Lindsay Clancy prosecutors could ask judge for murder retrial in children's killings

After oral arguments on the Plymouth County District Attorney's Office's request for a gag order on the Lindsay Clancy case, Judge William Sullivan said he'd take the motion under advisement and issue an order later.

Then he turned to the question of Clancy's mistrial.

Assistant Plymouth County DA Jennifer Sprague said she's not ready to pick a trial date.

Sullivan asked if prosecutors have made a decision on whether to seek a new trial.

"This will be a retrial, as to what that looks like will depend," Sprague said. "We're not at that point yet."

Reddington asked why prosecutors "do not know" if they plan to seek the retrial on first-degree murder or lesser charges. He has previously indicated he would be open to a plea deal that avoids prison.

He also said he would prefer the retrial take place under Sullivan before his upcoming retirement. He asked for the second trial to take place in spring.

Sullivan suggested March but said the parties could have another discussion in the coming weeks.

He scheduled a status conference and potential trial setting10 a.m. on Nov. 16 to continue scheduling discussions. Sullivan offered to have the hearing over Zoom, but Reddington said the defense would prefer to appear in person.

Heather O'Connor, a Massachusetts attorney for the lone holdout, blasted Lindsay Clancy's defense and said her client did nothing wrong or unusual as she asked the judge to dismiss a motion to provide access to confidential juror records to the defendant's lawyers.

"So why are we here?" she asked. "Not because of the questionnaire, the defense read. It had the ability to question it and chose not to and accepted it, not because of a phone. Every juror was allowed to keep one. Not because of anything any juror reported before the mistrial. No, we are here because Juror Doe did not vote the way that the defense needed."

Only after the mistrial did the defense dig deeper into her client's background, she said.

"The defense relies on television and podcast interviews," she said. "After jurors saw what the public and the defense had to say about this case, and the defense wants to put only one juror under investigation, search only one phone, pull only one criminal history — the juror who disagreed."

All of that is irrelevant, she argued, because the necessity of a mistrial is based on what was known at the time of the judge's decision, not based on any subsequent information.

She asked for the judge to dismiss Clancy's motion for access to confidential juror records.

Sullivan did not issue a decision and called for a recess.

Lindsay Clancy's lead defense attorney Kevin Reddington defiantly talked over Judge William Sullivan in court Monday as he argued for access to confidential juror records connected to the lone holdout, Michael Desronvil, whom he named in court for the first time.

"You know what, I'm gonna stop you right there," Sullivan said, interrupting Reddington's oral argument.

"No you're not going to stop me," Reddington replied.

He said he has evidence Desronvil lied on his juror questionnaire and may have a criminal record.

"I wanted to have an inquiry of this individual, not to harass him, not to berate him, but to find out what the truth is of what went on," he said.

Desronvil previously told Fox News' Kayleigh McEnany that he answered the questionnaire truthfully and that a 2021 altercation with his wife had been "blown out of proportion."

"There was no physical abuse, emotional abuse, financial abuse of any sorts," he said. Charges were later dropped.

Sullivan cools things off and called for a sidebar.

Assistant Plymouth County District Attorney Jennifer Sprague, arguing against the defense motion to dismiss the charges against Lindsay Clancy, argued that the court's decisions leading up to her mistrial were proper under precedent set by Massachusetts's highest court.

The state's Supreme Justice Court has held that the courts should "avoid coercion of a lone dissenting juror,” she said.

In notes from the foreperson, the holdout was identified by his juror number and knew that he had been "exposed," what the alleged issues were, in a situation that she said is the same scenario that the SJC warned could be coercive.

"Someone can understand the law and be able to apply it and come to a different conclusion, because they credit or discredit evidence in a different way than the other jurors do, and that's a right that should be protected," she said. "And it could be that the other jurors, the 11 jurors, were wrong in the way they applied the law. It's not for the trial judge to choose sides in a deadlocked jury and decide."

She asked for the motion to dismiss to be denied.

Judge William Sullivan opened the hearing by saying there are three motions to discuss today — defense motions to produce preserved records and to dismiss the case, and a prosecution motion to impose a gag order on "prejudicial extrajudicial statements."

Lindsay Clancy's lead defense attorney Kevin Reddington asked for them to be heard in this order: the motion to dismiss, the motion for a gag order, and the motion on juror records.

Sullivan agreed that the motion to dismiss can be argued first, defense attorney Martin Weinberg kicked things off with a focus on the lone holdout juror who wanted to find Clancy guilty before the deadlock led to a mistrial.

"The jury issues that your honor was confronted with in both Mr. Reddington and the prosecutor argued to you on Sept. 3, and for one, being a right to a jury trial, a right to 12 jurors, not just 11, who are impartial, unbiased, deliberating, following the law, whether or not they agreed with it or not," Weinberg said.

"Your honor  received two jury notes on Sept. 3, [the first] said a member of the jury is unable to follow the instructions regarding reasonable doubt. How should we proceed?" Weinberg continued. "And then the second one that came late in the day and was addressed by your honor on the morning of Sept. 4, was juror X has made statements acknowledging doubt, but refuses to apply it to the verdict. As the law states. That is why we cannot come to a unanimous decision."

LINDSAY CLANCY HOLDOUT JUROR WON'T HAVE TO TURN OVER PHONE OR FACE INQUIRY, JUDGE SAYS

Weinberg argued that the jury notes called for a voir dire to look into whether the holdout was behaving appropriately.

Sullivan interjected, "Didn't I do that. DIdn't I do a voir dire? Didn't I ask each individual [juror]?"

Weinberg argued that a deeper probe was necessary under precedent.

"It needs to probe an order to make credibility findings about whether the jurors' affirmation of your honor's voir dire, in fact, is to be trusted, particularly when there's a predicate of the foreperson speaking on behalf of 11 jurors that may not adopt the reliability of what a 12th juror has said," he said.

Lindsay Clancy remains on suicide watch in a Massachusetts hospital where she is being held while a court weighs what's next for her two months after her high-profile murder trial ended without a verdict and a deadlocked jury.

"She, currently, and since she got there, the first day they transferred her to the hospital in Tewksbury, she's had what they call a one-on-one contact," attorney Rosemary Scapicchio told "CBS Mornings" Sunday. "In other words, they can't leave her alone because they're concerned that she's gonna kill herself."

Scapicchio is part of the legal team representing Clancy in a civil lawsuit against her mental health providers and not her criminal defense team.

Clancy faces three charges of first-degree murder in connection with the strangling deaths of her kids, Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months.

After their killings, prosecutors say Clancy attempted to take her own knife with drugs, a knife and by leaping out of a second-floor window in her former home. She survived after her husband returned home to find the traumatic scene and called 911.

At trial, her defense attorney Kevin Reddington argued that she should not be held criminally responsible due to mental illness or defect, citing her many attempts to seek mental health treatment and arguing that she'd had postpartum psychosis.

Accused Massachusetts killer mom Lindsay Clancy returns to court Monday for a motions hearing two months after her murder trial ended with a deadlocked jury in the strangling deaths of her three young children.

Clancy's lawyers have asked the court to drop the charges on double jeopardy grounds and have called for an inquiry into the lone juror out of 12 who wanted her found guilty.

PROSECUTORS REVEAL SIX LINDSAY CLANCY JURY NOTES AS THEY FIGHT BID TO DISMISS MURDER CHARGES

Prosecutors, meanwhile, following a storm of public statements from her defense on the case and high interest across the country, have asked for a gag order.

Judge William Sullivan had previously said he wanted to schedule a new trial quickly, but prosecutors have yet to formally announce they are seeking one.