Judge Shuts Down Lindsay Clancy's Push To Question Holdout Juror
A Plymouth County judge has already turned down Lindsay Clancy's bid to dig into the one juror who kept her first trial from reaching a verdict. A bigger decision — whether she can be retried on murder charges at all — is due November 16.
Case at a glance
- Lindsay Clancy — Defendant, accused
Next: Judge Sullivan has scheduled a status hearing for Nov. 16, 2026, at 10 a.m., where he says he will rule on the double jeopardy motion to dismiss, the defense's request for the holdout juror's phone and questionnaire records, and the prosecution's gag order motion. Sullivan has floated March 2027 as a possible retrial date, but Sprague has not committed prosecutors to retrying Clancy on first-degree murder specifically, and Sullivan's mandatory retirement when he turns 70 in June 2027 is adding pressure to settle a schedule quickly.
Monday's hearing in Plymouth Superior Court
On Monday, Nov. 2, 2026, Lindsay Clancy was back in Plymouth Superior Court for a nearly three-hour hearing before Judge William Sullivan, according to NBC News. Her lawyers argued for three things at once: dismiss the murder charges outright on double jeopardy grounds, let them dig into the lone juror who kept her first trial deadlocked, and, failing that, let her face reduced charges instead of a second murder trial.
Sullivan did not rule on any of it Monday. He scheduled a status hearing for Nov. 16, when he said he will announce his decision on the motion to dismiss, according to WBUR and the Serpa Law Office's account of the hearing.
But Sullivan had already ruled on a version of the juror question before Monday ever started. Per WBUR, "the judge has already denied a defense request to issue a not guilty finding due to a lack of evidence to convict Clancy," and "Sullivan also rejected a request for an investigation into the holdout juror." What is still open is a narrower follow-up argued Monday: whether the defense can see the juror's cellphone records and his answers on the jury questionnaire, including whether he was truthful about his criminal history.
The killings in Duxbury
Clancy, now 36, is accused of strangling her three children — Cora, 5; Dawson, 3; and Callan, 8 months old — with exercise bands in the family's Duxbury, Massachusetts home on the evening of Jan. 24, 2023, according to NBC News. A Plymouth County grand jury indicted her on murder and strangulation charges in their deaths, according to the Serpa Law Office.
After the killings, Clancy jumped from a bedroom window in a suicide attempt. She has been paralyzed from the chest down since, and she has remained at Tewksbury Hospital, where her attorney has described her as being on 24-hour suicide watch, NBC News reported.
Her ex-husband, Patrick Clancy, found the scene when he returned home from running errands that night and later testified for the prosecution at trial. He has since filed a separate wrongful-death lawsuit against Lindsay Clancy's former healthcare providers, arguing their care worsened her condition; a Norfolk Superior Court judge has that case's motion to dismiss under advisement, according to WBUR.
"Agree with the majority, or potentially be investigated." — Heather O'Connor, attorney for the holdout juror, via CNN
A trial, a deadlock, a mistrial
Clancy's murder trial ran more than a month this past summer. Prosecutors argued she "acted intentionally, rationally and swiftly," while her defense said she was in postpartum psychosis and not criminally responsible, according to CNN.
The jury deliberated more than 38 hours over seven days and reported three separate times that it could not agree, according to WBUR. After the second report, Sullivan gave the panel the Tuey-Rodriquez instruction — the standard Massachusetts charge asking jurors in the minority and majority to reconsider their positions without giving up an honest conviction.
On Sept. 3, 2026, the foreperson told the court one juror was not following the law on reasonable doubt. Sullivan brought each juror in individually, reminded them of their duty, and asked if they could follow his instructions on the law; all 12 said yes. The next day, Sept. 4, he declared a mistrial after a third report of deadlock — 11 jurors favoring not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility, one holding out for a murder conviction.
Who's involved
Judge William Sullivan is presiding over the case; he faces mandatory retirement when he turns 70 in June 2027, a timeline both sides have raised in arguing over when a retrial should happen.
Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Sprague is the lead prosecutor on the case. Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz oversees the office and told reporters outside court Monday, "I'll be talking more on November 16," according to CNN.
Kevin Reddington and Martin G. Weinberg represent Clancy. Weinberg, who also represented Karen Read in her own double jeopardy fight before the Supreme Judicial Court, argued the dismissal motion Monday; Reddington has led the fights over the juror and the media.
The holdout juror, identified in multiple outlets as Michael Péguy Desronvil, has given television and podcast interviews since the mistrial. Jury foreperson Roni Carlson has also spoken publicly, telling NBC10 about the moment she thought the panel had reached a verdict before the holdout changed his answer. Desronvil has his own attorney, Heather O'Connor, who appeared in court to oppose releasing his records.
What's already on the record
Sullivan made several rulings before Monday's hearing. On Oct. 1, 2026, he denied Clancy's renewed motion for a required finding of not guilty, ruling prosecutors presented enough evidence for a jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that she killed the children and was criminally responsible, according to Boston 25 News as cited by the Serpa Law Office. He also had already denied an earlier request to replace the holdout juror with an alternate during deliberations, and rejected a request to investigate him, per WBUR.
Still pending: the double jeopardy motion to dismiss the case outright; a defense request to review the holdout juror's phone records and questionnaire answers for honesty about his criminal history; and the prosecution's motion for a gag order barring attorneys and law enforcement from speaking to the media about the case.
If Clancy is convicted of murder at a retrial, she faces life in prison. If a jury instead finds she lacked criminal responsibility, the court would likely move to commit her to a psychiatric hospital. Prosecutors could also choose to retry her on first-degree murder, bring lesser charges such as manslaughter, drop the case, or negotiate a plea — though Sprague told the court Monday, "We're not at that point yet," according to the Guardian.
What each side said in court
Reddington pushed hardest on the juror. When he tried to use Desronvil's name while arguing the defense's position, Sullivan cut in: "I'm going to stop you right there." Reddington shot back, "No, you're not going to stop me," according to the Guardian.
Heather O'Connor, the juror's attorney, warned that opening his records would punish him for his verdict, not his conduct, telling the court it would send potential jurors a message: "Agree with the majority, or potentially be investigated," according to CNN.
Sprague defended how Sullivan handled the deadlock, telling the judge the record was clear: "It is clear from the record that this juror did not refuse to deliberate. He refused to agree," she said, according to the Guardian and NBC News.
Reddington, pressing for a fast retrial rather than more delay, told Sullivan: "I am not going to have this woman sit incarcerated for the next year or two or three. I want a trial and I want it with you and I want it this spring," according to the Guardian.
What Vinnie has said about this case
“When we watched Lindsay Clancy's criminal case, there was a theme that came from Kevin Reddington and it was a theme that everyone talked about that Lindsay Clancy's doctors were horrific.”
Vinnie Politan on his show, “Patrick Clancy's Lawsuit Is Already in Trouble” (October 28, 2026)
“Lindsay Clancy loses again and loses in a big way inside of the courtroom and this is now becoming a routine here for Kevin Reddington.”
Vinnie Politan on his show, “Lindsay Clancy Loses Again” (October 26, 2026)
What happens next
Judge Sullivan has scheduled a status hearing for Nov. 16, 2026, at 10 a.m., where he says he will rule on the double jeopardy motion to dismiss, the defense's request for the holdout juror's phone and questionnaire records, and the prosecution's gag order motion. Sullivan has floated March 2027 as a possible retrial date, but Sprague has not committed prosecutors to retrying Clancy on first-degree murder specifically, and Sullivan's mandatory retirement when he turns 70 in June 2027 is adding pressure to settle a schedule quickly.
How this plays in court
From the prosecution's chair, this is straightforward manifest necessity: a jury deadlocked after 38 hours and three separate deadlock reports, with a judge who individually questioned every juror before declaring a mistrial. Sprague's distinction — that the holdout juror "refused to agree" rather than "refused to deliberate" — is the legal line that matters, because disagreeing with the majority is not grounds to remove a juror or scrap a trial.
The defense's double jeopardy argument depends on convincing Sullivan he should have gone further: pulled the holdout juror aside, questioned him alone, and potentially swapped him for an alternate mid-deliberation. Courts are historically reluctant to do that, because probing why one juror disagrees risks coercing a verdict rather than protecting one — the exact risk Sprague raised in opposing the motion.
The fight over the juror's phone and questionnaire records is really a fight about precedent. If Sullivan lets the defense open those records because other jurors criticized this one to the press after the fact, every future holdout juror in a high-profile case becomes a target for post-trial discovery — the "dangerous message" the juror's own attorney warned against.
None of these rulings touch the underlying question a second jury would still have to answer: whether Clancy understood what she was doing when she killed her children. The prosecution doesn't need favorable rulings here to retry that case; the defense needs them to avoid trying it again at all.
- The Guardian: Lindsay Clancy back in court seeking to dismiss murder charges after mistrial
- CNN: Lindsay Clancy’s judge eyes March 2027 for retrial – if there is one
- WBUR: Judge considers argument to dismiss Lindsay Clancy's case
- NBC News: Judge is weighing a retrial for Lindsay Clancy in the deaths of her three children
- Serpa Law Office: Lindsay Clancy Hearing on November 2, 2026 and the Double Jeopardy Motion