EXCLUSIVE: Lindsay Clancy Jury Fight Explodes After Mistrial — Boston Globe Demands Access to Juror Inquiries
Lindsay Clancy's case is facing a new courtroom transparency fight after the 'Boston Globe' demanded public access to juror inquiries following her mistrial.
Sept. 8 2026, Published 6:30 p.m. ET
The legal battle surrounding Lindsay Clancy's criminal case is far from over following the dramatic mistrial – with the Boston Globe now going to court to demand public access to questioning involving jurors, RadarOnline.com can reveal.
According to court documents obtained by Radar, Boston Globe Media Partners, LLC filed a motion on September 4 asking Brockton Superior Court to permit the public to attend inquiries of jurors conducted by the judge, prosecutors, and Clancy's defense team.
Jury Access Showdown
The 'Boston Globe' is pushing for public access to juror inquiries in Clancy's criminal case.
The media company argued that the public's right to observe judicial proceedings extends beyond what happens in front of the jury during trial.
In its filing, the Globe cited the Supreme Court precedent recognizing public access to jury selection and Massachusetts cases addressing access to jurors and proceedings involving potential outside influences.
The newspaper's attorneys argued: "The public's presumptive right of access to judicial proceedings extends to jury voir dire, the trial itself, and post-verdict hearings concerning extraneous influences on jurors."
No More Sidebars
Clancy's trial ended in a mistrial after jurors were unable to reach a verdict.
The Globe's motion also points to a request from Clancy's defense seeking a standing order that there be no further sidebars, and that proceedings instead take place in open court. According to the filing, the Globe believes allowing the public to read what happened later is not enough.
Its attorneys argued that a transcript of sidebar discussions released after the fact "is not a substitute for contemporaneous public access to judicial proceedings."
The Globe cited Massachusetts' highest court in arguing that even a redacted transcript provides less public access than being able to observe court proceedings as they happen.
A Change in How Juror-Related Proceedings Will Be Handled?
Clancy's defense has sought to keep future proceedings in open court.
The filing further argues that the presumption of public access can only be overcome when there is an overriding interest strong enough to justify closure.
Any restriction, the Globe maintained, would have to be narrowly tailored and supported by specific findings explaining why keeping the proceeding closed was necessary. The newspaper ultimately asked the court to grant its motion allowing public access to juror inquiries.
The Globe's intervention now puts fresh scrutiny on how juror-related proceedings will be handled as Clancy's case moves forward after the mistrial.
Transparency Takes Center Stage
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
The Globe argues the public should be able to follow key juror proceedings in real time.
Clancy's criminal trial ended in a mistrial after jurors were unable to reach a unanimous verdict. The latest filing does not accuse jurors of wrongdoing, nor does it establish that misconduct occurred.
Instead, the Globe is challenging how much access the press and public should receive when jurors are questioned as the case continues through the court system.
The dispute could now place courtroom transparency at the center of the next chapter of the Clancy case – with the media organization arguing that the public should be able to witness crucial juror-related proceedings in real time rather than learning what happened through transcripts released later.
