PLYMOUTH, Mass. — Lindsay Clancy’s defense is requesting that a Massachusetts court investigate a holdout juror from her recent mistrial, and the juror’s attorney is clapping back.
In a statement, Attorney Edward Andrew Paltzik called the motion filed by Attorney Kevin Reddington “Looney Tunes,” which includes a motion for access to the juror’s confidential questionnaire and records, along with information about any background checks conducted on the juror and whether the Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office has had any matters involving the juror since 2021.
The filing further requests cellphone call and text data, as well as limited data-session logs, for the juror during key deliberation days between Aug. 27 and Sept. 4.
The defense also asked the court to order a limited forensic extraction of the phone carried into the jury room during that period.
Paltzik identified his client as Michael Péguy Desronvil, the juror who voted to convict Clancy. Clancy’s trial for the first-degree murder of her three children ended in a mistrial.
“Kevin Reddington’s disgusting motion to investigate Michael is worthy of nothing but universal condemnation. This is certainly not the final word from us on this subject, but merely our first words. It’s all going to backfire spectacularly on sore loser Reddington,” Paltzik said in a statement.
Full statement:
“The Looney Tunes motion filed yesterday by Kevin “Shooter McGavin” Reddington to investigate Michael is not just an attack on Michael for being the courageous lone holdout juror. Reddington’s motion is actually a full-frontal attack on the U.S. Constitution. Because if the new normal is that jurors are going to face brutal reprisals for disagreeing with a defense attorney, you can kiss the Sixth Amendment goodbye. To anyone who thinks that Reddington’s motion is OK, just remember that the tables will inevitably turn. Imagine a similar trial sometime in the not too distant future where it is the reverse scenario: 11-1 in favor of guilty, with one holdout favoring not guilty by reason of insanity. I doubt you folks would be alright if the District Attorney then filed a motion to investigate that lone holdout standing in the way of a conviction. That’s why this is actually not a partisan issue. Really, this is a “do we still want to have a Sixth Amendment” issue. If you are like me and believe steadfastly in the Constitution, it’s easy to see how, regardless of your party affiliation, this is an absolutely terrible path of ruin Reddington wants to take us down. If we follow his destructive proposal to its logical conclusion, we’re going to have an endless cycle of prosecutors investigating holdouts who oppose “guilty” and defense attorneys investigating holdouts who oppose “not guilty.” Pretty soon we’ll end up with a retrograde justice system that will look a lot like the Hatfield-McCoy Feud: a cycle of carnage so malignant that its origins will fade in importance, replaced by the hopeless death spiral of the cycle itself. Kevin Reddington’s disgusting motion to investigate Michael is worthy of nothing but universal condemnation. This is certainly not the final word from us on this subject, but merely our first words. It’s all going to backfire spectacularly on sore loser Reddington.”
— Edward Andrew Paltzik
Clancy’s next court date is September 29. It is still not clear if the Plymouth County District Attorney will retry her case.
This is a developing story. Check back for updates as more information becomes available.
Download the FREE Boston 25 News app for breaking news alerts.
Follow Boston 25 News on Facebook and Twitter. | Watch Boston 25 News NOW