Lindsay Clancy jurors speak out for the first time and reveal what led them to believe she was not guilty

Three jurors who were part of Lindsay Clancy's trial have broken their silence after the harrowing case was declared a mistrial.

The US, and the globe, were gripped by the trial that shared heartbreaking details about Clancy and the deaths of her young children, Cora, five, Dawson, three, and eight-month-old Callan.

The three of them were killed in their family home in Massachusetts in January 2023 by their mom.

Following their deaths, Clancy successfully tried to take her own life. Her actions have left her paralyzed from the waist down.

Clancy never denied killing her young children, but her defense argued that the 36-year-old was suffering with postpartum psychosis at the time therefore should not be held criminally responsible.

Her trial went on for weeks and, despite several days of deliberations, the jury failed to react a verdict. As a result, the trial was declared a mistrial.

Lindsay Clancy may have to go through a second trial (Greg Derr / POOL / AFP via Getty Images)

Now jurors Roni Carlson, Kellie Farina, and Paula Devlin have spoken out for the first time to NBC10 Boston.

Speaking to the news outlet, Carlson – who was the jury foreperson – shared: "We weren't trying to figure out if she murdered the children, she did and she's admitting to that. We're trying to figure out: Did she know right from wrong at that time?"

She continued: "And with everybody saying she loved her children so much and everything proved she loved her children, from her journals to her mother-in-law, everything proved that she loved her children. So she had to have snapped."

Carlson also discussed the one juror who refused to agree with the other 11. Clancy's lawyer, Kevin Reddington, says this particular juror, who has not been indentified, 'robbed' his client of acquittal.

Supposedly the man in question 'would not interact with us and try to understand', said the jurors.

"He had reasonable doubt. He admitted he had reasonable doubt," Carlson shared. "I started filling out the forms, I was so excited. There were three forms I had to fill out, and then he said 'but I'm still not going to say she's not guilty'."

According to the jurors who chatted with NBC10, things got so intense during the deliberations there was some name-calling between them. The six alternate jurors could reportedly hear them arguing.

It's currently unclear if Clancy will face a second trial or not. The decision lies in the hands on the prosecutors.

While they make up their minds, Clancy's lawyer Reddington has issued a plea to Donald Trump to have the mom-of-three pardoned.

"Mr. President, I would hope that you would consider this young lady and the person she is, what she's been through, and consider a pardon," the attorney said on Good Morning America on September 8.

Roni Carlson was the jury foreperson (NBC10 Boston)

Everything jurors have said about the Lindsay Clancy trial

In the US, once a trial is over, jurors are allowed to speak out about the case they were assigned to and what happened in their deliberations. So far, three jurors have opted to go public about what went on during the high-profile trial in an interview with Boston NBC affiliate NBC10.

All but one agreed on a not guilty by insanity verdict

The foreperson confirmed that they had all agreed to return a not guilty verdict, having not been swayed by the prosecution's case; however, one holdout juror refused to find Clancy not guilty by insanity, resulting in a mistrial being declared.

Deliberations filled with 'lots of crying'

The jury foreperson, a retired fifth-grade teacher, admitted it was 'heartbreaking' to be unable to reach a unanimous verdict in the case, adding that the deliberations were filled with 'lots of crying' and 'lots of tears and then hugging'.

"I was so sad, so sad that we couldn't come up with a verdict for Lindsay. It was so heartbreaking," she said.

Holdout juror 'admitted he had reasonable doubt'

According to the jury foreperson, the entire 12-person jury had agreed on a not guilty by insanity verdict, apart from one, who she said was male.

She told NBC he 'admitted he had reasonable doubt and I started filling out the forms, I was so excited'.

However, when she was partway through filling out the three verdict sheets, she claims he told the group: "But I'm still not going to say that she's not guilty by reason of insanity."

The holdout juror was a point of contention in the emotionally charged trial after Clancy's defence team attempted to lodge a last-minute appeal alleging the juror was 'biased' and not following the court's instructions on reasonable doubt. The appeal was unsuccessful.

Deliberations led to fights and shouting

The group deliberated for a total of nearly 40 hours, which resulted in a lot of yelling which could be heard through the walls, according to the three jurors interviewed by NBC.

"We weren't trying to figure out if she murdered the children. She did and she's admitted that," the foreperson explained. "We're trying to figure out - did she know right from wrong at that time."

Holdout juror supposedly questioned toxicology reports

Another juror, who works for a government defence contractor, said the lone juror was questioning the meds Clancy was prescribed leading up to the deaths of her three children: "We had the toxicology reports. We could see exactly the amounts."

The juror added that nurses on the panel were discussing this but the holdout juror 'just completely disregarded the information that they gave'.

The lone juror in question has not spoken out.

"Everything proved that she loved her children"

The foreperson told NBC that they weren't convinced by the prosecution's case, saying that Clancy 'had to have snapped and not known what she was doing'.

Prosecutors were 'very, very harsh'

The third juror to go public, a chef at a senior centre, said she found the prosecutors to be 'very, very harsh'.

"They had no character witness in regard to Lindsay of being a bad mother," they added.