Lindsay Clancy Could Have Trouble Winning Appeal After New Jury Revelations

The biggest Lindsay Clancy jury revelation is the sole holdout on the panel actually did change his vote, and that could make it more difficult for Clancy to appeal the mistrial.

When Paula Devlin spoke to Gayle King on "CBS Mornings," she said the holdout juror refused to vote not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility -- like the other 11 jurors -- because he doubted Clancy was having a psychotic break when she killed her 3 kids and attempted to kill herself.

She also revealed the holdout, a Black male, initially wanted to find her guilty of first degree murder. However, Paula says that changed after they reviewed video of Clancy's interview with investigators. She doesn't say where he landed, but presumably it would be guilty of either second degree murder or manslaughter.

The fact he changed his mind is hugely significant, because it shows he didn't simply dig in his heels and refuse to follow the judge's instructions ... or, at least, it's not clear he did. Instead, Paula paints the picture of a mindful juror who thought one thing, but was willing to change his mind after reviewing evidence.

Remember, Clancy's attorney Kevin Reddington was incensed in court when Judge William Sullivan did not replace the holdout juror ... claiming that juror was refusing to correctly apply the concept of "reasonable doubt."

If that were the case, it could go a long way to helping Reddington's argument in an appellate court, but that view of the holdout juror seems less accurate ... if you believe Paula.