Lindsay Clancy’s defence lawyer has asked a judge to further investigate the conduct of one juror after the proceedings ended in a mistrial.

In a motion filed on Friday of last week, Kevin Reddington asked the court to question the juror — referred to as ‘Juror Doe’ — about his use of a mobile phone during deliberations, specifically between the hours of 8am and 4.30pm on these days.

Using a phone during deliberations is a violation of state court rules.

Reddington has also asked the court to look at how truthful he was on a questionnaire filled out by prospective jurors before the trial began, as well as responses he gave to questions asked during the jury selection process.

After a trial lasting almost six weeks, more than 80 witnesses, and 35 hours of deliberations, a mistrial was declared in the case of the Massachusetts mother, 36, who was accused of murdering her three children.

Clancy didn’t deny killing Cora, five, Dawson, three, and Callan, eight, in the basement of their home in January 2023, but her defence claimed she was in a state of postpartum psychosis when the crimes took place, and therefore was not criminally responsible for her actions.

The prosecution said that, while there was no doubt Clancy was suffering from depression, she still made a calculated decision to kill her children.

Reddington previously lashed out at the single juror, who he says ‘robbed’ them of a not-guilty verdict.

While the identities of the jury were initially sealed by the judge, the juror in question, Michael Desronvil, has since issued a public statement.

Speaking in a statement via his lawyer, which was released to NewsNation via X, the 48-year-old explained: ‘I didn’t have any doubts.

‘As I tried to explain different possible theories during deliberation, I kept getting cut off as if I had doubts based on the evidence presented.’

He added: ‘Based on all the physical evidence, key witnesses, and what the prosecution presented, I thought it was enough proof that she [Clancy] knew exactly what she was doing and planned.’

Desronvil’s lawyer, Edward Paltzik, has since responded to the motion with a stinging attack on Reddington, calling the move ‘Looney Tunes’.

In a statement posted on X, he said: ‘Reddington’s motion is actually a full-frontal attack on the U.S. Constitution.

‘Because if the new normal is that jurors are going to face brutal reprisals for disagreeing with a defense attorney, you can kiss the Sixth Amendment goodbye.’

Three female jurors have also spoken publicly, telling NBC Boston how they reached their decision and why they couldn’t persuade the holdout.

‘We weren’t trying to figure out if she murdered the children,’ foreperson Roni Carlson said. ‘She did and she’s admitting to that. We’re trying to figure out: Did she know right from wrong at that time?’

Another juror, Kellie Farina, accused the prosecution of being ‘harsh’, ‘very cold’ and ‘biased right out of the gate’ — acknowledging they had a difficult job while arguing that they should have shown compassion.

And juror Paula Devlin hit out at Desronvil, whose identity remained sealed at the time, saying ‘he would not interact with us and try to understand…he really did not take anything that anybody said.’

Meanwhile, Lindsay’s ex-husband Patrick Clancy has said he had to forgive her for killing their children.

In his first interview since the trial he told CBS: ‘I didn’t know how to manage a postpartum illness. I think mental illness has this ability to be tragically deceptive.

‘When it comes to forgiveness, I also felt that if I didn’t get there, I would be eaten up inside forever.’

The case is set to return to court in Plymouth, Massachusetts, on September 29, as prosecutors determine whether to seek a retrial.

MORE: Businessmen who brokered fighter jet and missile sales to warzones are jailed

MORE: Trump reveals his reason for the media ban that left him ‘yelling into the void’

MORE: Lawyer whose gun failed as he tried to shoot ex-wife in busy restaurant is jailed