Reddington seeks holdout juror’s cell phone in postponed Clancy hearing
Source: Fox News · All Fox News reports
Unlock the full scoreboard
Letter grade, factuality, lean, and rationales — free with registration. No card required.
See grades free How grading works
Already have an account? Sign in. The full report below is free to read.
Embed this grade
Disagree with this grade or political lean?
Flagging is open to every reader with a free account. Sign in or create one to dispute this report.
Topics in this report
Summary
The Fox News segment on “Outnumbered” features Kayleigh McEnany discussing new details ahead of Lindsay Clancy’s September 29 hearing with the holdout juror’s attorney, Edward Paltzik. It covers Kevin Reddington’s motion to examine “Juror Doe” Michael’s cell phone for 48 hours, impounded juror questionnaires, and potential bar complaint against Reddington for post-mistrial comments labeling the juror an “obstructionist.” The motion was adjourned with DA consent pending Judge Sullivan’s order. The discussion questions whether the 11-1 split favoring not guilty by reason of insanity followed jury instructions on postpartum psychosis versus legal clarity, and why Reddington did not use peremptory strikes earlier.
Editorial Assessment
The broadcast accurately conveys the latest procedural twist in the Clancy case, where a mistrial was declared September 4 after seven days of deliberations with an 11-1 split for not guilty by reason of insanity. Viewers receive specific reporting on the unprecedented motion and its pause but miss broader context: multiple judges declined to remove the holdout, who told interviewers he had “zero doubt” of guilt from the start and cited evidence including toxicology and the strangulation method. Framing leans toward portraying the insanity defense as overriding clear evidence of the killings, potentially skewing perception that the lone juror blocked justice rather than upheld his view of the law. The absence of prosecution or majority-juror voices creates an incomplete picture of deliberations. Overall quality is solid on the narrow hearing update but one-sided on the underlying merits.
Key Moments
Reddington’s motion to seize the holdout juror’s cell phone for 48 hours and question him in court is unprecedented
Paltzik and legal experts on the broadcast described it as such; September 2026 filings confirm the request for phone metadata, questionnaires, and examination of the juror identified as Michael Desronvil.
The motion has been adjourned with consent from the DA and Reddington; it likely will not be heard Tuesday
McEnany reported this from her call with Paltzik; recent coverage confirms the September 29 hearing will focus on status, Rule 25 motion for required finding of not guilty, and retrial scheduling instead.
The holdout juror is an obstructionist who refused to follow instructions on reasonable doubt and postpartum evidence
Reddington and the segment adopt this view based on a jury note; the holdout and his attorney state he had zero doubt of guilt from day one with a mountain of evidence, and judges declined to remove him.
The trial was about three innocent children with no voice rather than a moment for women’s rights or postpartum depression
Direct quote from Reddington’s interview; omits that the legal question was criminal responsibility under Massachusetts insanity statute, where 11 jurors found psychosis negated responsibility.
Reddington had 16 peremptory strikes available but did not use one on this juror, raising questions why he is challenging him now
Paltzik raised this in the interview; no independent verification of exact strike count or Reddington’s reasoning is provided, and post-trial attacks on jurors are generally disfavored.
Notable Concerns
- Heavy emphasis on defense perspective that postpartum psychosis was improperly prioritized over evidence of intent
- Limited discussion of why courts repeatedly rejected juror removal despite the foreperson note
- No counterpoint from DA Tim Cruz on retrial plans or the strength of the original case
Sources Consulted
- Lindsay Clancy holdout juror had “zero doubt” in case, lawyer says
- Lindsay Clancy hearing Sept. 29 could affect murder retrial
- Lindsay Clancy to appear in court for the first time since her mistrial
- Judge declares mistrial in Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial after jury deadlocks
- 3 Lindsay Clancy jurors confirm single holdout declined to acquit
- Lindsay Clancy’s Defense Lawyer Asks Judge to Investigate Holdout Juror After Mistrial
- The Clancy Holdout Juror Says He Will File a Bar Complaint Against Reddington
- Lindsay Clancy trial | 3 jurors talk about deadlocked deliberations in exclusive interview