LINDSAY Clancy flashed a rare smile in court on Tuesday as her lawyer stunned the courtroom by insisting there is “no evidence” she killed her three children, and then clashed with the judge over when any retrial could happen.
Kevin Reddington argued prosecutors had never properly proved Clancy carried out the killings, despite her defense previously not disputing that she killed five-year-old Cora, three-year-old Dawson and eight-month-old Callan.
The dramatic arguments unfolded at Plymouth Superior Court in Massachusetts, where Clancy returned for the first time since jurors failed to reach a unanimous verdict earlier this month.
Reddington said prosecutors had failed to properly establish what happened inside the family’s Duxbury home on January 24, 2023.
“This entire case is based on speculation,” he told Judge William Sullivan.
Reddington also lashed out at the fierce public reaction to Clancy, saying people who hear she killed her children often skip over the legal question of whether she was criminally responsible.
“When people hear that she admitted to it, they go off on a tangent,” he told the court.
“‘She’s a demon and possessed and should be executed,’” Reddington said, describing the reaction he says Clancy has faced.
“This is coming from politicians, from President Trump, all the way down,” he added.
His remarks came days after the holdout juror’s attorney publicly called Clancy a “demon” and said she deserved execution.
Reddington argued that such rhetoric ignored the two-part question at the heart of the case – whether Clancy committed the acts and whether prosecutors proved beyond a reasonable doubt that she understood they were wrong.
Clancy did not dispute during her trial that she killed five-year-old Cora, three-year-old Dawson and eight-month-old Callan.
But Reddington is now attacking the evidence underpinning the prosecution’s argument that she carried out the killings while understanding that what she was doing was wrong.
Judge William Sullivan has delayed arguments on Clancy’s bid to have the charges dismissed until November 2.
The next hearing could now tackle both the defense bid to dismiss the case and, if the charges remain in place, when Clancy could face a new jury.
Clancy’s lawyers told the court they were ready to argue the motion on Tuesday, but prosecutor Jennifer Sprague asked for more time because it had only recently been filed.
Outside the court, more than 300 women dressed in pink T-shirts gathered ahead of the hearing, turning the entrance into a sea of pink as tensions built over whether Clancy could face a second trial.
Supporters wore matching shirts emblazoned with “Justice for Lindsay” and messages including “Presumed innocent,” “Seek the truth” and “Mental health matters.”
The show of support echoed scenes from Clancy’s first trial, when crowds repeatedly gathered outside the courthouse as jurors weighed whether Clancy was criminally responsible for killing her children.
As Reddington made his way through the crowd outside the courthouse, a woman appeared to stretch out an arm to hold people back as cameras and reporters closed in around him.
The defense lawyer was surrounded by a crush of media as he arrived for the high-stakes hearing.
Clancy also spoke in court for the first time since the mistrial.
When Judge William Sullivan greeted her at the start of Tuesday’s status conference, the 36-year-old replied simply, “Good morning.”
Clancy’s lawyers have asked Sullivan to investigate the 12th juror, who prevented the panel from reaching a unanimous decision.
Court filings have said the jury was split 11-1 in favor of finding Clancy not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility.
The defense wants the court to examine the holdout juror’s questionnaire answers and conduct during deliberations.
They have also raised questions over whether the juror followed court rules involving cellphone use.
The request comes after tensions over the holdout juror exploded during deliberations in the first trial.
At one point, defense attorney Kevin Reddington told the court that “one juror refuses to listen to the law on reasonable doubt.”
Sullivan declined to remove the juror after questioning members of the panel individually.
The jury later reported it was hopelessly deadlocked, forcing the judge to declare a mistrial.
Reddington is now also asking Sullivan to dismiss the case rather than allow prosecutors to try Clancy again.
The fight over the lone holdout juror has only grown more bitter since the mistrial.
Michael Desronvil has denied the claims from fellow jurors that he refused to follow the law or acknowledge his own reasonable doubts about the prosecution’s case.
His attorney, Edward Paltzik, has accused Reddington of unfairly targeting Desronvil and warned that attacking a juror for sticking to his view could set a damaging precedent for future jury service.
Paltzik has insisted that his client followed the evidence and had “zero doubt” about his position.
Desronvil also spoke publicly for the first time on Monday night, asking people to shift attention away from him and back to Clancy’s three children.
“I know the whole focus has been on me, but we want to reel everything back and put the focus on the three angels,” he told Fox News.
He said Cora, Dawson and Callan were “the ones that can’t speak for themselves, the ones that can’t defend themselves, and the ones that can’t fight the battles.”
Reddington, meanwhile, has called Desronvil an “obstructionist juror” and wants the court to examine allegations about his conduct during deliberations, including claims involving cellphone use and answers on his jury questionnaire.
Source : https://www.the-sun.com/news/17072224/lindsay-clancy-back-in-court-after-mistrial/