SINGLE JUROR HOLDS THE LINE FOR LINDSAY CLANCY MISTRIAL

The famous Lindsay Clancy trial came to an unexpected conclusion this past Friday September 4th.  After days of deliberation, the jury was unable to return an ultimate verdict.  This comes after several iterations of deliberation where the judge sent the jury back into their chamber to try their hardest to come to a consensus.  Despite all of this, no unanimous decision was made.  Due to this, the judge declared a mistrial.  One single juror held the line against the remainder of the jury, refusing to allow Lindsay Clancy off the hook. What does this mean?  Is Lindsay Clancy off the hook for killing her children?  Let’s walk through a legal analysis of the situation.  

Firstly, we should walk through what occurred prior to the mistrial declaration.  As the jury informed the judge for the final time that they were unable to come to a conclusion due to a single juror, the judge allowed something unorthodox to happen.  At the request of the defense  counsel, the judge allowed for the defense to petition for the removal of the juror holding up the verdict.  What does this mean?  This means that the defense was awarded one hour to contact the Massachusetts supreme court and plead their case for the removal of the “problem juror”.  

A call ensued where they attempted to paint this juror as untrustworthy and antagonistic to the court process.  The supreme court deliberated on the matter, and returned the decision to deny their request.  This means that the juror was found to be of sound moral fiber for the context of the trial.  The juror was not excluded from the trial.  This means that the verdict remained unresolved.  This is what moved the judge to declare a mistrial. 

Now, let’s move into what a mistrial actually means.  According to Cornell Law School:

“A mistrial occurs when a jury is unable to reach a verdict and there must be a new trial with a new jury; or there is a serious procedural error or misconduct that would result in an unfair trial, and the judge adjourns the case without a decision on the merits and awards a new trial.”

So, in layman’s terms, a mistrial occurs when the jury can’t make a decision on whether or not the defendant is innocent or guilty.  In the case of Lindsay Clancy, the trial is supposed to determine whether or not Clancy is insane or not.  That means: was Lindsay Clancy able to realize what she was doing at the time of the murder was wrong or not due to postpartum psychosis.  

As many know, the standard for a criminal jury trial is “proof beyond a reasonable doubt”.  Meaning: if there is any amount of doubt in regards to the verdict, it does not meet the legal standard for conviction.  What this single juror is saying by holding up the deliberation, is that there is obviously reasonable amounts of doubt in regards to whether or not Clancy was in a full blown psychosis at the time of the murders. There must be a unanimous decision made by the jury to convict someone in a jury trial.  Thus, the judge declared a mistrial. 

What is the ultimate outcome of this mistrial declaration?  This means that a new trial date must be set, and a brand new set of jurors must be picked.  Essentially, the entire trial will be done over again.  Hopefully the new jury can come to the decision to offer some justice for the dead children.  A new preliminary hearing date has not yet been set yet. However, according to some reports, the end of September may mark the start date for the next steps in the process.  Until then, Clancy is being held in a mental facility awaiting her next trial to determine her fate.

Sources: