Holdout Juror in Lindsay Clancy Mistrial Speaks Out
Left 33%
Center 33%
Right 33%
2 left · 2 center · 2 right
What happened
In January 2023 in Duxbury, Massachusetts, Lindsay Clancy admitted strangling her three children — Cora, 5; Dawson, 3; and Callan, 8 months — with exercise bands and then jumping from a second-story window; she was tried for murder in Plymouth County Superior Court and pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, citing postpartum psychosis. After seven days of deliberations, 11 of 12 jurors voted to acquit her as not criminally responsible while Michael P. Desronvil, the sole holdout, favored a first-degree murder conviction, and Judge William Sullivan declared a mistrial on September 4. In his first interview since the mistrial, on Fox News’s “Fox & Friends” with Kayleigh McEnany, Desronvil said he had no reasonable doubt, described deliberations as tense, and said journalists had swarmed his home, gone through his mail, and peered through windows. Clancy remains at Tewksbury Hospital pending a November status hearing on a possible retrial; defense attorney Kevin Reddington has asked the court to examine Desronvil’s cellphone records and juror questionnaire and has cited a 2021 assault charge against Desronvil’s then-wife that was later dismissed.
Sourcing check · Fully on the record · 6 articles
6 of 6 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.
What these terms mean and how they're counted
- On the record · names a source 6 of 6
- On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Michael P. Desronvil, Michael Desronvil, Kevin Reddington and William Sullivan
- Primary evidence · cites a document or data 0 of 6
- Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: None cited.
- Credits another outlet 0 of 6
- The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
- Unnamed sources 0 of 6
- The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
- How it developed
- When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Oct 15, 14:10 UTC by NBC News, naming its source.
- Not counted 0
- Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out
Unpacked
Right-leaning coverage never reports that fellow jurors accused Desronvil of refusing to apply reasonable doubt. NBC puts that claim next to his insistence he had none, noting other jurors said he was "not following the standard of reasonable doubt." Fox News casts the hung jury as a refusal to compromise, without that charge. Readers of only the right-leaning version hear a holdout standing on evidence, not a juror answering a charge that he refused to apply the law.
Right-leaning coverage puts in the headline a defense request to examine only Desronvil's phone, and his reply that every juror had one on breaks. Left-leaning coverage never mentions that request.
What answers did he give on the juror questionnaire that the defense now wants a judge to examine?
Bottom line
NBC reported the other Clancy jurors said the holdout was not following reasonable doubt, a charge that never appears in his Fox News interview.
The receipts — 6 facts one side's coverage lacks
- Fellow jurors said Desronvil was not following the standard of reasonable doubt and had been blocking a unanimous decision
- Judge William Sullivan rejected a defense motion to override the deadlocked jury and declare Clancy not guilty
- Defense attorney Kevin Reddington said Desronvil stole seven weeks of the other jurors' lives and that Clancy was robbed by this man
- The defense filed a motion seeking an investigation of Desronvil's past domestic-violence allegations, probation records, and juror questionnaire
- Reddington has publicly tried to rebrand the holdout as the obstructionist
- Desronvil said constantly praying guided him through 38 hours of deliberations
The Left View
NBC News and The Guardian portray Desronvil as a holdout who blocked an 11-juror consensus for acquittal and, according to fellow jurors they cite, was unwilling to negotiate, hostile in the jury room, and not following the reasonable-doubt standard. The Guardian quotes Reddington saying Desronvil “stole seven weeks of the life of these other jurors” and that Clancy was “robbed by this man,” and both outlets relay Reddington’s claims that Desronvil was biased against people with mental illness and made a false statement under oath on his questionnaire. NBC notes Reddington’s comment that Desronvil had “every right” to his opinion “but not to refuse to apply the law,” reports the dismissed 2021 charge, and frames the split against a postpartum-psychosis defense that drew women who “showed up in droves to support Clancy.” Those outlets also cover his harassment complaints and his refusal to share the evidence he said backed his vote.
The Right View
Fox News and OAN present Desronvil as standing on the evidence and refusing to compromise, and they foreground his appeal to remember the victims, whom he called “the three angels.” Fox reports his statement that “everybody had their cellphones” and used them only on breaks, contrasting that with Reddington’s request to examine only Desronvil’s records, which Desronvil’s lawyer called a “looney tunes motion.” The coverage emphasizes surveillance footage he said showed journalists going through his mail and peeking through windows, police escorting his fiancée, his denial that he lied on the questionnaire, and his description of the 2021 case as “blown out of proportion” with “no physical abuse, emotional abuse, financial abuse.” Fox highlights his view that Clancy’s “methodical” “execution of the children” and Patrick Clancy’s unreleased 911 call were decisive, and his remark that he would serve again because he serves “a higher power” and “can’t be a coward.”
Our Take (balanced)
The left’s strongest argument is that eleven jurors who sat through the same trial were prepared to find Clancy not criminally responsible, and that those jurors — plus the defense — described Desronvil as hostile and as refusing to apply the reasonable-doubt and insanity instructions, a charge given extra weight by Reddington’s questionnaire and dismissed-charge allegations. The right’s strongest argument is that a juror who is unconvinced is not obliged to join an acquittal, that Desronvil pointed to planning and the 911 call as evidence of criminal responsibility, and that exclusive demands for his phone records plus public branding as “the obstructionist” look like targeting the dissenter, consistent with documented press intrusion at his home. The central unresolved tension is whether the deadlock was a lawful holdout based on the evidence or a refusal to apply the criminal-responsibility standard — something neither a television interview nor closed-door juror recriminations can settle on the public record.
6 sources
- Lone holdout juror in Lindsay Clancy mistrial says he has felt harassed
- Holdout juror in Lindsay Clancy trial gives first interview since mistrial
- Lindsay Clancy holdout juror says everyone had phones as defense seeks only his records
- Clancy trial holdout juror details ‘tense’ deliberations, urges public to remember ‘the three angels’
- Lindsay Clancy holdout juror's 'media tour' not helping: Ex-prosecutor
- Lindsay Clancy holdout juror's interview 'not helping' privacy: Rahmani
More stories
The week's bottom lines, in your inbox
One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.