UNREAL: Lindsey Clancy’s Attorney Asks The Judge To INVESTIGATE The Lone Holdout Juror!

JUST IN: Lindsay Clancy’s lawyer asks judge to investigate the lone holdout juror, seeking his phone records & details of a past domestic assault charge.

— Polymarket (@Polymarket) September 21, 2026

Click to expand...

BREAKING: In an INFURIATING move, Lindsay Clancy's defense attorney is trying to force an INVESTIGATION into the lone holdout juror Michael Desronvil — moving to examine his PHONE records and have him questioned

STOP TRYING TO DESTROY THIS MAN!!

The attorney is trying to get… pic.twitter.com/gLu3o4cAzB

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 21, 2026

Click to expand...

JUST NOW: Legal expert Jonathan Turley GOES OFF on Lindsay Clancy's defense attorney Kevin Reddington for trying to character assassinate lone holdout juror Michael Desronvil

"The JUDGE [should've said] — we don't DO THAT. That's NOT part of our system…you DON'T go in front… pic.twitter.com/WrqqjllWSI

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 21, 2026

Click to expand...

Lawyers for Lindsay Clancy have asked a judge to investigate the conduct of the lone juror who wanted to convict the mother from Massachusetts of murder in the deaths of her three children.

In a motion filed Friday but made public Monday, Clancy’s lawyers asked the court to question the juror about his alleged use of a cellphone during deliberations, his truthfulness on a questionnaire that prospective jurors filled out before the trial began and his truthfulness when jurors were questioned by the judge a day before the trial ended.

The judge declared a mistrial Sept. 4 after the jury insisted it couldn’t reach a unanimous verdict, despite days of trying. Eleven of 12 jurors were ready to clear Clancy of criminal responsibility, with the majority feeling that she was in the grip of a rare condition called postpartum psychosis when she strangled her kids. But one juror, Michael Desronvil, sided with the prosecutors, who had argued that Clancy knew what she was doing.

Among other things, Clancy’s lawyer, Kevin Reddington, asked the court to obtain a record of any calls or texts Desronvil made between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. on each day the jury deliberated. Phone use during deliberations is prohibited in the state.

Prosecutors have yet to say whether they plan on putting Clancy on trial again. She remains charged with murder and is in a psychiatric hospital until her case is resolved.

In another motion on Monday, Clancy’s lawyers asked the judge to take the unusual step of dismissing the criminal case, rather than putting on a new trial, on the grounds that a mistrial shouldn’t have been declared in the first place.

They argued that the judge should have replaced the holdout juror with an alternate during the deliberations after a jury foreperson complained to the judge that one juror was refusing to listen to the law on reasonable doubt.

Click to expand...

Judge William Sullivan previously overruled a defense motion to have the holdout juror dismissed and replaced with an alternate, saying he felt it was not appropriate for him to get involved in the deliberations.

“The jury twice informed the Court that one of its members was refusing to apply the Court’s instructions regarding the fundamental concept of reasonable doubt,” Weinberg wrote. “After the first such report, the Court asked each juror individually whether he or she was able to apply the law. Upon receiving the second report, the Court tempered its response even further, simply reminding all jurors as a group of their obligation to follow its instructions generally. The Court denied Ms. Clancy’s explicit requests to go further.”

Weinberg’s motion argued that Sullivan’s decision to declare a mistrial before investigating the holdout is improper, alleging that the jury foreperson accused the holdout of making “statements acknowledging doubt but refus[ing] to apply it to the verdict as the law states.”

“Ms. Clancy, like all criminal defendants, had a Constitutional right to have her fate decided by an impartial jury of her peers, faithfully applying the law as instructed rather than superimposing the juror’s own view of legal right and wrong, including the foundational principle that, absent proof beyond a reasonable doubt of her guilt, she must be acquitted,” he wrote. “The multiple reports of a juror violating this bedrock principle, therefore, required a judicial inquiry sufficient to ascertain whether her right to an impartial jury was being violated.”

Weinberg also argued that there was a legal basis for conducting a probe into the holdout before the mistrial was declared. However, Sullivan did not hold one.

On Friday, Clancy’s trial attorney Kevin Reddington called for an investigation into the holdout juror who wanted to find her guilty of murder charges in connection with the strangling deaths of her three young children.

“[The other jurors] know that they were robbed — by one man — for whatever his agenda was, who stole seven weeks of the life of these other jurors that were so attentive, so beautiful, so wonderful and listened to this evidence,” he told reporters after leaving the courthouse following her mistrial.

Reddington is asking a Massachusetts judge to preserve juror records from all 12 panelists and six alternates, including their questionnaires, courthouse hallway surveillance video taken outside the deliberation room and sign-in sheets for the jurors’ cellphones.

Reddington is asking the court to conduct a “limited inquiry” into the holdout and for information on any potential background checks stemming from a February motion for access to prospective juror information filed by Plymouth County prosecutors.

Click to expand...