Lindsay Clancy Holdout Juror Breaks Silence, Says He Believed She Was Guilty ‘From Day One’

Reading Time: 2 minutes

In the weeks since Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial ended in a mistrial, there’s been a great deal of speculation about the lone juror who prevented a unanimous verdict.

He’s now come forward to offer his account of what happened behind closed doors.

The holdout juror, identified only as Michael, spoke with Ray Marcel of “Fugitive TV” this week.

And Marcel subsequently appeared on Chris Cuomo’s NewsNation program to discuss what the juror told him.

Michael spoke to Marcel about his role in the case, and he says he believed Clancy was guilty from the very beginning.

According to Marcel, Michael didn’t gradually come to the conclusion that Clancy was criminally responsible for the deaths of her three children.

“He felt that she was sane when she did it,” Marcel said, recounting his conversation with the juror (per TMZ).

Marcel added that Michael told him “from day one” that he believed Clancy was guilty and that he never expressed reasonable doubt about her criminal responsibility.

That account is notable because the jury ultimately deadlocked 11-1, with 11 jurors reportedly prepared to find Clancy not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility.

The mistrial was declared on September 4 after the jury spent days deliberating without reaching a unanimous decision.

Clancy’s defense had argued that she was suffering from severe postpartum psychosis when she killed her three children, Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months, in January 2023.

Her attorneys have maintained that Clancy was not legally responsible for her actions because of her mental state at the time.

The lone holdout, however, refused to join the consensus formed by the other jurors.

His position has become the center of an increasingly bizarre post-trial saga, with multiple jurors publicly discussing the deliberations and offering their own accounts of what happened in the jury room.

One juror previously said the holdout could not identify a specific piece of evidence or witness testimony supporting his position. Another juror defended him, saying that several members of the panel had entered deliberations with strong opinions.

Meanwhile, Clancy’s attorney, Kevin Reddington, has asked a judge to enter a not-guilty finding rather than allow the case to proceed toward another trial.

The judge has not yet granted that request, and prosecutors have not announced whether they intend to retry Clancy.

For now, the case remains unresolved, and the latest comments from the juror at the center of the mistrial are adding another layer to an intensely scrutinized legal battle.

And with Clancy’s ex-husband Patrick Clancy preparing to speak publicly in his first major interview since the mistrial, this very complicated case is clearly nowhere near its final chapter.

We will have further updates on this developing story as new information becomes available.