Lindsay Clancy murder trial jury leaves without verdict, defense attorney says juror "spurned the instructions" (Triple Baby Killer)

CBS News Boston ^ | 3 Sep 2026 | Mike Toole, Matt Schooley & Kristina Rex

[PghBaldy]

A sixth day of jury deliberations in Lindsay Clancy's Massachusetts murder trial ended Thursday without a verdict. Following an animated sidebar late in the day, defense attorney Kevin Reddington unsuccessfully asked for Judge William Sullivan to remove a juror because he claimed they "spurned the instructions" of the court

[Clutch Martin]

Can a mistrial be declared - holding the defendant without bond until the new trail is arranged?

[Alberta's Child]

I’m not even sure what you’re talking about. Almost everyone posting on this subject seems to be operating under the assumption that the jury is being asked to decide a single set of three murder counts here. All I did was point out that the jury actually has multiple options here and could very well be disputing which charges are applicable.

[muir_redwoods]

They are instructions, not orders. Jurors are free to disregard any instructions so long as they don’t violate the law. Its biggest example is called jury nullification and judges and lawyers hate it. Too bad.

[flamberge]

All I did was point out that the jury actually has multiple options here and could very well be disputing which charges are applicable.

Your point is valid. It does not explain or justify the behavior of the jury in my mind.

I do not believe that it takes six days for a jury to compromise on a selection of charges ranging from premeditated murder to involuntary manslaughter.

I have served on a conflicted jury. The foreman did not go running to the judge with a complaint about the holdout. The matter was resolved in deliberations.

This jury appears to be deadlocked with public animosity between jurors and visible sympathy for the defendant (as shown by public appearances of some jurors wearing pink shirts). This looks to me like a case of juror nullification of laws against homicide.

Not something I find tolerable.

Time to declare a mistrial, due frankly to gross juror misconduct, and move on to the next available step in the judicial process. If there is one.

[Seruzawa]

As if mental health professionals aren’t a bunch of charlatans.

[Alberta's Child]

You might be right about what is going on among the jurors. I haven’t assumed anything, but it’s clear this case is an unusual one just based on the high level of public exposure.

[Does so]

Freeing her would provoke dozens ofinfanticide nationwide.

A Maine mother killed her three kids, was found guilty, husband pleaded for her release—which was granted. Bought a new house, had three kids. Guess what happened next?

[AFB-XYZ]

The media suggesting? How do we know that it isn’t 11 jurors for conviction, and the holdout is for acquittal?

I realize that may sound like a dumb question, but I can’t seem to find anything concrete online. Just a bunch of assumptions by a bunch of people.

[ek_hornbeck]

Treatment of women with post partum depression is an issue

Issue or not, it shouldn't be a get out of jail card for anybody. People with depression still know that murder is illegal - that's the criterion for criminal responsibility. Depression doesn't turn people into hallucinating lunatics with no grasp of reality.

[ek_hornbeck]

Now a feminist raised contingent of women figure sticking up for any guilty woman is fair after the jobs denied to qualified women in the past and so on due to male sexism back then.

This is precisely the feminist mindset. It mirrors the attitude that lets black murderers, rapists and armed robbers walk free - i.e. black violent criminals are just victims of "institutional racism", while any female criminal, no matter how depraved, is allegedly a victim of "institutional patriarchy". Leftists truly inhabit an alternative reality.