The trial of Lindsay Clancy, a Massachusetts mother accused of murdering her three children, ended in a mistrial this month after the jury failed to reach a unanimous verdict. Her attorney, Kevin Reddington, has asked the court to investigate a juror, identified as "Juror Doe", for using a mobile phone during deliberations and for the truthfulness of his answers on a jury questionnaire.

Clancy has not denied killing her children—Cora, five, Dawson, three, and Callan, eight months—at the family's Massachusetts home. Her defense argued she was not guilty by reason of insanity, citing postpartum psychosis, while prosecutors alleged she made a calculated decision to send her husband out on an errand so she could strangle the children. The jury was ultimately divided 11-1 in favor of finding Clancy not criminally responsible, with the lone holdout, Michael Desronvil, insisting on her guilt.

Desronvil's attorney, Edward Paltzik, called the new defense motion a "Looney Tunes" attack on his client for doing his civic duty. He stated that if jurors face reprisals for disagreeing with a defense attorney, the Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial would be undermined. The jury forewoman claimed in an NBC interview that Desronvil had expressed reasonable doubt about Clancy's guilt but refused to find her not guilty by reason of insanity—a claim he denies.

In a separate motion, Reddington also asked for the case against Clancy to be dismissed. Prosecutors have not yet said whether they will retry her. The case has drawn significant public attention and sparked debate over pressure on jurors.

Source: www.bbc.co.uk