The Lindsay Clancy murder trial is expected to end with a hung jury and a mistrial will be declared.
The reason for the mistrial will apparently be the inability of one man to accept that Lindsay Clancy was not guilty of murdering her children.
Earlier this morning, it was wrongly reported that the trial had already ended. In fact, the mistrial declaration was put on hold for an hour and the jury was not dismissed. Clancy’s defense attorney Kevin Reddington has been given 60 minutes to file an appeal asking that he be allowed to argue that the jury should not be dismissed, and the holdout juror be replaced so that the proceedings can continue without a dismissal.
As the trial reconvened on seventh day of jury deliberations, Judge William Sullivan heard arguments from the prosecution and the defense regarding the single holdout juror who, according to a note sent by the jury foreperson yesterday, ”refuses to listen to the law … on reasonable doubt.”
EXPLORE MORE
Congressman Scott Perry Exposes Major Washington Overreach During Live TeleTown Hall
Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA) recently connected with constituents across Pennsylvania's 10th Congressional…
European Commission probes cyberattack on mobile device management system
The European Commission is investigating a cyberattack after detecting signs that its…
Armed Israeli settlers beat and rob AFP photographer
Jaafar Ashtiyeh was reportedly struck with rifle butts despite being clearly identified…
Why did the variable-sweep wing survive on large aircraft?
Tu-22M and Tu-160 – from the experimental Project 145 to the Tu-160MVariable-sweep…
Trump Stuns By Outright Dismissing Notion Putin Preparing To Attack A NATO State
President Trump has added fuel to the fire of controversy and speculation…
Hackers abused React Native CLI flaw to deploy Rust malware before public disclosure
Hackers exploit a critical React Native CLI flaw (CVE-2025-11953) to run remote…
Before day began, defense attorney Kevin Reddington filed a motion asking that “there be no further sidebars and this trial and all related proceedings will be handled in open court.”
It is now abundantly evident that Reddington believed the jury was split eleven to one in favor of his client. His statements to the court show that he wanted the holdout juror removed from the case.
Judge Sullivan said, over defendant attorney Reddington’s objection, he would not conduct a further inquiry of the juror causing the impasse and would send the jury back to deliberate. He stated that he would direct the jury panel to “follow the law as I give it to you, whether you agree with it or not.”
At 9:30 a.m. Sullivan called the jury into his courtroom, and after giving a few instructions, sent them back to deliberate.
Clues
While Reddington was careful not to mention the jury number of the holdout juror being discussed, during his comments to the judge he let it slip that the juror is a “he.”
Although the note sent to the judge yesterday has not been shared with the public, the judge revealed that the substance of the note was “the juror acknowledged doubt, but refuses to apply it to the verdict.”
“That note does not indicate that this is a person who has refused to follow the law,” said Judge Sullivan. He further said that when he polled each juror separately yesterday, each one, including the juror at issue, had said that they could follow the law.
