Clancy mistrial holdout’s lawyer disputes claim juror ignored law
Edward Paltzik, attorney for the lone holdout juror in Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial, rejected a claim that his client refused to follow the law. Paltzik said Michael P. Desronvil had no doubt and substantial evidence supporting his position. The jury deadlocked after 11 members favored a not criminally responsible finding, leading to a mistrial on Sept. 4.
The jury deliberated for seven days before deadlocking on Sept. 4. Eleven members favored a not criminally responsible finding, while Michael P. Desronvil alone sought conviction, prompting Judge William Sullivan to declare a mistrial.
Clancy had admitted killing Cora, Dawson and Callan at the family’s Duxbury home in January 2023. Her defense cited postpartum psychosis; prosecutors said she understood and planned the acts. Desronvil’s lawyer, Edward Paltzik, said his client had no doubt and substantial supporting evidence. The foreperson alleged he would not follow reasonable-doubt law. Desronvil later pointed to physical evidence and testimony. Prosecutors have not announced a retrial; Clancy returns to court Sept. 29.
The mistrial may prolong uncertainty for the Clancy family, the victims’ relatives, and the Duxbury community. It could also intensify public debate over how courts handle postpartum psychosis and juror independence. A retrial, if pursued, may affect prosecutors, defense lawyers, and future jurors by testing how reasonable doubt and insanity standards are explained. The case could shape perceptions of whether mental-health evidence is weighed consistently, though its specific legal effect remains uncertain.