The jury in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial has wrapped up a fourth day of deliberations without reaching a verdict. On Tuesday, jurors informed Judge William Sullivan in a written note that they were “unable to come to a unanimous decision” after hours of discussion. Sullivan, pointing to the length and complexity of the trial, instructed them to continue deliberating.

Outside the Plymouth, Massachusetts, courthouse and across social media, the case has also drawn an unsettling wave of public reaction. Some supporters — many of them women — have been openly sympathetic toward Clancy, who has admitted to killing her three children, turning an already devastating criminal case into a disturbing online spectacle.

The reaction echoes other recent instances of accused or admitted killers attracting fan-like followings, including the attention surrounding Luigi Mangione in New York City. It has raised uncomfortable questions about how far parts of the public have drifted from basic moral judgment in high-profile crime cases.

Now, a 56-year-old woman is accused of taking that obsession beyond online commentary and into conduct that could create serious legal complications for the trial.

Authorities say she was allegedly interfering with jurors and attempting to influence the outcome — conduct that is illegal and taken extremely seriously in any criminal proceeding.

🚨 THIS CAN’T HAPPEN

Massachusetts State Police confirm a 56-year-old woman (Dawn Light of Sutton) was arrested OUTSIDE the courthouse after court dismissed today.

Charge: intimidating a witness or juror in connection with a criminal proceeding.

She’s expected to be arraigned… pic.twitter.com/1Ofl18mtpu

— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) September 2, 2026

It’s important to note that authorities did not explicitly say she was intimidating jurors from the Clancy trial, but all indications point to that. 

Either the defense or the prosecution could ask for a mistrial if they believe the jury has been tainted, and the judge could raise the issue on his own if he’s so inclined.

The Clancy trial has been closely watched around the country because A) it was a truly heinous crime, and B) many, including me, are stunned that the jury couldn’t agree on a quick conviction and send this psychopath to jail for the rest of her days. She meticulously planned out the killings and carried them out in ways that would be beyond comprehension for most human beings: she admitted to strangling them one by one with exercise bands.

Meanwhile, at least two of the jurors have worn pink clothing, leading some pundits to think that they’re showing solidarity with Clancy, who is claiming an insanity defense and blaming post-partum depression and over-medication. We’ll get more details Wednesday after the suspected jury intimidator appears in court, but it sure looks like she could put the whole morbid proceedings in jeopardy.

I’m not a lawyer, but I’m allowed to have opinions, and one I’ve held since I can remember is that the insanity defense is an artifice. In my view, anyone who can kill three of their own children is by definition insane — but it doesn’t mean they’re not guilty.

This trial has been tragic and weird from the start — and now it just got weirder.

This is a developing story, and RedState will bring you updates as new information comes in.

Editor’s Note: The American people overwhelmingly support President Trump’s law and order agenda.

Help us fight back against the Democrats and Soros-backed DAs that refuse to enforce our laws to hold criminals accountable. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.