The identities of the jurors who decided Lindsay Clancy’s fate will remain shielded from the public for two weeks as intense attention turns toward the man her attorney blames for causing the mistrial. Superior Court Judge William F. Sullivan ordered the jury list impounded for 14 days, citing concerns about juror safety following the emotionally charged murder trial. The order comes amid growing public reaction to defense attorney Kevin Reddington’s claim that 11 jurors favored acquitting Clancy while one man refused to join them.
5Sullivan issued the impoundment order after the jury failed to reach a unanimous decision following seven days and more than 38 hours of deliberations. The judge cited the court system’s responsibility to protect jurors and ordered the names of those selected for the trial to remain confidential.
“Accordingly, the Court orders that the list identifying the names of empaneled jurors in this trial be impounded. This Order shall not preclude any juror from identifying himself or herself and/or from speaking to the public about his or her jury service,” the order stated, per News Nation Now. “This Order shall expire fourteen days from the date of issuance, unless otherwise ordered by the Court, for good cause shown, pursuant to Rule 3(b) of the Uniform Rules of Impoundment Procedure.”
The restriction therefore applies to the official court list. It does not prevent individual jurors from voluntarily identifying themselves or discussing their experience.
Juror Protection Follows Intense Public Reaction
5The temporary protection comes as the unidentified holdout juror faces intense scrutiny from Clancy’s supporters and her defense attorney.
Clancy’s case attracted national attention and sparked a deeply divided debate over postpartum mental health and criminal responsibility. The attention intensified after Reddington publicly identified the alleged holdout as a man.
The jury consisted of nine women and three men. Reddington claimed that 11 members had been prepared to acquit Clancy before the panel became hopelessly deadlocked. If his account is accurate, all nine women on the jury would have supported acquittal.
The impoundment order prevents the public from using court records to identify any of the jurors during the 14-day period.
Lindsay Clancy’s Lawyer Blames One Man For Mistrial
5The conflict became public after the jury foreperson sent Sullivan a note claiming that one juror was not following the court’s instructions concerning reasonable doubt. Reddington asked Sullivan to remove the panelist, but the judge rejected the request. Sullivan said the note did not establish that the juror had refused to follow the law.
After the mistrial, Reddington offered a much harsher assessment outside the courthouse. “[Clancy] was robbed by this man,” Reddington said, further adding that he hopes the juror can “sleep at night.”
The defense attorney claimed the holdout had also deprived the remaining panel members of a resolution after weeks of testimony. “They know they were robbed by one man, for whatever his agenda was, who stole seven weeks of the life of these other jurors that were so attentive, so beautiful, so wonderful,” he claimed.
Judge Refused To Remove The Alleged Holdout
5Sullivan declined to intervene in the internal disagreement after questioning whether the information before him justified removing a deliberating juror. The judge previously explained that he could not side with one portion of the jury over another simply because they disagreed over the evidence or the law.
Clancy’s defense later pursued an emergency appeal in an attempt to prevent the mistrial, but the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court denied the request.
When the jurors returned to the courtroom Friday, Sullivan formally declared the panel deadlocked. “It is with heavy heart we are still unable to come to a decision and will not be able to,” the jury told the judge in its final note.
Lindsay Clancy Could Still Face Another Trial
5Clancy is charged with killing her three children, Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months, inside their Duxbury, Massachusetts, home in January 2023. She does not dispute killing the children. Clancy’s attorneys maintained that postpartum psychosis left her unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions, while prosecutors argued that she knew right from wrong and intentionally killed her children.
Prosecutors can pursue another trial, consider a plea agreement or decide not to proceed. Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz has not yet announced which path his office will take.
A hearing is scheduled for September 29, when the court could address the defense’s next motions and the possibility of a retrial.
