*Lindsay Clancy juror Paula Devlin says the Black man who became the lone holdout in Clancy’s 11-1 mistrial changed his thinking after watching a recorded interview with Clancy, concluding that the case was not first-degree murder — but he still did not join the other jurors in finding her not criminally responsible.
Devlin, speaking with Gayle King on CBS Mornings, revealed that the holdout was the jury’s only Black member and estimated that he was in his 30s. Devlin did not suggest his race influenced his decision.
The more revealing part of her account, however, is how his position evolved as the jury deliberated.
Jury Started With an 8-2-2 Divide
The panel did not begin anywhere near its eventual 11-1 split.
“It was 8-2-and-2,” Devlin told King. Eight jurors were leaning toward finding Clancy not criminally responsible, two had not decided and two favored guilt.
Scroll to continue reading
Devlin said she began deliberations leaning toward finding Clancy not responsible and became more convinced as jurors reviewed the evidence. The jury ultimately moved to 11-1 before Judge William Sullivan declared a mistrial Sept. 4 following seven days of deliberations.
Holdout’s Position Changed After Clancy Video
One moment described by Devlin offers a deeper look at why the deadlock became so complicated.
“And then we watched the video of Lindsay’s interview and after that [the holdout] said he had realized that it wasn’t murder in the first degree,” Devlin said. “That’s where we saw his doubt.”
That shift is significant: According to Devlin, the holdout was not simply rejecting the other 11 jurors’ position from beginning to end. Evidence apparently moved him away from first-degree murder, yet he still did not agree that Clancy should be found not guilty by reason of insanity, known in Massachusetts as lack of criminal responsibility.
Other jurors have separately said the holdout acknowledged reasonable doubt but would not vote for an insanity acquittal. The foreperson raised the dispute with the judge before the mistrial.
Patrick Clancy and Psychiatrist Had an Impact
Devlin identified other testimony that shaped her own decision, including forensic psychiatrist Dr. Phillip Resnick’s discussion of altruistic filicide.
She also pointed to Patrick Clancy, whose testimony about his wife remained strikingly compassionate despite the deaths of their children.
Devlin said prosecutors appeared to try to “nudge Patrick to say something derogatory” about Lindsay Clancy, but he wouldn’t.
“That was very impactful,” she said.
Clancy admitted killing Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months, in their Duxbury, Massachusetts, home in January 2023. Her defense maintained that postpartum psychosis rendered her not criminally responsible. Prosecutors argued that she acted deliberately and understood that killing her children was wrong.
An 11-1 Mistrial Still Leaves Clancy’s Fate Open
The new account arrives as Clancy’s defense tries to prevent another trial. Attorney Kevin Reddington has asked Sullivan to find Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity, arguing prosecutors failed to present sufficient evidence of criminal responsibility. A hearing is scheduled for Sept. 29.
The holdout’s identity makes for a striking new detail, but his apparent movement during deliberations tells the bigger story: The jury came extraordinarily close to agreement, and even its lone dissenter developed doubt about the prosecution’s first-degree murder case.
(If You Like/Appreciate This EURweb Story, Please SHARE it!)
RELATED NEWS ON EURWEB.COM: Kenyan Cult Leader (Paul Nthenge Mackenzie) Charged with Murder of 191 Children | VIDEO
We Publish Breaking News 24/7. Don’t Miss Out! Sign up for our Free daily newsletter HERE.
