It’s been a dramatic three weeks since Lindsay Clancy’s case came to a crashing end when a mistrial was declared inside the jam-packed courtroom in Plymouth, Massachusetts.

A war of words broke out between several jurors and the lone holdout, who waived their anonymity to share their stories with the media and accuse him of refusing to follow the law when it came to reasonable doubt.

The holdout, Michael Desronvil, hired a high-powered attorney who came out swinging, doubling down on his decision inside the jury room and trading furious barbs with Clancy’s attorney Kevin Reddington over his public comments.

On Monday night, Desronvil finally broke his silence in a video statement to Fox News's Sean Hannity saying that 'we want to reel everything back and put the focus on the three angels.' 

Reddington has also given several TV appearances, including one in which he appealed directly to President Donald Trump to weigh in on the high-profile case.

And Patrick Clancy, Clancy’s ex-husband and the father of their late children Cora, Dawson and Callan, sat down with 60 Minutes - revealing that he and his new wife Dr Rachel Danis are now expecting their first child together.

Now, on Tuesday morning, Clancy will return to Plymouth County Superior Court for the first time since her trial ended for a hearing that will shape the future of her case.

The status hearing could very well set the wheels in motion for a second trial for the killings of her three children - or it could end her criminal case once and for all.

Defense attorney Kevin Reddington will argue several motions to strike down the state’s ability to retry the mom-of-three, including one calling for a finding of not guilty due to lack of criminal responsibility and one seeking to dismiss all charges citing double jeopardy rules.

The defense is also fighting for information about the holdout juror including his cell phone records, surveillance footage from the courthouse and access to his juror questionnaire.

Meanwhile, prosecutors could reveal their own plans of whether they will try Clancy a second time and, if yes, on the same or lesser charges.

If Judge William Sullivan sides with the defense to dismiss the case or find her not guilty, Clancy’s case could be tossed entirely.

If he denies them, and the state decides to retry the case, a second trial date could be set.

All in all, it is shaping up to be a critical day in the case that became closely watched all across the globe - sparked a reckoning around postpartum mental health - and that continues to divide opinion, spark controversy and raise unanswered questions about what really took place behind the closed doors of the jury room.

Clancy was charged with three counts of first-degree murder for killing Cora, five, Dawson, three, and Callan, eight months old, inside the family home in the wealthy suburb of Duxbury, Massachusetts, on January 24, 2023.

The 36-year-old labor and delivery nurse strangled the children with exercise bands in the basement after sending Patrick out of the home to run errands.

She then tried to kill herself, cutting her wrists and neck and jumping from the second-floor bedroom window.

Clancy survived but was left paralyzed from the waist down.

The mom-of-three did not deny killing her children but pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, saying she was suffering from severe postpartum depression and psychosis at the time.

Over five weeks of testimony, jurors heard Patrick’s devastating 911 call, saw graphic photos of the children’s autopsies, learned details of Clancy’s spiraling mental health in the months leading up to the killings and listened to dueling diagnoses from psychiatrists and mental health experts.

Ultimately, the 12 jurors failed to reach a unanimous verdict after Desronvil refused to join the other 11 in finding her not guilty by reason of insanity.

A mistrial was declared on September 4 following 38 hours of deliberations over seven days, leaving the case in limbo.

What happens next will however soon become clear as the two sides return to court for an anticipated showdown over several motions filed by the defense in the days and weeks since the mistrial - all aimed at avoiding a second trial.

In one motion, Reddington is asking the judge to enter a finding of not guilty on all charges arguing that the prosecution does not have sufficient evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Clancy was in control of her actions when she strangled her children.

The defense argues that the state failed to prove its case on both points needed to find her criminally responsible: whether or not she was suffering a mental defect or disease at the time, and whether or not she could still control her actions or conform to the law despite her mental illness.

The state's own witnesses struck down the first point, with every expert witness on both sides agreeing that Clancy was seriously mentally ill at the time of the killings.

On the second point, the defense says the prosecution presented evidence which shows she could perform familiar tasks in a bid to try to prove she was in control of her actions.

But Reddington argues that psychiatrist Dr Paul Zeizel gave 'unrebutted testimony' that someone in a state of psychosis can carry out familiar tasks such as driving and that hallucinations are intermittent, not constant.

'Taken at their strongest, these show that Ms Clancy could perform familiar tasks and act in sequence. They do not show that she could appreciate her wrongfulness or conform her conduct to the law. That is the element. Nothing else counts,' the filing argues.

The state's insufficient evidence is the basis of an acquittal on all charges, the defense argues.

A separate filing, brought on September 21 by Reddington and Clancy's new defense attorney Martin Weinberg, pursues an alternative way to stave off a retrial.

The motion to dismiss seeks to throw out the case altogether, arguing a second trial would break double jeopardy laws.

The argument centers on Judge Sullivan's handling of the jury ruckus during deliberations and his decision to ultimately declare a mistrial.

In an unprecedented final 24 hours of trial, the jury foreperson sent two messages to the judge accusing the then-unidentified holdout of expressing reasonable doubt, but of refusing to follow the law when it came to reasonable doubt.

In open court, Reddington called for the holdout to be struck from the case or to at least to face further questioning.

Judge Sullivan declined.

Just hours later, after the jury returned deadlocked again and a last-ditch Hail Mary bid from the defense failed, a mistrial was declared.

Clancy’s legal team is now arguing that the judge failed to properly probe the holdout juror and the claims made by the foreperson, and so ‘extinguished a viable alternative to the declaration of a mistrial.’

A thorough inquiry could have removed the need for a mistrial and so a second trial would be a violation of double jeopardy laws, the filing reads.

‘We have a jury that was calling out for help, not once but twice informing the Court that its deliberations were being hijacked by a juror's disregard of the Court's instructions.’

Desronvil has said through his attorney Edward Paltzik that he has ‘zero doubt’ about Clancy’s guilt, based on what was described as ‘mountains of evidence.’

The defense is also calling for an investigation into Desronvil and seeking his juror questionnaire, phone records and information about his own brushes with the law.

It emerged following the trial that Desronvil was arrested for domestic violence in 2021. The case was later dropped but he still had an active restraining order against him while serving as a juror in the case.

Fellow juror Nick Dargie also claimed that Desronvil was scrolling on his phone during deliberations.

Clancy’s defense points to both factors, asking the judge to probe both whether Desronvil was truthful during jury selection and his use of his phone during the trial.

Reddington wants the court to extract Desronvil’s cell phone records for the period from 8.30am to 4.30pm from August 27 through September 4, the days the jury was deliberating.

The defense also wants access to the juror questionnaires and for the court to examine whether or not Desronvil was truthful given that prior arrests and legal proceedings are standard questions on the juror questionnaire completed at the start of the selection process.

On Monday, Desronvil's attorney Paltzik told Fox News’s Kayleigh McEnany that the defense motion has now been adjourned - sparking a furious response from Reddington who said that it is 'fully alive' but that the defense and prosecution had agreed to continue it to a later date at the request of a local attorney representing the juror.

It will be up to the judge whether or not the matter will be discussed in court on Tuesday.

On the eve of the hearing, Desronvil broke his silence to say that he wants the focus of the case to return to Clancy's three children, rather than himself.

'I know the whole focus has been on me but we want to reel everything back and put the focus on the three angels, the ones that cannot speak for themselves, the ones that that can't defend themselves, and the ones that cannot fight the battles. And those are Cora, Dawson and Callan,' he said in a video statement on Hannity.

He then went on to 'thank god for blessing me with the ability to love my daughter,' and share his gratitude for those that have supported him.

'Your prayers, your emotional support, your psychological support, is tremendous to my heart- that I feel, that I sense, that I know. I do want to thank you from the bottom of my heart. Thank you,' Desronvil said. 

Paltzik told McEnany that Desronvil will not be attending Tuesday's hearing, as the attorney continued to hit out at Reddington and threatened to file a bar complaint against him. 

The prosecution has not yet responded to any of the defense’s arguments.

In fact, while Reddington has made multiple TV appearances since the mistrial was declared, the Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office has remained silent.

The only public comments came in a press briefing in the immediate aftermath of the mistrial ruling, where DA Tim Cruz said there would be ‘no decisions made today’ regarding whether or not to retry Clancy.

More than three weeks have now passed and the state is yet to reveal how they plan to proceed with the case.

Prosecutors are now likely weighing whether any second trial could end more favorably to them after 11 jurors agreed with the insanity defense.

They will also likely be considering the toll of a second trial on the other victims, notably Patrick who suffered a panic attack while testifying at trial.

The two sides could ultimately decide to reach a plea agreement to spare all involved from going through the lengthy, deeply distressing and costly case all over again.

It’s something that Reddington suggested he would be open to in an interview with GMA earlier this month.

While unclear if any conversations have yet been held between the two sides, the hearing may offer a glimpse into where those negotiations may stand or where they could fall.

On Tuesday, Judge Sullivan could take all of the matters under advisement and rule at a later date.

But it’s also possible that, by the end of the day, there could be no case, a new trial date set or a plea deal in the works for Lindsay Clancy.