Lindsay Clancy's Defence Seeks Probe Into Lone Juror Who Refused To Clear Her of Murder Charges

Lindsay Clancy's defence team has asked a judge to investigate the conduct of Michael Desronvil, the lone juror who opposed finding her not criminally responsible for the deaths of her three children.

Defence lawyer Kevin Reddington filed a motion seeking a limited inquiry into the juror's conduct, including allegations concerning cellphone use during deliberations and the answers he provided during jury selection.

Judge William Sullivan declared a mistrial on 4 September after the 12-member jury failed to reach a unanimous decision following days of deliberations. Eleven jurors were prepared to find Clancy not criminally responsible as she had suffered from postpartum psychosis when she strangled her children in 2023, while Desronvil maintained that prosecutors had established that she understood what she was doing.

Defence Targets Holdout Juror

Reddington's motion asks Judge William Sullivan to examine whether Desronvil used his mobile phone during deliberations. The defence has requested records showing calls or messages made during the hours when the jury was deliberating, because jurors in Massachusetts are prohibited from using phones during that process.

The filing also asks the court to examine whether Desronvil gave accurate answers on his prospective juror questionnaire and during questioning by the judge. The defence has additionally sought information concerning Desronvil's background, including potential involvement in previous cases handled by the Plymouth County District Attorney's Office.

It also requested material relating to the jury-selection process and background checks. The allegations remain matters raised by Clancy's lawyers and are not court findings, while Desronvil's attorney has strongly rejected the effort to scrutinise his client.

Juror Rejects Claims He Had Doubts

The jury foreperson previously said Desronvil had acknowledged reasonable doubt but still refused to vote for a finding that Clancy was not criminally responsible. Desronvil has disputed that account, saying through his lawyer that he was convinced by the physical evidence, testimony and prosecution case that Clancy knew what she was doing.

'As I tried to explain different possible theories during deliberation, I kept getting cut off as if I had doubts based on the evidence present,' a statement released by Desronvil's attorney, Edward Paltzik, read. 'Based on all the physical evidence, key witnesses, and what the prosecution presents, I thought it was enough proof that she knew exactly what she was doing and planned,' it added.

Paltzik has condemned the defence motion and said that jurors should not face legal scrutiny simply because they reach a different conclusion than other members of a jury. He characterised the filing as a serious threat to the independence of jurors. Desronvil has maintained that his position was based on the evidence presented at trial and not from any outside influence.

Defence Seeks To Prevent Retrial

Separately, Clancy's lawyers are seeking to prevent a retrial. Attorney Martin Weinberg has asked the judge to dismiss the case, arguing that the mistrial should not have been declared because the holdout juror could have been replaced with an alternate juror during deliberations. The defence has also invoked double-jeopardy protections in arguing that Clancy should not face another trial on the same charges.

Clancy remains charged with murder and is being held in a psychiatric hospital while the case continues. Prosecutors have not announced whether they intend to retry her. A hearing is scheduled for 29 September, when the court is expected to consider the defence motions and the next stage of the proceedings.