of reality. Though most people with postpartum psychosis don’t harm their children, mothers with severe cases may try to do so.

Here’s the latest:

Clancy’s lawyer hopes to debate in open court how the judge will question the juror

Defense attorney Kevin Reddington told reporters after leaving court Thursday that the foreperson’s note identified the holdout juror to the judge.

He said he’s hoping that before the judge questions that juror on Friday, attorneys on both sides will get to argue over the specifics of that inquiry.

Reddington wants that debate out in the open, not in a private sidebar conversation.

A single juror may be preventing a verdict. The judge had them sleep on it

A deadlocked jury returns Friday for the seventh day of deliberations in the Lindsay Clancy trial, a day after the jury’s foreperson informed the judge that a single juror wasn’t following the court’s instructions about reasonable doubt.

The extraordinary disclosure made Thursday in the form of a note delivered to the judge offered the clearest glimpse yet of what may be keeping jurors from reaching a verdict on whether the Massachusetts mother is criminally responsible for killing her three children.

The jury has twice told Judge William Sullivan that it is unable to agree on a verdict. On Thursday, Sullivan brought in each juror individually and questioned them in private. The judge then reread his instructions on reasonable doubt before sending them back to continue deliberating. Soon thereafter, he sent them home.

This story was originally published at 6:30 a.m. Friday and will be updated throughout the day. We are livestreaming in the video player above and will post the latest updates here.