Lindsay Clancy has returned to court in Massachusetts seeking the dismissal of first-degree murder charges over the deaths of her three young children, after a jury was unable to reach a verdict at her trial.
Her lawyers told Judge William Sullivan that holding a retrial would breach her constitutional rights. Prosecutors said they intend to seek a new trial if the case proceeds, although they have not decided whether to pursue the same charges.
Clancy, 36, is accused of strangling her children with exercise bands at the family home in Duxbury, a suburb of Boston, in 2023. She then attempted to take her own life by cutting herself with a knife and was paralysed after jumping from a second-floor window.
At Monday’s hearing, defence lawyer Martin G Weinberg argued that the judge should have investigated concerns raised by the jury foreperson about a juror allegedly failing to follow the rules of deliberation.
Weinberg said further questioning might have provided grounds to remove the juror, identified as Michael Desronvil, and allow deliberations to continue. Judge Sullivan instead spoke to each juror, reminded them of their responsibilities and explained the meaning of reasonable doubt before asking whether they could apply the law to the case. All said they could.
The defence argued that a juror’s assurance that he could follow the law could not be accepted without further scrutiny. Weinberg said the foreperson should also have been questioned separately about what was taking place during deliberations.
Assistant district attorney Jennifer Sprague rejected the argument, saying there was no evidence that the juror’s position resulted from personal bias or an inability to deliberate rather than a different view of the evidence.
“It is clear from the record this juror did not refuse to deliberate,” Sprague said. “He refused to agree.”
Defence lawyer Kevin Reddington also accused the holdout juror of using a mobile phone to research terms connected with the case and questioned whether he had been truthful during jury selection.
Clancy has not disputed killing her children. Her lawyers have argued that she was suffering from postpartum psychosis and could not control her actions, while prosecutors have acknowledged her mental health problems but said she acted deliberately and understood that what she was doing was wrong.
Judge Sullivan did not immediately rule on the request to dismiss the charges. He scheduled a further hearing for November 16 and indicated that a retrial could begin in March.
The court is also expected to consider Massachusetts’s request for a gag order preventing lawyers and their supporters from making media statements likely to materially prejudice the criminal proceedings.
