Following six days of deadlock in Plymouth, Massachusetts, the jury in the Lindsay Clancy trial failed to reach a verdict Thursday, September 3, 2026. The defense unsuccessfully sought to remove a juror after the foreperson reported a holdout refused to follow instructions on reasonable doubt.
Defense Demands Juror Removal Amid Jury Deadlock
The murder trial of Lindsay Clancy took an unexpected turn on Thursday afternoon when a note from the jury foreperson revealed intense internal conflict. The panel, consisting of nine women and three men, had already sent two deadlock notices to Massachusetts Superior Court Judge William Sullivan earlier in the week. However, Thursday’s communication alleged that a single holdout juror was refusing to follow the court’s legal instructions regarding reasonable doubt.
Defense attorney Kevin Reddington reacted sharply to the disclosure. He argued that Judge Sullivan’s initial response of addressing the jury with general instructions was insufficient to address a juror who had allegedly spurned the instructions of the court.
Kevin Reddington, Defense Attorney, stated that the court had received an instruction from the foreperson of that jury which had been working for a week now, stating that there was one juror who refused to listen to the law that had been provided regarding reasonable doubt, and he respectfully suggested that the soft instruction given to them at the sidebar asking if they could listen to the law as instructed did not focus on the core issue.
Reddington formally requested that the disputed juror be dismissed from the 12-person panel and replaced with an alternate. He warned that allowing the holdout to remain could force an unwarranted mistrial.
Kevin Reddington, Defense Attorney, added that if they came back there in a half-hour with a mistrial because of a juror who had just spurned the instructions of the court, it would be a shame — a real shame.
Judge Sullivan Denies Dismissal Request and Prosecutors Oppose Intervention
Judge Sullivan ultimately rejected the defense motion to remove the juror. The judge noted that each juror had previously sworn to follow the court’s instructions and confirmed individually that they could continue to do so.
Judge William Sullivan, Massachusetts Superior Court, noted that he did not feel it was proper to side with one side or the other of the deliberations, nor did he feel it was appropriate to say he agreed with one juror or eleven, explaining that at that point he had asked if they were able to follow instructions, noting they had sworn earlier that they could and had stated at that point that they still could.
Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Sprague supported the court’s cautious stance, arguing that judges cannot police the internal dynamics or interpretive disagreements of a deliberating panel.
Jennifer Sprague, Assistant District Attorney, maintained that there was no way to determine what the deliberations entailed, who was correct, or who was incorrect, and asserted that they should not attempt to do so.
Following the legal arguments, Judge Sullivan instructed the jury to return to the deliberation room. After approximately 30 more minutes of discussion without reaching a verdict, the judge sent the deadlocked jurors home for the day shortly after 4 p.m. ET, ordering them to return Friday morning.
The Underlying Case and Potential Mistrial Stakes
Clancy admits that she strangled her three young children—Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and eight-month-old Callan—on January 24, 2023, before jumping from a bedroom window in a suicide attempt that left her paralyzed from the waist down. Her defense team argues she was suffering from severe, unmanaged postpartum psychosis and experienced auditory hallucinations compelling her to commit the acts. Prosecutors contend she was not psychotic and planned the killings after sending her husband out on errands.
If the panel returns unable to reach a unanimous decision, Judge Sullivan will likely face a situation where he must declare a mistrial. While Reddington stated outside the courthouse that he would be prepared to retry the case as early as next week, he maintained that he ultimately hopes the current jury can reach a resolution.
