{"id":2941,"date":"2026-09-04T14:08:16","date_gmt":"2026-09-04T14:08:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941"},"modified":"2026-09-04T14:08:16","modified_gmt":"2026-09-04T14:08:16","slug":"watch-lindsay-clancy-defense-and-judge-erupt-in-heated-showdown","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941","title":{"rendered":"WATCH: Lindsay Clancy Defense And Judge Erupt In Heated Showdown"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

Tensions flared Friday after Judge William Sullivan denied Lindsay Clancy\u2019s defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, a request to remove the lone juror accused of holding up a verdict, sparking a fiery exchange over the judge\u2019s reasonable doubt instructions.<\/p>\n

Read more Trump Names New Acting Head Of U.S. Army<\/a><\/p>\n

Reddington pressed Sullivan to be more forceful in reminding jurors of the reasonable doubt standard, arguing that the judge\u2019s instructions Thursday had been too soft.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cI would ask that you not just give them, as I described it yesterday, a soft inquiry where you listen to my instructions. I would ask that you specifically direct their attention to proof beyond a reasonable doubt and re-instruct them on that forcefully,\u201d Reddington said.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cI think I did that yesterday, didn\u2019t I?\u201d Sullivan snapped back.<\/span><\/p>\n

Reddington kept arguing that Sullivan\u2019s reasonable doubt instructions lacked force, provoking an irritated response from the judge.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWhat do you want me to do? Get a brass band? I read the instruction as written by the [Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court]. The fact that I perhaps didn\u2019t give it my full inflection, I\u2019m sorry about that. I\u2019m not an actor. I\u2019ve just given the instructions,\u201d Sullivan said.<\/span><\/p>\n

Reddington then pressed the judge over what he characterized as glossing over reasonable doubt instructions during Thursday\u2019s heated proceedings.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cBut just in case the record is clear, I am specifically not glossing over this issue. I have thought about this issue long and hard. I know the defendant objects, but the characterization that I\u2019m glossing over it. Trust me, that\u2019s not the situation,\u201d Sullivan said. \u201cA<\/span>nd I\u2019ll try and give this with more pizzazz than I gave yesterday, I suppose.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The tense exchange erupted moments after Sullivan rejected Reddington\u2019s bid to remove the lone holdout juror. The defense revealed in open court that there were two notes alleging the juror was refusing to follow the law. Reddington brought the jury back into the courtroom and ordered the panel to resume deliberations.<\/p>\n

\u201cYou should consider all of my instructions as a whole. You may not ignore any instruction and give special attention to any one instruction. You must follow the law as I give it to you, whether you agree with it or not,\u201d Sullivan said in the latest round of instructions.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The holdout juror was first identified Thursday after the foreperson sent Sullivan a note alleging that one juror was refusing to follow the judge\u2019s instructions on reasonable doubt. The panel of nine women and three men remained deadlocked after more than 35 hours of deliberations.<\/span><\/p>\n

The surprise note sent the courtroom into a scramble and sparked a heated sidebar involving Sullivan, the defense, and the prosecution. Reporters inside the courthouse described Clancy\u2019s attorney as visibly angry and frustrated.<\/span><\/p>\n

In an unusual moment, Reddington wheeled Clancy over to the sidebar so she could hear the discussion.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cShe has a right to know what\u2019s going on,\u201d Reddington<\/span> said<\/span>. \u201cIf it\u2019s not going to be in open court, the judge said I could bring her up so she could hear.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Sullivan then brought the jurors into the courtroom one by one and asked whether they could follow his instructions. Moments later, he brought the entire jury back into the courtroom and explained the meaning of reasonable doubt before ordering them to return to deliberations.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cI want to remind you that you are required to follow my instructions on the law as I gave them to you,\u201d Sullivan told the jury. \u201cProof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond all possible doubt.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more Red State Supreme Court Deals Blow To House Republicans Ahead Of Midterms<\/a><\/p>\n

Reddington asked Sullivan to remove the juror accused of disregarding the instructions and replace that juror with an alternate. Sullivan denied the request, saying he could not determine which side of the jury room dispute was correct.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cI don\u2019t feel that it is proper for me to side with one side or the other of the deliberations,\u201d Sullivan said,<\/span> according<\/span> to CBS Boston. \u201cI don\u2019t feel it\u2019s appropriate for me to say I agree with one juror or the 11.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Prosecutor Jennifer Sprague also opposed removing the juror, arguing that Sullivan had responded appropriately by questioning each member of the panel.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cI think what Your Honor has done by asking each juror if they\u2019re able to follow the law and then giving a general instruction on reasonable doubt is appropriate,\u201d she said.<\/span><\/p>\n

The dispute is particularly consequential because Massachusetts places an unusual burden on the prosecution when a defendant raises an insanity defense.<\/span> Under Massachusetts law<\/span>, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was sane and criminally responsible at the time of the crime.<\/span><\/p>\n

Her defense team argues that postpartum psychosis left her unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions.<\/span><\/p>\n

It is unclear how the jury is divided or which verdict the 11 jurors have reportedly selected. That information will not be released unless the jury reaches a verdict or the court declares a mistrial.<\/span><\/p>\n

Reddington<\/span> said<\/span> the foreperson\u2019s note showed that 11 jurors had reached a decision while one was refusing to apply the reasonable doubt standard.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cA note that the judge already has says there are 11 jurors that have made a decision and one juror will not apply reasonable doubt,\u201d Reddington said.<\/span><\/p>\n

Asked about the possibility of a mistrial, Reddington dismissed the idea.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cI don\u2019t want a mistrial. Why would I want a mistrial? I kicked the sh*t out of their case,\u201d he<\/span> told<\/span> reporters.<\/span><\/p>\n

Clancy, a former labor and delivery nurse, has admitted to strangling her three children with exercise bands in 2023 inside the family\u2019s Duxbury, Massachusetts, home. Her defense team argues that the medical system failed her and that postpartum psychosis left her not criminally responsible for her actions.<\/span><\/p>\n

The jury is weighing several possible outcomes, including first-degree murder, second-degree murder, manslaughter, not guilty by reason of insanity, or acquittal.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

If convicted of first-degree murder, Clancy faces life in prison without the possibility of parole. In the event of a mistrial or insanity-based acquittal, Clancy is expected to<\/span> remain<\/span> in a state-run psychiatric hospital for the foreseeable future. A mistrial would leave the criminal case unresolved and could result in another trial.<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more Fetterman Hits Abdul El-Sayed With $100,000 Double Dare<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Tensions flared Friday after Judge William Sullivan denied Lindsay Clancy\u2019s defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, a request to remove the lone juror accused of holding up a verdict, sparking a fiery exchange over the judge\u2019s reasonable doubt instructions.Reddington pressed Sullivan to be more forceful in reminding jurors of the reasonable doubt standard, arguing that the judge\u2019s instructions Thursday had been too soft.\u201cI would ask that you not just give them, as I described it yesterday, a soft inquiry where you listen to my instructions. I would ask that you specifically direct their attention to proof beyond a reasonable doubt and re-instruct them on that forcefully,\u201d Reddington said.\u201cI think I did that yesterday, didn\u2019t I?\u201d Sullivan snapped back.Reddington kept arguing that Sullivan\u2019s reasonable doubt instructions lacked force, provoking an irritated response from the judge.\u201cWhat do you want me to do? Get a brass band? I read the instruction as written by the [Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court]. The fact that I perhaps didn\u2019t give it my full inflection, I\u2019m sorry about that. I\u2019m not an actor. I\u2019ve just given the instructions,\u201d Sullivan said.Reddington then pressed the judge over what he characterized as glossing over reasonable doubt instructions during Thursday\u2019s heated proceedings.\u201cBut just in case the record is clear, I am specifically not glossing over this issue. I have thought about this issue long and hard. I know the defendant objects, but the characterization that I\u2019m glossing over it. Trust me, that\u2019s not the situation,\u201d Sullivan said. \u201cAnd I\u2019ll try and give this with more pizzazz than I gave yesterday, I suppose.\u201d\u00a0The tense exchange erupted moments after Sullivan rejected Reddington\u2019s bid to remove the lone holdout juror. The defense revealed in open court that there were two notes alleging the juror was refusing to follow the law. Reddington brought the jury back into the courtroom and ordered the panel to resume deliberations.\u201cYou should consider all of my instructions as a whole. You may not ignore any instruction and give special attention to any one instruction. You must follow the law as I give it to you, whether you agree with it or not,\u201d Sullivan said in the latest round of instructions.\u00a0The holdout juror was first identified Thursday after the foreperson sent Sullivan a note alleging that one juror was refusing to follow the judge\u2019s instructions on reasonable doubt. The panel of nine women and three men remained deadlocked after more than 35 hours of deliberations.The surprise note sent the courtroom into a scramble and sparked a heated sidebar involving Sullivan, the defense, and the prosecution. Reporters inside the courthouse described Clancy\u2019s attorney as visibly angry and frustrated.In an unusual moment, Reddington wheeled Clancy over to the sidebar so she could hear the discussion.\u201cShe has a right to know what\u2019s going on,\u201d Reddington said. \u201cIf it\u2019s not going to be in open court, the judge said I could bring her up so she could hear.\u201dSullivan then brought the jurors into the courtroom one by one and asked whether they could follow his instructions. Moments later, he brought the entire jury back into the courtroom and explained the meaning of reasonable doubt before ordering them to return to deliberations.\u201cI want to remind you that you are required to follow my instructions on the law as I gave them to you,\u201d Sullivan told the jury. \u201cProof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond all possible doubt.\u201dReddington asked Sullivan to remove the juror accused of disregarding the instructions and replace that juror with an alternate. Sullivan denied the request, saying he could not determine which side of the jury room dispute was correct.\u201cI don\u2019t feel that it is proper for me to side with one side or the other of the deliberations,\u201d Sullivan said, according to CBS Boston. \u201cI don\u2019t feel it\u2019s appropriate for me to say I agree with one juror or the 11.\u201dProsecutor Jennifer Sprague also opposed removing the juror, arguing that Sullivan had responded appropriately by questioning each member of the panel.\u201cI think what Your Honor has done by asking each juror if they\u2019re able to follow the law and then giving a general instruction on reasonable doubt is appropriate,\u201d she said.The dispute is particularly consequential because Massachusetts places an unusual burden on the prosecution when a defendant raises an insanity defense. Under Massachusetts law, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was sane and criminally responsible at the time of the crime.Her defense team argues that postpartum psychosis left her unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions.It is unclear how the jury is divided or which verdict the 11 jurors have reportedly selected. That information will not be released unless the jury reaches a verdict or the court declares a mistrial.Reddington said the foreperson\u2019s note showed that 11 jurors had reached a decision while one was refusing to apply the reasonable doubt standard.\u201cA note that the judge already has says there are 11 jurors that have made a decision and one juror will not apply reasonable doubt,\u201d Reddington said.Asked about the possibility of a mistrial, Reddington dismissed the idea.\u201cI don\u2019t want a mistrial. Why would I want a mistrial? I kicked the sh*t out of their case,\u201d he told reporters.Clancy, a former labor and delivery nurse, has admitted to strangling her three children with exercise bands in 2023 inside the family\u2019s Duxbury, Massachusetts, home. Her defense team argues that the medical system failed her and that postpartum psychosis left her not criminally responsible for her actions.The jury is weighing several possible outcomes, including first-degree murder, second-degree murder, manslaughter, not guilty by reason of insanity, or acquittal.\u00a0If convicted of first-degree murder, Clancy faces life in prison without the possibility of parole. In the event of a mistrial or insanity-based acquittal, Clancy is expected to remain in a state-run psychiatric hospital for the foreseeable future. A mistrial would leave the criminal case unresolved and could result in another trial.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2912,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2941","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news-2"],"yoast_head":"\nWATCH: Lindsay Clancy Defense And Judge Erupt In Heated Showdown - Blue Route Journal<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"WATCH: Lindsay Clancy Defense And Judge Erupt In Heated Showdown - Blue Route Journal\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Tensions flared Friday after Judge William Sullivan denied Lindsay Clancy\u2019s defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, a request to remove the lone juror accused of holding up a verdict, sparking a fiery exchange over the judge\u2019s reasonable doubt instructions.Reddington pressed Sullivan to be more forceful in reminding jurors of the reasonable doubt standard, arguing that the judge\u2019s instructions Thursday had been too soft.\u201cI would ask that you not just give them, as I described it yesterday, a soft inquiry where you listen to my instructions. I would ask that you specifically direct their attention to proof beyond a reasonable doubt and re-instruct them on that forcefully,\u201d Reddington said.\u201cI think I did that yesterday, didn\u2019t I?\u201d Sullivan snapped back.Reddington kept arguing that Sullivan\u2019s reasonable doubt instructions lacked force, provoking an irritated response from the judge.\u201cWhat do you want me to do? Get a brass band? I read the instruction as written by the [Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court]. The fact that I perhaps didn\u2019t give it my full inflection, I\u2019m sorry about that. I\u2019m not an actor. I\u2019ve just given the instructions,\u201d Sullivan said.Reddington then pressed the judge over what he characterized as glossing over reasonable doubt instructions during Thursday\u2019s heated proceedings.\u201cBut just in case the record is clear, I am specifically not glossing over this issue. I have thought about this issue long and hard. I know the defendant objects, but the characterization that I\u2019m glossing over it. Trust me, that\u2019s not the situation,\u201d Sullivan said. \u201cAnd I\u2019ll try and give this with more pizzazz than I gave yesterday, I suppose.\u201d\u00a0The tense exchange erupted moments after Sullivan rejected Reddington\u2019s bid to remove the lone holdout juror. The defense revealed in open court that there were two notes alleging the juror was refusing to follow the law. Reddington brought the jury back into the courtroom and ordered the panel to resume deliberations.\u201cYou should consider all of my instructions as a whole. You may not ignore any instruction and give special attention to any one instruction. You must follow the law as I give it to you, whether you agree with it or not,\u201d Sullivan said in the latest round of instructions.\u00a0The holdout juror was first identified Thursday after the foreperson sent Sullivan a note alleging that one juror was refusing to follow the judge\u2019s instructions on reasonable doubt. The panel of nine women and three men remained deadlocked after more than 35 hours of deliberations.The surprise note sent the courtroom into a scramble and sparked a heated sidebar involving Sullivan, the defense, and the prosecution. Reporters inside the courthouse described Clancy\u2019s attorney as visibly angry and frustrated.In an unusual moment, Reddington wheeled Clancy over to the sidebar so she could hear the discussion.\u201cShe has a right to know what\u2019s going on,\u201d Reddington said. \u201cIf it\u2019s not going to be in open court, the judge said I could bring her up so she could hear.\u201dSullivan then brought the jurors into the courtroom one by one and asked whether they could follow his instructions. Moments later, he brought the entire jury back into the courtroom and explained the meaning of reasonable doubt before ordering them to return to deliberations.\u201cI want to remind you that you are required to follow my instructions on the law as I gave them to you,\u201d Sullivan told the jury. \u201cProof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond all possible doubt.\u201dReddington asked Sullivan to remove the juror accused of disregarding the instructions and replace that juror with an alternate. Sullivan denied the request, saying he could not determine which side of the jury room dispute was correct.\u201cI don\u2019t feel that it is proper for me to side with one side or the other of the deliberations,\u201d Sullivan said, according to CBS Boston. \u201cI don\u2019t feel it\u2019s appropriate for me to say I agree with one juror or the 11.\u201dProsecutor Jennifer Sprague also opposed removing the juror, arguing that Sullivan had responded appropriately by questioning each member of the panel.\u201cI think what Your Honor has done by asking each juror if they\u2019re able to follow the law and then giving a general instruction on reasonable doubt is appropriate,\u201d she said.The dispute is particularly consequential because Massachusetts places an unusual burden on the prosecution when a defendant raises an insanity defense. Under Massachusetts law, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was sane and criminally responsible at the time of the crime.Her defense team argues that postpartum psychosis left her unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions.It is unclear how the jury is divided or which verdict the 11 jurors have reportedly selected. That information will not be released unless the jury reaches a verdict or the court declares a mistrial.Reddington said the foreperson\u2019s note showed that 11 jurors had reached a decision while one was refusing to apply the reasonable doubt standard.\u201cA note that the judge already has says there are 11 jurors that have made a decision and one juror will not apply reasonable doubt,\u201d Reddington said.Asked about the possibility of a mistrial, Reddington dismissed the idea.\u201cI don\u2019t want a mistrial. Why would I want a mistrial? I kicked the sh*t out of their case,\u201d he told reporters.Clancy, a former labor and delivery nurse, has admitted to strangling her three children with exercise bands in 2023 inside the family\u2019s Duxbury, Massachusetts, home. Her defense team argues that the medical system failed her and that postpartum psychosis left her not criminally responsible for her actions.The jury is weighing several possible outcomes, including first-degree murder, second-degree murder, manslaughter, not guilty by reason of insanity, or acquittal.\u00a0If convicted of first-degree murder, Clancy faces life in prison without the possibility of parole. In the event of a mistrial or insanity-based acquittal, Clancy is expected to remain in a state-run psychiatric hospital for the foreseeable future. A mistrial would leave the criminal case unresolved and could result in another trial.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Blue Route Journal\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-09-04T14:08:16+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2941#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2941\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/19da116f8d79cf8987781569801c6b7c\"},\"headline\":\"WATCH: Lindsay Clancy Defense And Judge Erupt In Heated Showdown\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-04T14:08:16+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2941\"},\"wordCount\":1074,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2941#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/2ecb1addef9964bfe2a9b7e4a6a309c5.avif\",\"articleSection\":[\"News\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2941#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2941\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2941\",\"name\":\"WATCH: Lindsay Clancy Defense And Judge Erupt In Heated Showdown - Blue Route Journal\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2941#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2941#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/2ecb1addef9964bfe2a9b7e4a6a309c5.avif\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-04T14:08:16+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/19da116f8d79cf8987781569801c6b7c\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2941#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2941\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2941#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/2ecb1addef9964bfe2a9b7e4a6a309c5.avif\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/2ecb1addef9964bfe2a9b7e4a6a309c5.avif\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":675},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2941#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"WATCH: Lindsay Clancy Defense And Judge Erupt In Heated Showdown\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"Blue Route Journal\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/19da116f8d79cf8987781569801c6b7c\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"WATCH: Lindsay Clancy Defense And Judge Erupt In Heated Showdown - Blue Route Journal","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"WATCH: Lindsay Clancy Defense And Judge Erupt In Heated Showdown - Blue Route Journal","og_description":"Tensions flared Friday after Judge William Sullivan denied Lindsay Clancy\u2019s defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, a request to remove the lone juror accused of holding up a verdict, sparking a fiery exchange over the judge\u2019s reasonable doubt instructions.Reddington pressed Sullivan to be more forceful in reminding jurors of the reasonable doubt standard, arguing that the judge\u2019s instructions Thursday had been too soft.\u201cI would ask that you not just give them, as I described it yesterday, a soft inquiry where you listen to my instructions. I would ask that you specifically direct their attention to proof beyond a reasonable doubt and re-instruct them on that forcefully,\u201d Reddington said.\u201cI think I did that yesterday, didn\u2019t I?\u201d Sullivan snapped back.Reddington kept arguing that Sullivan\u2019s reasonable doubt instructions lacked force, provoking an irritated response from the judge.\u201cWhat do you want me to do? Get a brass band? I read the instruction as written by the [Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court]. The fact that I perhaps didn\u2019t give it my full inflection, I\u2019m sorry about that. I\u2019m not an actor. I\u2019ve just given the instructions,\u201d Sullivan said.Reddington then pressed the judge over what he characterized as glossing over reasonable doubt instructions during Thursday\u2019s heated proceedings.\u201cBut just in case the record is clear, I am specifically not glossing over this issue. I have thought about this issue long and hard. I know the defendant objects, but the characterization that I\u2019m glossing over it. Trust me, that\u2019s not the situation,\u201d Sullivan said. \u201cAnd I\u2019ll try and give this with more pizzazz than I gave yesterday, I suppose.\u201d\u00a0The tense exchange erupted moments after Sullivan rejected Reddington\u2019s bid to remove the lone holdout juror. The defense revealed in open court that there were two notes alleging the juror was refusing to follow the law. Reddington brought the jury back into the courtroom and ordered the panel to resume deliberations.\u201cYou should consider all of my instructions as a whole. You may not ignore any instruction and give special attention to any one instruction. You must follow the law as I give it to you, whether you agree with it or not,\u201d Sullivan said in the latest round of instructions.\u00a0The holdout juror was first identified Thursday after the foreperson sent Sullivan a note alleging that one juror was refusing to follow the judge\u2019s instructions on reasonable doubt. The panel of nine women and three men remained deadlocked after more than 35 hours of deliberations.The surprise note sent the courtroom into a scramble and sparked a heated sidebar involving Sullivan, the defense, and the prosecution. Reporters inside the courthouse described Clancy\u2019s attorney as visibly angry and frustrated.In an unusual moment, Reddington wheeled Clancy over to the sidebar so she could hear the discussion.\u201cShe has a right to know what\u2019s going on,\u201d Reddington said. \u201cIf it\u2019s not going to be in open court, the judge said I could bring her up so she could hear.\u201dSullivan then brought the jurors into the courtroom one by one and asked whether they could follow his instructions. Moments later, he brought the entire jury back into the courtroom and explained the meaning of reasonable doubt before ordering them to return to deliberations.\u201cI want to remind you that you are required to follow my instructions on the law as I gave them to you,\u201d Sullivan told the jury. \u201cProof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond all possible doubt.\u201dReddington asked Sullivan to remove the juror accused of disregarding the instructions and replace that juror with an alternate. Sullivan denied the request, saying he could not determine which side of the jury room dispute was correct.\u201cI don\u2019t feel that it is proper for me to side with one side or the other of the deliberations,\u201d Sullivan said, according to CBS Boston. \u201cI don\u2019t feel it\u2019s appropriate for me to say I agree with one juror or the 11.\u201dProsecutor Jennifer Sprague also opposed removing the juror, arguing that Sullivan had responded appropriately by questioning each member of the panel.\u201cI think what Your Honor has done by asking each juror if they\u2019re able to follow the law and then giving a general instruction on reasonable doubt is appropriate,\u201d she said.The dispute is particularly consequential because Massachusetts places an unusual burden on the prosecution when a defendant raises an insanity defense. Under Massachusetts law, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was sane and criminally responsible at the time of the crime.Her defense team argues that postpartum psychosis left her unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions.It is unclear how the jury is divided or which verdict the 11 jurors have reportedly selected. That information will not be released unless the jury reaches a verdict or the court declares a mistrial.Reddington said the foreperson\u2019s note showed that 11 jurors had reached a decision while one was refusing to apply the reasonable doubt standard.\u201cA note that the judge already has says there are 11 jurors that have made a decision and one juror will not apply reasonable doubt,\u201d Reddington said.Asked about the possibility of a mistrial, Reddington dismissed the idea.\u201cI don\u2019t want a mistrial. Why would I want a mistrial? I kicked the sh*t out of their case,\u201d he told reporters.Clancy, a former labor and delivery nurse, has admitted to strangling her three children with exercise bands in 2023 inside the family\u2019s Duxbury, Massachusetts, home. Her defense team argues that the medical system failed her and that postpartum psychosis left her not criminally responsible for her actions.The jury is weighing several possible outcomes, including first-degree murder, second-degree murder, manslaughter, not guilty by reason of insanity, or acquittal.\u00a0If convicted of first-degree murder, Clancy faces life in prison without the possibility of parole. In the event of a mistrial or insanity-based acquittal, Clancy is expected to remain in a state-run psychiatric hospital for the foreseeable future. A mistrial would leave the criminal case unresolved and could result in another trial.","og_url":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941","og_site_name":"Blue Route Journal","article_published_time":"2026-09-04T14:08:16+00:00","author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/#\/schema\/person\/19da116f8d79cf8987781569801c6b7c"},"headline":"WATCH: Lindsay Clancy Defense And Judge Erupt In Heated Showdown","datePublished":"2026-09-04T14:08:16+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941"},"wordCount":1074,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/2ecb1addef9964bfe2a9b7e4a6a309c5.avif","articleSection":["News"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941","url":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941","name":"WATCH: Lindsay Clancy Defense And Judge Erupt In Heated Showdown - Blue Route Journal","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/2ecb1addef9964bfe2a9b7e4a6a309c5.avif","datePublished":"2026-09-04T14:08:16+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/#\/schema\/person\/19da116f8d79cf8987781569801c6b7c"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/2ecb1addef9964bfe2a9b7e4a6a309c5.avif","contentUrl":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/2ecb1addef9964bfe2a9b7e4a6a309c5.avif","width":1200,"height":675},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2941#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"WATCH: Lindsay Clancy Defense And Judge Erupt In Heated Showdown"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/","name":"Blue Route Journal","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/#\/schema\/person\/19da116f8d79cf8987781569801c6b7c","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/blueroutejournal.com"],"url":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2941","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2941"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2941\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/2912"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2941"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2941"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2941"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}