Lindsay Clancy Holdout Juror’s CRIMINAL PAST Comes to Light

So remember when SO many people were calling the Lindsay Clancy holdout juror an “American hero” and saying he was the ONLY smart person on that jury because he refused to agree with the other jurors?

Well… we’re now learning A LOT more about this juror, and this definitely raises some questions. 👀

According to NBC 10 Boston, this juror had a criminal assault charge involving his wife in 2021. Police were reportedly called after his teenage nephew allegedly witnessed him grab his wife by the throat and throw her into a dresser. The jurors mom reportedly screams “You’re evil” as police arrested him.

That criminal charge was eventually dismissed, and his ex-wife reportedly chose not to testify. The ex wife spoke to media outlets this week and said she did not want to testify in the case because she was worried she would lose custody of her daughter. 

But it doesn’t stop there.

A year later that same teenage nephew obtained a restraining order against his uncle, alleging that he pushed him to the ground and repeatedly punched him in the face, telling him that he was the reason he lost his family and had “this” coming for a long time.

That restraining order was reportedly STILL ACTIVE when this man was selected to serve on the Lindsay Clancy jury.

The jury questionnaire reportedly specifically asked potential jurors if they had ever been arrested, charged with a crime, or served with a court order.

So the question is now: Was all of this properly disclosed on his questionnaire?

Because if it wasn’t, that could be a HUGE issue.

And we’re also learning that while the Clancy jury was deliberating, this juror was reportedly involved in an eviction case involving more than $12,000 in unpaid rent.

Then there’s what the other jurors reportedly said about him after the mistrial.

Several jurors described him as refusing to engage in deliberations and said he was arrogant and would not listen to what anyone else had to say.

Now, let me be VERY clear…none of this proves that this juror was wrong about Lindsay Clancy.

His personal history does not automatically mean his opinion about the case was wrong, and it certainly doesn’t prove that his background influenced his decision.

BUT…

When you have a juror sitting on one of the biggest murder trials in Massachusetts, and you later find out there was a reportedly active restraining order against him at the time he was selected — along with a prior criminal charge that was dismissed — I think it is completely fair to ask whether he should have been seated on this jury in the first place.

Because this wasn’t just a disagreement between jurors.

His refusal to reach a verdict ultimately resulted in a mistrial.

And now there are questions about whether information that potentially should have been disclosed during jury selection was actually disclosed.