After weeks of testimony and seven days of tense jury deliberations, the Lindsay Clancy murder trial ended without a verdict . Now, three jurors are speaking out for the first time, revealing what happened inside the jury room, including the disagreements that ultimately led to a mistrial.
The jurors have been identified as Kelly, a retired chef; Ronnie, a fifth grade special needs teacher; and Paula, who worked for government contractors. They also praised her defense lawyer, Kevin Reddington. The jurors were more critical of the prosecutors, saying they felt the prosecution showed no compassion.
The jurors said they believed Clancy was not criminally responsible for killing her children. One juror said she would hire him herself if she ever needed a lawyer, as per TMZ. Three jurors from Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial spoke to NBC10 Boston’s Sue O’Connell on Tuesday, in an interview that lasted over an hour.
Why the jury could not reach a verdict
Ronnie, the jury’s foreperson, was the juror who wrote a note to the judge raising concerns about another juror’s ability to reach a verdict while accepting the definition of reasonable doubt, as per NBC News. And we were like, ‘No, we have it in front of us. We don’t need that,’ and we would highlight it. But he had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children. Clancy’s defense team then made several attempts to have that juror replaced with an alternate juror. The judge later spoke to each juror separately and repeated his instructions about reasonable doubt. He did not remove any jurors and sent them back to continue deliberating.
The jurors said they read him the definition of reasonable doubt “numerous times. She continued, “He actually said one day in the end, ‘Well, why don’t we have the judge come in and read it again? The final days of the trial became more tense after the jury’s foreperson told the judge that one juror was not following the court’s instructions about reasonable doubt.
