Watch: Lindsay Clancy's Lawyer Melts Down, Calls Judge 'Soft' For Letting Holdout Juror Remain

Lindsay Clancy's defense team is absolutely melting down after Judge William Sullivan refused to remove a holdout juror in Clancy's triple-murder trial, in which the jury must decide whether Clancy is criminally responsible for strangling her three children, Cora, 5; Dawson, 3; and Callan, 8 months. Her defense claims that she was suffering from hallucinations amid postpartum psychosis. The prosecution claims she was not in psychosis when she sent her husband out of the house on long errands, before she murdered her children and then tried to make it appear as though she attempted suicide. 

On Thursday, the jury foreperson sent a note indicating one juror was refusing to apply the judge’s instructions on reasonable doubt. Judge William Sullivan questioned each juror individually at sidebar, then gave the full panel what defense attorney Kevin Reddington later called a "soft" reminder of the law and sent them back to deliberate.

"They’ve said at this point that they can," Sullivan said. "That was specifically addressed towards the specific question, and that’s what I’m doing."

Reddington demanded that the holdout to be removed, and requested a more pointed inquiry - which Sullivan declined. 

JUST IN: Lindsay Clancy stares at the jury as Judge William Sullivan sends them home for the day.

The moment came shortly after Clancy's attorney, Kevin Reddington, fumed and called on Sullivan to remove one of the jurors. https://t.co/r7g6JPmXyM pic.twitter.com/32z5efMIKP

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) September 3, 2026

According to Clancy's defense team, the holdout juror is a man. 

"Clearly, we have a person who, under their oath, stood in front of you yesterday … under oath looked you in the eye and lied," said Reddington. "That juror told you that he would be able to apply the law to the facts as you asked him."

When court resumed Friday, Reddington hammered Sullivan, arguing that the prior instruction was inadequate, and pressed again for removal or further questioning of the juror (whom he accused of having lied under oath). Sullivan refused additional inquiry, stating he had considered the issue at length and would not remove the juror. Redding responded by calling Sullivan 'soft' - to which Sullivan replied: "What do you want me to do?! Get a brass band? I read the instruction as written by the Massachusetts Supreme Court. The fact I perhaps did not give it my full inflection, I'm sorry about that, I'm not an actor - I'm giving instruction.

🚨 BREAKING: Lindsay Clancy's defense attorney is MELTING DOWN in court and DIRECTLY SPARRING with the judge, calling the judge "SOFT"

DEFENSE: Stop being soft with jury instructions!

JUDGE: What do you want me to do?! Get a BRASS BAND?! I read the instruction as written by the… pic.twitter.com/dijDZAdqzG

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) September 4, 2026

No More Sidebars!

Following the spat, Clancy's defense team filed a motion to Sullivan asking that there be no more sidebars for the remainder of the trial - and that all further proceedings be handled in open court. The prosecution, meanwhile, suggested that there be no further questioning of the jury, and asked that Sullivan send them to continue deliberations, arguing that the holdout juror has "no indication of lack of impartiality or bias or extraneous influence, and no indication of inability to deliberate."

Reddington disagreed - arguing that the juror appears to have a personal issue getting in the way of him being able to deliberate fairly, and demanded that he be replaced with an alternate. 

According to Massachusetts law, a judge can only send a jury back for deliberations twice before declaring a mistrial - which looks like where we're headed.