Holdout in Lindsay Clancy trial said he had reasonable doubt but still wouldn’t acquit, juror says

___

EDITOR’S NOTE: This story includes discussion of suicide. If you or someone you know needs help, the national suicide and crisis lifeline in the U.S. is available by calling or texting 988.

___

In the interview with NBC10, three jurors described the seven days of deliberations that failed to produce a verdict.

Foreperson Ronni Carlson said she thought at one point that the group had finally persuaded the juror arguing for a conviction to vote for an acquittal.

“He admitted he had reasonable doubt. I started filling out the forms, I was so excited. There were three forms I had to fill out, and I started filling them out. I wrote my signature on each one.

And then he said, ‘But I’m still not going to say that she’s not guilty by reason of insanity.’”

The names of the jurors have been temporarily sealed by the judge, and the holdout juror has not yet come forward and given a public account of what happened inside the jury room.

On three occasions, jurors sent the judge notes saying they were unable to reach a unanimous decision. Carlson also sent the judge a note complaining that a single juror wouldn’t follow the court’s instructions about reasonable doubt.

Juror Paula Devlin described that holdout juror as “arrogant.”

“He really did not take anything that anybody said,” she told NBC10.

Judge William Sullivan questioned the jurors, re-read his instructions regarding reasonable doubt, then asked them to keep trying to agree on a verdict.

Clancy’s lawyer, Kevin Reddington, previously said he believed Clancy would have been acquitted if not for the stubbornness of a single juror.

Jurors know “they were robbed by one man, for whatever his agenda was, who stole seven weeks of the life of these other jurors that were so attentive, so beautiful, so wonderful,” he said.

Clancy could have been sentenced to life in prison if convicted of murder. If acquitted, the judge could have ordered her confined to a mental health facility until a mental health evaluation determined she would no longer be a danger to the public if released. Clancy could face another trial.

Foreperson says evidence showed Clancy loved her children

Over 21 days of testimony, jurors heard how Clancy’s mental health collapsed after the birth of her youngest child. They heard from Clancy’s family members, who described her decline, and medical providers who treated her in the months ahead of the killings.

The evidence proved Clancy loved her children, said Carlson, who pointed to Clancy’s journals and testimony from her former mother-in-law, who called Clancy a nurturing and loving mother.

“So she had to have snapped, and not known what she was doing,” Carlson told NBC10. “To me, it was proof that she didn’t know what she was doing.”

Juror Kellie Farina said prosecutors lacked compassion and found them to be cold.

“I know it’s their job, but in a case like this, you expect a little bit,” she said.

Jurors also heard the 911 call Clancy’s then-husband made when he found their children strangled. Farina described it as “the most horrific thing.” The jury played it again in the deliberation room and jurors cried, she said.

“We were just like, ‘My God, the desperation.’ The despair in his voice was … it’s something that will stick with me,” Farina said.

___

AP reporter Jessica Hill reported from Las Vegas.

Jessica Hill, The Associated Press

by The Canadian Press

Holdout in Lindsay Clancy trial said he had reasonable doubt but still wouldn’t acquit, juror says

What's Trending