Ana Faguy
Reporting from court in Massachusetts

Image source, The Patriot Ledger/Reuters

Jurors in the trial of Lindsay Clancy in Massachusetts are deadlocked after three days of deliberations - but the judge has asked them to keep trying to reach a verdict.

Clancy is facing murder charges for killing her three children at their family home in 2023. If found guilty, she could face a mandatory life sentence in prison without the possibility of parole.

Though Clancy admits to killing her kids, a jury must decide if she is guilty of premeditated murder. She has pleaded not guilty, and her lawyers argue she was suffering from postpartum psychosis at the time, and therefore could not distinguish right from wrong.

The jury, comprised of nine women and three men, began its deliberations last week after hearing weeks of testimony from dozens of witnesses.

Earlier today, they sent Judge William Sullivan a note saying they were unable to make a unanimous decision - drawing audible gasps from the courtroom.

If the jurors continue to be deadlocked, the judge may take additional measures to push them to come to an agreement.

We are pausing our live coverage but you can read more of our reporting here.

Image source, Reuters

Kevin Reddington is Lindsay Clancy's lead attorney and has over 40 years of experience as a defence lawyer, according to his website.

The prosecutors, meanwhile, are Plymouth County Assistant District Attorneys Jennifer Sprague and Shanan Buckingham.

Sprague supervises all homicides that occur in Plymouth County and has tried 28 homicides, according to her LinkedIn profile. Buckingham, meanwhile, is chief of the Family Protection Unit at the Plymouth County District Attorney's Office.

The lawyers are overseen by Judge William Sullivan, who graduated from the Boston College Law School and was a partner in a law firm before becoming a judge.

Image source, Reuters

Postpartum psychosis has become a key focus of the Clancy trial.

Her defence argues she was suffering from it when she killed her children, while prosecutors argue she acted deliberately.

Those who have just given birth can experience a range of psychiatric conditions, the most serious and life-threatening of which is postpartum psychosis.

The UK's National Health Service (NHS) defines postpartum psychosis as a rare, serious mental health illness that should be treated as a medical emergency.

Those who have it can experience mania and depression as well as psychotic symptoms, such as delusions and a disconnection from reality. In rare, severe cases, they may harm or kill themselves or other people.

In the US, a major barrier to awareness and treatment of postpartum psychosis is that it remains unclassified in American medicine's encyclopaedia of psychiatry.

Postpartum psychosis is very different from postpartum blues, sometimes referred to as the "baby blues", which affects around 85% of people who give birth and typically involves difficulty controlling emotions such as anxiety, sadness and anger, according to the Cleveland Clinic.

Postpartum depression, meanwhile, is more serious than postpartum blues, with patients feeling many of the same symptoms but more intensely and for a longer period of time.

Read more about the conditions here.

Shaimaa Khalil
North America correspondent

Image source, Reuters

The case has touched a nerve, particularly among women with personal experience of postpartum mental illness. During the trial, hundreds of Lindsay Clancy’s supporters have gathered outside the courthouse - some cheering as the vehicle carrying her arrived.

Some spoke about feeling ignored or dismissed when they sought help and said they saw something of themselves in the young mother at the centre of this trial.

Their stories reflect a wider concern that postpartum depression and postpartum psychosis can be missed, misunderstood or misdiagnosed, with mothers’ warnings not always taken seriously until they reach crisis point.

For Clancy’s supporters, this case is about more than one woman’s criminal responsibility. It is also about whether a mother in severe mental distress repeatedly asked for help and whether the healthcare system failed to recognise how ill she had become.

Others say the children are being overshadowed and the strength of feeling is just as evident on the other side of this deeply divisive case.

Critics argue that, at its heart, this is the story of three young children killed by their mother. The last time their father saw them alive, Cora and Dawson were sitting on the sofa eating chicken nuggets as he left to collect dinner and medication. Callan was just eight months old.

Some believe the intense sympathy for Lindsay Clancy and the public campaign supporting her has overshadowed the children and the lives taken from them.

They argue that mental illness may help explain what happened, but it must not make Cora, Dawson and Callan secondary figures in the story of their own deaths.

The Clancy trial contains details that people may find distressing.

If you are suffering distress or despair and need support, you could speak to a health professional, or an organisation that offers support.

Details of help available in many countries can be found at Befrienders Worldwide., external

In the UK, a list of organisations that can help is available at BBC Action Line.

Image source, Reuters

This post contains distressing details and references attempted suicide

Before jurors began their private deliberations on Thursday, the prosecution and defence in the trial tried to make persuasive arguments for a conviction or acquittal.

Here's a recap of the defence's closing remarks:

• Throughout the case, the defence has stressed psychosis was the reason Lindsay Clancy killed her children andClancy's attorney, Kevin Reddington, homed in on that during his remarks
• He stressed that Clancy is not guilty of killing her children because she was suffering from a disease and said the prosecution was not able to prove otherwise
• Much of the testimony during the trial focused on her treatment. Reddington firmly defended that in his remarks, saying "she took the drugs as she was told to take them"
• At one point, he directly addressed the prosecutors' table and implored them to explain why they spent a week trying to prove Clancy's suicide attempt was not serious.

And this is what prosecutor Jennifer Sprague said:

• Sprague did not dispute Clancy was mentally ill but told the jury she could tell the difference between right and wrong at the time of the killings.

• Sprague pushed back on the allegation that Clancy's doctors failed her, saying they "were doing to the best they could with the information she provided them" and accused the mother of three of not being truthful about her medication dosages
• The prosecutor also took jurors through the day's events back in 2023 and said that for the timeline to make sense Clancy would have had to start killing her children immediately after her then-husband left
• Sprague said that meant she had planned the killings. "She lied, she stayed calm, she presented herself as normal. She had complete control over her behaviours and emotions," Sprague argued

Ana Faguy
Reporting from court in Massachusetts

A deadlock among the jury such as this one happens in "complex and emotionally charged trials", Heather Cucolo, a New York Law School professor and expert in mental health law, tells the BBC.

"I’m not entirely surprised," she says, adding it's not an uncommon outcome for the judge to instruct the jury to return and review the evidence in an attempt to reach a verdict.

"If the deadlock persists, the judge might issue an additional “dynamite” instruction [known as a Tuey-Rodriguez charge in Massachusetts or an Allen charge in federal jurisdictions] to encourage the group to consider alternative perspectives and strive for an agreement while upholding their genuine convictions," Cucolo says.

But, she notes, it is "typically a last-ditch effort" from a judge.

Grace Goodwin
Live reporter

Since Lindsay Clancy's murder trial began more than a month ago, we've heard from both prosecutors and defence lawyers, as well as more than 70 witnesses - including medical practitioners and members of Clancy's family - who have testified about the circumstances surrounding the 2023 killings of her three children.

Here's what you need to know:

Clancy's defence team does not dispute that she killed her children but has argued that she should not be held criminally responsible as she was experiencing postpartum psychosis at the time.

The prosecution has argued that they were murdered, that Clancy's actions were premeditated and intentional, and that she does not meet the legal definition of insanity.

Members of Clancy's family, including her ex-husband, mother and ex-mother-in-law have all testified that she was a loving mother who was experiencing a serious mental breakdown.

Forensic psychologists spoke on behalf of both the defence - arguing Clancy did not understand the wrongfulness of her acts - and the prosecution - arguing Clancy was mentally unwell but understood killing her kids was wrong.

You can read more about the key moments in the trial here.

Ana Faguy
Reporting from court in Massachusetts

As Judge Sullivan read out the jury's note earlier, Clancy appeared stoic, sitting in a wheelchair next to her attorney. She wore a beige sweater.

Her parents and sister, who are in court, looked sad and frustrated - whispering with one another as they exited.

So far, we have not heard from Clancy herself and she has not testified in her own defence.

Image source, Reuters

Ana Faguy
Reporting from court in Massachusetts

As we mentioned earlier, Clancy is charged with three counts of first-degree murder.

The jury in her trial, which has been deliberating since Thursday and which a short time ago said it had not been able to reach a unanimous decision, has the following options:

• Clancy could be found guilty of first-degree murder. In the state of Massachusetts, first-degree murder - the intentional and premeditated killing of another person - carries a mandatory life in prison sentence without the possibility of parole
• Clancy could be found guilty of a lesser charge including second-degree murder - committed with malice or extreme recklessness, but without prior planning - or manslaughter - unintentionally killing "by wanton and reckless conduct". In either of those instances she would face time behind bars
• If Clancy is found not guilty by reason of insanity she will not be set free. She'll go to a psychiatric hospital where her status will be periodically reviewed. She could remain in hospital for life

You can read more about the possible outcomes here: The jury's options in Lindsay Clancy's murder trial

It is not uncommon for jurors in high-profile trials to struggle to reach a decision and judges have a protocol for these situations.

Judge Sullivan has already told the jurors they have an important duty to do and that they should keep trying to reach a decision.

In federal court, judges often give what is known as an Allen charge to jurors when they are deadlocked.

If this jury comes back a second time, Massachusetts law says the judge should read what is called a Tuey-Rodriguez charge - the state's version of an Allen charge - after consulting with attorneys, which instructs the jurors once again on the importance of reaching a decision.

If the jury comes back a third time still deadlocked, a judge can declare a mistrial.

Ana Faguy
Reporting from court in Massachusetts

The jury deciding what happens to Clancy is made up of nine women and three men. They are a range of ages.

A total of 18 jurors listened to weeks of testimony during the case. After closing arguments wrapped, six jurors were selected at random to sit out of deliberations.

Ana Faguy
Reporting from court in Massachusetts

The jury was bought into court a short time ago, where Judge Sullivan announced to the court that the group could not come to a unanimous decision after days of deliberation.

There were audible gasps in the room.

As Judge Sullivan instructed the jurors to go back out and continue their deliberations, one juror shook her head in agreement and another shut her eyes.

Image source, Reuters

This post contains distressing details

Lindsay Clancy is a 36-year-old Massachusetts mother and former labour and delivery nurse who is on trial for the murder of her three young children in 2023.

Clancy is accused of strangling her kids - Cora, five, Dawson, three, and Callan, who was eight months - with fitness bands in their Massachusetts home before jumping out of a second-floor window in January 2023.

The jump paralysed Clancy from the waist down and she has attended the trial in a wheelchair. She is charged with three counts of first-degree murder and three counts of assault and battery. Prosecutors allege she made a calculated decision to intentionally kill her children.

Lawyers for Clancy, who does not dispute carrying out the killings but has pleaded not guilty to murder charges, say she was experiencing postpartum psychosis at the time.

Throughout her murder trial, Clancy has been held at Tewksbury Hospital, a state-run public psychiatric hospital in Massachusetts, about 20 miles (32km) from Boston.

Her trial, which began in July and which has been live streamed to the public, has stirred intense national interest as well as debate about postpartum depression and the mental health of new mothers.

After days of private discussions, jurors in the murder trial of Lindsay Clancy remain deadlocked.

"After many hours of deliberation we are unable to come to a unanimous decision," jurors told Judge William Sullivan.

The judge has ordered the jury to go back and continue further deliberation.

Stay with us.