Juror Refuses to Acquit Lindsay Clancy Despite Expressing Reasonable Doubt, Foreperson Says

A juror in the trial of Lindsay Clancy, the Massachusetts mother charged with killing her three children, refused to vote for acquittal despite stating she had reasonable doubt about the verdict, according to the jury’s foreperson. The foreperson, Roni Carlson, told NBC 10 Boston that the holdout juror admitted doubt but said, "I’m still not going to say that she’s not guilty by reason of insanity," and would not change his position.

Carlson, a retired elementary school teacher, said the juror’s refusal prevented the jury from reaching a unanimous decision, prompting judge William Sullivan to declare a mistrial. Another juror, Paula Devlin, described the holdout juror as "very arrogant" and said he did not consider the arguments presented.

Clancy is accused of strangling her three children in January 2023 and then attempting suicide by jumping from a bedroom window, which left her paralyzed. Prosecutors maintained that the killings were intentional, while the defense argued that Clancy suffered a psychotic break linked to untreated postpartum depression and overmedication. The jurors noted evidence such as journals and testimony from family members that portrayed Clancy as a loving mother.

Clancy remains detained at a psychiatric facility, and a status hearing is scheduled for September 29. Prosecutors have not indicated whether they will pursue a new trial.