LINDSAY CLANCY’S LONE HOLDOUT JUROR HAD AN ACTIVE RESTRAINING ORDER — AND A $12,000 EVICTION CASE DURING THE TRIAL

New details uncovered by NBC10 Boston are raising serious questions about the lone juror who refused to join the majority in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial — including a prior assault charge, an active restraining order and thousands of dollars in unpaid rent.

The Lindsay Clancy murder trial ended without a verdict.

But the controversy surrounding the jury may be far from over.

A new investigation by NBC10 Boston has uncovered a series of court records involving the lone holdout juror whose refusal to agree with the other jurors ultimately contributed to the mistrial.

According to NBC10 Boston, the juror had previously faced a criminal charge involving an alleged assault against his wife, later became the subject of a restraining order obtained by his teenage nephew and was facing eviction over more than $12,000 in unpaid rent while the Clancy jury was deliberating.

The revelations are now prompting questions about how he was selected to serve on one of Massachusetts’ most closely watched criminal trials.

A 2021 ASSAULT CHARGE

According to a police report reviewed by NBC10 Boston, the juror faced an assault charge in September 2021 after his 13-year-old nephew called 911.

The teenager allegedly told police that his uncle had grabbed his wife by the throat and thrown her into a dresser.

Police responded and arrested the man.

The couple later divorced, and the criminal charge was eventually dismissed.

NBC10 Boston reported that the man’s former wife said she did not want to testify because she was concerned about losing custody of her daughter.

The dismissed charge does not establish that the alleged conduct occurred, but the history is significant because Massachusetts’ standard juror questionnaire asks prospective jurors whether they have previously been arrested or charged with a crime.

AN ACTIVE RESTRAINING ORDER

The investigation uncovered another court record that was still active during the Clancy trial.

Last year, the juror’s teenage nephew — the same person who had called 911 during the 2021 incident — obtained a restraining order against his uncle.

According to the affidavit cited by NBC10 Boston, the teenager alleged that his uncle pushed him to the ground and repeatedly punched him in the face.

The teen also alleged that his uncle blamed him for calling police.

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

NBC10 Boston’s chief legal analyst Michael Coyne questioned how someone with that history could have been seated on such a high-profile jury.

The Massachusetts juror questionnaire specifically asks prospective jurors whether they have been arrested, charged with a crime or served with a court order.

However, because juror questionnaires are not public records, NBC10 Boston said it could not determine how the juror actually answered those questions.

THEN CAME THE $12,000 RENT DISPUTE

The investigation also uncovered a separate legal problem involving the juror’s housing.

Housing court records reportedly show that he stopped paying rent at his home in March.

While the Clancy jury was deliberating, his landlord obtained a judgment for more than $12,000 in unpaid rent and began moving forward with eviction proceedings.

The timing adds another unusual layer to the story.

At the same time the jurors were deciding one of the most emotionally charged criminal cases in Massachusetts, the lone holdout was also facing a significant housing dispute of his own.

THE JUROR WHO WOULD NOT BUDGE

After the trial ended in a mistrial, several jurors spoke publicly about what happened inside the deliberation room.

They described the lone holdout as unwilling to meaningfully engage with the rest of the panel.

One juror described his behavior as “shocking,” while others characterized him as arrogant and said he would not interact with them.

The jury ultimately failed to reach the unanimous verdict required to resolve the case.

The result was a mistrial after weeks of testimony and deliberations.

The new revelations have now shifted some attention away from the evidence presented at trial and toward the person who held the decisive vote.

COULD HIS JUROR QUESTIONNAIRE BECOME CRITICAL?

That may be the next question.

NBC10 Boston reported that experts believe prosecutors could have reason to examine the juror’s original questionnaire to determine whether he properly disclosed his legal history.

But there is currently no public evidence establishing that he intentionally concealed anything during jury selection.

The questionnaire itself is not publicly available, meaning it remains unknown exactly what information he provided.

NBC10 Boston contacted the Plymouth District Attorney’s Office and Clancy’s defense team for comment. Both declined to comment on Friday.

The juror himself has also not publicly discussed his role in the trial.

His jury information remains impounded, and NBC10 Boston said it is not identifying him because he has chosen not to speak publicly.

THE CLANCY CASE IS NOT OVER

The revelations come just days after the highly anticipated trial of Lindsay Clancy ended without a verdict.

Clancy was accused of killing her three young children at the family’s Duxbury home in January 2023.

Her defense argued that she was suffering from severe postpartum psychiatric illness and was not legally responsible for her actions.

After weeks of testimony, the jury could not reach a unanimous decision.

Now, attention is turning toward what happens next — both for Clancy and for the controversial jury that failed to deliver a verdict.

And one question is likely to remain at the center of the fallout:

How did a juror with this legal history end up sitting on the case in the first place?

For now, the answer remains unclear.

But the newly uncovered court records have ensured that the story of the Lindsay Clancy jury is not ending with the mistrial.