Posted on 09/09/2026 7:53:28 AM PDT by Az Joe
A juror who voted to acquit Lindsay Clancy sensationally admitted that she changed her vote after being swayed during hostile deliberations with 'big personalities' in the room.
The anonymous juror, who is the fourth to come forward following the murder trial, told CBS Boston that she had not kept up with the high-profile case before being summoned to court in Massachusetts.
She said her initial stance was to convict Clancy - and despite eventually voting to acquit the killer mother, the juror admitted she 'maybe still believes' Clancy should go to prison.
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
what a trainwreck
So as suspected, there were pink-clad activists in the jury room. Massachusetts is chock full of such types who care nothing about justice. Only ideology matters.
Trash!
There ought to be a pre-trial psych evaluation for all jurors.
They might be sane but stupid.
Godless people deceived by a Godless attorney.
There were at least two jurors who wore pink multiple times to jury duty.
One wonders if they were the ones bullying other jurors to acquit?
One also wonders why the judge overlooked such obvious jury contamination? Would he allow those in the courtroom to wear other clothing indicating support for Clancy?
Of course she’s guilty.
“she changed her vote after being swayed during hostile deliberations with big personalities in the room.”
WTF is this mindless moron doing on a jury?
R.I.P. innocent children.
In sum, a couple woke Karens in the jury bullied everyone else into silence, and one man stood up to it.
Call Bull...Michael Weatherly...
One thing I keep expecting people to pick up on and mention: jurors are to use common sense and their real life experiences, but they are NOT to act as expert witnesses and interpret the evidence and spread those “interpretations” and “opinions” to other jurors—that’s where the prosecution and defense (and perhaps Judge) were to have had experts come in and explain things and give their opinions to the jury. If those “2 nurses” on the jury were doing this, interpreting lab tests and the presence or significance of drugs and drug levels (mentioned in another story and by the recorded interview of the foreperson), they violated their judge instructions and juror oath they took and they tainted the jury decision and probably caused a mistrial regardless. This is my understanding. Lawyers?
“A juror who voted to acquit Lindsay Clancy sensationally admitted that she changed her vote after being swayed during hostile deliberations with ‘big personalities’ in the room.”
###############
It’s not much of a stretch to say that women tend to follow the consensus of what other women think, particularly the leaders. Feelings-oriented.
Men much less so. Facts-oriented.
These Clancy jurors are doing for women what police body cams did for blacks.
So as I understand it; 11 jurors voted to acquit, nine women and two men, one man held out till hung jury. Of the nine women, three went on some sort of media criticizing the guy who held out. Now how many others have gone public defending the one guy? At least one woman, or is it two?
How is this not a psyops? Crazy ass juror women wearing pink during the hearing, the attorney’s antics, two large unattractive women prosecutors, her attorney asking Trump for a pardon. They will not let this die and they’re desperately trying to make Trump take a solid stance. It’s men vs women. For the midterms.
“ There ought to be a pre-trial psych evaluation for all jurors.”
Oh. I’m sure there was and this is what was desired
“She described herself as the ‘perfect juror’ for Clancy’s trial, because she does not have children of her own to bias her views”
The worst juror possible. A woman who isn’t a mother is not a peer. The next jury needs to be fathers and grandmothers only. And yet despite being a non birthing person, she still thought Clancy was guilty. Absolute waste of life.
Coming soon a full on beat down in the jury room when one or more holdouts won’t acquit. The Lefts whole program is to destroy every single institution the West has built and trial by jury is one of those institutions that the left hates.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.