The behind-the-scenes story of the discussions among jurors who ended up deadlocked over whether Lindsey Clancy, the 36 year old who strangled her three children, five year old Cora, three year old Dawson and eight month old Callan, should be committed for trial, has been revealed by three of the women who sat on the 12 member panel that failed to reach a verdict.

According to their testimony to NBC 10 Boston, the jurors came within a step of finding Clancy not guilty by reason of mental illness, with one man disagreeing and triggering the mistrial.

“He admitted he had reasonable doubt after we watched the video of Clancy’s interview. I had already started filling in the forms, I was so excited. There were three forms I had to complete and I had already put my signature on each one, but then he said: ‘Even so, I’m not going to say she’s not guilty by reason of insanity,'” said the jury foreperson.

The three jurors who spoke publicly were Paula, a former government agency employee, Kelly, who works as a chef, and Ronnie, the jury foreperson and a retired special education teacher.

The three women described the juror who disagreed as “arrogant,” claiming he refused to work with the other members or consider their views on the evidence in the case.

“He was very arrogant. He genuinely wouldn’t accept anything the others said,” one of the women claimed. “All of us, out of frustration, would get up and walk around the room because we couldn’t bear to sit any longer. We’d all go over to the cart with the evidence. He, I think, only got up once, and only for a very short time, before going back to his seat,” added another of the three jurors.

“He didn’t want to interact with us or try to understand. We read him the definition of reasonable doubt many times, exactly as Judge William Sullivan had set it out in his instructions. But he found it extremely difficult to get past the fact that Lindsey killed her children in such a violent way,” she explained.

The three female jurors also said the prosecution failed to show sufficient understanding towards the 36 year old, who, as they learned during the trial, had been suffering from severe insomnia, anxiety, depression, suicidal thoughts and thoughts of harming her children in the four months before the killings.

“It struck me as cruel, very, very cruel,” said one juror. “The fact that no witness came forward to say Lindsey was a bad mother… I found that one-sided.”

The jury foreperson said that all the witnesses and evidence “showed that she loved her children… so she must have lost control.”

The three women described Clancy’s lawyer using terms such as “charismatic,” “arrogant,” “compassionate” and “funny,” adding that “the compassion he showed towards Lindsey was striking.”

Judge Sullivan declared a mistrial on Friday, after the jury sent a third note stating they were unable to reach a unanimous decision.

The jury, made up of nine women and three men, deliberated for a total of around 38 hours over seven days. They first informed the judge they were deadlocked on Tuesday, again on Wednesday, and for a third and final time on Friday.

Clancy’s lawyer, Kevin Reddington, asked the jury to find that the 36 year old former nurse bore no criminal responsibility, arguing that she had been suffering from severe postpartum psychosis and was hearing a voice ordering her to strangle her three children, five year old Cora, three year old Dawson and eight month old Callan, on 24 January 2023.

Prosecutors, on the other hand, argued that she had carefully planned the killings and invented the claims of voices and a psychotic episode in order to avoid criminal responsibility.