Lindsay Clancy must face a retrial despite the defense's motions

By Adele Rutherford · Reporting from Atlanta · September 29, 2026

The defense seeks to dismiss charges and probe a holdout juror, but Judge Sullivan should uphold the process and allow the Commonwealth to retry the case.

Procedure is where power lives. The Plymouth Superior Court docket is cluttered with attempts to rewrite the score. Lindsay Clancy returns to court after the September 4 mistrial declaration. Judge William Sullivan acted when the jury failed to reach a unanimous verdict. They deliberated for seven days.

The defense team, led by Kevin Reddington, argued Clancy lacked criminal responsibility. They cited the standard in Commonwealth v. McHoul. Under McHoul, a person is not responsible if mental disease prevents them from appreciating their conduct's criminality. The defense claims Clancy suffered from postpartum psychosis and bipolar disorder. She killed her children—Cora, Dawson, and Callan—in January 2023.

Eleven jurors voted to find Clancy not guilty by reason of mental defect. Michael Peguy Desronvil stood alone as the holdout for first-degree murder. The defense now attempts to dismantle the legal threshold of evidence sufficiency. They mirror the plaintiffs in Brown v. Board of Education who challenged the doctrine of separate facilities. Calling a jury deadlocked is within a judge's discretion. Crying foul over a hung jury ignores how criminal trials function.

The defense filed motions to dismiss on double jeopardy grounds. Double jeopardy prevents a person from being tried twice for the same crime after an acquittal. They also demand an inquiry into the holdout juror. This threatens the architecture of jury secrecy. Reddington requested information on the juror's questionnaire and phone records.

As reported by CNN and the Boston Herald, Desronvil's attorney, Edward Paltzik, defended his client. Professor David Rossman noted the motion to investigate the juror is a long shot. This fight over the legal threshold for insanity seeks to turn private deliberations inside out. It mirrors the battles in State of Florida v. George Zimmerman over the standard of self-defense.

Courts are reluctant to second-guess a juror's reasoning. Both sides agreed to adjourn the motion to investigate the juror. The attempt to penalize dissent should trouble those who value an independent panel.

The defense argues a retrial is an "exercise in futility." Many medical experts agreed Clancy was mentally ill. Brad Bailey noted the state is unlikely to get a better result. District Attorney Timothy Cruz said no decision on a retrial would be made that day. This plea to mercy mistakes a criminal docket for a therapeutic exercise.

Professor Daniel Medwed observed that prosecutors are "ministers of justice." Cruz is a law-and-order Republican in Plymouth County. He is disinclined to dismiss charges after an 80-witness trial. Dismissing would read as an institutional admission of failure. Professor Heather Cucolo says prosecutors must consider if a good-faith basis for guilt remains.

A rule that only works for your preferred outcome is no rule at all. Treating an 11-to-1 hung jury as an error invites administrative collapse. A mistrial is neither a conviction nor an acquittal. Judge Sullivan should deny the motion to dismiss. The state should try its case before a new jury.

Lindsay Clancy must face a retrial despite the defense's motions

Sources