A juror who ultimately voted to acquit Lindsay Clancy has revealed she originally believed the Massachusetts mother was guilty and criminally responsible for killing her three young children.
The anonymous woman, identified by CBS Boston as juror No. 5, said her opinion changed during contentious deliberations that ended with an 11-1 deadlock and a mistrial last week.
The juror said she knew little about the nationally followed case before being selected because she does not regularly watch the news.
She entered deliberations leaning toward conviction.
‘Originally, I felt that she was guilty and she was criminally responsible for it.’
Even after voting to acquit Clancy by reason of insanity, the juror acknowledged that she remains conflicted about the case.
‘Maybe I still believe that Clancy is guilty, in a certain way,’ she admitted.
Clancy, 36, is charged with killing her three children, Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months, inside the family’s Duxbury home in January 2023.
She admitted strangling the children with exercise bands but pleaded not guilty, with her defense arguing that postpartum psychosis left her unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions.
Prosecutors maintained that Clancy was criminally responsible and deliberately carried out the killings.
The anonymous juror said the evidence initially left her inclined to side with prosecutors, particularly the harrowing 911 call made by Clancy’s husband, Patrick, after discovering the children.
‘I will never be the same after that 911 call,’ the juror said.
The recording was played for jurors but has not been publicly released.
She also pushed back against online conspiracy theories accusing Patrick Clancy of killing the children and framing his wife.
‘If these people could have heard that visceral, blood-curdling scream,’ she said. ‘It was horrifying.’
But her assessment of Lindsay Clancy‘s criminal responsibility shifted as jurors reviewed the evidence and debated her mental condition.
RELATED: NEW: Lindsay Clancy Jurors Break Their Silence In Interview After Mistrial
‘I think this was a woman who was not mentally healthy, she was in the throes of a significant mental crisis,’ the juror said.
‘I really just felt like she was so deep in it that she couldn’t see her way out, and this was the only option.’
She eventually concluded that prosecutors had not eliminated enough doubt for her to convict.
‘There was not a single moment throughout that presentation of that case that you could say, ‘Oh yep, 100 percent I’m certain she did it,” she recalled. ‘There is too much gray area.’
The juror also offered a dramatically different view of the lone holdout who prevented an acquittal.
Three other jurors who spoke publicly this week criticized the unidentified man for refusing to change his vote, but juror No. 5 said he was not the only person in the room who had dug in.
RELATED: Lindsay Clancy’s Attorney Sends Jaw-Dropping Message To Trump
‘This standalone juror was not the only one that was unwilling to see things from the other side, so I’m going to kind of defend that individual,’ she said.
‘There were some big personalities in that room, but at the end of the day, I feel like it just came down to an inability to move past your convictions.’
She said other jurors began trying to persuade the holdout early in the deliberations, with tensions eventually growing intense enough that arguments could reportedly be heard outside the jury room.
Foreperson Roni Carlson and jurors Kellie Farina and Paula Devlin have separately said the holdout acknowledged having reasonable doubt but still refused to return a not guilty by reason of insanity verdict.
Carlson recalled becoming optimistic that the jury had finally reached an agreement before the man again refused to acquit.
‘but I’m still not going to say she’s not guilty,’ Carlson recalled.
Judge William Sullivan declared a mistrial Sept. 4 after more than a week of deliberations failed to produce a unanimous verdict.
The latest juror interview now reveals that the final 11-1 split did not necessarily reflect where every juror began. At least one woman who ultimately sided with Clancy entered the jury room believing she was guilty before changing her position after reviewing the case with the other jurors.
POLL: Do You Believe Transgenderism Is A Mental Illness?
