BS BULLETIN:

• Juror Nick Dargie says he repeatedly pressed the lone holdout in Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial to identify evidence supporting his position — and says the man couldn’t.
• The jury ultimately split 11-1 in favor of finding Clancy not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility, resulting in a mistrial after nearly 40 hours of deliberations.
• Clancy’s attorney now plans to ask that the case be dismissed as prosecutors weigh whether to put her through a second trial.

Another juror in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial is breaking his silence — and his account offers an extraordinary glimpse into the jury-room showdown that ended with one man standing between Clancy and an acquittal.

Nick Dargie, 25, one of three men on the 12-person Massachusetts jury, says he repeatedly challenged the lone holdout to explain exactly what evidence supported his position.

According to Dargie, he never got an answer.

“There were several times I would ask him to show us, like, evidence or, you know, describe a witness testimony that helped to prove what he was saying,” Dargie told ABC News.

“He couldn’t.”

NEW: ABC News speaks exclusively with another Lindsay Clancy trial juror, the *fifth* to have spoken out since the trial ended. ABC said Nick Dargie, one of the two men who sided with the nine women who voted not guilty, was “devastated” he couldn’t to set Clancy free, and… pic.twitter.com/WhyppJL5HU

— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) September 9, 2026

Dargie said the holdout couldn’t point to “a single piece of evidence or witness testimony” explaining his position. That impasse, Dargie said, ultimately prompted the jury to send another note to Judge William Sullivan explaining its problem.

Clancy, 36, was charged with murdering her three children — Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and 8-month-old Callan — at the family’s Duxbury home in January 2023.

There was no dispute at trial over whether Clancy killed the children.

The central question was whether she was criminally responsible at the time.

Prosecutors argued Clancy deliberately strangled the children and understood what she was doing. Her defense maintained that the former labor-and-delivery nurse was suffering from postpartum psychosis and was not criminally responsible for her actions.

After seven days of deliberations, the jury was reportedly divided 11-1 in favor of finding Clancy not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility.

Dargie emphasized that he had no problem with a juror reaching a different conclusion if it was grounded in the evidence.

“There’s nothing wrong with somebody having a completely opposite opinion,” he said. “That would be a hung jury. That, like, that is our justice system.”

But other jurors have offered an even more remarkable account of what happened.

Foreperson Roni Carlson said the holdout at one point acknowledged that he had reasonable doubt.

Carlson said she believed they had finally reached a unanimous decision and even began completing the verdict forms.

Then the holdout reportedly said he still would not vote to find Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity.

Juror Paula Devlin has described the holdout as “arrogant” and said he disregarded information presented by other jurors.

There is another side emerging from the jury room.

An unidentified female juror told CBS Boston that the holdout wasn’t alone in being stubborn during deliberations. She said there were “big personalities” on the panel and that jurors on both sides initially had difficulty moving away from their positions.

She herself initially believed Clancy should be held criminally responsible before ultimately changing her mind.

The holdout juror has not publicly told his side of the story.

Judge Sullivan declared a mistrial Sept. 4 after the jury reported that it could not reach a unanimous verdict.

Now the post-trial juror interviews could become part of the next legal battle.

Clancy attorney Kevin Reddington says he intends to seek dismissal of the charges, pointing in part to the claims that the holdout acknowledged reasonable doubt but nevertheless refused to vote for acquittal.

A hearing is scheduled for Sept. 29. Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz has not yet announced whether prosecutors will retry Clancy.

MY QUICK TAKE

This story somehow gets stranger every time another juror talks.

An 11-1 jury is one thing. That’s the system.

But if the jurors’ account is accurate, this wasn’t simply one guy saying, “I looked at the evidence and I’m convinced she’s guilty.”

They’re saying they asked him to show them the evidence. He couldn’t.

Then the foreperson says he admitted he had reasonable doubt — and still wouldn’t budge.

The holdout deserves the opportunity to tell his side. But you can certainly understand why the other 11 jurors are now asking what exactly they spent seven days arguing about.

DBS WIRE SOURCES:

• Daily Mail — Male Lindsay Clancy juror breaks silence over deliberations that led to mistrial
• ABC News — Clancy juror says holdout didn’t show ‘single piece of evidence’ explaining vote
• NBC10 Boston — Lindsay Clancy jurors break their silence about holdout and deliberations
• People — Lindsay Clancy juror says holdout couldn’t provide evidence to defend his vote
• The Washington Post — Holdout juror admitted ‘reasonable doubt,’ foreperson says