The Lindsay Clancy Trial has sputtered to an easily predictable mistrial, and the largely, but not exclusively, Democrat white woman supporters of Clancy are upset that an apparently male juror held out for punishment of some kind for Clancy’s admitted strangling of her three infant children. I’ll not belabor the issue of punishment vs mental health non-culpability. That has been exhaustively addressed here and elsewhere and will continue to be addressed, as it’s likely the case will be retried.
Read more Is Josh Shapiro really presidential material?
Good luck finding a jury that isn’t hopelessly prejudiced on both sides. In fact, good luck finding a jury at all, as attorney John Hinderaker at Powerline explains:
What I really want to comment on is the behavior of Clancy’s lawyer, Kevin Reddington, and the apparent spinelessness of the trial judge, William Sullivan. Reddington repeatedly attacked the holdout juror in open court and on television, both as the jury was deliberating and after the court had declared a mistrial. While deliberations were still going on, Reddington accused the juror of “lying to the court” and refusing to follow the court’s instructions.
I have never seen anything like this. I tried many jury cases, and I can’t imagine how a trial judge before whom I appeared would have come down on me if I had publicly attacked a particular juror, or group of jurors, as the trial was in progress. It is unheard of. And Judge Sullivan let Reddington get away with it, while, at Reddington’s insistence, holding hearings in open court, in front of television cameras, that should have been conducted privately in chambers. Given this behavior, it is hard to see how the court will be able to find jurors willing to serve in a potential retrial.
All in all, it was a travesty, and another marker in the ongoing deterioration of our public culture and our judicial system.
Graphic: X Post
Perhaps I missed the Prosecution objecting to Reddington’s outrageous conduct? Like Hinderaker, I was amazed, but not surprised. Reddington is an old guy, a guy who obviously has decades of experience as a defense lawyer. But that may be the problem.
Far too many in the defense bar “go native,” in the manner of diplomats who begin to so identify with the denizens of the nations in which they serve, they fight for their interests rather than America’s interests. I saw it all the time in my police career.
Some defense lawyers, particularly the young ones, are defense lawyers because they have irrational, TDS-like grudges against the system. They not only go all out to defend their clients, but are willing to break any rule and stretch any law to do it. That kind of defense is at least a part of their own revolutionary psychosis. They, at least the male ones, often wear ponytails, which speaks to other issues.
Read more Lindsay Clancy and the cuckoos
Others let their zeal to defend their clients as fervently as possible get away from them. They sometimes sway into unethical conduct, and most judges, at least those who don’t share the same ideology, quickly kick them back within legal bounds.
I used to have hilarious conversations with defense lawyers. I’d hand-deliver copies of updates in my cases and mercilessly rib them about how ridiculously guilty their clients were. That avoided any complaints about failure of the state to fully disclose everything, and most of my cases were plea-bargained, but not to misdemeanors. Our plea bargains were for X number of felonies, with significant jail time, rather than the full load of 20+ felonies. That saved time and money; bad guys were taken off the street, and their record was still loaded with felony convictions.
But what’s Reddington’s problem? He went full native+. Maybe he’s retiring soon and wanted to go out with a bang? Perhaps celebrity so late in life has overwhelmed him? Maybe he’s trying to get appeal issues on the record? If so, he’s putting evidence for his own disbarment on record, but maybe he thinks that’s impossible in Massachusetts. Maybe he’s right. Who knows? Who cares?
What’s certain is Judge Sullivan made a mess of things. Even I, a mere police detective, knew you don’t let lawyers attack jurors in open court, and certainly not if the proceedings are ongoing and televised. Hinderaker is right: that sort of argument takes place privately, in the judges’ chambers. All manner of interesting and revealing things take place there.
Prosecutors are going to have to tread very carefully if they retry this case, as they almost certainly will. I almost wish they wouldn’t. Perhaps it’s because my writing research overdoses me on cases of this kind, but this debacle has punished America enough. I’m almost thinking criminal punishment for Lindsay Clancy—and yes, I’m predisposed to that–might not be worth the damage it’s doing to us.
Graphic: X Post
Almost.
Become a subscriber and get our weekly Friday newsletter with unique content from our editors. These essays alone are worth the cost of the subscription.
Mike McDaniel is a USAF veteran, classically trained musician, Japanese and European fencer, lifelong athlete, firearm instructor, retired police officer, and high school and college English teacher. He is a published author and blogger. His home blog is Stately McDaniel Manor.
Read more The CDC’s new new report: gun grabbers are appalled