Paula Devlin, a juror in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial, said it was Clancy’s ex-husband’s testimony that may have influenced her most, while the lone juror who held out may have felt attacked and refused to change her vote for that reason. In an interview with “CBS Mornings” co-host Gayle King on Friday, Devlin said that when they began deliberating, jurors were more divided, with eight saying Clancy was not responsible. two undecided, and two who pleaded guilty to murder. The jury was made up of nine women and three men. Devlin said ages ranged from 22 to 70, and there was only one member who was a minority, a black man in his 30s who was also the only holdout. “I was leaning toward not being responsible for all the evidence I had heard,” Devlin told King. “And there were certain things I wanted to see when we started deliberating. Everything we talked about and every point everyone in the room made reinforced it more and more.” Clancy was accused of murdering her three young children, 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson, and 8-month-old Callan, in her home in Duxbury, Massachusetts, on January 24, 2023. Her attorneys argued that she was not criminally responsible because she was overmedicated and suffering from postpartum psychosis. Prosecutors argued that Clancy planned it and knew right from wrong. The highly publicized trial ended in a mistrial last Friday after jurors were unable to reach a unanimous verdict after more than seven days of deliberation. Several jurors, including Devlin, have said the jury was split 11-1 in favor of finding Clancy not responsible. She said they spent several days seeing if they could convince the holdout, who believed Clancy should be found guilty of murder, to come to their side, but he wouldn’t budge. Lindsay Clancy looks at the jury at the conclusion of her murder trial in Plymouth, Massachusetts, on September 4, 2026. Greg Derr/Pool/AFP “We all worked together. And I don’t know if it was to convince him to begin with,” Devlin told King. “We all worked together to convince each other once we got to that point where it was 10-2. I felt really bad for them because they felt attacked. And there’s no way not to do that.” “Even in a normal conversation, when they target you and you have to defend yourself, it’s a difficult thing to do,” he added. “We don’t have to do that every time.” Devlin said two witnesses in particular solidified his decision about the verdict: Dr. Phillip Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist, and Patrick Clancy, Lindsay’s husband at the time of the murders and who found the children dead after Lindsay attempted suicide. Paula Devlin, a juror in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial, discusses the verdict in the case on Friday, September 11, 2026. CBS News “I think Dr. Resnick, your testimony about altruistic filicide was really shocking,” Devlin said, referring to the psychological condition when a parent believes that killing their children is in their best interest. “Throughout the entire trial, we had all the witnesses, nothing but good things had been said about Lindsay and what an amazing mother she was, how much she loved her children.” “We saw it in every photograph that was taken in the house the night this happened,” he continued. “Everywhere you looked, there was love. There was a big sign that said, ‘It’s a Wonderful Life.’ There was nothing to say she wasn’t that. And then to hear someone talk about the real reason why this could suddenly happen, it was really shocking. “Devlin told King that the emotional testimony of Patrick Clancy, Lindsay’s now ex-husband, was particularly powerful. “I think the prosecution tried to push Patrick to say something derogatory and he didn’t do it,” Devlin said. “And that was very shocking, even after all this time and even after knowing this happened and losing her three children, I still couldn’t say anything really bad about her.” Patrick Clancy will be sworn in for his second day of testimony on July 29, 2026. David L. Ryan/Pool Clancy’s attorney, Kevin Reddington, filed a motion Thursday to have the mistrial dismissed and for Clancy to be acquitted in the case. Reddington told “CBS Mornings” earlier this week that he decided to file the motion after hearing from several jurors about how the person who resisted was not properly following procedures. “I would defend that person’s right to be an obstacle for a month. That’s what the system is all about,” Reddington told “CBS Mornings” on Wednesday. “But when the foreman clearly and unequivocally indicated in the jury question that this person had doubts, reasonable doubts, as we know now, and simply refused to listen to the judge’s instructions about the law, that’s when I got angry, because that’s why I used the expressions and the terms that I used. It just wasn’t right.” Devlin said he was not in favor of dismissing the case even though he believes Clancy was not guilty by reason of insanity. He said justice would be for Clancy to “get the help he needs” rather than going free if Reddington’s appeal is successful. “I don’t feel good about it,” he said of the filing, which experts told CBS News is a long shot. “Part of the reason we wanted ‘not responsible’ was because everyone wants justice for children.” “Those kids never left that room. They never left our hearts. And that was a way to get justice for those kids. This wouldn’t have happened if Lindsay hadn’t gotten lost in the system and the system had failed her,” he said. The motion to dismiss will be heard on Sept. 29 at a previously scheduled status hearing. The district attorney has not said whether he plans to refile the case, while Reddington also appeared open to a deal that would include lesser charges for Clancy. However, he said it’s up to District Attorney Tim Cruz. More from CBS News Go deeper with The Free Press in:
