Karen Read jury foreman on what Lindsay Clancy trial jurors might be feeling: "It was just heavy"

Over the past few weeks, the crowds and media presence have grown outside the courthouse in Plymouth, Massachusetts, for Lindsay Clancy's murder trial. It's a scene jurors pass every day on their way in and out of the courthouse parking lot.

Few know what it's like to be on a jury for a case that catches the world's attention.

That potential pressure to reach a verdict is something Charlie DeLoach is familiar with. He was the jury foreman in Karen Read's murder retrial in 2025. It's his voice that read the court the not guilty verdict on the murder charges against her.

"It was just heavy," DeLoach said in an interview with WBZ-TV on Thursday. DeLoach and his fellow jurors deliberated four days before reaching their verdict. He spoke with WBZ-TV about what jurors in the Clancy trial might be going through as they wrapped day six with no verdict and reports of one holdout causing the deadlocked jury.

"It's hard to come to a final decision with 12 people," DeLoach said. "My heart kind of goes out to that one person, because when we did it, I could probably cut the tension in that room with a knife. A majority of them probably want to go home and be done with all this. For the foreman, it's a hard job trying to keep 11 other people feeling like they are all being heard."

Nick Polavin is a co-founder of JuryConnect. His company consults attorneys across the country to better understand the psychology and decision-making process behind groups of jurors.

He said the request on Thursday from the foreman of the Clancy jury to replace one of its members is not unprecedented. 

"At this point so many days in, I am sure they are butting heads," Polavin said. "They have probably all taken their turns arguing with that juror. That juror probably is not caving. And so I would imagine for the other 11, they are probably frustrated thinking that this one person is holding us up from a verdict and they won't hear me out. But to that one juror, whatever they are thinking, the verdict is just as important to them. They are at this point, unlikely to cave."

If the judge were to replace a juror in any case, the law requires the jury to start deliberations all over again.

"I hope they all come to a decision together," DeLoach said. "I hope no one is feeling like they are being pressured into a decision that is going to make them regret it later."