Jury notes reveal holdout juror disputes reasonable doubt in Clancy murder case

Court filings reveal that a single holdout juror refused to apply the legal definition of reasonable doubt, preventing a verdict in the murder trial of Lindsay Clancy. These details, released on Friday, clarify why the jury in the 2023 Duxbury, Massachusetts case declared a mistrial after seven days of deliberations. The notes were not read aloud during the trial but were included in documents filed ahead of Clancy’s next court appearance on November 2.

Clancy, 36, faces charges for killing her three children in their home. Her legal team argues that Judge William Sullivan had other options before ending the trial and that double jeopardy now prevents a retrial. Prosecutors counter that the judge declared a mistrial only as a last resort after the jury failed to reach a unanimous decision. The dispute centers on two specific notes from the foreperson that identify the holdout and describe his resistance to the instructions.

The deliberation timeline began on August 28 when the jury requested to see Clancy’s pill bottles and the knife she used in an apparent suicide attempt. On September 1, the panel told the judge it could not reach a unanimous verdict. Sullivan instructed them to continue. On September 2, after roughly 26 hours of discussion, the jury reported a deadlock again. Sullivan then issued a Tuey-Rodriguez instruction, a strong directive to consider the opinions of other jurors.

On September 3, the foreperson sent a note stating that one member "is unable to follow the instructions regarding reasonable doubt." Sullivan questioned each juror individually about their ability to follow the law, and all affirmed they could. An hour later, the foreperson sent a second note identifying the juror by number. The note said the member "made statements acknowledging doubt, but refused to apply it to the verdict as the law states." The foreperson added that this was the reason the panel could not agree.

The holdout juror, Michael P. Desronvil, has stated he had no doubts about Clancy’s guilt. He claims other jurors cut off his attempts to propose different theories during the discussions. On September 4, Sullivan declined to question the holdout further. The jury then sent a final note at 11:21 a.m. stating they could not reach a verdict and did not expect to do so. The message concluded that the panel was reporting this news "with a heavy heart."