Lindsay Clancy could walk into Plymouth Superior Court on Tuesday morning charged with three murders and leave acquitted. It is possible. It is not likely. And even if it happens, she will not go home.
Clancy’s case is back before Judge William Sullivan at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, September 29, 2026, her first appearance since the September 4 mistrial. WCVB reported that the judge ordered Tewksbury State Hospital to bring her. Three defense motions are pending, and the order in which the judge takes them matters. Here are the four realistic ways Tuesday ends, and what each one means.
1. The judge acquits her
How: By allowing Kevin Reddington’s renewed motion for a required finding under Mass. R. Crim. P. 25. The rule lets a judge decide a reserved motion “after the jury is discharged without having returned a verdict,” and requires a finding of not guilty if the evidence “is insufficient as a matter of law to sustain a conviction.” Because the Commonwealth must prove criminal responsibility beyond a reasonable doubt once the issue is raised, the question is whether any rational jury could have found she was criminally responsible.
Why it would be huge: A required finding is an acquittal, and double jeopardy protects an acquittal. Rule 25(c)(1) gives the Commonwealth a right to appeal relief granted “after the jury has returned a verdict of guilty.” There was no verdict here. That is why this motion, not the juror fight, is the one that could end the case, as we explained in our preview.
Why she still would not go home: The defense asked for a finding of not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility. Under G.L. c. 123, § 16(a), the court may then order the person “hospitalized at a facility for a period of forty days for observation and examination.” Under § 16(b), the district attorney may petition for commitment within 60 days, and “An order of commitment under the provisions of this paragraph shall be valid for six months,” renewable in one-year periods. She has been held at Tewksbury State Hospital throughout the case.
How likely: Unusual. The same judge denied the motion when it was first made at trial, and a judge who sat through the evidence can easily conclude it allowed a finding either way, which is all the Commonwealth needs.
2. The judge throws out the charges on double jeopardy
How: By allowing the motion to dismiss filed by Martin Weinberg, who argued Karen Read’s double jeopardy appeal. The theory is that the judge declared a mistrial without the “manifest necessity” the Constitution requires, because claims that one juror was refusing to follow the law reached him first and he did not look into them.
What happens then: The case would be dismissed, but not necessarily over. Under Mass. R. Crim. P. 15(a)(1), “The Commonwealth shall have the right to appeal to the Appeals Court a decision by a judge granting a motion to dismiss a complaint or indictment.” District Attorney Timothy Cruz could use it.
How likely: The motion runs into the settled rule that a genuinely deadlocked jury is the classic case of manifest necessity. It is a serious argument, but it is the kind usually resolved on appeal rather than granted by the trial judge.
3. Everything is denied and the case heads to a second trial
What happens then: The judge denies the Rule 25 motion and the double jeopardy motion, and deals with the juror motion by denying it or granting something narrow, such as reviewing the juror’s questionnaire himself. The case would then be on track for a retrial, if Cruz chooses to retry it. He has not said.
The escape hatch: A denied double jeopardy claim does not have to wait for a second trial. Defendants can seek immediate review from a single justice of the Supreme Judicial Court, the route Read took. We explained that in our piece on Weinberg’s motion.
4. Nothing is decided Tuesday
Most likely of all. Tuesday has been described as a status conference. Judges routinely hear argument on motions like these and take them under advisement, then rule in writing days or weeks later. The Commonwealth may also ask for time to respond. If that happens, the headline will be the arguments, and possibly what Cruz says about a retrial, not a ruling.
The juror sideshow
The loudest fight is about the holdout juror, Michael Desronvil. He will not be there. Fox News host Kayleigh McEnany reported Monday that he told her he has “no desire to be a part of the circus” and will be represented by local counsel. His lawyer, Edward Paltzik, told Fox he will “100%” file a bar complaint against Reddington. Our report on the juror’s absence and why his lawyer’s denial does not settle the questionnaire issue.
Whatever the judge does with the juror motion, it cannot by itself end the case. It matters mainly as support for the double jeopardy argument and for the record on appeal.
Frequently asked questions
What time is the Lindsay Clancy hearing?
9 a.m. Tuesday, September 29, 2026, in Plymouth Superior Court before Judge William Sullivan. WCVB reported that the judge ordered Tewksbury State Hospital to transport Clancy to court.
Could Lindsay Clancy be released tomorrow?
Not realistically. Even if the judge enters a finding of not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility, G.L. c. 123, section 16 allows a 40-day observation hospitalization and a commitment petition by the district attorney. She has been held at Tewksbury State Hospital throughout the case.
Can the DA appeal if the judge dismisses the case?
Yes, if the dismissal is on the double jeopardy motion. Mass. R. Crim. P. 15(a)(1) gives the Commonwealth the right to appeal a decision granting a motion to dismiss an indictment. A required finding of not guilty after a hung jury is different, because Rule 25(c) provides an appeal only after a guilty verdict.
Will the judge rule on Tuesday?
He may, but judges often take motions like these under advisement and rule later in writing.
Will the DA announce a retrial?
District Attorney Timothy Cruz has not said whether he will retry the case and is not required to announce a decision on Tuesday.
Sources: Mass. R. Crim. P. 15(a)(1) and 25 read at mass.gov; G.L. c. 123, section 16 read at malegislature.gov. WCVB (transport order) and Fox News (juror’s absence), September 28, 2026. Lindsay Clancy is presumed innocent. General information about Massachusetts law, not legal advice.