Three Lindsay Clancy Jurors Speak Out — and, Yep, They're Every Bit As Awful As You Feared

Sep 08, 2026 6:45 PM
Advertisement
Three Lindsay Clancy Jurors Speak Out — and, Yep, They're Every Bit As Awful As You Feared
Greg Derr/The Patriot Ledger via AP, Pool

Three female jurors in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial, including the foreperson, are speaking out for the first time about the deliberations that ended in an 11-1 deadlock. After telling the presiding judge three times that they couldn't come to a unanimous decision, he ultimately declared a mistrial on Friday.

Advertisement

The three unnamed women spoke of their frustrations with the lone male juror who refused to agree with the other eleven on acquitting Clancy (finding her not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility (i.e., insanity)). Clancy admitted to killing her three young children – 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson, and 8-month-old Callan – in January 2023, but claimed she was profoundly mentally ill at the time. 

It was revealed by the Boston reporter who interviewed the women that the jury, which was made up of nine women and three men, was stacked with teachers and nurses, and the 11 who voted to acquit were miffed that the holdout "had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children."

Juror number two said of the man, "He, I think, got up to the cart [with the exhibits] once and then went back to his seat. He would not interact with us and try to understand. We read to him the definition of reasonable doubt."

"He said one day, 'Why don't we have the judge read it again?' and we were like, 'No, we have it in front of us,'" she revealed. 

Advertisement

The jury foreperson echoed those frustrations, saying that because he had voiced "reasonable doubt," she was "so excited." 

"He had reasonable doubt. He admitted he had reasonable doubt," she said. "I started filling out the forms, I was so excited. There were three forms I had to fill out, and then he said, 'But I'm still not going to say she's not guilty.'"

Here's the video of the three women speaking with the reporter:

And here's the transcript of the comments made by the foreperson:

He had reasonable doubt. He admitted he had reasonable doubt after we watched that video of the interview. I think that's when it was.

He admitted he had reasonable doubt, and I started filling out the forms. I was so excited. I actually—there were three forms I had to fill out, and I started filling them out. I wrote my signature on each one.

And then he said, “But I'm still not going to say that she's not guilty by reason of insanity.”

At the heart of the matter seems to be whether the holdout disagreed with the murder charge altogether or the decision by the other jurors to acquit Clancy, which are profoundly different conclusions. He has yet to speak publicly, possibly fearing retribution from the rabidly pro-Clancy crowd that gathered daily outside the Plymouth, MA, courthouse wearing pink shirts and hoping to catch a glimpse of the defendant. 

Advertisement

The comments by the female jurors come after Clancy's defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, appeared Tuesday on "Good Morning America" (GMA) and implored President Trump to intervene and pardon his client – an option not open to the president because she isn't facing federal charges. 

Reddington, too, has had harsh words for the male juror, previously saying his client had been "robbed" of a satisfactory trial outcome – stating snarkily, "I hope that guy can sleep well at night" – and told GMA he was "bothered" that the male juror "refused to apply the law."

Editor's Note: Do you enjoy RedState's conservative reporting that takes on the radical Left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.

Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.

VIP

Join the Conversation

VIP members get the ability to comment on articles.

Recommended

Trending on RedState Videos