Clancy’s Defense Lawyer Asks Judge to Investigate Holdout Juror, tell me about this news in (https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/21/us/lindsay-clancy-investigate-holdout-juror.html)

In September 2026, following the mistrial in the triple-murder trial of Lindsay Clancy in Massachusetts, her defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, filed a motion asking Judge William Sullivan to launch a formal investigation into the lone holdout juror whose vote forced the deadlock.

Background and Deadlock

Lindsay Clancy was tried on three counts of first-degree murder in the 2023 deaths of her three young children. Her defense argued that severe postpartum psychosis rendered her not criminally responsible under Massachusetts law. After extensive deliberations, the 12-member jury deadlocked 11 to 1with 11 jurors in favor of finding her not criminally responsible and a single juror voting guiltyprompting the judge to declare a mistrial on September 4, 2026.

The Defense Motion to Investigate

In the court filings, the defense asked the judge to investigate the holdout juror (designated as “Juror Doe,” later identified in public reports as Michael P. Desronvil):

1. Voir Dire and Legal History: The defense requested access to the juror’s confidential questionnaire and background-check records to determine whether he disclosed relevant legal history during jury selection. Public reporting revealed the juror had a prior 2021 domestic violence charge (which was dismissed) and had been subject to a civil restraining order that remained active during part of the trial proceedings, alongside an ongoing eviction matter.

2. Deliberation Conduct and Outside Information: The motion sought cellphone metadata and a limited forensic examination of a phone allegedly brought into the deliberation room to ascertain whether the juror accessed external news or outside materials during deliberations.

3. Questioning Under Oath: Defense counsel requested that the juror be examined under oath regarding his answers during jury screening, his compliance with judicial instructions, and whether bias against mental illness played a role in refusing to adhere to the court’s instructions on reasonable doubt and criminal responsibility.

The motion is part of a broader effort by Clancy’s defense team to challenge the handling of jury deliberations and push to dismiss charges or prevent a retrial.