Two Weeks After Lindsay Clancy Mistrial, Holdout Juror and Patrick Clancy Speak Out

Two weeks after a Massachusetts jury deadlocked in Lindsay Clancy’s triple-murder trial, the lone holdout juror and Clancy’s ex-husband, Patrick Clancy, are speaking publicly for the first time.

Michael Péguy Desronvil, 48, the juror who refused to join an 11-1 majority, said in a statement Thursday that fellow jurors misrepresented his views and that he never doubted the evidence supported a guilty verdict. The statement came after a seven-week trial ended without a verdict and after Clancy’s defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, accused the holdout of having an agenda.

“I didn’t have any doubts,” Desronvil said. “As I tried to explain different possible theories during deliberation, I kept getting cut off as if I had doubts based on the evidence presented.”

The Boston Globe reported this week that it confirmed Desronvil’s identity through photos published online, court records and an interview with one of his fellow jurors.

The judge declared a mistrial on Sept. 4 after the jury repeatedly told the court it could not reach a unanimous verdict. Clancy’s lawyers argued she was suffering from postpartum psychosis when she killed her three children—Cora, 5; Dawson, 3; and Callan, 8 months—at the family’s Duxbury, Massachusetts, home in January 2023. She acknowledged killing the children, but her defense said she should not be held criminally responsible because she was in the midst of a psychotic episode when she strangled them and attempted suicide.

The mistrial has left Clancy’s future uncertain. Prosecutors have not said whether they will seek a new trial. She is due back in court Sept. 29 for a hearing as the Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office weighs that decision.

Inside the jury room, the divide was bitter. On the sixth day of deliberations, jury foreperson Roni Carlson wrote a note to the judge saying Desronvil “has made statements acknowledging doubt, but refuses to apply it to the verdict as the law states.” Reddington then asked the judge to replace Desronvil with an alternate, a request the judge denied. “There’s one juror who refuses to listen to the law that you’ve given him or her on reasonable doubt,” Reddington told the judge.

But Desronvil now says his position was not based on doubt about guilt. “Based on all the physical evidence, key witnesses, and what the prosecution presented, I thought it was enough proof that she knew exactly what she was doing and planned,” he said.

The panel—nine women and three men—deliberated for more than 38 hours. Jurors sent notes indicating they were split 11 to 1, and at one point the majority alleged the lone holdout could not follow the law on reasonable doubt. Several jurors who leaned toward finding Clancy not guilty due to lack of criminal responsibility later described frustrating conversations in the deliberation room.

“There was times he wouldn’t engage, like he’d be scrolling on his phone while people were talking to him, things like that,” juror Nick Dargie told ABC News. Juror Kellie Farina told NBC10 Boston: “He had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children.” Carlson told NBC10 there was no doubt Clancy killed her children, but said it was also obvious to jurors that she loved them.

The Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office previously declined to comment on reports about juror identities.

The holdout juror is now being represented by attorney Edward Andrew Paltzik, who said in a statement on X that he was protecting the man’s identity and asked the public to pray for him. “He is presently safe and sound at an undisclosed secure location in a rural area of Northern New England,” Paltzik wrote.

Paltzik described his client as a devoted father and a man of God and said the “evil people who have so viciously attacked this American Hero and Champion of Justice will be held accountable to the maximum extent of the law and beyond.” CNN has reached out to Paltzik for more information and to ask whether any legal action is being taken on behalf of the juror.

In a second post early Friday, Paltzik said there would be a time for accountability and for “the real story of the Lindsay Clancy Trial” to be told—but not now. He said neither he nor his client would give interviews and warned that attempts to contact the juror would “not be well-taken.” “Please respect his dignity, humanity, and privacy,” Paltzik wrote. “Stay away from his home, stop calling him, and don’t even think about deciphering his location.”

He added that more information would be shared “on an appropriate timeline,” including ways to support the juror and “the cause of truth and justice that he so righteously stands for.” He also thanked “all the patriotic Americans who have stood in solidarity behind him.”

Patrick Clancy, Lindsay’s ex-husband, also stepped forward after the mistrial, sitting down with his new wife for a CBS “60 Minutes” interview scheduled to air Sunday. He had been the first witness called in the trial and spent two days testifying about Lindsay’s downward spiral before the deaths of their three children.

In the interview, Patrick Clancy told CBS correspondent Ross Douthat that he still talks to his children “all the time.” Asked whether he feels angry at himself, he said: “I think I did the best I could with what I had at the time, and I live with the outcome.” He repeated, “I live with it every day, but I think I did the best I could.”

Dr. Rachel Danis, a fertility doctor in New York City, married Patrick Clancy in April, CBS reported. During Lindsay Clancy’s trial, both Patrick Clancy and Danis became targets of unfounded conspiracy theories, and lawyers for Patrick Clancy recently announced they would take legal action to stop the online barrage.

Danis joined her husband for the “60 Minutes” interview. “I don’t understand how this story has been so twisted,” she said. “But I would hope people know that Pat is, as I said before, the most selfless father and supportive partner, and I was just a girl that met a guy running in Central Park on a really cold Saturday, and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that.”

The case has become a flashpoint in debates over postpartum psychosis, criminal responsibility and how courts handle jurors who question the limits of reasonable doubt. The 11-1 deadlock also underscores how a single holdout can shape the trajectory of a high-profile prosecution—and why the decision about a retrial will be closely watched in Massachusetts and beyond.

CNN’s Eric Levenson, Cindy Von Quednow and Isa Mudannayake contributed to this report.

For more CNN news and newsletters, create an account at CNN.com.