Mistrial Ruling: Judge in Lindsay Clancy's Case Refuses to Let Her Lawyers Question the Lone Juror Who Blocked an Insanity Verdict, Leaving the Killer Mother Facing a Possible Second Trial

The judge in the Lindsay Clancy trial has denied her lawyer's request to question the holdout juror, RadarOnline.com can report.

Clancy was on trial this summer for the murder of her three children: Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, eight months. The trial ended in a mistrial when the jury hung 11 to 1. Eleven jurors voted not guilty by reason of insanity, with the holdout voting that she was guilty of murder.

During a status hearing on September 29, Clancy's attorney, Kevin Reddington, filed a motion with three requests: to look at the holdout juror's cellphone and questionnaire, and to cross-examine him in court.

All three requests were denied by Judge Sullivan.

"This Court concludes that any further judicial inquiry is inappropriate, given the mandate that the court must not delve into a juror's subjective reasoning, thought process, view of the case, or relationship to the other jurors, and must not inquire into the jury's deliberative content, collective thought process, or any disagreement among the jury," Sullivan wrote in his decision.

Reddington had also tried to get the juror removed during the trial.

The day before a mistrial was declared, the jury foreperson sent a note to the judge alleging the holdout was "refusing" to follow the legal standard of reasonable doubt.

Upon receiving this note, Sullivan asked each juror individually if they could follow the law – all 12 said yes. He also restated the legal standard of reasonable doubt.

Following this, the judge allowed them to continue deliberations, a decision Reddington was not happy with.

In a heated exchange with Sullivan, Reddington asserted the juror should be removed from the trial.

Referencing the foreperson's note, he said the juror "refuses to listen to the law that you've given him or her on reasonable doubt..." Additionally, the lawyer told Sullivan his "soft instruction" he gave jurors didn't address the issue.

"If we come back here in a half-hour with a mistrial because of a juror that has just spurned the instructions of this court, it's a shame, it's a real shame," Reddington lamented.

The holdout juror, who has since been identified as Michael P. Desronvil, has spoken out since the trial. In a Fox News interview, Desronvil said he "didn't have any doubt."

He stated he thought Clancy was "methodical" in planning the murders and that he had "a lot of evidence" to support it.

When asked to elaborate, he declined "out of respect for the other jurors and the court system."

Desronvil also said he "answered the questionnaire truthfully."

His truthfulness on the initial jury questionnaire has been under scrutiny. As Radar previously reported, an investigation by NBC Boston uncovered court records in which his ex-wife accused him of domestic violence.

The charges were dropped, but the publication spoke to the ex-wife, who said she had been scared of testifying against him and losing her daughter.

Additionally, his nephew took out a restraining order after Desronvil allegedly attacked him.

But Desronvil on Fox News claimed the ordeal with his ex-wife was "blown out of proportion."

"There was no physical abuse, emotional abuse, financial abuse of any sort," he alleged.

A second trial has not yet been set for Clancy. She is set to appear in court for another status hearing in November.