Lindsay Clancy back in court as retrial for triple child murder set for March 2027
A Massachusetts judge indicated he would like a retrial of Lindsay Clancy to begin in March 2027. Clancy pleaded not guilty in the 2023 deaths of her three children.
Clancy retrial eyed for March 2027 as judge weighs dismissal motion
A Massachusetts judge said on Monday he would like a retrial of Lindsay Clancy to begin in March 2027, according to abc7ny.com, though he stopped short of setting a firm date. Clancy, who pleaded not guilty in the deaths of her three children in 2023, appeared in court for a hearing that could determine the future of her triple murder case.
Judge William Sullivan indicated he wants to rule on a series of pending motions before committing to a definitive trial date. He said he hopes to resolve those motions by a 16 November conference.
"I'm thinking sometime in March if we can do that, or earlier if possible. But I think March is probably realistic," Sullivan said.
Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Sprague declined to outline how prosecutors plan to approach the case in detail, but confirmed a retrial is the direction. "This would be a retrial," Sprague told the court. "As to what that looks like will depend. We're not at that point yet."
Motion to dismiss
Clancy's legal team asked Sullivan to dismiss the case entirely, arguing the judge failed to fully investigate whether the holdout juror who forced a mistrial had properly followed the court's instructions. Attorney Martin Weinberg contended that retrying Clancy would violate her right against double jeopardy.
Weinberg argued that another trial would subject Clancy "to live with a continuing state of anxiety and insecurity … knowing about the stakes in living through the first trial." He added that notes sent to the court concerning the holdout juror's behaviour "goes to the heart of what American criminal justice gives to defendants."
"We contend based on these juror notes, and again respectfully, that they do not unambiguously support the proposition that all 12 jurors were deliberating and following your Honor's instructions," Weinberg said.
Sullivan told the defence he "understands" the argument and does not take it personally, but took the motion under advisement rather than ruling from the bench.
Sprague countered that Sullivan had properly asked each juror to confirm they were following the court's instructions, without probing the substance of deliberations. "It is clear from the record that this juror did not refuse to deliberate. He refused to agree," she said. "It's not for the trial judge to choose sides in a deadlock jury and decide."
Heated exchange over holdout juror
The hearing grew tense when defence attorney Kevin Reddington named the holdout juror, who has since spoken publicly about his experience. Sullivan immediately intervened.
"I'm going to stop you right there," the judge said.
"No, you're not going to stop me," Reddington replied.
Reddington argued he should be permitted to name the juror because the identity was already publicly available online. Sullivan disagreed. "That's through the internet; that's through other people. There is no need, here in this courtroom, to use that," he said.
The holdout juror — who subsequently identified himself as Michael Péguy Desronvil — stated in post-trial interviews that he had no doubts about Clancy's guilt.
The exchange arose during arguments over a request by the defence to access court and phone records related to the holdout juror. Prosecutors argued the motion should be denied in its entirety. The court also heard arguments on a prosecution request for a gag order on the case.
Defence pushes for spring trial with Sullivan
Reddington said he is in favour of a spring trial and wants the case heard by Sullivan, who is approaching mandatory retirement.
"I am not going to have this woman sit incarcerated for the next year or two or three. I want a trial, and I want it with you, and I want it this spring," Reddington told the court.
Sullivan said he hopes to have rulings on the three pending motions — the dismissal motion, the gag order request, and the records access request — in place before the 16 November conference.
Source: Google News MT — Crime (en)