Plymouth, Mass. - The defense attorney for Lindsay Clancy, Kevin Reddington, has responded to criticism from the lawyer representing the lone juror who voted against her acquittal. The juror's attorney, Edward Paltzik, had described Reddington's motions as a "full-frontal attack on the U.S. Constitution" and a threat to the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees due process rights to criminal defendants.
Reddington disputed Paltzik's claims, saying that all of his motions are "legitimate" and based on "sound, law, facts, jury questions." He added that he would have taken similar action if he were representing a client in a similar situation. Reddington also took issue with Paltzik's description of the juror as the "lone holdout juror," saying that he prefers to call him the "obstructionist juror."
The juror, identified as Michael Desronvil, has stated that he believes Clancy was guilty of the murder charges against her in the strangling deaths of her three young children. However, eleven other jurors disagreed and wanted to find her not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect, in alignment with Reddington's defense argument that Clancy was suffering from postpartum psychosis and was not criminally responsible for her actions.
A mistrial was declared on September 4 after a week of deliberations, and Clancy is due back in court on Tuesday for a hearing on several defense motions. Prosecutors may also announce plans to seek a second trial.
Reddington's motion for a "limited inquiry" into the holdout juror's background and potential criminal history has been met with opposition from Paltzik, who claims that it is an attack on the system and an attempt to intimidate the juror. Paltzik has also defended his client's characterization of Clancy as a "demon" who strangled her children, saying that it is not controversial to acknowledge the severity of the crimes.
NTC Report coverage is based on reporting from the original publisher.
View original reporting →
