The Lindsay Clancy jurors have said they are deadlocked
By NJ Chicaa
@NJChicaa (127835)
United States
September 1, 2026 10:23am CST
This is the high-profile criminal trial of the woman who killed her 3 young children. She has admitted to the murders but the defense has stated that she was going through post-partum psychosis and did not understand what she was doing at the time.
The jurors have to come to a unanimous decision and this morning they indicated that they have not been able to do so after 4 days of deliberations. The judge has instructed them to return to deliberations and to try to come to a verdict.
I'm not someone who regularly pays attention to criminal trials or who watches crime shows but I served on a jury for the first time like 2 years ago so I guess I'm more interested in the process. Honestly I was dreading it but aside from the tedious process of jury selection I found it interesting. That being said the trial was only 2 days (plus 2 days of jury selection) and my job paid me my regular salary for the days I missed.
The case I was on was pretty clear cut and I think we deliberated for a total of 15 minutes with just 1 question submitted to the judge. We probably could have come to the same decision after 5 minutes.
Have you ever served on a jury? What was your experience?
https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/01/us/live-news/lindsay-clancy-trial
5 people like this
5 responses
@AmbiePam (126373)
• United States
1 Sep
I was wondering if someone was ever going to mention this case. I didn’t know where to start. I’ve never felt sorry for a murderer before, but I’ve also never believed someone was in a post partum psychosis like she was/may have been.
I was called to jury selection, and was questioned with several others in the box, but ultimately, I was let go. I’ll never do it again though. My back was on fire, and I hadn’t realized I’d need the doctor’s excuse note I was told I could get. I was only 25 then. I’d die off at 45.
3 people like this
@NJChicaa (127835)
• United States
1 Sep
I really thought my brief bio of having the CNN logo burned into my plasma TV and teaching forensic science would get me disqualified. I can't remember--there was something else I said that I was SURE would disqualify me. Nope. Both the prosecutor and defense guy laughed when they seated me as juror #10 and I was like "sunofabiotch". (well you get my meaning)
2 people like this
@Manasha (2974)
• Pondicherry, India
1 Sep
I’ve never served on a jury, but I can definitely understand why the process would become more interesting after experiencing it yourself. Four days of deliberations sounds incredibly intense, especially with a case involving such serious circumstances. Your experience sounds much more straightforward, though—I can imagine 15 minutes of deliberation after a two-day trial felt almost anticlimactic! I’d probably be nervous going into jury duty too, but I think I’d find the process fascinating once I was actually involved.
3 people like this
@FourWalls (87517)
• United States
1 Sep
I can’t do jury duty because of my health problems. I know the judge doesn’t want to interrupt a court proceeding with, “Will juror #7 please quit wheezing?” 
This may sound wrong and contrary to what you’re “supposed” to do on a jury, but I would convict. If you convict, they always have the appeal process. If you acquit, no second chance. We had a sleazeball here in Louisville who got acquitted for murdering his girlfriend, then only served a couple of years for perjury because he lied during the murder trial under oath. 
This may sound wrong and contrary to what you’re “supposed” to do on a jury, but I would convict. If you convict, they always have the appeal process. If you acquit, no second chance. We had a sleazeball here in Louisville who got acquitted for murdering his girlfriend, then only served a couple of years for perjury because he lied during the murder trial under oath. 2 people like this
@JudyEv (387585)
• Rockingham, Australia
2 Sep
My experience was much like yours. I was dreading it too but did find it interesting.
