Prosecutors cite jury deadlock notes in bid to keep Lindsay Clancy murder case alive
Court filings show the jury foreperson sent six notes documenting a deadlock before a mistrial was declared, and prosecutors are asking the judge to deny the defendant's motion to dismiss the charges.
New court documents reveal that the foreperson of the jury in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial sent six separate notes documenting the panel's inability to reach a unanimous verdict before a mistrial was declared. The notes, dated between August 28 and September 4, indicate repeated impasses and a dispute involving a single holdout juror identified as Michael Desronvil.
On August 28, jurors requested to view evidence, including pill bottles and a knife used in a suicide attempt. By September 2, the first note stated, “After many hours of deliberation, we are unable to come to a unanimous verdict.” A similar note followed the next day after Judge William Sullivan urged the jury to continue deliberations.
On September 3, the foreperson reported that a juror could not follow the instruction regarding reasonable doubt, prompting the judge to question each juror individually. An hour later, another note indicated that the holdout juror acknowledged doubt but refused to apply it to the verdict, preventing a unanimous decision.
The final note, sent on September 4, read, “With a heavy heart that we report that we are unable to come to a unanimous decision and will not be able to.”
Following the mistrial, prosecutors filed a motion arguing that the deadlocked jury constituted a manifest necessity and that the defendant’s request to dismiss the charges should be denied. Prosecutor Jennifer Sprague wrote that the Commonwealth should be allowed to continue pursuing justice for the three children.
Defense attorney Kevin Reddington had asked the jury to find Clancy not criminally responsible, citing severe postpartum psychosis. He also sought a hearing to examine the holdout juror’s conduct, but Judge Sullivan denied the request. The defense later argued that juror comments in the press amounted to an “unannounced verdict,” which they claimed should bar a retrial under double-jeopardy principles.
No new trial date has been set, and prosecutors have not confirmed whether the same first-degree murder charges will be pursued. Clancy is scheduled to appear in court on November 2.