Lindsay Clancy judge declares mistrial — but lawyer granted Hail Mary bid to appeal

nypost.com ^ | Sep. 4, 2026

[V_TWIN]

PLYMOUTH, Mass. – A judge declared a mistrial in Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial Friday on the seventh day of deliberations — but gave her defiant lawyer one hour to file an emergency appeal against the ruling.

The 12-person jury – made up of nine women and three men – told Judge William Sullivan that they could not agree on whether to convict Clancy, 36, of three counts of first-degree murder.

---

TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: clancy; mistrial; trial

[lastchance]

It was more likely he understood it perfectly well. Arriving at reasonable doubt is not groupthink. It is an act of a reasonable person’s conscience based on the facts set before him.

[Salvavida]

HODOR saved the day. It will be retried with a better prosecution team.

[No.6]

… if your goal was to allow dunderheads to decide people’s lives, getting dismissed summarily is a good way to achieve that.

[ronniesgal]

really who has not heard about this? they will not be able to get an impartial jury.

[Recovering_Democrat]

I always thought it was the Roger Staubach pass.

From the Pro Football Hall of Fame web site interview with Staubach:

“...’It was 14-10 at the time and time was running out. When I threw the ball to Pearson, I kind of under-threw it. The term “Hail Mary” was developed because after the game, I told the press I closed my eyes and said a “Hail Mary.”’

https://www.profootballhof.com/news/chat-transcript-with-roger-staubach

[stanne]

“May I ask is you are American, because by this comment it appears not. This is in reference to a desperation throw in the last seconds of an American football game”

The NFL uses it in reference to the Mother of God.

Period

[dforest]

Did you notice? Obviously from the start they didn’t have an impartial trial, and the jury was also not impartial.

Many mistakes, planned and unplanned made this trial a joke.

Blame Massachusets, the judge, the defense, the jury foreperson, and the outright stupidity of their laws regarding cases like this.

Apparently, it took one brave fella to set people’s sights on the fact that a case like this, according to Massastupid law, does not need a jury because if you bring a case when the defense uses insanity charges, it is decided that if you follow their law, according to Redfield, the outcome is that you are not following the law unless you dismiss all the evidence of planning and guilt presented by the prosecution.

All you can do is decide not guilty in order to follow the law..

[Political Junkie Too]

The defense is going to file an appeal that the hung juror should be replaced and deliberations should continue. The basis is the belief by the defense that the juror was unwilling to follow the Judge’s instructions.

I agree with you, with one caveat. The claim that he juror was not following the judge's instructions was a characterization by some of of the other jurors and the defense attorney. I belive the judge clarified this morning that the juror in question declared that he was following the instructions and that this was his deeply-held moral conviction.

That said, the solution can never be to replace the holdout juror. That's why we have twelve people and not one.

If a hold-out juror can be replaced with a more compliant one, then what is the point of having a trial if we can just replace jurors during deliberations unitl we get one that votes the way we want?

-PJ

[mdmathis6]

I have reasonable doubt concerning her innocence so I vote guilty!

[NorthWoody]

If I were the one holding out for a guilty verdict, my jaw would have dropped at the first vote, when I found out that I was the only sane person in the room.

After that, I would have had so much contempt and disgust for the other jurors, I would have requested to take my meals separately from them.

Also, the jury should have been sequestered. But if it truly was 11-1 for acquittal, that may not have made a difference.

[Nateman]

My goal was simply to be honest.

[Vermont Lt]

I guess the Justice agreed with you. And she agreed really quickly. LOL

[KingofZion]

God put one angel on the jury to bring justice to those children and the angel was strong like Gabriel.

The sooner this woman is executed the sooner justice will be done.

[dforest]

Get a load of this. This is the mentality of the media and those pink loonies. The DA responds:

https://x.com/mattvanswol/status/2095956074897576273

[murron]

I believe the judge announced that it was only one.

[Midwesterner53]

If the jury was 11-1 for acquital, we owe a deep gratitude to the brave hold out who put those children ahead of everyone screaming for a not guilty verdict and absolutely approving of the murders.

[Jim Noble]

Move the trial to Oklahoma and deliberations will last 15 minutes. GUILTY.

I presume you heard all the evidence that the jury heard, both opening and closing statements by the Commonwealth and the defense, and were instructed in the law by the judge?

Oklahoma is still in the United States, right?

[Alas Babylon!]

I knew it had to come from someone before Flutie... Thanks for teaching me!

[Campion]

I think it was 11-1 for not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity, which isn’t exactly “not guilty”; it typically results in a long period of confinement in a facility for the criminally insane.

[Yolanda]

11 jurors in the Lindsay Casey trial had zero regard for the 3 young children who were murdered by their mother. Instead they went with the bizarro defense theory that the medical physicians who prescribed mind altering drugs were responsible for LIndsay Clancy strangling her 3 children. Also The defense lawyer said Lindsay heard voices instructing her to kill her children. These voices only appeared when she proceeded to strangle each child , one after the other with exercise bands.
Fortunately there was one person, a sane male juror who disagreed with the majority and voted that Lindsay Clancy was guilty of murder.
After the mistrial was declared, Lindsay Clancy’s lawyer spoke to the press gaggle outside the courtroom. He put a bullseye on the one juror who would not be bullied into acquitting the murderer. If any harm comes to this juror, Lindsay Clansy’s lawyer should be on the hook for incitement.