Breaking News
January 1, SHOCKING: What One Juror Just Revealed About the Holdout in Deadly Mom Trial

Wyatt’s Take
- A liberal holdout juror derailed justice for three murdered children in Massachusetts — now we know exactly who blocked the verdict
- Fellow jurors expose the lone dissenter who bought into the ‘mental illness’ excuse while ignoring brutal facts about a triple infanticide
- This case proves our broken justice system lets emotion and woke ideology override accountability for the most heinous crimes
The Lindsay Clancy murder trial ended in a mistrial, and now shocking details are emerging about the single juror who refused to hold a mother accountable for killing her three young children. Fellow jurors are speaking out, revealing the identity and reasoning of the holdout who derailed justice.
One juror has now confirmed that the lone holdout was a Black man who simply couldn’t bring himself to convict Clancy, despite overwhelming evidence that she strangled her three children to death in their Massachusetts home.
NEW: Lindsay Clancy juror Paula Devlin reveals on 'CBS Mornings' that the lone, male holdout juror who voted to find Clancy guilty of murdering her children was the *only* person of color — a black man.
The 11 not-guilty jurors — who hectored him for a week to cave — were all… pic.twitter.com/5qirHNGCyx
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) September 11, 2026
The revelation comes as frustration mounts over a justice system that increasingly prioritizes sympathy for criminals over justice for victims. Eleven jurors were ready to convict on the most serious charges. One stood in the way.
According to reports from inside the jury room, the holdout juror repeatedly focused on Clancy’s mental state and her role as a mother, rather than the cold facts of what she did to Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months.
“She loved her children,” the holdout reportedly insisted, as if love could excuse methodically strangling three helpless kids.
Other jurors described their frustration as they reviewed evidence showing Clancy researched ways to kill, planned the murders while her husband was out, and executed her children one by one. But the single dissenting vote was enough to deadlock the jury.
The defense leaned heavily on claims of postpartum psychosis and mental illness — the kind of excuse-making that’s become standard in high-profile cases where defendants claim they weren’t in control of their actions. Never mind that Clancy was coherent enough to plan, research, and carry out three separate murders.
Massachusetts prosecutors now face the decision of whether to retry the case, meaning more delays, more taxpayer money spent, and more trauma for the surviving family members who’ve already endured the unthinkable.
The Clancy case has become a flashpoint in debates over how the justice system treats mothers who kill their children. Critics argue that female defendants, especially those who claim mental illness, receive far more sympathy than male defendants accused of similar crimes.
Meanwhile, three children are dead, a father has lost his entire family, and the woman responsible walks free on bail while the legal system ties itself in knots over whether to hold her accountable.
The revelation about the holdout juror raises serious questions about jury selection and whether personal biases prevented a fair evaluation of the evidence. In a case this clear-cut, one person’s refusal to convict looks less like reasonable doubt and more like an emotional decision disconnected from the facts.
Wyatt Matters
When one person’s feelings can override justice for three murdered babies, something is deeply broken. Working families across America understand that actions have consequences — it’s a lesson we teach our kids from day one. But our elite justice system increasingly operates under different rules, where the right excuse or the right sympathetic story can mean never facing real accountability. Those children deserved better. Their father deserved better. And the American people deserve a justice system that puts victims first, not criminals.
-
Entertainment3 years agoWhoopi Goldberg’s “Wildly Inappropriate” Commentary Forces “The View” into Unscheduled Commercial Break
-
Entertainment3 years ago‘He’s A Pr*ck And F*cking Hates Republicans’: Megyn Kelly Goes Off on Don Lemon
-
Featured3 years agoUS Advises Citizens to Leave This Country ASAP
-
Featured3 years agoBenghazi Hero: Hillary Clinton is “One of the Most Disgusting Humans on Earth”
-
Latest News3 years agoNude Woman Wields Spiked Club in Daylight Venice Beach Brawl
-
Featured3 years agoFox News Calls Security on Donald Trump Jr. at GOP Debate [Video]
-
Entertainment3 years agoComedy Mourns Legend Richard Lewis: A Heartfelt Farewell
-
Latest News3 years agoSupreme Court Gift: Trump’s Trial Delayed, Election Interference Allegations Linger
Cat Man
September 11, 2026 at 6:16 pm
What??? This article is bass ackwards. I can’t make sense of it. If someone can, please tell me what I’m missing.
Jon
September 11, 2026 at 6:27 pm
So these sick women are also bigots on top of condoning murder. May they burn in hell.
G
September 11, 2026 at 7:12 pm
Are there any mental institutions for the criminally insane left in this country? This mental illness defense is more of a scam where the criminal conveniently escapes accountability Too bad the alternate juror couldn’t have been used to replace the sympathetic juror
RaySpike
September 11, 2026 at 10:30 pm
It wasn’t the 1 Juror. It was the 11 others! The 11 we’re the sympathetic ones. The 1 Holdout wanted a guilty verdict.
For some reason, The writer of this story decided to LIE and twist everything backwards!
Someone needs to apologize for this, write a retraction and explain why they chose to LIE !
Lolly Walsh
September 12, 2026 at 12:46 pm
Yes,one juror wanted her to be convicted! The other 11 didn’t. Whoever wrote this article is a moron.
Billie Miller
September 11, 2026 at 8:42 pm
This is not even close to the truth – everything is backwards‼️
LC
September 11, 2026 at 8:50 pm
I thought the jury were all voting for reason by insanity. Sounds to me like this hold out juror has its own issues. The woman killed three children, her own children and she did it methodically and calculating. She will go to hell. In all the videos and photos I have seen she has literally no expression on her face ever. She killed her kids and she deserves prison for life if not the death penalty. Crazy ass, bitch!
RaySpike
September 11, 2026 at 10:25 pm
Why is the writer of this story lying ?! This is BS. 1 Juror Wanted to Vote GUILTY and the rest, At The Behest of the Female Nurses, Who wore pink shirts in Solidarity for Clancy were the ones that Wanted an Innocent Verdict! The 1 Holdout Was the only One that Wanted Justice for the Children and Wanted a Guilty Verdict !
This makes me not want to read your stories anymore since you are a LIAR ! What is Wrong With You ?