Hung Jury, Then What? Lindsay Clancy's Double Jeopardy Bid
Lindsay Clancy's first murder trial ended in a hung jury. Her lawyers now say a retrial would be double jeopardy. Here is how that argument works in Massachusetts.
November 3, 2026 · 3 min read
By Jocelyn C. Stewart
Lindsay Clancy's first murder trial ended in September with a deadlocked jury. On Nov. 2, her lawyers asked a Massachusetts judge to end the case for good, arguing that a second trial would be double jeopardy. The judge did not rule, but he said a retrial could come in March.
The hearing. Judge William Sullivan heard the motion in Plymouth Superior Court and took it under advisement, The Associated Press, via KSL, reported. He hopes to rule on the pending motions by a Nov. 16 conference, according to ABC News.
The charges. Clancy is charged with murder in the 2023 deaths of her three young children. She has pleaded not guilty. Her defense says postpartum psychosis left her not criminally responsible. Prosecutors say she knew her actions were wrong. The charges are unproven.
How the first trial ended. The jury split 11 to 1 in favor of acquittal, with one holdout, AP and CBS News Boston reported. The judge declared a mistrial.
The defense argument. Defense lawyer Martin Weinberg argued that after two jury notes about the holdout, the judge should have questioned jurors further. AP reported the defense says that could have led to removing the holdout and letting deliberations continue.
The prosecution's answer. Prosecutor Jennifer Sprague said the record shows the juror "refused to agree," not that he refused to deliberate, ABC News reported. Prosecutors plan to retry Clancy but have not decided on the charges, according to AP and CBS.
Also pending. Prosecutors want a gag order, which the defense calls an unconstitutional prior restraint. The defense wants records about the holdout juror, whose lawyer disputes its claims, AP and CBS reported.
Her law firm's website explains how the Double Jeopardy Clause works in military cases.