The Lindsay Clancy mistrial continued to generate debate Thursday as defense attorney Kevin Reddington rejected legal analyst Jonathan Turley’s criticism of his public remarks about a holdout juror and said he would welcome a debate.
Asked about Turley’s earlier rebuke during a televised interview, Reddington said the professor “was wrong,” pointing to what he described as information that explains why the panel did not reach a unanimous verdict in accordance with the law. He added that Turley should review the record before making accusations and called the comments about him reprehensible.
The interview referenced Turley’s prior statement condemning Reddington’s remarks about the lone juror whose vote prevented a unanimous verdict on the murder charges. The interviewer noted that the public has not heard the holdout juror’s own account of deliberations. Reddington replied that it is likely only a matter of time before the juror is interviewed.
The back-and-forth follows the conclusion of Clancy’s high-profile trial, which ended in a mistrial after jurors deadlocked on whether she was criminally responsible for the deaths of her three children. Prosecutors have said they intend to retry the case.
Debate over Lindsay Clancy mistrial criticism
After Reddington’s interview aired, Turley responded on social media, saying he was surprised by the debate challenge. He questioned what, exactly, would be subject to debate, citing what he described as a professional duty for lawyers not to stoke anger against a holdout juror and suggesting Reddington appeared to exempt himself from that duty.
Turley has argued that attorneys should not inflame public sentiment against jurors who exercise independent judgment during deliberations. Reddington has maintained that the holdout failed to follow the judge’s instructions, and he says subsequent information supports his criticism.
The case remains in limbo after the mistrial, with a retrial expected, according to prosecutors.
