Lindsay Clancy mistrial: defence seeks acquittal as juror reveals holdout's chilling re-enactment
Lindsay Clancy's attorney has filed a motion for acquittal after a mistrial, while a juror describes the lone holdout mimicking the stranglings during deliberations.
Defence moves for acquittal in Lindsay Clancy case after 11-1 jury split
Lindsay Clancy's defence attorney has filed a motion asking a Massachusetts judge to enter a finding of not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility on each murder charge, following a mistrial declared on Friday after the jury split 11-1. According to foxnews.com, a retired Massachusetts judge says the move is routine but unlikely to succeed.
Clancy, 36, faced three counts of first-degree murder in connection with the deaths of her three children — 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson and 8-month-old Callan — who were found strangled at the family's home in Duxbury, Massachusetts, in January 2023. Judge William Sullivan declared the mistrial after jurors were unable to reach a unanimous verdict.
Defence attorney Kevin Reddington filed the motion on Thursday, citing Rule 25 of the Massachusetts Rules of Criminal Procedure, and is seeking a hearing on 29 September. He asked Sullivan to enter a not-guilty ruling on the grounds that the trial evidence was legally insufficient to establish that Clancy was criminally responsible for the killings.
'A big ask': retired judge weighs the motion's prospects
Retired Massachusetts Judge Jack Lu, who has been following the case, said the filing does not hinge on the conduct of the holdout juror.
"The argument by Mr Reddington is not based on the holdout juror — it is that the evidence was insufficient to support a finding that the defendant, Ms Clancy, was criminally responsible," Lu told Fox News Digital.
Lu described such motions as commonplace but rarely successful. "I cannot remember ever seeing one of these motions acted on," he said. "Mr Reddington is asking to wipe the entire case out and that is a big ask."
Reddington himself acknowledged in the filing that a hung jury does not terminate jeopardy and that a mistrial "ordinarily permits retrial." Nevertheless, he argued that 11 of the 12 jurors had applied the reasonable-doubt standard and concluded that prosecutors had not proven criminal responsibility. The holdout, the filing contends, allegedly ignored his own doubts and insisted on a guilty verdict without grounding that position in the evidence.
Reddington targets prosecution witnesses
In the filing, Reddington directed particular criticism at the Commonwealth's rebuttal expert witnesses. "Taken at their strongest, these show that Ms Clancy could perform familiar tasks and act in sequence," he wrote. "They do not show that she could appreciate wrongfulness or conform her conduct to the law. That is the element. Nothing else counts."
He argued that prosecutors effectively undermined their own case when their forensic experts agreed that Clancy had a serious mental illness on the day she strangled her children. Reddington pointed to treating clinicians who testified that Clancy had presented with postpartum depression and anxiety in the weeks before 24 January, and noted that none had observed psychosis at those appointments.
"Depression and anxiety of the severity that led to psychiatric admission are themselves a mental disease or defect," he wrote. "No rational jury could find beyond a reasonable doubt that she had no mental disease or defect when the Commonwealth's own proof established that she did."
Lu explained the legal threshold involved: "This translates to the defendant moving for a court-ordered not guilty, claiming that the defendant is entitled to a not guilty as a matter of law." In his years on the bench, he said, he could not recall ever granting such a motion.
Juror describes holdout mimicking stranglings in deliberation room
Separate accounts from fellow jurors have shed new light on what took place inside the jury room. Nick Dargie, 25, told ABC News that the lone holdout at one point attempted to physically demonstrate the way Clancy had allegedly killed her children, using an exercise band and an empty water bottle.
"He took the exercise band out of the bag, grabbed an empty water bottle and tied the band around the water bottle and pulled it," Dargie said. "I was just so shocked that he did that."
Dargie said the display made no sense to the other jurors. "We're not in here to play detective or it's not a game of Clue — this is serious," he said. He added that he asked the holdout juror to explain his reasoning, but received no substantive response.
"There was several times I would ask him to show us evidence or describe a witness testimony that helped to prove what he was saying, and he couldn't," Dargie said. "There wasn't a single piece of evidence or witness testimony that he used to prove why he was thinking the way he was, which is why we ultimately sent in that note."
That note, sent by the jury foreperson, reported that one juror was refusing to follow the court's instructions — a development that preceded Sullivan's decision to declare the mistrial.
Retrial still on the table
With the mistrial formally on the record, prosecutors retain the right to bring Clancy to trial again. Reddington's motion for acquittal represents the defence's primary legal avenue to prevent a second proceeding, though Lu's assessment — that such motions are almost never granted — suggests the case is likely heading back to court.
No date for a retrial has been announced. The 29 September hearing on Reddington's motion will be the next formal step in the proceedings.
Source: Google News MT