Holdout juror's lawyer criticizes defense motion in Clancy case

MASSACHUSETTS — The attorney for holdout juror Michael Péguy Desronvil criticized a defense motion asking a judge to question him after Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial ended in a mistrial, ABC7 Los Angeles reported.

The dispute has focused attention on juror privacy and the treatment of holdout jurors after several jurors described an 11-1 split in favor of not guilty by reason of insanity, according to ABC7 Los Angeles.

Defense attorney Kevin Reddington asked Judge William Sullivan to question Desronvil about his “truthfulness” during jury selection and his conduct during deliberations, ABC7 Los Angeles reported. Reddington and defense attorney Martin Weinberg also filed a motion to dismiss the case against Clancy.

Edward Andrew Paltzik, Desronvil’s attorney, wrote that “Kevin Reddington's disgusting motion to investigate Michael is worthy of nothing but universal condemnation. This is certainly not the final word from us on this subject, but merely our first words,” according to ABC7 Los Angeles.

The trial ended in a mistrial earlier in September 2026 after seven days of juror deadlock. Several jurors said the panel was split 11-1 in favor of finding Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity, ABC7 Los Angeles reported.

Juror Nick Dargie told ABC News that Desronvil did not always take part in deliberations. “There was times he wouldn't engage, like he'd be scrolling on his phone while people are talking to him, things like that, where he's just not paying attention,” Dargie said.

Desronvil defended himself in a Sept. 18 statement to ABC News shared by his attorney. “I didn't have any doubts,” Desronvil said. “As I tried to explain different possible theories during deliberation, I kept getting cut off as if I had doubts based on the evidence presented.”

Paltzik argued that the defense request amounted to “a full-frontal attack on the U.S. Constitution,” according to ABC7 Los Angeles. Legal analyst Terri Austin said, “Now we're talking about the privacy of these individual jurors and the effect that's going to have on jury pools out there,” adding, “Nobody's going to want to sit on a jury if, in fact, you can take my phone and look at everything that I was texting, so I think it’s a problem.”

Judge William Sullivan extended an impoundment order blocking release of the full juror list, citing “significant and divisive attention,” according to WCVB.