Accused killer mother Lindsay Clancy’s lawyer referenced the bombshell Karen Learn homicide case Friday in his failed bid to keep away from a mistrial — by arguing that the jurors might have been confused throughout deliberations.
Lawyer Kevin Reddington cited the high-profile case — by which Learn was charged with killing her Massachusetts police officer boyfriend in January 2022— whereas demanding that jurors be “polled” and requested to return for extra deliberations.
“Underneath Karen Learn versus the Commonwealth … Massachusetts guidelines of prison process give a trial choose discretion to require a jury to return a verdict for fees on which they’ve agreed earlier than declaring a mistrial,” Reddington instructed Choose William Sullivan.
An analogous rule “additionally permits the choose to ballot the jury when a verdict is returned and earlier than the decision is recorded, nevertheless, a choose is just not required to simply accept a partial verdict earlier than declaring a mistrial,” he mentioned.
Observe The Put up’s dwell updates on the Lindsay Clancy trial
A lawyer for the prosecution then fired again, “I’d object to that … I believe we’re in a special situation right here than within the Learn case.”
“In that case, they did attain a verdict on sure fees however not others,” she mentioned.
Earlier than making the argument, Reddington had simply requested the choose to think about that the jury observe was extremely uncommon.
“That jury foreperson wrote, very unusually, that it was ‘with a heavy coronary heart’” that they couldn’t agree on a verdict, Reddington mentioned.
In Karen Learn’s first homicide trial in 2024, jurors had been confused by whether or not they needed to agree on a verdict for all fees — together with second-degree homicide, manslaughter whereas beneath the affect, and leaving the scene of a crash, Learn’s lawyer, Peter Elikann, instructed The Put up Friday.
Right here’s the newest on Lindsay Clancy’s homicide trial:
“[Reddington] didn’t need a problem the place the jury didn’t understand it wasn’t all or nothing,” Elikann mentioned.
To forestall that, Reddington mentioned he wished every juror polled about whether or not they’re actually in a impasse.
“He desires every certainly one of them individually questioned on every particular person cost,” Elikann mentioned.
Some jurors in Learn’s first trial thought Choose Beverly Cannone was unclear concerning the definition of a unanimous verdict, Elikann mentioned.
“Jurors felt Choose Cannone not solely prematurely declared a mistrial, they felt she ought to have inquired whether or not they had been unable to agree on all the costs — or whether or not they had come to settlement on a number of the fees however not others,” Elikann mentioned.
Boston prison protection lawyer Brad Bailey mentioned Reddington made the comparability as a result of uncommon jury observe.
“It is advisable watch out in how notes are construed, and that you must ensure you’re not lacking one thing earlier than you do one thing as vital in declaring a mistrial,” Bailey mentioned Friday.
“[Reddington is] referencing a case the place there was actual confusion,” he mentioned. “It is advisable ensure that the observe is unambiguous earlier than you declare a mistrial.”
Learn was finally acquitted in a second trial of second-degree homicide, manslaughter, and leaving the scene of a crash, however convicted of working beneath the affect in June 2025.
She was accused of mowing O’Keefe down together with her SUV after dropping him off at his cop pal’s home following an evening of heavy consuming.
Prosecutors mentioned Learn then drove off, leaving O’Keefe to die in a snowbank as a winter storm was coming in in a single day.
The Clancy case was finally declared a mistrial Friday following greater than six days of deliberations attributable to one holdout juror who wished to convict her.
