Lindsay Clancy juror says Patrick Clancy's testimony swayed her decision, reveals more about lone holdout

Paula Devlin, a juror in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial, said it was Clancy's ex-husband's testimony that might have swayed her the most, while the lone holdout in the jury might have felt attacked and refused to change his vote for that reason.

In an interview with "CBS Mornings" co-host Gayle King on Friday, Devlin said that when they began deliberating, the jurors were more split, with eight saying Clancy was not responsible, two undecided, and two who said  guilty of murder.

The jury was made up of nine women and three men. Devlin said the ages ranged from 22 to about 70, and there was only one member who was a minority, a Black male in his 30s who was also the lone holdout. 

"I was leaning towards not responsible from all the evidence I had heard," Devlin told King. "And I had certain things I wanted to look at when we got into deliberation. Everything that we talked about and every point that everybody in the room made just kind of reinforced that more and more."

Clancy was charged with murdering her three young children — 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson and 8-month-old Callan — at their home in Duxbury, Massachusetts, on Jan. 24, 2023. Her attorneys argued she was not criminally responsible because she was overmedicated and suffering from postpartum psychosis. Prosecutors argued Clancy planned it and knew right from wrong.

The highly publicized trial ended in a mistrial last Friday after the jurors could not come to a unanimous verdict after more than seven days of deliberation.

Several jurors, including Devlin, have said the jury was divided 11 to 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 would not budge.

"We all worked together. And I don't know if it was to convince him to start with," Devlin told King. "We all worked together to convince ourselves once we got to that point where it was 10 to 2. I felt very bad for them because they felt attacked. And there is no way to not do that."

"Even in normal conversation, when it is pointed at you and you have to defend yourself, it's a hard thing to do," she added. "We don't have to always do that."

Devlin said two witnesses in particular solidified her decision on the verdict: Dr. Phillip Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist, and Patrick Clancy, Lindsay's husband at the time of the murders and the one who found the children dead after Lindsay attempted suicide.

"I think Dr. Resnick, his testimony about altruistic filicide was really impactful," Devlin said, referring to the psychological condition when a parent believes killing their children is best for them. "All throughout the trial, we had all the witnesses, there had been nothing but good said about Lindsay and how amazing of a mother she was, how much she loved her children."

"We saw that in every picture that was taken in the house on the night that this happened," she continued. "Everywhere you looked, there was just love. There was a big sign that said, 'It's a wonderful life.' There wasn't anything that says she wasn't that. And then to hear somebody talking about a real reason why all of a sudden this could happen, that was really impactful."

Devlin told King that the emotional testimony of Patrick Clancy, Lindsay's now ex-husband, was particularly impactful.

"I think the prosecution tried to nudge Patrick to say something derogatory and he wouldn't," Devlin said. "And that was very impactful, even after all this time and even after knowing this happened and losing his three children, he still couldn't say anything really bad about her."

Clancy's lawyer, Kevin Reddington, on Thursday filed a motion for the mistrial to be thrown out and for Clancy to be acquitted in the case. Reddington told "CBS Mornings" earlier this week he decided to file the motion after hearing from several jurors about how the holdout was not properly following procedures.

"I would defend that person's right to be a holdout for a month. That's what the system is about," Reddington told "CBS Mornings" on Wednesday. "But when the forelady indicated clearly and unequivocally in the jury question that this person had doubt, reasonable doubt, as we know now, and just refused to listen to the judge's instruction on the law, that's when I was upset, because that's why I used the expressions and the terms I did. It just wasn't right."

Devlin said she was not in favor of the case being thrown out even though she thinks Clancy was not guilty by reason of insanity. She said justice would be for Clancy to "get the help she needs," as opposed to walking free if Reddington's appeal is successful.

"I don't feel good about that," she said about the filing, which experts told CBS News is a long shot. "Part of the reason why we wanted 'not responsible' was that everybody wants justice for the children."

"Those children never left that room. They've never left our hearts. And that was a way to get justice for those children. This wouldn't have happened if Lindsay didn't get lost in the system and failed by the system," she said.

The motion to dismiss will be heard on Sept. 29 at a previously scheduled status hearing in the case. 

The district attorney has not said whether he plans to refile the case, while Reddington also sounded amenable to a plea deal that would include lesser charges for Clancy. However, he said that it is up to the district attorney, Tim Cruz.