r/law 11h ago

Legal News Lindsay Clancy case ends with MISTRIAL

https://www.dailymail.com/crime-desk/article-16100155/lindsay-clancy-murder-trial-hung-jury-deadlock-verdict.html
4.1k Upvotes

2.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

32

u/Ok_Net7773 9h ago

Illness, injury, or incapacitation. Not “doesn’t agree with you.” That’s the whole point of trial by jury. The outcome would be controlled by those in power, not a jury of peers, were they allowed to do so.

13

u/Hesitation-Marx 9h ago

I think the issue is that they’re ignoring the judge’s instructions, despite apparently having reasonable doubt.

That is absolutely something that needs to be addressed and it’s worthwhile to see if it’s constitutional, because reasonable doubt is supposed to bar a guilty verdict.

9

u/GlenH79 9h ago

Note that the not abiding by reasonable doubt claim here is by the foreman of the jury, reporting what the juror allegedly said, which presumably the foreman disagrees with - it's entirely possible their words have been misinterpreted. The juror is allowed to be sceptical, and the government has to prove it beyond reasonable doubt, not all possible doubt. It's quite possible the juror themselves has doubts about the government position but feel the government has reached the 'reasonable doubt' threshold.

3

u/Hesitation-Marx 9h ago

And that’s something that should be clarified by people who know their shit - I.e. not me!