The emergency motion, prepared with the help of appellate attorney Dana Goldblatt, sought what is known as a single-justice session of the SJC. Under Massachusetts law, a single justice can hear certain emergency matters and grant temporary relief while the full court considers whether to take up the issue later.
In practical terms, Clancy's lawyers asked the SJC to:
- Order an inquiry into whether a specific holdout juror was able and willing to apply the law on reasonable doubt and criminal responsibility, particularly in light of Clancy's claim of severe postpartum psychosis.
- Prohibit further deliberations with that juror unless and until the trial court conducted an individual examination (voir dire) to confirm that the juror could follow the judge's instructions.
- Stay the mistrial ruling temporarily, so that these issues could be addressed before the trial was officially terminated.
The defense argued that there were indications that at least one juror might be biased or unwilling to properly apply the legal standards on mental illness and criminal responsibility. They contended that allowing the mistrial to proceed without addressing this issue could violate Clancy's right to a fair trial by an impartial jury.
