BS BULLETIN:

• The lone holdout who caused the mistrial in Lindsay Clancy’s murder case reportedly had a previous domestic violence arrest involving allegations that he grabbed his then-wife by the throat.
• NBC10 Boston found that his teenage nephew later obtained a restraining order against him over separate assault allegations — and that order was reportedly still active during the Clancy trial.
• The revelations are raising new questions about how the juror made it through the selection process for one of Massachusetts’ highest-profile murder trials.

The lone juror who refused to acquit Lindsay Clancy is facing a very different kind of scrutiny now.

The unidentified male holdout reportedly has a history of domestic violence allegations, including a previous criminal charge involving his then-wife and an active restraining order obtained by his nephew.

And according to an NBC10 Boston investigation, that restraining order was still active while the juror was sitting through Clancy’s murder trial.

The revelation comes just days after other jurors began describing the extraordinary deliberations that ended with an 11-1 deadlock and a mistrial.

Clancy admitted killing her three young children in the family’s Duxbury, Massachusetts, home in January 2023. Her defense maintained that she was suffering from postpartum psychosis and therefore was not criminally responsible.

Eleven jurors ultimately favored finding her not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility.

One man refused.

Now NBC10 Boston’s investigation is raising questions about how that man was selected for the jury in the first place.

According to court records obtained by the outlet, the juror faced a criminal charge in September 2021 after an alleged domestic violence incident involving his then-wife.

His 13-year-old nephew reportedly called 911 and told police that his uncle had grabbed his wife by the throat and thrown her into a dresser.

According to the police report cited by NBC10 and the New York Post, the man’s mother could be heard screaming, “You’re evil!” as police placed him in handcuffs.

The criminal charge was eventually dismissed.

His ex-wife reportedly told NBC10 she stopped pursuing the case because she feared that testifying could jeopardize custody of her daughter.

But that wasn’t the end of the allegations.

The same nephew later sought a restraining order against his uncle, alleging another violent confrontation.

According to an affidavit cited in the reporting, the nephew accused his uncle of pushing him down and repeatedly punching him in the face.

The nephew also alleged that his uncle blamed him for calling police during the earlier incident involving his wife.

That restraining order reportedly remained active when the man was selected for the Clancy jury.

And that’s where the story takes another turn.

According to NBC10 Boston, Massachusetts’ juror questionnaire asks prospective jurors whether they have been arrested, charged with a crime or served with a court order.

Legal analyst Michael Coyne questioned how someone with this history made it onto the panel. “I don’t see how they would’ve allowed him to be a member of this jury,” Coyne told NBC10.

It isn’t publicly clear from the reporting how the juror answered the questionnaire or what information court officials knew during jury selection.

The man has not publicly responded to the allegations or explained his side of the Clancy deliberations.

But fellow jurors have been talking.

Juror Nick Dargie said the holdout couldn’t point him to a single piece of evidence or witness testimony supporting his refusal to acquit Clancy.

Dargie also described an extraordinary moment in which the holdout allegedly wrapped one of the exercise bands used to kill Clancy’s children around a water bottle and pulled it tight, apparently reenacting the strangulation during deliberations.

“I was so shocked,” Dargie said. “We’re not here to play detective — it’s not a game of Clue. This is serious.”

Other jurors have alleged that the holdout acknowledged having reasonable doubt but nevertheless refused to find Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity.

The judge declined a defense request to remove him, and the trial ultimately ended without a verdict.

One juror has offered a more sympathetic account, saying the holdout wasn’t alone in initially resisting the majority’s position and describing “big personalities” on both sides of the deliberations.

How did a prospective juror with a previous domestic violence charge and an allegedly active restraining order make it onto this particular jury?

MY QUICK TAKE

Forget whether you agree with his vote for a moment.

The guy reportedly had an active restraining order against him while sitting on a murder trial involving a mother who strangled her three children.

And the juror questionnaire apparently asks about exactly this kind of thing.

That’s the part somebody needs to explain.

Because after an 11-1 mistrial, allegations that he ignored reasonable doubt, that bizarre exercise-band reenactment and now this?

The question isn’t merely what happened inside that jury room anymore.

It’s how he got into it.

DBS WIRE SOURCES:

• NBC10 Boston — Domestic violence allegations raise questions about Clancy holdout juror
• New York Post — Clancy holdout had domestic violence allegations and active restraining order
• TMZ — Clancy holdout juror reportedly had DV arrest and active restraining order
• Fox News — Fellow juror says Clancy holdout reenacted killings during deliberations
• Boston Globe — Jurors say lone holdout refused to acquit despite reasonable doubt