The judge has declared a mistrial in Lindsay Clancy’s triple-murder trial after the jury deliberated for seven days without reaching a unanimous verdict. So, now what happens?

Judge William Sullivan told the parties Friday afternoon he’d like to retry the case later in the fall. In the meantime, the judge scheduled a status conference for the end of the month.

Clancy’s attorney Kevin Reddington initially said he wants to get the second trial underway as soon as possible, ideally the week after next.

Judge Sullivan told Reddington, “My thinking is to try it sooner rather than later, but I’m not sure that sooner.” The judge said he’d check the courthouse schedule and his own.

The lead prosecutor said she’d be out of the state for the next two weeks but didn’t offer an opinion on trial scheduling beyond that.

Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz told reporters after the trial adjourned Friday that the prosecution will decide whether to actually retry the case at a future court hearing.

“There will be no decisions made today regarding that,” he said.

Ultimately, the decision to pursue another trial is up to Cruz, a longtime Democratic prosecutor whose office runs an advocacy center that serves child abuse victims.

In the interim, Clancy will return to Tewksbury Hospital in Massachusetts, where she’ll continue being held without bail on her murder charges.

The DA could offer plea

Clancy is currently charged with three counts of first-degree murder. In Massachusetts, the most severe murder charge requires a jury trial. The district attorney could offer the defense an opportunity to plead guilty to a lesser charge.

Prosecutors “would retry her as a first degree, or perhaps decide at a later time to offer a plea deal for a lesser charge. Only the DA can do that,” Boston defense attorney Elyse Hershon told CNN.

If the district attorney opts to downgrade charges against Clancy, the parties could potentially come to a plea agreement to avoid a second trial. Reddington has told reporters it’s up to the district attorney to initiate those conversations.

Oftentimes, prosecutors will ask the victims’ family for their perspective. In this case, because the families of the victims and the defendant are intertwined, competing interests may interfere with consensus.

Attorneys from either side could file motions in the interim – one might make a strategic request to move the case to another jurisdiction in the state, arguing they can’t get a fair trial in Plymouth County.

A Clancy supporter was arrested Tuesday afternoon after she allegedly filmed jurors in the courthouse parking lot. She’s been charged with aggravated intimidation of a witness or juror and pleaded not guilty at an arraignment Wednesday. Attorneys could argue the jury pool is tainted or a new panel could similarly be subject to intimidation in Plymouth County if Clancy is tried there a second time.

The parties also may relitigate some issues over what evidence and witnesses should be admissible in a new trial.

“There could be a changed position on some of those motions given what happened in the trial, and they could relitigate it because new information has come to light,” Hershon said.

Reddington, who’s been openly critical of the prosecution’s expert witnesses, might seek to bar them from testifying again.

Those expert witnesses, including Dr. Avram Mack, interviewed Clancy about the killings in recent months and testified at trial about her mindset.

However, the defense is not required to allow those experts any access to Clancy going forward, according to Hershon.