Lindsay Clancy's trial ended in a mistrial after the jury split 11-1, with one holdout juror preventing a verdict. Her lawyer, Kevin Reddington, publicly asked President Trump to consider a pardon for Clancy, though it was noted that a president can only pardon federal crimes. Jurors who spoke afterward described the deliberations and their disagreement with the lone holdout, and Reddington said he plans to request that the jury be sequestered in any new trial.
NBC, Guardian, NYT and WaPo focus on factual reporting of the mistrial, the pardon request (noting its legal impossibility), juror accounts of the holdout, and related coverage of Patrick Clancy's team pushing back on conspiracy theories, with a tone sympathetic to Clancy's postpartum psychosis narrative and the jurors who nearly acquitted her.
BBC coverage is straightforward factual reporting on the mistrial, Reddington's pardon plea, and juror interviews, with minimal editorializing and inclusion of legal process details like the five-day motion window.
New York Post covers the same core facts (mistrial, pardon plea, juror interviews) with a tabloid tone emphasizing dramatic quotes ('killer mom', 'I was so excited') and heavy coverage of the copycat Corie Walsh case, but does not editorially condemn the jurors.