2026-09-21T18:23:00-0400 / 哥伦比亚广播公司/美联社
林赛·克兰西的律师已请求法官调查唯一一名希望认定这位马萨诸塞州母亲犯有杀害三名子女谋杀罪的陪审员的行为。她的律师还请求法官驳回这起刑事案件，称任何重审都会侵犯她的双重审判权。
在周五提交、周一公开的一份动议中，克兰西的律师请求法院就该陪审员所谓的在评议期间使用手机、在审判开始前填写的陪审员资格问卷中是否如实作答，以及在审判结束前一天接受法官询问时是否如实陈述等情况进行质询。
9月4日，陪审团在经过数日努力后仍坚称无法达成一致裁决，法官随后宣布休审。12名陪审员中有11人准备认定克兰西无须承担刑事责任，多数人认为她在勒死5岁的科拉、3岁的道森和8个月大的卡伦时，正处于一种名为产后精神病的罕见病症发作状态。但一名名为迈克尔·德斯龙维尔的陪审员支持检方观点，检方此前主张克兰西清楚自己的行为。
克兰西的律师凯文·雷丁顿还请求法院调取德斯龙维尔在陪审团评议期间每日早8点至下午4点30分之间的所有通话和短信记录。该州禁止陪审员在评议期间使用手机。
检方尚未透露是否计划对克兰西再次提起诉讼。她目前仍被控谋杀罪，在案件审结前将一直在精神病医院接受治疗。
周一提交的另一份动议中，克兰西的律师请求法官采取非同寻常的举措直接驳回刑事案件，而非启动重审，理由是本就不该宣布休审。
他们辩称，在陪审团负责人向法官抱怨一名陪审员拒绝听取关于合理怀疑的法律解释后，法官本应在评议期间将该持不同意见的陪审员替换为候补陪审员。
“克兰西女士和所有刑事被告一样，享有宪法赋予的由其同侪组成的公正陪审团裁决其命运的权利，陪审团应忠实按照指示适用法律，而非强加陪审员自身对法律对错的看法，包括这项基本原则：如果没有超出合理怀疑的证据证明其有罪，就必须宣告她无罪，”她的律师在驳回动议中写道。“因此，多份关于一名陪审员违反这一核心原则的报告，要求进行司法调查，以确定她获得公正陪审团的权利是否遭到侵犯。”
普利茅斯县地区检察官蒂莫西·克鲁兹的发言人拒绝就这些动议置评。
德斯龙维尔尚未因担任陪审员期间的行为被指控有任何不当行为，但其他陪审员抱怨他态度顽固，始终认定克兰西有罪。
上周，德斯龙维尔的律师爱德华·帕尔齐克发布了一份声明，德斯龙维尔在其中表示，他“毫无怀疑”克兰西在杀害三名子女时清楚自己的行为。
“在评议期间，我试图解释各种可能的理论时，我的发言不断被打断，仿佛我对现有证据存在疑虑，”他在声明中说道。
“根据所有实物证据、关键证人以及检方提交的证据，我认为已有足够证据证明她完全清楚自己的行为并有所预谋，”声明写道。
雷丁顿提交动议之际，克兰西的前夫帕特里克·克兰西接受了《60分钟》栏目采访，谈及他认为前妻在杀害三名子女时正与之抗争的精神疾病。
当被问及在涉及精神疾病的案件中，问责和正义等理念意味着什么时，帕特里克·克兰西对采访记者罗斯·多沙特说道：“我认为我们可以找到一种富有同情心的方式来应对这些悲剧。”
“这并不意味着不需要问责，”帕特里克·克兰西说。“这只是意味着我们要正视痛苦和耻辱，并努力找到防止此类悲剧再次发生的方法。我一直都是这么看待这件事的。”
Lindsay Clancy’s attorney requests investigation into holdout juror, asks judge to dismiss criminal case
2026-09-21T18:23:00-0400 / CBS/AP
Lawyers for Lindsay Clancy have asked a judge to investigate the conduct of the lone juror who wanted to convict the mother from Massachusetts of murder in the deaths of her three children. Her lawyers have also asked the judge to dismiss the criminal case, claiming any successive trial would violate her double jeopardy rights.
In a motion filed Friday but made public Monday, Clancy’s lawyers asked the court to question the juror about his alleged use of a cellphone during deliberations, his truthfulness on a questionnaire that prospective jurors filled out before the trial began and his truthfulness when jurors were questioned by the judge a day before the trial ended.
The judge declared a mistrial Sept. 4 after the jury insisted it couldn’t reach a unanimous verdict, despite days of trying. Eleven of 12 jurors were ready to clear Clancy of criminal responsibility, with the majority feeling that she was in the grip of a rare condition called postpartum psychosis when she strangled her kids — 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson and 8-month-old Callan. But one juror, Michael Desronvil, sided with the prosecutors, who had argued that Clancy knew what she was doing.
Among other things, Clancy’s lawyer, Kevin Reddington, asked the court to obtain a record of any calls or texts Desronvil made between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. on each day the jury deliberated. Phone use during deliberations is prohibited in the state.
Prosecutors have yet to say whether they plan on putting Clancy on trial again. She remains charged with murder and is in a psychiatric hospital until her case is resolved.
In another motion on Monday, Clancy’s lawyers asked the judge to take the unusual step of dismissing the criminal case, rather than putting on a new trial, on the grounds that a mistrial shouldn’t have been declared in the first place.
They argued that the judge should have replaced the holdout juror with an alternate during the deliberations after a jury foreperson complained to the judge that one juror was refusing to listen to the law on reasonable doubt.
“Ms. Clancy, like all criminal defendants, had a Constitutional right to have her fate decided by an impartial jury of her peers, faithfully applying the law as instructed rather than superimposing the juror’s own view of legal right and wrong, including the foundational principle that, absent proof beyond a reasonable doubt of her guilt, she must be acquitted,” her attorneys wrote in a motion to dismiss. “The multiple reports of a juror violating this bedrock principle, therefore, required a judicial inquiry sufficient to ascertain whether her right to an impartial jury was being violated.”
A spokesperson for Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz would not comment on the motions.
Desronvil hasn’t been accused of any wrongdoing in connection with his service on the jury, though other jurors complained that he was inflexible in his opinion that Clancy was guilty.
In a statement released by his lawyer last week, Edward Paltzik, Desronvil said he “didn’t have any doubts” that Clancy knew what she was doing when she killed her three children.
“As I tried to explain different possible theories during deliberation, I kept getting cut off as if I had doubts based on the evidence present,” he said in his statement.
“Based on all the physical evidence, key witnesses, and what the prosecution presents, I thought it was enough proof that she knew exactly what she was doing and planned,” the statement read.
Reddington’s motions come as Clancy’s ex-husband, Patrick Clancy, sat down for an interview with “60 Minutes” to talk about the illness he believes his then-wife was battling when she killed their three children.
Asked what ideas like accountability and justice mean in cases where an illness is involved, Patrick Clancy told correspondent Ross Douthat, “I think we can find a compassionate way to deal with these tragedies.”
“And that, that doesn’t mean no accountability,” Patrick Clancy said. “It just means that we recognize the suffering and the stigma, and we try to find a way to prevent this from happening in the future. That’s always how I’ve looked at it.”
发表回复