Lindsay Clancy judge orders jurors to continue deliberations - as her lawyer claims one juror 'refuses to listen to instruction'
Ms Clancy is facing murder charges following the deaths of her three children at her home in 2023.
A judge has ordered jurors in Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial to continue deliberating after her lawyer claimed one juror was refusing to follow instructions on reasonable doubt.
Listen to this article
Judge William Sullivan again reminded the jury of the legal test before sending them back to consider their verdict.
It came after jurors twice indicated they had been unable to reach a decision in the murder trial, which sees former nurse Lindsay Clancy accused of killing her three young children.
Clancy’s defence lawyer Kevin Reddington objected to the move, urging the judge to make further enquiries and remove a juror he claimed had “refused to listen” to the court’s directions.
The jury has now spent more than 34 hours deliberating without reaching a verdict.
“My motion is to remove this juror that refuses to listen to your instruction and reasonable doubt,” he told the court.
He added: “If we come back here in a half-hour with a mistrial because of a juror that has just spurned the instructions of this court, it’s a shame – it’s a real shame.”
Prosecutor Jennifer Sprague said the judge’s directions were appropriate and that no further action was needed.
Judge Sullivan said he had asked jurors whether they were able to follow his instructions, adding that they had previously sworn that they could.
He said it would not be appropriate to disclose whether he agreed with the position of “one juror or 11” at that stage, but noted the defence objection before ordering another recess.
The mother's legal team continue to insist she was suffering from postpartum psychosis at the time of the deaths.
Meanwhile, prosecutors continue to argue that the mother knew what she was doing.
The trial in question began six weeks ago, with deliberations now in their sixth day.
The state of Massachusetts does not permit a majority verdict, meaning any jury would have to deliver a unanimous decision.