(LifeSiteNews) — After a sixth day of deliberations, the Lindsay Clancy jury remained at an impasse because one of its members refuses to listen to the judge’s instruction on Massachusetts’ law concerning “reasonable doubt.”
Defense attorney Kevin Reddington chose to speak publicly rather than privately in a sidebar with the judge to note that, according to the jury foreperson, a single juror “refuses to listen to the law … on reasonable doubt.”
Reddington adjured the judge that his instruction to the jury was insufficient to correct the juror in question. Reddington further suggested that the juror had “spurned” the judge’s instructions and requested that the juror be removed and replaced.
While it’s unclear whether the holdout juror is siding with the defense or the prosecution, court experts agreed that Reddington appeared confident that the jury was leaning in favor of his client.
Judge William Sullivan brought the entire jury back into the courtroom and spoke with each individually before making his pronouncement. He later dismissed them for the day.
The anticlimactic moment came after an exhausting week of deliberations following a five-week trial that included more than 300 exhibits and over 80 witnesses and experts.
Clancy murdered her three children – 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson, and 8-month-old Callan – by strangling them with rubber exercise bands.
The prosecution has stated that Clancy “acted intentionally, rationally and swiftly” rather than in a moment of postpartum psychosis; she very deliberately planned the murders by researching them ahead of time and ensured her husband was out of the house. The defense insists that the killings were triggered by a lethal combination of psychiatric medications and her postpartum struggles.