A juror in the trial of Lindsay Clancy is sharing new details about what he said happened inside the jury room that led to a mistrial in the case of the Massachusetts woman facing first-degree murder charges for the 2023 deaths of her three young children.
Nick Dargie, one of the three men on the 12-person jury, told ABC News’ Aaron Katersky that the lone holdout juror who prevented a unanimous verdict did not show any evidence explaining his vote.
“There was several times I would ask him to show us evidence or, you know, describe a witness testimony that helped to prove what he was saying, and … he couldn’t,” Dargie, 25, said in an interview Wednesday.
And he doesn’t have to. “I didn’t believe the defense’s assertions of insanity, I believe the state’s case beyond a reasonable doubt. I can’t point to one, two, or three specific things, I just didn’t believe it in it’s totality,” is valid.
Edit: A lack of ability to articulate his reasoning would certainly be a hinderance to getting anyone on his side, but the validity of his vote doesn’t depend on his ability to pull a Twelve Angry Men.
See this is kind of the point. He didnt even do that much, according to the article. Which is what most people would do when it’s their thought. If the juror was somehow compromised or lying, they would act like they acted here. No reason, no reasoning, no defense.
I dunno, neither of us were in the room. We can’t say exactly what happened, but to me this reeks of some tampering or something. But we won’t know.
Tampering? Why? This isn’t some big trial with millions of corporate dollars on the line, or some important person’s freedom, or some politician’s power. This was just one sad woman who did a tragic thing, with no big outcome for anyone else. Who’s going to bankroll and operate a jury tampering scheme, and why?
I’d say he did it with his vote, whether he vocalized it or not. And, of course as you said we weren’t there so this is right out of my ass, being bullied by eleven other people might have made him defensive and withdrawn.
Miscarriages of justice happen every day, maybe there would be fewer if jurors that weren’t sure didn’t go along with the group. Demonizing this guy sends a message that jurors in the next high profile case will remember.
Sure, you can jump to the defense of this random guy, but by all accounts it sounds like he was just a sociopathic incel. Sometimes the guy everyone is saying is acting like a giant piece of shit asshole is in fact a giant piece of shit asshole and not some virtuous scrappy underdog.
Two things.
One, this conversation isn’t just about that guy, it’s about jurors in general, and their right to vote the way they want without having to deliver a well reasoned argument detailing why.
Two, that is straight out of your ass. “All accounts” so far amounts to a couple of jurors that have come out to express their frustration about the holdout not engaging with the process much towards the end when he was the only one left voting guilty, and a weird story about him miming strangulation with the evidence for no reason they could understand. And one interview that I’ve seen since I made the previous comments where the interviewee said he did express reasons, the ones she mentioned were that he couldn’t wrap his head around how she could be going about her life normally (maybe normally isn’t the best word, she did do things like call the suicide hotline several times, just doing normal everyday things and not acting “crazy”) if she was experiencing postpartum psychosis and the way she acted in her interrogation.
We don’t know shit about this guy, you are completely making that up. If it turns out this guy made a bunch of social media posts that were misogynistic, or there is evidence of outside influence, or something else like that, I will change my opinion on him. An opinion that doesn’t have much to it right now, because we know absolutely nothing about him, the things you pull out of your ass notwithstanding. But that will not affect my opinion on the jury process.
It’s 2026. That’s the status quo now. Expecting people to think before, during, or after their actions is uncalled for.
It might not even be that someone told him to. Maybe he just really hates her and doesn’t want to admit that.