Juror Paula Devlin says Lindsay Clancy jury sought to create change
Comments from a juror in the Lindsay Clancy case have drawn criticism from a legal analyst.
AI-assisted coverage comparison, editor-supervised · How this was made

Juror Paula Devlin says Lindsay Clancy jury sought to create change
Photograph: Internewscast (embedded from source)
What this story says
- Juror Paula Devlin said the Lindsay Clancy jury viewed the case as a chance to make things better for other women and families.
- Devlin stated the jury was divided 11-1 before a mistrial was declared.
- Legal analyst Neama Rahmani criticised Devlin's comments, arguing jurors must base decisions only on case facts.
- The children killed were Callan, Dawson, and Cora Clancy, in Duxbury, Massachusetts, in January 2023.
Who covered it
Percentages are shares of the 14 outlets carrying a published leaning rating. Coverage measured .
Trust
42/100
Craft
59/100
Hype
68/100
14 sources · methodology
Thin on the left so far
Only 1 of the 14 outlets with a published leaning rating that ran this story are rated left.
This story is still being watched, so it is a count and not yet a finding. Coverage keeps arriving for hours after an event, and a side that has published nothing this morning may publish by tonight. If it is still true when we stop checking, we will say so plainly.
Juror Paula Devlin stated that the panel in the Lindsay Clancy case believed they had an opportunity to create change for women and families. Devlin, speaking after the mistrial, said the jury understood the trial could be a "turning point" and that "Justice for those children is this never happening again." She also said the jury was divided 11-1 before the deadlock resulted in a mistrial.
Disagreement on juror reasoning
Legal analyst Neama Rahmani criticised Devlin's comments, stating that jurors are supposed to decide cases solely on the facts presented and apply the law, rather than shape or change it. Rahmani told News Outlet that it is not appropriate for jurors to consider the impact of their decision on other women, children, or cases. He added that there is little that can be done at this stage, as the judge has already declared a mistrial and courts generally do not probe jury deliberations.
What the coverage left out
None of the right-rated reports mention the detail from Internewscast that Clancy's husband Patrick Clancy vacationed in the Hamptons over the weekend with his new wife, Rachel Danis.
Still developing. We have re-checked which outlets are covering this 2 times, most recently on 14 Sept 2026, 22:15, and will add the sides that appear.
How each side covered it
Our own reading of the reporting listed below, written from the outlets’ articles rather than quoted from them. The reasoning is set out on our methodology page.
Left
1 rated outlet
- The Hindustan Times reported that a Lindsay Clancy juror sparked backlash after saying the mostly female jury saw the case as a "turning point" to improve outcomes for other women. The outlet noted that many accused the juror, Paula Devlin, of pushing an agenda and quoted Benny Johnson on X, who shared a clip of Devlin's interview with CBS News. Johnson wrote that "These jury media tours are getting insane and they’re trying to intimidate the one juror who had the courage to stand up to them." The report also mentioned that journalist Sarah Fields wrote, "Juror’s statement on the murder of three small children. She is saying the quiet part out loud."
Centre
1 rated outlet
- Internewscast reported that one of the 11 jurors who favoured finding Massachusetts mother Lindsay Clancy not criminally responsible for the deaths of her three children said the panel saw the case as an opportunity to create change for women and families. The outlet stated that legal analyst Neama Rahmani described that reasoning as "problematic." Paula Devlin told "CBS Saturday Morning" that jurors understood the trial could become a "turning point," even though they were isolated from developments outside the courtroom. Devlin said the jury was divided 11-1 before the deadlock resulted in a mistrial. The report also noted that a GiveSendGo fundraiser to benefit the holdout juror has raised over $115,000 and that Clancy's husband Patrick Clancy vacationed in the Hamptons with his new wife.
Right
12 rated outlets
- Twelve right-rated reports focused on juror Paula Devlin's comments about the jury seeing the Lindsay Clancy case as an opportunity to create change for women and families. Headlines included "Lindsay Clancy Juror Admits Using Vote to Push Social Justice for Women" (LifeNews.com), "Nolte: Lindsay Clancy Juror Admits ‘Not Guilty’ Vote About Sending a Message" (Breitbart), and "Lindsay Clancy Juror Admits To Feminist Motives Behind Trial" (Zero Hedge). LifeSiteNews reported that a "cadre of social justice jurors" accused the lone male holdout of ignoring the judge’s instructions, while "it was they who had ignored the law." Louder With Crowder and Twitchy also highlighted Devlin's comments about the jury's role in affecting "change" for women. Fox News noted that a trial attorney and legal analyst called that approach "problematic."
Questions about this coverage
- How did the left and right cover Juror Paula Devlin says Lindsay Clancy jury sought to create change?
- Of the 14 outlets on this story carrying a published leaning rating, 7% are rated left, 7% are rated centre, 86% are rated right. Those percentages are shares of the rated outlets, not of every outlet that ran it. The sections above set out what each side emphasised, in its own terms.
- Is Juror Paula Devlin says Lindsay Clancy jury sought to create change left or right?
- The story itself is neither. What can be counted is who has covered it, and 86% of the 14 rated outlets on it are rated right — so far this is a story carried mostly by the right. Coverage is still arriving and that can change, which is why the figure is dated rather than fixed.
- Is the coverage of Juror Paula Devlin says Lindsay Clancy jury sought to create change biased?
- Juror Paula Devlin says Lindsay Clancy jury sought to create change is one event reported by 14 outlets, and this page does not rate the story as biased or unbiased. What it publishes is the spread: which outlets ran it, where named rating organisations place each of them on the spectrum, and what each side chose to lead with. A leaning rating describes an outlet's record over time, not this article, and the two should not be run together.
- Which side is not reporting Juror Paula Devlin says Lindsay Clancy jury sought to create change?
- When we first saw this story, outlets rated left had barely covered it. Coverage accretes for hours after an event, so that is where to look rather than a verdict — the split above is the current count, and it is the one to read.
- Which outlets covered Juror Paula Devlin says Lindsay Clancy jury sought to create change?
- 14 that we know of, every one of them listed further up this page with a link to its own report and to what we hold on the publisher. Nothing here is a summary of somebody else's summary: the outlets are named so the original reporting can be read.
- What did juror Paula Devlin say about the Lindsay Clancy case?
- Juror Paula Devlin stated that the panel in the Lindsay Clancy case saw it as an opportunity to create change for other women and families. She also mentioned that the jury was divided 11-1 before the mistrial was declared.
- Who is Neama Rahmani and what did he say about the juror's comments?
- Neama Rahmani is a legal analyst and trial attorney. He criticised Devlin's comments, stating that jurors should decide cases solely on the facts and apply the law, rather than consider the impact of their decisions on broader societal issues.
- What were the key facts of the Lindsay Clancy case?
- Lindsay Clancy is accused of killing her three children, Callan, Dawson, and Cora, in Duxbury, Massachusetts, in January 2023. Her defense argued she was not criminally responsible due to postpartum psychosis.
Read it at the source
14 outlets, grouped by the leaning a published rating gives them. Every headline links to the original; an underlined outlet name opens our profile of that publisher.
Left
1Centre
1Right
12- Lindsay Clancy jurors reveal they were hellbent on social justice, not the law (opens LifeSiteNews in a new tab)
LifeSiteNews — is LifeSiteNews biased? Our profile of this outlet
- Lindsay Clancy Juror Admits Using Vote to Push Social Justice for Women (opens LifeNews.com in a new tab)
LifeNews.com — is LifeNews.com biased? Our profile of this outlet
- Nolte: Lindsay Clancy Juror Admits ‘Not Guilty’ Vote About Sending a Message (opens Breitbart in a new tab)
- Lindsay Clancy Juror Admits To Feminist Motives Behind Trial (opens Zero Hedge in a new tab)
Zero Hedge — is Zero Hedge biased? Our profile of this outlet
- Lindsay Clancy juror says panel saw case as chance to ‘make it better for other women’ (opens wfmd.com in a new tab)
- Lindsay Clancy juror says panel saw case as chance to 'make it better for other women' (opens democraticaccent.com in a new tab)
democraticaccent.com — is democraticaccent.com biased? Our profile of this outlet
- Lindsay Clancy juror says panel saw case as chance to 'make it better for other women' (opens Fox News in a new tab)
- Lindsay Clancy 'Bombshell': Juror Says Advancing 'Feminism' Was Major Factor in Decision (opens RedState in a new tab)
Show 4 more
- What This Clancy Juror Admitted to Is the Worst Revelation Yet (opens PJ Media in a new tab)
- Lindsay Clancy juror continues her media tour, says the role of the women on the jury was to affect "change" for women (opens Louder With Crowder in a new tab)
Louder With Crowder — is Louder With Crowder biased? Our profile of this outlet
- Devlin on Trial: Juror Says Pro-Lindsay Clancy Women on Panel Had Ulterior Motive When Casting Votes (opens Twitchy in a new tab)
- Clancy Juror Continues Her Media Tour, Says the Quiet Part Out Loud About Mostly Female Lindsay Clancy Jury (opens The Gateway Pundit in a new tab)
The Gateway Pundit — is The Gateway Pundit biased? Our profile of this outlet
Not rated
0No outlet in this group ran the story.
How did this read?
About the coverage, not about the story. We do not ask whether you agree with what happened — we have no honest use for that answer.


