Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis offered to welcome the unidentified juror whose lone vote produced a mistrial in the Lindsay Clancy murder case, criticizing scrutiny of the man’s personal history after other jurors publicly challenged his conduct and reasoning.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has stepped into the growing controversy surrounding the lone holdout juror in Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial, offering the unidentified man what he called “asylum” in Florida after an NBC10 Boston investigation examined the juror’s personal and legal history following the mistrial.
“I’m sure he’d be welcomed and appreciated,” DeSantis said, offering to give him “asylum” in Florida.
DeSantis’ offer was rhetorical rather than a formal immigration or legal asylum process. It followed days of television interviews in which other members of the jury criticized the holdout, whose refusal to join an 11-1 majority favoring a finding of not guilty by reason of insanity prevented a unanimous verdict.
“A man objected to allowing a woman to kill her three young kids and get away with it, so NBC is trying to smear that juror, whose identity should be protected,” DeSantis wrote on X.
“Another low for legacy media. If the juror is being harassed, Florida will provide asylum — I’m sure he’d be welcomed and appreciated.”
Clancy’s five-week trial ended in a mistrial Sept. 4 after more than seven days of jury deliberations. She had pleaded not guilty to three murder charges in the January 2023 deaths of her children — Cora, 5; Dawson, 3; and Callan, 8 months — at the family’s Duxbury, Massachusetts, home. The central question was not whether Clancy killed the children, but whether she was criminally responsible at the time. Her attorneys argued that she was suffering from postpartum psychosis and should be found not guilty by reason of insanity, while prosecutors maintained that she understood her actions and knew right from wrong.
After the mistrial, several jurors began speaking publicly about the deliberations and the man who refused to join the majority.
Three female jurors interviewed by NBC10 Boston described the holdout as “arrogant” and said he would not move beyond the fact that Clancy had “viciously killed her children.” The foreperson and other jurors said the final split was 11-1 in favor of finding Clancy not criminally responsible because of mental disease or defect.
Nick Dargie, 25, one of the male jurors, separately told ABC News that he repeatedly asked the holdout to identify evidence supporting his position.
“There wasn’t a single piece of evidence or witness testimony that he used to prove why he was thinking the way he was,” Dargie said.
Dargie said there was nothing inherently improper about a juror reaching a different conclusion, adding that disagreement is part of the jury system. His criticism centered instead on what he described as the man’s unwillingness to explain his reasoning or engage fully with the other jurors.
The holdout has not spoken publicly.
Another juror, Paula Devlin, disclosed additional details about him during an appearance Friday on “CBS Mornings,” saying he was a Black man in his 30s and the only racial minority on the 12-member jury. CBS reported that the panel consisted of nine women and three men ranging in age from 22 to approximately 70.
Host Gayle King reacted to the disclosure on air.
“A black man is a holdout juror,” King said. “Well, I have to sit with that for just a second.”
“I’m very fascinated by the holdout juror, learning that he’s a black man today,” King later said after hearing more about the jury’s composition.
Devlin said the jury had initially been considerably more divided. Eight jurors began deliberations leaning toward finding Clancy not criminally responsible, two were undecided and two favored a murder conviction. The group eventually moved to 11-1 before deliberations ended.
The scrutiny intensified after NBC10 Boston published an investigation into the unidentified holdout’s background.
The station reported finding a dismissed 2021 domestic assault charge, an active restraining order obtained by a family member and a pending eviction proceeding involving more than $12,000 in unpaid rent. NBC10 said the restraining order remained active while the juror was serving in the Clancy case. The station also said it had “repeatedly attempted to contact the juror at home.”
NBC10 did not publish the man’s identity, noting that he had chosen not to speak publicly and that the jury list remained impounded.
The station raised questions about the jury-selection process because Massachusetts’ standard juror questionnaire asks prospective jurors whether they have been arrested, charged with a crime or served with a court order. NBC10 acknowledged that juror questionnaires are not public and said it could not confirm how the holdout answered those questions.
The 2021 assault charge identified by NBC10 was ultimately dismissed. The report also described allegations underlying the restraining order, but those allegations are separate from any finding of guilt in the Clancy case and do not establish misconduct during jury deliberations.
NBC10 chief legal analyst Michael Coyne questioned whether the juror would have been seated if all relevant information had been disclosed during jury selection.
“I don’t see how they would’ve allowed him to be a member of this jury,” Coyne said.
“I don’t see how, if those questions had been answered correctly, one side or the other would’ve taken the chance with allowing him to be seated,” he added.
DeSantis interpreted the investigation differently, portraying it as an attempt to discredit a juror whose vote prevented Clancy from receiving the insanity verdict favored by the other 11 members of the panel.
The mistrial has left the underlying criminal case unresolved.
Clancy’s attorney, Kevin Reddington, has filed a motion seeking to have the case dismissed and Clancy acquitted, citing concerns raised by jurors about the deliberations. The motion is expected to be addressed at a Sept. 29 hearing. Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz has not yet announced whether prosecutors will seek another trial if the defense motion fails.
The holdout’s vote remains legally significant because a criminal jury must reach a unanimous verdict. Whatever criticism other jurors have made publicly about his reasoning or behavior, one dissenting vote was sufficient to prevent a verdict and produce the mistrial.
DeSantis’ intervention has now widened what began as a dispute inside a Massachusetts jury room into a broader argument over juror privacy, post-trial media scrutiny and whether an unidentified citizen should face public examination for refusing to join the majority in a highly publicized murder case.
Original article
Comments