It has only been a few days since Lindsay Clancy’s trial ended in a mistrial, and now we are starting to hear from some of the jurors about what was happening inside that jury room. I have been following this trial closely, so hearing what they are saying now definitely caught my attention.

What really stands out to me is that three jurors have now spoken publicly about the deliberations. According to their accounts, the jury was split 11–1. The foreperson has said the holdout juror acknowledged having reasonable doubt, but still would not agree to a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity. That is a detail I keep coming back to, because it raises even more questions for me about how this trial ultimately ended in a mistrial.

Then there is what happens next. Lindsay’s attorney, Kevin Reddington, says he plans to ask the court to prevent the Commonwealth from trying her again, arguing that double jeopardy should apply because there was not a “manifest necessity” for the mistrial. That motion has not been decided—and as of today, I have not seen the actual motion filed yet—so I don’t want to get ahead of the court. But this is definitely the next filing I’ll be watching for.

This case clearly isn’t over. I’ll be watching for Reddington’s filing, the Commonwealth’s response, and what happens at the September 29 status hearing. When those documents become available, I’ll go back to the records, add them to the site, and we can look at what they actually say—not just what we hear about them.

Sources

Reuters — Three jurors discuss the Lindsay Clancy mistrial — September 9, 2026

CBS News — Reddington plans to ask the court to bar a retrial — September 9, 2026