Judge Rules Lindsay Clancy Can Be Tried Again, Rejecting Her Double Jeopardy Bid

A Plymouth judge cleared the way for a Lindsay Clancy retrial, rejecting a double jeopardy claim and a probe of the holdout juror. What the rulings mean.

Share this article

The historic Old County Courthouse in Plymouth, Massachusetts, the town where the Lindsay Clancy retrial ruling was issued, file photo
The historic Old County Courthouse in Plymouth, Massachusetts (file photo). Photo: Swampyank, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 3.0

A Plymouth Superior Court judge on Monday, Nov. 9, cleared the way for Lindsay Clancy to be tried again on murder charges in the deaths of her three young children in Duxbury, rejecting her lawyers’ argument that a second trial would violate her constitutional protection against double jeopardy. Clancy has pleaded not guilty and is presumed innocent.

“Because the Court concludes that there was a manifest need for a mistrial based on the jury’s deadlock,” Judge William F. Sullivan wrote in a 16-page ruling, “a retrial on the murder indictments does not violate Clancy’s right not to be placed in double jeopardy,” USA Today reported. Whether a Lindsay Clancy retrial actually happens is up to Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz, who has not announced a decision. The case returns to court on Nov. 16.

Advertisement

What the judge decided

Sullivan issued three rulings, according to Massachusetts Legal Resources, citing Boston 25 News and WCVB. He denied the defense motion to dismiss on double jeopardy grounds. He refused a defense request for records about the holdout juror, including questionnaires and cellphone data, and for questioning that juror under oath. And he denied, without prejudice, a prosecution request for a gag order limiting what lawyers can say to the media, meaning prosecutors may ask again “if circumstances change.”

Defense lawyers had argued that Sullivan acted too soon in declaring a mistrial on Sept. 4 and should have questioned and possibly removed the holdout juror, citing jury notes saying the juror was not following the law on reasonable doubt, Reuters reported. Prosecutors countered that questioning the holdout could have meant the judge improperly interfering with deliberations.

Sullivan agreed with that concern. “The Court’s primary concern must be protecting the fairness of the proceedings and avoiding the possibility of a coerced verdict,” he wrote, according to the Massachusetts Legal Resources summary. He also wrote that granting the cellphone request without a proper basis would be “an improper intrusion into this juror’s privacy.” That reasoning tracks the Supreme Judicial Court’s 2025 decision in the Karen Read case, which called a hung jury “a traditional example” of manifest necessity.

How the first trial ended

At the first trial, no one disputed that Clancy strangled her daughter Cora, 5, and sons Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months, with exercise bands on Jan. 24, 2023, in the basement of the family’s Duxbury home, Reuters reported. She then cut herself and jumped from a second-story window, leaving her paralyzed. Her lawyers argued she was suffering from postpartum psychosis and was not criminally responsible, Massachusetts’ version of the insanity defense.

The 26-day trial included 90 witnesses and about 300 exhibits, and jurors deliberated about 27 hours over four days before the deadlock, according to the Boston 25 account of the ruling. WCVB reported an 11-1 split in favor of acquittal. Several jurors later said in televised interviews that, except for one holdout, they were prepared to find Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity, which would have meant commitment to a state psychiatric hospital. The holdout later said in a statement through his attorney that he “didn’t have any doubts” about her guilt, USA Today reported. A first-degree murder conviction in Massachusetts carries a mandatory life sentence without parole.

Advertisement

What happens next

Sullivan has suggested a second trial could take place in March, Reuters reported, but no date has been set. Asked last week whether the state planned to retry Clancy, Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Sprague said, “We’re not at that point yet,” WCVB reported. Cruz has said he would talk more about the path forward after the Nov. 16 hearing.

The ruling comes as another high-profile Massachusetts murder jury drew scrutiny: earlier this month, the jury in the Birchmore case began deliberating in the Matthew Farwell trial. Follow more courts and public safety coverage in our Boston news section.

If you or someone you know is struggling after childbirth, the National Maternal Mental Health Hotline is available 24/7 at 1-833-TLC-MAMA (1-833-852-6262).

Sources

Read next in Crime & Law

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Get The Boston Report newsletter

Boston news, the War Room and our Iran briefing, in your inbox. Unsubscribe anytime.

Get The Boston Report newsletter
Boston news, the War Room and our Iran briefing in your inbox. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sign up