Lindsay Clancy returned to court on Monday as her lawyers sought to dismiss the charges that she murdered her three young children. Her trial ended in September with a deadlocked jury, and Judge William Sullivan did not immediately rule on the defence motion.
The defence argues that allowing another trial would violate double jeopardy protections. Attorney Martin G. Weinberg said the judge should have investigated further after the jury foreperson sent two notes indicating that a juror was not following the rules. He argued that more questioning might have established grounds to remove the juror and continue deliberations rather than declare a mistrial.
Another defence lawyer, Kevin Reddington, asked the court to examine juror Michael Desronvil’s questionnaire and alleged that he had used his phone during deliberations and researched altruistic filicide. He also urged the judge to determine whether Desronvil had conducted research related to the case. The claims were raised by the defence at the hearing.
After receiving the foreperson’s notes during the trial, Sullivan questioned each juror, reminded them of their duties and asked whether they could apply the law. All said they could. Weinberg argued that the judge should also have questioned the foreperson separately. Prosecutor Jennifer Sprague said further inquiry risked intruding into the substance of deliberations and defended the judge’s handling of the jury.
Sprague argued that Desronvil had not refused to deliberate, but had disagreed with the other jurors. After the trial, Desronvil said he believed Clancy was guilty and that the evidence showed she knew what she was doing and planned her actions. The jury foreperson, Roni Carlson, separately told NBC10 that Desronvil had said he would not find Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity.
Clancy has not disputed killing her children in 2023. Her lawyer has argued that she had postpartum psychosis and could not control her behaviour. Prosecutors acknowledge that she had mental health problems but maintain that she acted deliberately and understood that her actions were wrong.
Prosecutors also opposed the dismissal motion, arguing that double jeopardy does not prevent the state from seeking justice for the three victims. Sprague asked Sullivan to impose a gag order over statements made outside court, citing what she described as Reddington’s inappropriate media comments. The judge said he would consider the request.
Sullivan scheduled another hearing for 16 November to revisit the case and potentially set a retrial date. Reddington urged the court to avoid further delays and said he wanted a trial in the spring. Sullivan said a March trial was probably realistic.
Sources: The Guardian World.