LEGAL Fed Up With Abuse, Holdout Clancy Juror Will Carry Out Aggressive Plan to Shut Up Killer's Attorney

Kathy in FL

Administrator
_______________

Fed Up With Abuse, Holdout Clancy Juror Will Carry Out Aggressive Plan to Shut Up Killer's Attorney​


Kevin Reddington won’t be able to walk away so easily after targeting the lone holdout juror, 48-year-old Michael Desronvil.

Reddington defended 36-year-old Lindsay Clancy during her murder trial for the killing of her three young children in 2023. Earlier this month, Desronvil held the line during deliberations, refusing to let Clancy go. A mistrial was declared in the case.

That put Desronvil in the sights of nearly every Clancy supporter, mainstream media outlets across the country, and Reddington himself.

According to People, Reddington said Desronvil “robbed” Clancy and his fellow jurors through his actions. A separate report from People noted that Reddington also filed a motion to investigate Desronvil, asking Judge William Sullivan on Sept. 18 to look at his cell phone data usage.

Needless to say, Reddington has been targeting Desronvil, but his attorney Edward Paltzik said his client intends to act.

When being interviewed by Fox News’ Kayleigh McEnany, she asked if Paltzik intended to file a bar complaint to which he responded, “one hundred percent.”

The Ethics Reporter explained, “A bar complaint is a formal written complaint submitted to your state’s attorney discipline authority alleging that an attorney has violated the professional conduct rules that govern lawyers in your state.”

The organization noted that this is not a lawsuit, although it “may result in the attorney being publicly censured, suspended, or disbarred.”

Paltzik did address lawsuits when McEnany asked about defamation, but concluded, “It’s a bit early to talk about lawsuits.”

“But I can say this. Kevin Reddington’s conduct is not consistent with the standards of professionalism that we expect from members of the Bar,” he said.

“If you’re an officer of the court and you have taken an oath to uphold the United States Constitution, you’ve sworn to defend the Constitution, and then you get out there right after a trial and you attack a juror — but then you don’t stop, you continue to attack the juror, you’re attacking the juror outside the courtroom, inside the courtroom, everywhere — Kevin Reddington is not behaving rationally anymore,” Paltzik concluded.

Desronvil, for his own sake, should not simply endure Reddington’s tactics.

Further, he has a responsibility to set the correct precedent.

We cannot uphold the rule of law when jurors are targeted like this.

It will create a climate going forward ripe for the miscarriage of justice.

Situations like Desronvil’s are why jurors generally remain anonymous.

They must not be subjected to social pressures, threats, or smear campaigns.

Clancy’s lunatic supporters have done everything to ensure that when jurors deliberate, the questions they ask do not boil down to the law, but the agenda and the narratives at play.

If that mentality flourishes, we no longer have a justice system.

 
That attorney said … “HE … won. I guess everyone loses. He’s going to find out what happens to a dumbass flapping jaw head.

Hope it costs him and the justice system big time.

The other gum flapping jurors spouting off should not be beyond reproach either. Fry them all. They slandered the guy and made a mockery of the justice system. The judge too!!
 
Should Michael have been doxxed. No.

However, if he was placing bets, possibly on the trial outcome, like the other jurors implied, I believe that is fair to know. Did that influence how he voted? If so, there should be consequences. He was being evicted for lack of payment. Was he trying to make money off the trial?

It is also reasonable to know if he lied about his DV charges and that he has an active restraining order on the juror form. If he lied to the court, there should be consequences.

Many things should have been done better with this trial.
 
Good, and I hope he wins. Honestly, I am not certain my choice would be the same as this juror's, but I have been in the position of being the one person on a jury who thought something was "off," so I know how difficult it is to take that sort of a stand (as it was, I was able to influence the amount of the "award" given, but that's another story).

If this situation is allowed to continue, and this defense attorney goes unpunished, no sane American will ever want to sit on a jury again. And judges know that while you can essentially force someone to sit there (on pain of either prison, loss of their job, or both), you can't force anyone to actually do the work.

The long saga of the O.J. Simpson trial and how, by the end, one juror had essentially had a hysterical meltdown from being locked up so long, and the others were totally exhausted, suggests there are strong indications (not proof, but indications) that jurors just voted any way they could to get the heck out of there. Afterward, they were left on their own to deal with the horrific emotional and personal baggage that went with serving on the trial of such a high-profile person. One that, in addition to everything else, mixed racial issues into the rest of the mess.

At that point, some states made reforms for jurors, but obviously not nearly enough. If what this defense attorney did isn't outright illegal, then that State needs to revamp its laws, and federal laws need a look as well. As it is, some jurors already know that since some States don't require employees to be paid during jury service, and often the compensation is nowhere near adjusted for inflation; people can and do tell judges they can't serve because they will be so worried about paying rent that they can't concentrate on the case.

Now add to this:

"Judge, I'm going to be so worried that my life, reputation, and even my home will be threatened with complete destruction if the defense doesn't like how I vote, that I can't honestly say I can concentrate and make an uninfluenced vote in this case. Of course, I'm human, and I will be thinking about what happens to me later."

Good judges and even good attorneys know this, and they also know that once that happens, the entire judicial system falls apart. As it is, I've noticed that many criminal attorneys, both defense and prosecution, often seem more interested in winning the "game" of "winning," for whichever side they are on. Rather than being concerned about justice being done.

I saw this several times when genetic testing first came about, which in some cases could absolutely determine innocence and, 99.9 percent of the time, guilt (except for identical twins or damaged evidence). There were prosecutors who tried to refuse judicial reviews even when the "convicted" criminal faced execution, and the test would show for certain whether they did or did not commit the crime.

Was jerk, I will never forget, was quoted in the news as telling the judge something like, "Your Honor, the jury has made its decision, and we should respect that." Duh, the jurors didn't have access to that technology at the time, because it hadn't been invented yet.

I have never felt quite the same way about the US Judicial justice "Game of Justice" (and yeah, that needs to be a card game right up there with "Pets Against Humanity," only not as cute or funny.
 
I pray the juror gets this guy banned from practicing law NATIONWIDE for life. And he winds up owning everything the lawyer currently owns. I heard the lawyer wanting to crucify the juror because of the verdict. THAT is far beyond what an attorney is allowed or should even try to do. Start at the top and burn him down to his socks.
 
I hope Michael Desronvil sues the defense atty, the judge, the other jurors and the state of MASS for boat loads of money.
The defense attorney, yeah. The judge, did he go by the law or not? So, maybe. The other jurors, no. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. The state, why? The state can only disbar lawyers and/or judges when they prove themselves to be the jerks that they are. Let us not paint with a brush that is too wide.
 
Regardless as to whether or not a member of the jury behaved badly, there are ways of dealing with that without going public blasting him. The other jurors should also be held accountable for doxing Desronvil. The whole point of a jury is listening to the case and deciding the outcome based upon the law ... not what is to them politically correct. If that is why the other 11 decided against conviction, then they are also in the wrong. If Desronvil did decide his vote based on a bet, then he should be held accountable. The attorney should also be held accountable for his bad choices post-trial.

I'm not sure spending the rest of your life in a mental facility would be preferrable to spending it in prison. Neither place has any appeal to me!
 
That the juror was doxxed while performing his civic duty and had his life ruined by the vindictive female jurors is indicative the entire 'just us' system is in state of collapse

That Michael & Clancy case have been compared to OJ trial and he as a solo jurist nullification is astounding.
Reopened old cultural wounds inflicted by that utter fiasco of a "trial".

If declas reveals OJ did beat Nicole's face and she had to fake death, go into witness protection and assume a new identity, the public may not be so forgiving to the woman who put the nation thru that idiotic roller coaster ride for no reason other than she needed to flee domestic abuse & have plastic surgery

IMG_3151.jpeg


IMG_3149.jpeg

I hate every bit of this movie and see no reason to sit on a jury and offer up your life in sequester based on fraud, wanton govt lies, held on a jury under false pretenses, grossly defiant media abuse and legal misrepresentation of the truth.

This juror is a hero for his resistance and forcing a retrial And next time, more scrutiny on the husband, the grandfather, the real estate boondoggle, NXVIM sex cult, the rumored pedo exploitation of the kids, killed to protect the cult from prosecution. And on and on.

We are sick of protecting the fiend class from scrutiny and used by the media as pawns

Burn it down to its socks, not just the filthy defense atty but the entire justice racket of LIES.
 
Last edited:
If declas reveals OJ did beat Nicole's face and she had to fake death, go into witness protection and assume a new identity, the public may not be so forgiving to the woman who put the nation thru that idiotic roller coaster ride for no reason other than she needed to flee domestic abuse & have plastic surgery
Whaaaaaa?
If you'd seen the up close pictures of slaughtered Nichole you'd know she was good and truly d.e.a.d.
I don't know where you got the meme about her being Megan Kelly, but I know that's impossible. 1- Nichole is dead. 2 - Nichole was not smart enough to be Megan Kelly.

I don't like Megan Kelly, but acknowledge that she has a fair amount of smarts and education.

Nichole spent only a short time in Junior College before dropping out to be with OJ.
If you've ever read anything written by OJ himself you'd know he was almost illiterate. Got through high school and college by being a football star, not through education.
Nichole was with OJ because she was also not the brightest bulb...
With the smarts of Megan, she couldn't have spent any amount of time with OJ before being driven crazy by the amount of dumb....
 
Let the above stand as a fierce warning if you are guilty as sin, don't force homecanner to sit your jury.

I was threatened with jury duty as punishment in the past and dismissed by the judge before seated.

Will gladly demolish a perp & their crime family syndicate for the absolute & utter filth that's goin on
 
Just wear your 'Jury Nullification" t-shirt and you'll never never have to serve.
I'm not sure about that. I was in jury pool for a murder trial, and one man did and said many ridiculous things trying to avoid being chosen. He was chosen. I was never asked a question which probably was because I'd worked for attorneys for 30 years. I was extremely glad not to have been chosen!

My mother was chosen to be on a jury even though she was related to one person involved, knew the judge, one or both attorneys and the defendant. Don't recall details as who she was related to and have no idea what the trial was about or the results. She was in her late 80's at the time.

The population of the county is 6,497 so your chances of being called for jury duty are reasonably high. She was called many times and served numerous times. Finally, in her 90's declined to serve ... not because she wasn't sharp enough, but she no longer drove outside of her little (400 pop.) town.
 
I'm not sure about that. I was in jury pool for a murder trial, and one man did and said many ridiculous things trying to avoid being chosen. He was chosen. I was never asked a question which probably was because I'd worked for attorneys for 30 years. I was extremely glad not to have been chosen!

My mother was chosen to be on a jury even though she was related to one person involved, knew the judge, one or both attorneys and the defendant. Don't recall details as who she was related to and have no idea what the trial was about or the results. She was in her late 80's at the time.

The population of the county is 6,497 so your chances of being called for jury duty are reasonably high. She was called many times and served numerous times. Finally, in her 90's declined to serve ... not because she wasn't sharp enough, but she no longer drove outside of her little (400 pop.) town.
I had some experience with the UCMJ-President of a court-martial, administering Articles 15, Recorder (basically prosecutor) for a Board of Officers-and despite what everyone on the jury pool told me, I got picked.
 
30? years ago in Denton co. Tx. one jury member refused to answer all of the stupid questions that prospective jurors are asked. The judge put her in jail for contempt. After about 3 days the ACLU got her out. I can remember some of those and what does which magazine I read have to do with my ability to render a verdict? That taught me that in the court room the judge is god however, in the jury room all 12 of you are god.
 
what is a "moral prostitute"?
I took a business law class in college, fifty some years ago. I recall the the question coming up of the morality of lawyers representing clients they knew to be guilty. The instructor said that everyone, including the guilty, have the right to the best representation possible. He argued that when a lawyer takes a case, he has the obligation to do his best to have his client win his case, whether the client deserves to win the case or not.

It's kind of like a doctor being obligated to do his best at treating a patient, even if the patient is Charles Manson, Hitler, or Pol Pot, and deserves to suffer and die.

Some might have difficulty separating duty to one's client from other, conflicting, moral obligations. I can see how some would consider representing a client whose case you do not believe in, to be a prostitution of sorts.
 
If the juror plays his cards right he will be sotting on a pile of Money and anyone involved in that tril will have licenses suspended for allowing such liberal jurors to bully
And three children will still be dead. Sadly, I also believe that this confessed murderer will go free before this whole sordid mess ends...

Summerthyme
 
Clancy will never be free. Not only did she heinously murder her three children, just tried to escape her actions by jumping out a second story window and will remain paralyzed from the waist down for the remainder of her earthly ife.
 
Clancy will never be free. Not only did she heinously murder her three children, just tried to escape her actions by jumping out a second story window and will remain paralyzed from the waist down for the remainder of her earthly ife.
Yeah...and if we didn't have the one moral juror, she'd be sitting in a handicapped apartment right now, free as a bird...and probably with taxpayer funded home aides!

Massachusetts *does not have* a legal verdict of "guilty, but insane". They can only be guilty...or NOT guilty. I've read nothing anywhere that says they had a legal avenue to lock her up for *any* amount of time if she'd been found not guilty.

Summerthyme
 
I agree with amarilla but in addition there needs to be an immediate full court press by the state of Massivetwoshitz and the DOJ on top of the DOXers,leakers and reporters that have done massive damage to the Justus system . the progressive left has removed the ballot box if they do not aggressively contain this they have effectively removed the jury box the soap box has been nullified by the MSM our options are being limited to just the one remaining box!
 
30? years ago in Denton co. Tx. one jury member refused to answer all of the stupid questions that prospective jurors are asked. The judge put her in jail for contempt. After about 3 days the ACLU got her out. I can remember some of those and what does which magazine I read have to do with my ability to render a verdict? That taught me that in the court room the judge is god however, in the jury room all 12 of you are god.
 
Top