Lindsay Clancy juror says holdout ‘admitted he had reasonable doubt’
A mistrial was declared in the Lindsay Clancy murder case after a lone juror refused to convict despite admitting he had reasonable doubt. The case centers on whether the mother was suffering from postpartum psychosis at the time of the killings.
Why it matters
The case raises significant legal and social questions regarding the intersection of severe mental health crises and criminal responsibility in the justice system.
Three jurors in Lindsay Clancy's triple-murder trial have suggested in an exclusive interview with NBC10 Boston that the panel was leaning toward finding the Massachusetts mother not guilty by lack of criminal responsibility, but a single male juror prevented the panel from reaching a verdict - even after he "admitted he had reasonable doubt."
"He admitted he had reasonable doubt, and I started filling out the forms, I was so excited," the jury's foreperson Roni Carlson told NBC10's Sue O'Connell in an interview alongside two other female jurors. "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.'"
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in