‘I JUST WANTED TO SEE LINDSAY’ — WOMAN ACCUSED OF FILMING CLANCY JURORS NOW FACES FELONY CHARGE

A self-described “crime junkie” who came to the Lindsay Clancy trial hoping to see the defendant is now facing a felony charge after prosecutors accused her of recording jurors in a restricted area outside the courthouse.

What began as an attempt to get a glimpse of Lindsay Clancy has suddenly become a separate legal case — one that has raised fresh concerns about courtroom security and the protection of jurors.

Dawn Light, 56, of Sutton, Massachusetts, was arraigned Wednesday after authorities accused her of filming jurors as they left the Plymouth Superior Court during the closely watched trial.

She pleaded not guilty.

Her attorney insists the entire incident was a “complete misunderstanding.” According to the defense, Light was trying to photograph Clancy and had no intention of recording or interacting with jurors.

But prosecutors say investigators found something different on her phone.

THE MOMENT THAT TRIGGERED THE ARREST

According to police, Light was sitting in her vehicle in a restricted area near the courthouse Tuesday afternoon as jurors were leaving after another day of deliberations.

A court employee reportedly noticed her using her cellphone to record people leaving the building.

When authorities approached her, Light allegedly said she was waiting to see whether Lindsay Clancy would come outside.

She reportedly denied intentionally recording jurors.

Police initially found no relevant footage in her regular camera roll.

Then investigators checked the phone’s deleted files.

According to prosecutors, videos showing jurors were discovered there.

That discovery turned the situation into a criminal investigation.

Light was subsequently arrested and charged with aggravated intimidation involving a witness, juror or person providing information in a criminal proceeding.

HER LAWYER: ‘THIS IS A COMPLETE MISUNDERSTANDING’

In court, Light’s defense strongly disputed the suggestion that she was deliberately targeting jurors.

Her attorney, Jennifer White, told the judge that Light was simply hoping to get a photograph of Clancy.

The defense argued that Light had no intention of interfering with the jury or intimidating anyone involved in the trial.

“She was seeking a picture of Ms. Clancy,” her attorney said, describing the situation as a misunderstanding.

Light also reportedly told reporters that she had wanted to see Lindsay Clancy.

She has described herself as a “crime junkie” and a supporter of Clancy, according to reports.

But prosecutors are treating the incident seriously.

Assistant District Attorney Nicole Piacentini argued that the alleged conduct threatened the integrity of the judicial process.

The prosecution requested $50,000 in cash bail, along with strict conditions preventing Light from returning to the courthouse or having contact with jurors and witnesses.

THE JUDGE DID NOT ORDER CASH BAIL

The judge ultimately did not impose cash bail.

Instead, Light was released under conditions that require her to stay away from the courthouse, jurors and witnesses connected to the Clancy proceedings.

She was also ordered not to distribute photographs or videos connected to the incident.

Light is scheduled to return to court on October 15.

She has no known prior criminal record, according to her defense.

That argument was used by her attorney in opposing the prosecution’s request for cash bail.

WHY THE JURORS WERE QUESTIONED

The incident became even more significant because it happened while the Clancy jury was already struggling to reach a decision.

After Light’s arrest, Judge William Sullivan questioned the jurors individually about whether they had noticed anything unusual or been affected by the incident.

The defense later indicated that no juror reported a problem.

The jury itself has been at the center of another dramatic development.

After five days of deliberations, jurors twice reported that they were unable to reach a unanimous verdict.

Judge Sullivan then issued a Tuey-Rodriguez instruction, sometimes referred to as a “dynamite charge,” encouraging jurors to continue discussing the case while reminding them not to abandon sincerely held convictions simply to reach an agreement.

The jury has now been given another opportunity to reach a verdict.

If the deadlock continues, the judge could eventually declare a mistrial.

THE CLANCY CASE REMAINS AT A CRITICAL POINT

Lindsay Clancy, 36, is facing charges connected to the 2023 deaths of her three children — Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months.

Clancy has acknowledged the acts but her defense argues that she was experiencing severe postpartum psychosis and should not be held criminally responsible.

Prosecutors have presented a different interpretation, arguing that she understood what she was doing and acted deliberately.

The jury has spent more than 29 hours considering the evidence after a trial lasting roughly six weeks, featuring more than 80 witnesses and hundreds of exhibits.

The central question now is whether the jurors can reach a unanimous decision.

And while that decision remains unresolved, another legal battle has suddenly emerged outside the courtroom.

A CASE WITH TWO UNFINISHED STORIES

For Light, the allegations could carry serious consequences if she is ultimately convicted.

But for now, she has pleaded not guilty, and the allegations against her have not been proven in court.

Her defense maintains that she never intended to interfere with the jury.

For the Clancy jury, meanwhile, the pressure is very different.

They must decide whether they can finally agree after days of deliberation — while following strict instructions designed to protect the integrity of the trial.

The courtroom drama has already reached a remarkable point.

One jury is struggling to reach a verdict. Another woman is preparing to fight a felony charge. And both stories are now unfolding around the same courthouse.