Lindsay Clancy Holdout Juror’s Attorney Blasts Kevin Reddington, Plans Bar Complaint
PLYMOUTH, Mass. — The attorney for the holdout juror in Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial is sharply criticizing Clancy’s defense lawyer, Kevin Reddington, and says he plans to file a bar complaint against him as the case returns to a Massachusetts courtroom.
Edward Paltzik, who represents the juror publicly identified as Michael Péguy Desronvil, made the comments in an interview with Fox News Channel host Kayleigh McEnany that aired Sept. 28. He said he intends to pursue a professional misconduct complaint against Reddington.
“Ever since the moment he learned that Michael was not going to side with him, I believe that Kevin Reddington lost his mind,” Paltzik said.
Clancy, 36, was on trial for the January 2023 murders of her three children. Prosecutors allege she strangled them to death. Her defense argued she was not guilty by lack of criminal responsibility, saying she was suffering from postpartum psychosis at the time.
Prosecutors have not said whether they will retry Clancy. A hearing is set for Tuesday, Sept. 29.
Judge William Sullivan declared a mistrial on Sept. 4 after a jury of 12, including Desronvil, failed to reach a unanimous decision. Several jurors said one holdout—later identified as Desronvil—would not apply the reasonable-doubt standard, producing an 11-1 split in favor of finding Clancy not guilty.
Desronvil, through a statement released by Paltzik, disputed his fellow jurors’ account and said he did not have any doubt. In the Sept. 28 interview, Paltzik reiterated that Desronvil had “zero doubt” Clancy should have been found guilty and that he had a “mountain of evidence” to support his position.
Paltzik also doubled down on his criticism of Reddington, calling “everything” he has said “completely outrageous.”
“Kevin Reddington is just upset that he lost out on his legacy moment. He was one vote away from winning a trial that would have been the capstone of his career and he didn’t get it, and he lost his mind because of it,” Paltzik said.
USA TODAY has reached out to Reddington for comment.
In a previous statement to Fox News Digital, Reddington said Paltzik “ought to learn how to go into the courtroom and articulate his position rather than be a histrionic individual that’s just mouthing off to the media.”
“I think the biggest misconception is that this individual is referred to as the holdout juror. He, in fact, is the obstructionist juror,” Reddington said.
Since the trial ended, Reddington has filed several motions, including one requesting records related to Desronvil, referred to as “Juror Doe” in the motion. It calls in part for Desronvil to turn his phone over to a neutral examiner after another juror said he was on his phone during deliberations. The case is set to return to court Sept. 29, when the motions may be addressed.
On Reddington’s motions—including one about the holdout’s phone and another requesting dismissal on double jeopardy grounds—Paltzik said they are “not even one percent reasonable.”
“Those motions should be denied because 11-1 is not 12-0,” Paltzik said.
Reddington has said “every motion that has been filed is legitimate.”
When McEnany asked Paltzik whether he intends to file a bar complaint against Reddington, he responded, “One hundred percent.”
A bar complaint is a filing alleging an attorney has acted in violation of professional conduct standards set by a state’s licensing authority. In Massachusetts, where Reddington practices, initial complaint filings are confidential, according to the state’s Office of the Bar Counsel.
Paltzik alleged that Reddington’s “conduct is not consistent with the standards of professionalism that we expect from members of the bar.” He also objected to Reddington referring to the holdout as “he” during trial proceedings and in comments to the media. There were three men seated on the jury of 12.
“We’re not going to have a criminal justice system if jurors are afraid of reprisals,” Paltzik said.
What happens next
The dispute adds another layer to a case already focused on mental health, criminal responsibility and jury unanimity. The Sept. 29 hearing could determine how quickly the case moves toward a possible retrial or another legal fight, while any bar complaint would likely remain confidential in its early stages under Massachusetts rules.
Melina Khan is a national trending reporter for USA TODAY. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY.