Holdout juror in Lindsay Clancy trial says he 'didn't have any doubts' during deliberations

The man identified as the lone holdout juror in the Lindsay Clancy trial is speaking out, saying he "didn't have any doubts" during the jury's seven days of deliberations.

"I didn't have any doubts," Michael Péguy Desronvil said in a statement shared to ABC News by his attorney on Friday. "As I tried to explain different possible theories during deliberation, I kept getting cut off as if I had doubts based on the evidence presented."

He continued, "Based on all the physical evidence, key witnesses, and what the prosecution presented, I thought it was enough proof that she (Clancy) knew exactly what she was doing and planned."

Clancy pleaded not guilty to three murder charges for the deaths of her 5-year-old daughter Cora, 3-year-old son Dawson and infant son Callan, who were strangled at the family's home in Duxbury, a Boston suburb, on Jan. 24, 2023.

The former nurse attempted suicide on the night of her children's deaths, leaving her paralyzed and in a wheelchair, according to state prosecutors.

Her five-week trial ended in a mistrial on Sept. 4, after jurors failed to reach a unanimous verdict.

Several of Desronvil's fellow jurors who have spoken publicly since the trial say that deliberations eventually yielded an 11-1 split in favor of not guilty by reason of insanity. They claim the final juror -- who came forward as Desronvil --would not change his position favoring conviction, despite expressing reasonable doubt.

"There wasn't a single piece of evidence or witness testimony that he used to prove why he was thinking the way he was, which is why we ultimately sent in that note," Nick Dargie, one of the three men on the 12-person jury, said in an interview with ABC News' Aaron Katersky earlier this month, referring to a note the jury foreperson gave to Judge William Sullivan, leading him to declare a mistrial.

"Otherwise, like there's nothing wrong with somebody having a completely opposite opinion," Dargie said. "That would be a hung jury. That is our justice system."

Much of the testimony in Clancy's trial centered on whether or not she was suffering from postpartum psychosis -- considered a psychiatric emergency, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists -- when she strangled her children and attempted to take her own life, and whether she should be held criminally liable for the killings.

Prosecutors argued that Clancy was criminally responsible for the children's deaths and was capable of understanding the severity of her actions.

Jurors in Massachusetts are instructed that in order to prove a defendant is criminally responsible for their conduct, prosecutors must "prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not suffer from a mental disease or defect at the time of the alleged offense," according to the Massachusetts Court System.

Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz has not said publicly whether he plans to retry Clancy.

Clancy's defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, filed a motion earlier this month asking Sullivan to enter a finding of not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility for each criminal count.

Reddington requested the judge hear arguments about the motion during the next conference in the case, scheduled for Sept. 29.

Earlier this week, the judge in the case, Sullivan, ordered the extension of the impoundment order preventing the release of the full list of jurors' names, citing "significant and divisive attention," according to Boston ABC affiliate WCVB. Sullivan wrote in the order that "at least one juror" asked for the order to be extended indefinitely.

"There have been identifications of jurors and their personal information without their permission," Sullivan wrote, according to WCVB.