“NOT A SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE” — LINDSAY CLANCY JUROR REVEALS WHAT HAPPENED BEHIND THE JURY ROOM DOORS

Eleven jurors were reportedly ready to find Lindsay Clancy not criminally responsible. One juror refused — and another juror now says he could not explain his position with a single piece of evidence or witness testimony.

The Lindsay Clancy trial ended without a verdict.

But new details from inside the jury room are now revealing just how deeply divided the panel became — and how one holdout juror ultimately prevented the case from reaching a unanimous conclusion.

Nick Dargie, 25, one of the jurors who served on the case, has now spoken publicly about the deliberations.

According to Dargie, the lone holdout repeatedly refused to identify evidence or witness testimony that supported his position.

“There wasn’t a single piece of evidence or witness testimony that he used to prove why he was thinking the way he was,” Dargie said in an interview with ABC News.

That disagreement eventually resulted in a hung jury and mistrial.

11–1 — BUT NO VERDICT

Clancy’s five-week trial centered on one critical question: whether she was criminally responsible for the deaths of her three children.

Clancy did not dispute that she killed her children — Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months — in the family’s Duxbury, Massachusetts, home in January 2023.

Her defense argued that she was suffering from severe postpartum psychosis and had been overmedicated, leaving her unable to understand or control her actions.

Prosecutors argued that Clancy acted deliberately and was criminally responsible.

After nearly a week of deliberations, 11 jurors reportedly favored finding Clancy not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility.

One juror disagreed.

That single disagreement was enough to prevent a verdict.

Judge William Sullivan eventually declared a mistrial on September 4.

“SHOW US THE EVIDENCE”

Dargie said the jurors repeatedly tried to understand why the holdout reached his conclusion.

They asked him to point to testimony or evidence that supported his position.

According to Dargie, he could not.

“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, and he couldn’t,” Dargie told ABC News.

For Dargie, the problem was not simply that another juror disagreed.

He emphasized that a juror is entitled to reach a completely different conclusion.

The problem, he said, was that the holdout could not explain the evidentiary basis for his decision.

“Otherwise, there’s nothing wrong with somebody having a completely opposite opinion,” Dargie said. “That would be a hung jury. That is our justice system.”

THE REASONABLE DOUBT DISPUTE

Other jurors have also spoken publicly about the extraordinary disagreement.

The jury foreperson previously said the holdout acknowledged having reasonable doubt, but still refused to find Clancy not criminally responsible.

That distinction became one of the most contentious issues during deliberations.

The jurors eventually sent a note to Judge Sullivan expressing concerns about the situation.

The judge declined the defense’s request to remove the juror and instead instructed the panel to continue deliberating.

After further attempts failed to produce unanimity, the judge declared a mistrial.

ANOTHER JUROR DESCRIBED A SHOCKING MOMENT

Dargie has also described another moment from deliberations that stunned members of the jury.

According to him, the holdout used an exercise band around a water bottle to reenact the strangulation method discussed during the trial.

Dargie said he was shocked by the demonstration and felt the jury room was not the place to conduct such a reenactment.

Another juror reportedly criticized the holdout for refusing to engage with information presented during the trial, including testimony and toxicology evidence concerning Clancy’s medications.

THE CASE IS STILL NOT OVER

The mistrial does not mean Clancy was acquitted.

She remains charged, and prosecutors have not yet announced whether they will pursue a second trial.

Meanwhile, Clancy’s attorney Kevin Reddington has taken another legal step.

He is asking the judge to find Clancy not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility, arguing that the prosecution’s evidence was insufficient to establish criminal responsibility.

A hearing on the defense motion is scheduled for September 29. If the judge grants the motion, it could prevent a retrial.

For now, the case remains unresolved.

Five weeks of testimony.

More than 80 witnesses.

Seven days of jury deliberations.

And ultimately, one juror stood between Lindsay Clancy and a verdict.

Now, for the first time, members of that jury are explaining what happened when the courtroom doors closed — and why they could not reach the unanimous decision the case demanded.