Lindsay Clancy Trial: Judge William Sullivan Returns as Lawyers Fight Over Retrial, Juror and Dismissal
Lindsay Clancy is returning to a Massachusetts courtroom Tuesday, Sept. 29, for the first time since her murder trial ended in a mistrial, with her defense seeking to stop a retrial and prosecutors weighing what comes next.
The hearing before Plymouth Superior Court Judge William Sullivan comes less than four weeks after a 12-member jury failed to reach a unanimous verdict in the case involving the deaths of Clancy’s three children. The defense is asking the judge to dismiss the charges on double-jeopardy grounds while also seeking scrutiny of the lone juror who prevented a verdict.
Why Clancy’s Case Ended in a Mistrial
Clancy’s five-week trial ended Sept. 4 after seven days of deliberations. The jury was deadlocked 11-1, with 11 jurors prepared to find Clancy not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility and one juror, Michael Desronvil, maintaining that she should be convicted.
Judge Sullivan ultimately declared a mistrial after efforts to resolve the deadlock failed.
Clancy, 36, has acknowledged that she strangled her children, 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson and 8-month-old Callan at the family’s Duxbury, Massachusetts, home on Jan. 24, 2023. Her defense argued that she was experiencing postpartum psychosis and therefore lacked criminal responsibility for the killings.
Prosecutors argued that Clancy understood her actions and was criminally responsible.
The mistrial left the three first-degree murder charges unresolved, meaning Clancy was neither acquitted nor convicted.
Defense Seeks to Block a Second Trial
Clancy’s attorneys have filed motions arguing that prosecutors should not be allowed to try her again.
The defense argues that Judge Sullivan should have investigated complaints about the holdout juror before declaring a mistrial, questioning whether the circumstances met the legal standard of “manifest necessity” required to end the trial.
The defense has also asked the court to enter findings of not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility.
If the judge rejects the defense motions, prosecutors could seek a retrial. Reuters reported that prosecutors had not yet announced whether they would pursue another trial, leaving the next step in the case unresolved.
Holdout Juror Becomes a Second Legal Battle
The legal dispute has also centered on Desronvil’s conduct during jury deliberations. Clancy’s lawyers have asked for access to normally confidential jury materials and sought an investigation into whether Desronvil accurately answered questions during jury selection and whether he improperly used a cellphone during deliberations.
Those allegations have not resulted in a finding of misconduct against Desronvil.
His attorney, Edward Paltzik, has rejected the defense’s characterization of his client. In comments reported by Reuters, Paltzik said Desronvil “had zero doubt” and “rigidly applied the reasonable doubt standard.”
The conflicting accounts have become part of the defense’s broader challenge to the mistrial, with the court considering whether the juror-related issues have any bearing on the case’s next legal step.
Court Weighs Clancy’s Next Legal Step
The Sept. 29 hearing could shape the next stage of the case, including whether prosecutors are able to pursue a new trial.
Judge Sullivan had previously indicated that he would like any retrial to take place later in 2026. Prosecutors had not publicly committed to that course before the hearing.
Clancy remains in custody at Tewksbury Hospital, a state psychiatric facility. The mistrial itself did not resolve whether she is criminally responsible for her children’s deaths.
Read more
