After the Lindsay Clancy Mistrial Verdict, Female Jurors That Wanted to Acquit Are Speaking Out

Matt Margolis : Sep 9, 2026
PJ Media

According to the Boston reporter who interviewed the three women, the 11 jurors who favored acquittal were frustrated that the holdout "had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children."

[PJMedia.com] Back when word first got out that a single juror, a man, was standing alone against a not-guilty verdict in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial, many on the right (not the left for sure) called him a hero. (Image: iStock)

That's the understatement of the year.

Three of the women who sat on that jury, including the foreperson, have now gone public about what happened behind closed doors. Their account of the deliberations that ended in an 11-1 deadlock, prompting the judge to declare a mistrial, paints a portrait of an activist jury that wanted to let a mother who admitted to killing her own children be declared not criminally responsible for her actions, and one man would not let them.

According to the Boston reporter who interviewed the three women, the 11 jurors who favored acquittal were frustrated that the holdout "had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children."

Juror number two described the holdout's behavior during deliberations. "He, I think, got up to the cart [with the exhibits] once and then went back to his seat," she said. "He would not interact with us and try to understand. We read to him the definition of reasonable doubt."

She also recalled him asking for the instructions to be read again. "He said one day, 'Why don't we have the judge read it again?' and we were like, 'No, we have it in front of us,'" she said.

This was not a man who caved to a room full of frustrated colleagues. He held out because the facts, and his own conscience, would not let him sign his name to an acquittal... Subscribe for free to Breaking Christian News here

Continue reading Here.