Wild Feed

Desronvil said he believed the evidence presented in court showed she had planned the killings.

"I didn't have any doubts," he said in a statement to CBS on Thursday.

"As I tried to explain different possible theories during deliberation, I kept getting cut off as if I had doubts based on the evidence presented."

He didn't have any doubts, but he had doubts.

Let's see what the other jurors said....

The jury foreperson, a retired fifth-grade teacher, described not being able to reach a verdict as "awful" and an "emotional rollercoaster".

She told NBC that Desronvil had "admitted he had reasonable doubt", but as she started filling out the verdict sheets, he apparently said: "But I'm still not going to say that she's not guilty by reason of insanity."

Another juror told local CBS station WBZ-TV that most of the jurors had been "very firm in their stance" from the start and "the stand-alone juror was not the only one that was unwilling to see things from the other side".

But they added that because Desronvil would not "follow" his reasonable doubt nor offer logical reasoning for his position, they felt Clancy had not received a fair trial.

kinda wild to me they jurors are talking publicly about their decisions. especially for a high profile case. I get that it's allowed but still seems like something that shouldn't be encouraged

On September 25, 2021, Desronvil’s 13 year old nephew called the Brockton Police and said “please come….my auntie,” before hanging up. When police arrived they found Desronvil and his wife on the front steps of the porch, with Desronvil holding his 6 month old baby. Desronvil tried to tell police that they didn’t need any help in an attempt to get them to leave, but the 13 year old nephew told police that he witnessed Desronvil hit his wife after the woman attempted to take her crying daughter from him in order to comfort her, at which point he assaulted her by grabbing his wife by the neck and throwing her into a bedroom dresser. Desronvil’s mother yelled “YOU’RE EVIL” twice at her son before he was taken away by police.

The charges were dropped several months later, but the ex-wife spoke with NBC10 Boston and said that the charges were only dropped because she was worried about losing custody of her daughter if she testified.

As someone who has served on a jury myself, I have a difficult time criticizing the individual decisions of jurors for cases that I'm not involved in.

Obviously, it's not a vacuum, and being the only holdout isn't a good look... But unless you're sitting there in court every single day, taking notes and deliberating, then your opinion on the choices of individual jurors is completely irrelevant imo.

Criminal court cases are extremely complex, and reading a few news articles about it is not the same as being there. Suggesting that's enough is actually kind of insulting to our justice system.

Even when I'm pretty sure I would disagree had I been in that jury... It's just impossible to know.

I'm seeing the rightoids talk about this. It doesn't seem like news, anyone care to explain why this is on my feed?

This is ultimately a very sad story and proof that the system failed this family over and over.

For those without time to wade through the article:

the panel was ultimately divided 11-1 in favour of finding Clancy not criminally responsible.

"I had reasonable doubt, but I don't like how it feels to challenge my own biases and I misunderstood or lied during jury selection, so no, I don't have reasonable doubt."

That's the summary of this man.

Yeah I mean killing someone, much less multiple people, isn't like stubbing your toe. It's kind of a process.