Three women who were jurors in the Lindsay Clancy trial have spoken out for the first time since the case was ruled a mistrial. 

Speaking with NBC10 Boston, the three women detailed the arguments they had with the one male juror who would not acquit. 

One of the women, known only as juror two, told the outlet: 'He, I think got up to the cart [with the exhibits] once and then went back to his seat.

'He would not interact with us and try to understand. We read to him the definition of reasonable doubt. 

'He said one day "why don't we have the judge read it again?", and we were like no we have it in front of us.'

One woman, the jury's foreperson, told the outlet: 'He had reasonable doubt. He admitted he had reasonable doubt. 

'I started filling out the forms, I was so excited. There were three forms I had to fill out, and then he said "but I'm still not going to say she's not guilty."' 

According to the trio, they argued so much with the man that the alternate jurors could hear them through a wall. 

The outlet's commentator Sue O'Connell conducted the sit-down with the three women, a post to her X said that an hour-long special would follow later tonight. 

It comes after Clancy's lawyer Kevin Reddington spoke on Good Morning America earlier today saying that to his knowledge 11 jurors who agreed believed that Clancy deserved a not guilty by reason of insanity verdict, barring the one holdout juror. 

He also pleaded with President Donald Trump to consider pardoning Clancy, describing her as a good person. 

Reddington said: 'I'd like to say that perhaps Donald Trump, who felt compelled to speak out about this case.

'Mr President, I hope that you would consider this young lady, the type of person she is, what she's been through, and consider a pardon.'

Reddington also described her as being 'intelligent' and 'hardworking,' while describing the strong bond he has with Clancy. 

'I do feel a very strong bond with Lindsay because of the type of person she is. She's such a wonderful, wonderful person.'