Holdout Juror in Lindsay Clancy Trial Faces Domestic Violence Allegations and Eviction, Raising Jury-Selection Questions

When a juror refuses to deliberate, the case can go nowhere; but when that juror carries a shadowy past, the courtroom drama turns into a public‑safety debate.

In the high‑profile murder trial that began on July 20, 2026, the jury was left dead‑locked after nearly six weeks of testimony. Prosecutors charged Lindsay Clancy with three counts of murder for strangling her children in January 2023, while the defense argued postpartum psychosis and bipolar disorder negated criminal responsibility. After a week of deliberation, the judge declared a mistrial on September 4, 2026, and a fresh trial is set for September 29. Yet the mistrial also exposed a troubling detail: a single juror had declined to participate in the discussion.

Court documents and interviews with family members reveal that the holdout juror—an unnamed Plymouth County resident—has a documented history of domestic‑violence allegations. In September 2021, he was charged with assaulting his wife after a 13‑year‑old nephew called 911 when the juror allegedly grabbed his mother by the throat and threw her into a dresser. A police report from the Brockton District Court notes that the juror’s mother shouted, “You’re evil!” as officers arrested him. The couple later divorced, and the criminal charge was dismissed.

That same year, the nephew filed a restraining order after the juror allegedly pushed him to the ground and repeatedly punched him in the face. The nephew’s affidavit claimed the juror told him, “You ruined my life,” and added that the juror had been “doing this for a long time.” The restraining order remained active when the juror was selected for the Clancy trial and while he listened to evidence.

Housing court records show the juror has not paid rent at his home since March of the current year. The landlord obtained a judgment for more than $12,000 in unpaid rent and is proceeding with an eviction. The eviction case was filed while the jury was deliberating.

Several jurors described the holdout as arrogant and noted that he refused to engage in discussion. One juror called his behavior “shocking.” Family members who were contacted by investigators said the juror had been estranged from them since the 2021 incident and that they were unaware of his participation in the trial.

Massachusetts law requires prospective jurors to disclose arrests, charges, or court orders on a confidential questionnaire. Legal analyst Michael Coyne said that the juror should have checked the boxes for the assault charge, the restraining order, and the unpaid rent. Coyne added that if the questionnaire had been completed truthfully, the juror would likely have been disqualified.

The juror’s questionnaire is not a public record, and it is unclear whether it still exists or was destroyed after the mistrial. The investigators have asked the Plymouth District Attorney’s Office and the defense team for comment, but both sides declined to speak.

The case raises concerns about the jury‑selection process in Massachusetts, especially for cases involving serious criminal charges. If prosecutors review the questionnaire and find that the juror did not disclose relevant information, it could be considered a crime.

At this time, the holdout juror has not spoken publicly, and the jury list remains impounded. The next trial of Lindsay Clancy is set for September 29, 2026, and it is unclear whether the same juror will be called to serve again.

The investigation into the holdout juror’s background is ongoing, and further details may emerge as the new trial approaches.