Do we have time for one more look at the insane women who made up the Lindsay Clancy jury, now that, according to The Boston Globe, the lone holdout juror is "getting the negative attention he deserves"? The other jurors claim that the holdout disregarded jury instructions, but the jury had one job: to determine Clancy's innocence or guilt. Not to make a feminist statement. Not to get a national conversation going. Just determine innocence or guilt, based on the facts. The facts are that Clancy murdered her three children, aged 5 years to 8 months, with an exercise band. The lone holdout says eight jurors were pressuring him from the first day of deliberations to find Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity.
Maybe Paula Devlin and her pals on the jury should have been paying attention to the trial and not thinking about how they could get people talking.
Lindsay Clancy juror Paula Devlin:
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) September 17, 2026
"We thought, this is a real opportunity to get people talking. That's all we really thought." [Giggles]
Nothing about justice for the 3 children pic.twitter.com/aTYx7QQO8X
In fact, at some point during the trial, they were planning to do a joint press conference on the topic of postpartum depression.
Somehow, it gets worse…
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) September 17, 2026
Devlin says that mid-trial, the jurors already planned to do one big joint interview about postpartum
Literally activists disguised as jurors https://t.co/vd7KFJ3Fp0 pic.twitter.com/2m2k8S5M07
Stop giving this dumb bitch attention unless it's calling for her and the other hags to be arrested for jury intimidation.
— cracked ricer (@crackedricer) September 17, 2026
Yeah, it's time to take women off juries again. The experiment failed
— hi87 (@hi87des) September 17, 2026
So during deliberations, they were already planning their media tour. These women weren’t seeking justice, they were looking to make a statement and seek out fame. What horrible people they are!
— Am (@Amgomg99) September 17, 2026
They already said that they wanted to use the verdict to create change to “make it better for other women.” Make what better for other women? Killing your children?
The more they talk, the more they out themselves as unqualified jurors.
— Bob Snee (@snee_bob97236) September 17, 2026
Is this seriously what you get if you randomly select twelve people from Massachusetts?
— Tim (@Timthoughtsdot) September 17, 2026
This fat nasty witch wants to be a virtue signaling celebrity SOOOO BAD.
— ToasteR_PoppiN (@Toasterpoppin87) September 17, 2026
These activist women jurors have done more to discredit postpartum depression and women in general than any man could ever have done.
— Tammy Miller (@TammyMiller783) September 17, 2026
Whoaa....you didn't do your job. You certainly did not follow the judges order for the jury. You should be ashamed of yourselves. It's not your job to "get people talking"
— Robin (@robinsteen) September 17, 2026
So Clancey's lawyer was projecting hard when he accused the lone juror of "not following the law." Jurors are supposed to follow the instructions, not look at this as activism.
— Doctor Unqualified (@Dr_Unqualified) September 17, 2026
They should be challenged for breaching their oath as jurors to decide the case according to law and the evidence before the court.
— Mary Tagliaferri (@MaryTagliaferr4) September 17, 2026
I work for a judge. How many times have her jury instructions said not to discuss the case among themselves until they have the evidence and are back in the jury room deliberating?! Absurdity on display.
— Elise (@EliseDreamsOf) September 17, 2026
These revelations are building a roadmap for the prosecution. Hopefully a better team will be formed to implement it.
— Chris Larson (@TownCrier77) September 17, 2026
These jurors made this into a cause rather than a case
— Steven Johnson (@steven_pee51332) September 17, 2026
They had her acquitted on Day 1 and were planning their activist media tour rather than following jury instructions.
***