Jury Deadlocks in Lindsay Clancy Murder Trial; Judge Orders Continued Deliberations
Reports conflict on whether a mistrial was declared or the jury remains deadlocked, with the judge sending them back to deliberate.
2 reports on this incident · first at Sep 1, 2026, 4:02 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 1, 2026, 4:02 p.m. ETFirst report
Jury Deadlocked in Lindsay Clancy Murder Trial; Judge Orders Continued Deliberations
The jury in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial has reported being deadlocked, and the judge has instructed them to continue deliberations, according to NBC Boston.
Clancy is charged in a criminal case in district court. Prosecutors have alleged that she strangled her children because she was depressed and tired of living, and that she made a conscious choice to kill them before attempting suicide, NBC Boston reported.
The case is at the contested proceeding stage, and no verdict has been reached.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
- Lindsay Clancy jury says they're deadlocked, judge tells them to continue deliberatingnbcboston.com
- Judge sends Lindsay Clancy jury home without a verdict in case of mom who killed her 3 kidsabc7chicago.com
- Judge declares mistrial in Lindsay Clancy case, but allows defense to seek emergency staynbcboston.com
- Now that a mistrial has been declared, when could a second Lindsay Clancy happen?nbcboston.com
- Read Lindsay Clancy's former husband's statement after judge declares mistrialnbcchicago.com
- Lindsay Clancy's attorney files motion arguing for not guilty ruling by courtnbcboston.com
Revision history
- Version 34 Sept 2026, 21:22current
Updated to reflect conflicting reports on mistrial vs. continued deliberations and added the scheduled hearing on retrial date.
- Version 24 Sept 2026, 15:52
Updated to reflect conflicting reports on jury status and added attribution to both outlets.
- Version 11 Sept 2026, 20:07
First published.
- Version 11 Sept 2026, 20:02current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.