PLYMOUTH, Mass. — As jurors prepare to return for a fifth day of deliberations in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial, one legal expert says the panel’s decision to continue working through the case could signal that meaningful discussions are still taking place behind closed doors.
The jury spent another full day deliberating Tuesday after informing Plymouth Superior Court Judge William Sullivan in the morning that it was struggling to reach a unanimous verdict.
The note read: “After many hours of deliberation, we are unable to come to a unanimous decision.”
Rather than declaring a mistrial or taking additional action, Sullivan told jurors to continue their discussions, citing the case’s complexity, which featured more than 80 witnesses and over 300 exhibits during weeks of testimony.
Although jurors left court Tuesday afternoon without reaching a verdict, they also did not send any additional notes indicating they remained at a complete impasse.
Boston 25 News legal analyst Elyse Hershon said that may be significant.
“There are still very in-depth conversations taking place,” Hershon said. “They’re not in agreement yet, but they’re willing to keep working.”
What does the jury’s silence mean?
According to Hershon, it’s impossible to know how divided jurors may be or which charges they are discussing.
“We don’t know if they’re not in agreement on one of the five possible outcomes or all five,” she explained. “We don’t know if it’s 11 to 1. We don’t know what they’re disagreeing on. We don’t know how many are on each side.”
Still, the fact that jurors continued deliberating throughout Tuesday without sending another deadlock note suggests they have not completely given up on reaching a verdict.
“They might not be at a full impasse yet,” Hershon said. “They might still be having conversations and people are still being open-minded to each other. That’s what you want. You want them to take it seriously and listen to each other.”
Balancing emotion and evidence
Jurors are tasked with evaluating the facts of the case and applying the law as instructed by the judge, a challenging assignment in a case involving the deaths of three young children.
Clancy is charged with murdering her children, Cora, Dawson, and Callan Clancy, in January 2023.
Prosecutors argue the Duxbury mother knowingly killed her children during a failed suicide attempt and should be held criminally responsible.
Defense attorneys contend Clancy was suffering from severe postpartum psychosis and was unable to appreciate the nature of her actions.
Hershon noted that while jurors are expected to set aside emotion during deliberations, doing so can be difficult given the allegations.
“How do you put your emotions aside, especially when the case is so horrific and so gruesome?” she said.
The defense has repeatedly acknowledged the tragedy of the case while arguing that jurors must focus on Clancy’s mental state at the time of the killings and evaluate the competing expert testimony presented during the trial.
Could there be a retrial?
Questions have also emerged about what could happen if jurors ultimately cannot reach a verdict.
Hershon said it is still too early to speculate about a mistrial or retrial because deliberations remain ongoing.
Defense attorney Kevin Reddington told reporters this week that he believes prosecutors would pursue another trial if the current jury cannot reach a unanimous decision.
For now, however, all attention remains on the jury room.
Jurors are expected to resume deliberations Wednesday morning at Plymouth Superior Court, where they will continue working toward a verdict in one of Massachusetts’ most closely watched criminal cases.
Download the FREE Boston 25 News app for breaking news alerts.
Follow Boston 25 News on Facebook and Twitter. | Watch Boston 25 News NOW