A juror in the high‑profile Lindsay Clancy triple‑murder case admitted she entered the trial with a political agenda to set a precedent that could help future mothers. Paula Devlin said her vote for a not‑guilty verdict was driven by a desire to change something for other women.
Juror’s Political Motivation
Speaking on CBS Saturday Morning, Devlin said she wanted to make things better for “other women in the future” and for families of the children killed.
Trial Dynamics and Media Fallout
Clancy confessed to strangling her five‑year‑old daughter Cora, three‑year‑old son Dawson and eight‑month‑old son Callan with exercise bands in their Duxbury home in January 2023 and pursued an insanity defense.
The jury, not sequestered, felt the weight of its decision; 11 of 12 jurors voted for a not‑guilty verdict by reason of insanity, while one holdout refused, resulting in a deadlocked jury and a mistrial declared on September 4.
Law professor Jonathan Turley noted that Devlin’s remarks appear to confirm that voir dire failed and that some jurors treated the case as a cause rather than a legal dispute.
Current Status
Days after the mistrial, Devlin joined two older female jurors to publicly support Clancy and praise defense attorney Kevin Reddington, while revealing the panel’s age span spanned nearly five decades and that only one juror was a person of color.
She identified the holdout as a Black man, a revelation that shocked CBS host Gayle King, who said she needed to sit with that fact.
Clancy remains in custody at Tewksbury Hospital, a state‑run psychiatric facility, and the Commonwealth has not announced whether it will retry her.
Related: The Lindsay Clancy Holdout Reveal The Left Never Saw Coming
