Full Breakdown
Judge Denies Lindsay Clancy’s Request for Required Not-Guilty Finding After Deadlocked Jury
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event
On September 29, 2026, Plymouth Superior Court Judge William F. Sullivan heard arguments from defense attorney Kevin Reddington and prosecutors in the murder case of Lindsay Clancy. Reddington sought a Rule 25 “required finding of not guilty,” arguing that the Commonwealth had failed to prove that Clancy killed her three children on January 24, 2023. Sullivan denied the motion and scheduled a follow-up hearing for November 2 to consider additional motions, including a double-jeopardy challenge and a request to investigate the lone holdout juror.
Background & Context
Lindsay Clancy, a 36-year-old former labor-and-delivery nurse, faces three counts of first-degree murder for the strangulation deaths of her children—Cora, Dawson and infant Callan (8 months)—in their Duxbury home. She survived a self-inflicted jump from a second-floor window, resulting in paralysis, and pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, citing severe postpartum psychosis. After 38 hours of deliberation, the 12-person jury deadlocked on September 4, with an 11-1 split favoring a not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity verdict; the holdout juror, Michael Desronvil, voted for conviction, prompting a mistrial.
Timeline
- January 24, 2023 – Children’s deaths; Clancy’s suicide attempt.
- September 4, 2026 – Jury declares mistrial after deadlock.
- September 29, 2026 – Status hearing; Rule 25 motion denied.
- November 2, 2026 – Court to hear pending motions on double jeopardy, juror investigation, and possible gag order.
Data & Statistics
- Jury composition: nine women and three men.
- Verdict split: eleven jurors favored a not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity finding; one juror voted for conviction.
- Charges: three counts of first-degree murder; alternative charges could include second-degree murder or manslaughter.
Official Statements & Responses
Prosecutor Shanan Buckingham called the defense’s claim of insufficient evidence “laughable” and said the record is “voluminous” in establishing Clancy’s guilt.
Criticism & Opposition
Legal scholars noted the procedural stakes of the pending motions. Emeritus law professor David Rossman warned that “either side’s going to appeal whichever way the double-jeopardy motion gets decided,” highlighting the appellate implications.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
The dispute centers on whether the prosecution’s evidence meets the legal threshold for criminal responsibility. Defense counsel argues the evidence is “woefully deficient” and that no admission or direct proof links Clancy to the killings. Prosecutors point to DNA on exercise bands, the timeline, and Clancy’s exclusive presence with the children as sufficient proof. No independent forensic report is cited.
Verbatim Quotes
- “This entire case is based on speculation,” — Kevin Reddington, defense attorney
- “There was evidence introduced, both physical and circumstantial, that would permit a rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of the charge of murder,” — Justice William F. Sullivan
What’s Next
The November 2 hearing will address the double-jeopardy motion, the request to investigate juror Desronvil’s conduct, and a prosecutor-filed gag-order motion. Depending on those rulings, the Commonwealth may set a new trial date, pursue reduced charges, or negotiate a plea. Clancy remains incarcerated at Tewksbury State Hospital while the legal process continues.