BREAKING: LINDSAY CLANCY JURY SENDS FOURTH NOTE AFTER 36 HOURS — JUDGE GIVES MAJOR “REASONABLE DOUBT” WARNING

The Lindsay Clancy jury has now sent its FOURTH question to the judge — after roughly 36 hours of deliberations and growing tension inside the courtroom.

And this time, Judge William Sullivan had to stop and explain one of the most important legal standards in the entire case:

What exactly does “reasonable doubt” mean?

Sullivan reminded the jurors that the Commonwealth carries the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

But he also made clear that the law does not require prosecutors to eliminate every possible, imaginary or far-fetched doubt.

The evidence, he explained, must leave jurors with an “abiding conviction” and “moral certainty” that the charge is true before they can return a guilty verdict.

The clarification came as the jury remained unable to reach a unanimous decision in a case that has already lasted nearly six weeks.

And the courtroom drama escalated even further.

According to the jury foreperson’s note, one juror was allegedly refusing to follow the judge’s instructions concerning reasonable doubt.

Defense attorney Kevin Reddington immediately asked Sullivan to remove that juror, arguing that the situation could prevent the panel from reaching a lawful verdict.

But Sullivan refused to remove the juror.

Instead, he questioned jurors individually and reminded the entire panel that they were required to follow the law as he had instructed it. The jurors were then sent back to continue deliberations.

The development has placed the case at an extraordinary crossroads.

Clancy has admitted that she was responsible for the deaths of her three children — Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months — in January 2023.

But the central question at trial has never simply been what happened.

It has been whether Clancy was criminally responsible for what she did.

Her defense argues that she was experiencing severe postpartum psychosis and was not legally responsible for her actions.

Prosecutors have argued that, despite her mental-health struggles, she understood what she was doing and knew it was wrong.

Now, after days of deliberations, the jurors remain divided.

The panel has already told Sullivan more than once that it was struggling to reach a unanimous verdict. The judge previously encouraged them to continue deliberating rather than immediately declaring a mistrial.

Thursday brought another dramatic turn.

A defense request to replace the alleged holdout juror was rejected.

The jury then returned to its deliberations.

But the clock keeps moving.

If the jurors ultimately cannot reach unanimity, the judge could declare a mistrial. That would not mean Clancy had been found innocent — it would mean the jury could not legally reach a verdict, potentially opening the door to another trial.

For now, there is no verdict.

Only 12 jurors, an enormous amount of evidence, and one of the most difficult questions in the case:

Did the evidence leave them with the level of certainty required by law — or does reasonable doubt remain?

The jury is expected to continue deliberating Friday.

And after roughly 36 hours of debate, the entire case may now come down to whether those 12 jurors can finally agree.