Jury Deadlocked

Just after 10 a.m. on a Tuesday morning, the jury in the Lindsey Clancy trial handed Judge Sullivan a note that read: "After many hours of deliberation, we are unable to come to a unanimous decision." The twelve jurors had been tasked with choosing among several possible outcomes—acquittal, not guilty by reason of insanity, manslaughter, second-degree murder, or first-degree murder for each of the three children Clancy was charged with killing. After days of deliberation, they could not agree on any of them.

The Deadlock and What It Means

The jury's inability to reach a unanimous decision placed the trial at a critical crossroads. Under Massachusetts law, Judge Sullivan had the option to send the jurors back to continue deliberating, which he did, reminding them of the 80 witnesses and 300 exhibits they had heard and seen over five weeks. But if they return a second time without a verdict, the next step could be what's known as a "dynamite charge"—the judge instructing jurors to reexamine their opinions and consider the views of the majority without violating their own convictions.

Former prosecutor David Gelman, who spoke with the podcast host, explained that he didn't expect the judge to send them back a second time. "Either they can do it or they can't," he said. "I don't think going back there a second time will really change anybody's mind."