Lindsay Clancy Case: What the Latest Hearing Means for Her Future Trial

0:007 million Californians depend on community health clinics for their care, but Proposition 44 cuts billions from clinics. Under 44, hundreds of clinics will close and health services will be eliminated. That's why Prop 44 is opposed by nurses, doctors, and patients. Vote no on the clinic shutdown proposition. No, on 44. Add paid for by no on Prop 44. Stop the attack on patients and community health clinics, sponsored by California Primary Care Association Advocates. Add Committee's top funders ultimate health services in California Primary Care Association Advocates. Netflix's new series, East of Eden, is a bold reimagining of John Steinbeck's masterpiece, following generations of the Trask family through love, betrayal, and the choices that shape our humanity, starring Mike Feist and Christopher Abbott as the conflicted Trask brothers, and Florence P.S. Capy Ames, the complex, dark, and fascinating anti-heroine determined to build the life she wants, no matter the cost, dark, epic, and impossible to look away from. Watch East of Eden now, only on Netflix.

1:00Think about everything your lips get through in a day. The conversations, the meals, the late nights out with friends, Maybelline Matting lipstick is made to keep up. Transfer proof saturated matte color with up to 16 hour wear. It lasts through 10,000 words all in your terms. No touch-ups, no fading, no compromises. Shop Maybelline's SuperStay Matting Liquid Lipstick now, available on Amazon. Where's the evidence? Where's the evidence that she did this? This is just all based on speculation, the entire case. Where is the admission? Where does she say that she ever did this? Those are the incredible words of criminal defense attorney Kevin Reddington after stipulating in the first trial that ended in a mistrial. He's back in court yesterday and Plymouth, Massachusetts, suggesting that maybe his client Lindsay Clancy was not responsible for the death of her three

2:02children, Corridor Dawson-Callon. So what in the world is going on? Welcome to the Global Phenomenon, surviving the survivor. Where we bring you the best guests in all of True Crime. Here's your host, Emmy Award winning journalist Joel Waltman. What's up SDS Nation? Welcome to Surviving the Survivor. This is the Global Phenomenon bringing you the very best guests in all of True Crime. Also some of the best trials, an unbelievable case with Caleb Flynn coming to its somewhat conclusion yesterday guilty on all nine counts. You will likely spend the rest of his life. The one time American Idol contested behind bars without the possibility of parole sentencing for that is October 5th next week with victim impact statements. And we will bring that to you. But here's a case that the entire world is talking about. You have to go back to January 24th, 2023. Lindsay Clancy had screamed out for help.

3:04She had even gone to some mental health institutions to try to get help saying, look, I'm not doing well. They talked about this in the first trial that ended in the Miss trial back on September 4th. That day, September 24th, which will now live in ignominy on September 24th, and 23. She sent her ex-husband now ex-husband Patrick Clancy out to run the CVS in the 3-V restaurant. And in that time, the three children, Kora Dawson and Callan are no more in exercise band different ones. Three different exercise bands are used to unbelievably and so sadly squeeze the life out of Kora Dawson and Callan. And then yesterday was the first time there was a court hearing since the Miss trial back on September 24th. Before we get to the best guess very quickly, we are only partnering with companies that we believe in. And one of them, I just put the QR code is current. It is a banking app. It is unreal because it builds your credit.

4:09I've said this before, my own beloved mother when I was in college made me get a credit card. I said, why do I need a credit card in college? I'm basically still a kid. I don't, I just use your money. She said, no, gotta build your credit. Well, current builds your credit. Also, if you have overdraft fees, sometimes you take out more than you have, happens to me. This covers overdraft fees. And the best part about this is if you use their direct deposit system, you can advance out 750 bucks. Either per month or each pay period, I'm not exactly sure. I need to look that one up. But you can take out money before you have it. And what's better than free money? Nothing. And it'll also give you 75 bucks for joining the app. So even if you're not interested at all, I keep telling people, just clicking on the link or in the show summary or this QR code, it helps us tremendously much appreciated if you do that now on to the best guests. And they are best, best guests. The first, he teaches at Harvard Law School, the honorable Jay Blitzman, Margaret McLean, she's going to have

5:11her hands full. She is a host of the Margaret McLean show, former professor at Boston College School of Law, a trial lawyer, two prostitutes, your competition. Chris, Chris, and I also teach at BC Law School, Margaret. I actually taught, I taught in the undergrad, actually. But yeah, yeah, yeah. We teach in the law school, right, Chris? We sure do. And I missed you with the reception last night. Yeah. And there he is. I didn't even have to introduce them because Judge Jay did a former judge, Chris Mews. Look, look at this panel. I mean, you didn't tell me you're going to go to, I'm not going to throw out names like court TV. You're going to tell me you're going to go to court TV and have two judges, both to teach at Boston College, one teaches at Harvard Law, and then a third that is a, you get a tummy, you get a panel like this? No, that's why we say we've got the best guests in all of Drew Crombs. I also teach at Northeastern and New England Law Boston. There you go. Teachers at every school in Boston and Judge Mews was in the courthouse working as a judge in the same courthouse where the Lindsey Clancy trial had. Now go and find me a panel like

6:17this and I will give you your money back. By the way, like and subscribe. During the Lindsey Clancy trial, I had people say, I'd love to subscribe. I just don't have the money, which I get. Money is tight. Gas is expensive. But guess what? It's free. All you need is your index finger. That is it. Just an index finger. But Judge J Blitzman, let me start with you. I was covering the Caleb Flint closings, but I then watched the hearing after the fact. And I see Kevin Reddington gets up there and says, where's the evidence against my client? And I just did not, I said to myself, is this guy now accusing Patrick Clancy of this crime? There are only two people in that house. And then I went to my friends to prosecutors podcasts. I follow them on Twitter and he said, that's not what this means. So what happened yesterday with that? Well, this involves going into the legal weeds a bit. First of all, Kevin Reddington is leaving. No stun on turned obviously in his

7:23Ellis advocacy on behalf of this client. But I believe what happened yesterday relates to a pre-trial request that attorney Reddington made to bifurcate this trial, meaning that the issue of criminal responsibility would be deferred until after fact finding on the case itself, the question of guilt or innocence. Now, that is not the current model that we have in Massachusetts for hearing mental health insanity related defenses. We have a rule of criminal procedure which the judge understandably felt that he was obliged to follow. It would have taken a bit of creativity, pushed in the envelope for judge Sullivan, you have fact finding first, and then defer the issue of criminal responsibility during a next hearing. So bifurcated is the fancy phrase for

8:27two-part hearing. Approximately 12 to 20 states have provisions for guilty but insane types of procedures. There's a great variety of models and approaches. So I don't necessarily think this means that Kevin is doing a 180 and now appointing the finger third party culprit at anybody. I think part of what he did, well perhaps leaving that as a possibility is preserving the record he made with judge Sullivan asking in the first instance that the whole matter be bifurcated. In other words, fact finding first, then addressing the mental health issues in a separate proceeding, which is roughly analogous to what happens in death penalty cases. You have the guilt innocence component

9:28followed by the sentencing. But it is very creative. He also asked, as you probably, as I'm sure you know, for a limited inquiry of the juror who was the holdout in the case. And a lot has been written about and argued about in the aftermath. This gentleman now has retained an attorney. He is asserting in the aftermath of other jurors coming forward and speaking to the media that he never had any doubt. One of the questions regarding that, very, very important part of the process is whether or not this gentleman accurately filled out the jury, the juror questionnaire. If you don't let the juror questionnaire accurately in Massachusetts, it states on the bottom of that juror questionnaire. I've been called for juror duty. I've served on a jury. You're subject to a $2,000 fine. It doesn't say

10:31that you're subject to prosecution for perjury. Whether he filled the questionnaire out accurately or not, I have no, I don't know a pie, nor do I know. I assume that would be part of the limited voidier or a discussion that the judge Sullivan wishes to have with this individual, as well as possibly inquiring of another juror who asserts that the holdout juror was using his cell phone in the jury room. We'll get back. Purple Daisy has a question regarding the lone holdout. Purple, hold that question and bring it back on that when I circle back today. I just want to kind of hash this out though, Margaret, a little bit more and talk in the J Blitzman who teaches guys at Harvard and I'm a few levels below. So now I have to go and see if Margaret can help me

11:31understand it a little bit more. J takes for granted my intelligence. By the way, J, it was a pretty good win over the Red Sox last night. Sweet. Very sweet. So sweet. Two, two, two, and Chris, two Massachusetts boys. That's sweet. We have Kim Schittler and Ben Rice. Ben Rice. We watch both of those beautiful Boston-based human beings do a great work, but they were on the wrong team. Here's something that I assume you know. The Red Sox had a chance to draft a cam Schittler who went to Northeastern, but they passed on him. The Yankees took him right after the Red Sox had passed on him. So maybe the Yankees saw something that the Red Sox didn't. Let's talk about the Yankees. So something in Babe Ruth. It took him. Don't. Hey, I love the Red Sox. I don't like the front office. Never have.

12:33There you go. There's no stadium like Fenway Park. But Margaret started getting caught in the middle of the world. Oh, no problem. Yeah. I mean, I'm actually these guys. You guys are going to kick me right off the show, but I grew up in upstate New York. So I grew up a Yankee fan, moved to Boston. He came a Red Sox fan. But if the Red Sox lose, I go back and I root for the Yankees. So I don't know if that's legal. It's got Ben Rice, by the way. You're actually a little good trial attorney. Exactly. I can argue both sides. Jay Blissman isn't as my kid is on a little league team. It's the first year of what they call Coach pitch, where the coach is pitch. I didn't think they would do it, but they, because there's so many New Yorkers in Miami, but they actually have a Yankees team and he got drafted by the Yankees. And then my wife calls me before the season and says there's only two jerseys left. Number two and number six. I'm like, you kidding me? No one took Derek Jeter. I'm like, grab number two right away. So number six, number six, you go way back.

13:35One by clean, clearest boy or clear. I think Roy White in the 70s. Roy White more recently. Yes, that's true. Yeah. So there you go. We've now probably lost half our audience. He's like, I don't give a crap about the Yankees and numbers, but it cares. It's fun. So Margaret, he gets up there, Kevin Reddington. He's like, there's zero evidence. My client even did this after stipulating, basically, to say, let's get through all this evidence because I just want to get to the meat potatoes on the trial. Is it, is what Jay Blitzman really saying here is that there's a double burden in the Commonwealth, basically, to say, you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. And then you also have to prove that you are not criminally responsible. Is that what's going on here? So he wants to show or says that they didn't show that she's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. And now we have to do that in one phase and then go to the criminal or not criminally responsible in the second phase. So Reddington already asked for that before. And he

14:36wanted a bifurcated trial where it's basically a bite. The judge is right. Obviously, I would never say a judge is wrong. So I did all the time. Yes. So he wanted, he felt that bifurcated trial back in the beginning during the pre-trial phase allowed them to exclude Lindsey Clancy's confessions or statement during a first phase. So there, you know, there's two phases, right? The phase whether she did it or not, the second phase would be whether she's criminally responsible. He, Reddington originally wanted the focus to be on the, for the prosecution to strictly prove the forensics and the physical evidence of the crime scene first, rather than relying on the fact that she admitted to it. And because the court did not bifurcate that trial, the elements were tried together and we saw that over the summer. So ultimately, we have a deadlock jury. So that's why I think it confused a lot of people yesterday, but that's why, you know, he immediately,

15:39I'd say, criticized Judge Sullivan for not bifurcating that trial. And that's why he said, well, she, you know, he questioned the evidence. Of course, he knows the world is watching about whether his client committed the acts, the killing of the children, he claimed the police immediately assumed guilt. And that Lindsey had no memory of the event. He said, the police conducted in his words a horrific, ridiculous investigation. The entire case is based on speculation. Where's the evidence? And then he also pointed to that deficient DNA evidence. And the fact that she had no shoes on when she jumped out the window into the snow. And he says, ultimately, you know, where does, where in the record does it say that she actually did this, meaning did that to the kids committed the acts. She has no memory of it. And he even goes into her core body temperature, didn't even make sense. She nearly died later in the hospital. Then he also goes on to criticize Judge Sullivan again for not reading a voting instruction

16:42for this faulty police investigation. Margarit, explain that real quick. Just explain the voting. That has to do with that. Yeah. Yeah. So, a vote in instruction would be, which was denied during the trial. He wanted, he wanted the judge to instruct the jury on the evidence of the faulty police investigation. And they could consider that type of evidence. And, you know, but it was denied. Sorry, I'm a little under the weather today. Hopefully I'm making the sense. I think, yeah, too much, there's been too much law. I think, uh, did me in plus you got you guys got hit. You got to hit with the norrister. Did you guys? Yeah, I saw reporters in your, uh, your, your adopted hometown. But but Judge me is, let me, let me slide over to you. So, Margarit just talked about it about the body temperature being 82. He also says in addition to questioning the body temperature, he's like, where is the admission? Like, uh, I mean, obviously this is 5D chest that he's playing. And you,

17:46you know, I'm, you can confer with guys and women like you, all three of you to probably figure out how to, to move here in this, in this hearing yesterday. But and see, oh, we, I'm not sure if we have sound of that part of the hearing, I would love to get it. We have Kevin Reddington after the fact. But, um, but it did sound to me like a lay person. Oh, no, he's throwing Patrick Clancy under the bus. And this is after the 60 minutes thing. This is after the bazillion TikTok conspiracy theorist. So I don't know, was it a, um, you know, look, yes, to look out for his client first, did that take us down kind of a slippery slope? Because I think people don't understand the law are now pointing the finger back at Patrick Clancy, which is not what I think he intended to do. Seven million Californians depend on community health clinics for their care. But proposition 44 cuts billions from clinics under 44 hundreds of clinics will close and health services will be eliminated. That's why Prop 44 is opposed by nurses, doctors and patients vote no on the

18:49clinic shutdown proposition. No, on 44, ad paid for by no on prop 44, stop the attack on patients and community health clinics sponsored by California Primary Care Association Advocates, ad committees top funders, ultimate health services and California Primary Care Association Advocates. For a limited time, you can get a big Mac meal for just eight dollars. That's a burger, fries and a drink. They don't call it an extra value meal for nothing. Get a big Mac meal only at McDonald's. Price and participation may vary. Promotion pricing may be lower than meal pricing. I love football season. The games, the rivalries, the food, getting everyone together, no game day feels complete without a trip to total wine and more. I can find everything from cold beer and canned cocktails to wines and spirits for the whole crew. And if I want to bring something different to the watch party, the total wine team always has ideas. Plus, it's nice knowing I'm getting the lowest prices. Get your game day lineup ready at total wine and more. Spirits are not sold in Virginia and North Carolina. Drink responsibly B-21. I don't think I don't think that's what he was doing. I think what happened yesterday was very simple.

19:59I have I haven't, funny by coincidence, it's in my office here in my my my home studio. And it's a it's a judicial education conference at the judges attend Yanulean. In that year, it was called the civil mop up the post verdict work of the trial judge. And after every case, especially the complicated ones, you will receive a flurry of post verdict or in this case post trial motions. And this was one of them. The rule 25 motions is is to indicate to the court on the record the belief or the proposition that there was insufficient evidence as a matter of law to support a conviction. Regardless of whether or not it was a dead lot verdict. What Kevin was doing was his job. He was dotting all of the eyes. He was crossing the teeth. One of the important principles of the pellet work is that if you don't if you if you

21:08if you do not assert a defense, you're going to wave it. So what I saw him doing was to take all of the elements death and causation, criminal responsibility and attack all of it vigorously. And I think he did it for two reasons. One was to preserve the record. And the second one is that as Judge Lisbon was indicating in Massachusetts the conduct underlying the crime, a regardless of mental competency to to to criminally responsibly do it is integrated into into the entire defense of the we call it the insanity defense. And I think what he was doing was laying out a premise that he was not she never admitted to doing it. There was no direct evidence but tons of circumstantial evidence why and that's why it's not going to be a it will be a failing motion

22:08that she did do it. But I think it's all tied into a conduct to be able to explain the the very narrow issue that exists today as to and in the future trial as to whether she was able to understand what she was doing understood the difference between right and wrong and whether or not she was able to conform or did she have the psychosis that Kevin Reddick said. So I think it was a fully integrated package that Kevin was giving yesterday. And I don't think that he's believing in any way that the motion be allowed. There's just too much evidence on both sides. But it does lead to the primary attack that he and the attorney Weinberg have which is a which is a double jeopardy motion which again is a Hail Mary pass in in in in most of the lawyers and judges have a looking at the case. So so I would not read too much into it. I know that a lot

23:11of people are seeing you know why is he being ridiculous like like the like the like the assistant district attorney said or was he just doing his job. I think he was just doing his job. So I you know first of all quickly I second that emotion second that emotion Chris and as regards Marty Weinberg another iconic figure of the Massachusetts criminal defense bar. Marty just succeeded in having Sheriff Stevie Tompkins acquitted who was indicted for alleged a chicanery. That's the recent victory for attorney Weinberg but more contextually to this conversation as regards the functional double jeopardy argument. I believe Marty was also brought in by the defense team in the Karen Reed case. He was he was on the on the double jeopardy argument. So it's

24:13an issue. He has a lot of expertise and that argument was rejected by hours of criminal judicial court. That is the double jeopardy argument and as and as we know then Mr. Reed was subsequently acquitted when she was retried which relates to the other big issue or one of the other big issues in this case is Judge Sullivan being being the fact that Judge Sullivan asked the the parties to be back in the beginning of November and he prepared to schedule for scheduling of a new trial date as well as providing rulings on these emotions that we've been discussing. So that's the that's the that's one of the elephants in the room will will actually Jay I think is the I think it's a beam of I think it's a beam of light in the mold in the room because they all push back and said we're not ready to get it get it get it get a trial date Sullivan says no

25:13we will get one I will I will assign it and I'll give you a month to figure it out but we will have one and then if you need a continuance for good reason we'll give it to you and what I see in that is the pushback from the DA who is non-committal about retrying the case you know what happens after these big cases the DA goes out in the courthouse in front of the TV cameras and said we're going to try this case we'll get another jury and we'll get a conviction he's smartly and ethically holding off on that decision and and my tell was the way everyone pushed back Kevin Reddickin said I won't be ready for six months the assistant district attorney said this is pretty mature Sullivan says no it's not if you remember at the end of the last trial he said I want everybody to come back on the 29th of September and tell me when do you want to try this case if at all so yeah but you know also Chris you'll also remember at the end of the last trial after Kevin's motion or

26:17denied he said okay and I want to be back on Monday to start yeah remember that yeah and that came up in court yesterday yes go ahead switch my switch is things with the red socks and the he's Kevin's one schedule that's all it's well in nature you gotta be out of the you gotta be agile yeah the next sterile is the word yeah well judge uh Chris Muse um I guess since you just brought it up let's just drill down on this for another second and I feel bags Margaret sniffling so we'll get we don't worry about me I will get through this um Kim Cruz he's a district attorney uh COE I see oh I do see the videos in there and we'll get to them in just a second um thank you so um Kim Cruz is obviously a tough on crime uh district attorney in in Plymouth and he did come out after the mistrial was announced and said these three uh babies children deserve justice which I don't think there's anyone watching this who does not

27:22agree with that uh that they are the victims here um but do you think he is he is behind the scenes questioning the move forward and that is why there is seems to be a lack of like fervor I guess you know it's not like he came out I don't think he came out yesterday and only like through the hammerdown said this is gonna get tried before the end of this year you know he what's happening behind the scenes is he negotiating this in his own mind with his staff what's happening oh I think I think I know Tim I know the assistance you know I was that I was not only uh a judge in that courthouse I was a judge in that courtroom my lobby was right off of the the back of that court courtroom that everyone saw and so I've known Tim when it was a defense council and I knew his office because he doesn't try cases anymore and the younger people that that that uh

28:22represent his office they're very very capable and but I will say to you that that he he among all of the DA's in the 13 or 14 offices that we have he's probably the most hard charging he has a reputation for not breaking down cases and he has a reputation for going forward you know on on on on indictments regardless of uh uh you know any any concerns about the view of overcharging the way I look at that is I don't like it in terms of in terms of my my philosophy but the people in the county elect them to do that so so I respect that position that he has on the other hand he's a very shrewd person politically and he also has to talk to his assistants and I know that his assistants in my mind would be telling him uh Mr. District Attorney boss this is these are the problems that we have and when you have 11 good citizens listening carefully to the evidence coming back to say that she was not criminally responsible

29:25that has to weigh very heavily in the balance and when you have the community forget about the world community but the the county community uh basically saying why are you going to waste more money and more time on this thing where the woman clearly was was was depressed of some measure and why why what what what is it that you want to accomplish with her what do you want to do do you want her to go to a treatment center or do you really really really need to put her in jail after another very painful trial for the victims in this case the living victims the living victims in this case uh Patrick and his immediate family so I don't think that he's going to shirt that responsibility but I do see him taking a measured way towards it and I I I have a bet in my own mind because I don't have any money left I'm a retired judge um but I I have a bet that Tim will probably uh the the path forward I think would be to creatively reduce the

30:29charge to second degree murder put the ball in Kevin write it in court on behalf of this client and let her decide whether she wants to try it in front of a jury again or go jury waived why would she go jury waived people keep saying this you don't go jury waived unless you have the wink wink that you've got a favorable judge well here's the wink wink that exists what's the wink wink the wink wink that exists right now is that everybody in that courtroom knows who and how uh judge Sullivan will respond to real evidence without any pre commitments and my view of it is that uh my I I know Sullivan so well um that he's such a very humane person a very well accomplished trial lawyer and an excellent judge that I would probably take my chances with him because the because because Kevin will will tell you repeatedly

31:31as he told the jury all of the good evidence was on his side all of the bad evidence on the expert witnesses were trashed by him so first well I got to jump in because you know I said wink wink somewhat cynically yeah it shouldn't be a wink wink because that's not ethical but I know I think you can read a judge right I I I know the case I could turn I could turn but it's a huge huge gamble it's a if your defense attorney it's a huge gamble it takes 12 people to convict beyond a reasonable doubt it's a lot easier to convince one judge beyond a reasonable doubt it is to convince 12 people so that's the direction of a jury trial Jay the reality the reality marker will get you in there don't worry talk to the reality judge I'm running to know his case and Kevin ready to know his his his his spot in a courtroom he knows how

32:33to and and I'll concur with you on this point that he has the option and he will have to intelligently describe that option as you did to his client to make sure that she understands that it might be better to go to 12 instead of one but don't forget that everyone has criticized crew so far for not allowing it at the outset to go jury waves so I I just suggest that might be one outcome and that it can't be a plea it can't he's Kevin is not going to at this point pivot and say that his client was criminally responsible to get an eight-year sentence for manslaughter I just don't see that in the cards what I can see is his honor Jay Blitzman Chris Mews and five other Massachusetts judges talking about the Red Sox Yankees going look there are mitigating circumstances here in this in this series but I concur I just talking about the Yankees in legal terms is what

33:37I'm trying to get out there so anyway Margaret McClain my but tell us how the judges why we're wrong and feel free to do so because it happens all the time yeah well I think you're through our so-called power please no I think you're right so I live in Plymouth County all right and uh yep right here in situate so um I think that yeah I think because we've it's taken so long for Tim Cruz to make a decision I think he's weighing exactly that either drop the charges down to second degree murder or even possibly manslaughter and then you know even if you dropped it down to manslaughter maybe they could possibly work out a deal with Kevin Reddington where she gets credit for time served I don't know and doesn't go to get she she doesn't want to go to jail now I also think that uh no my my opinion just being on my channel and even Joel's channel during that trial there were it was very divided I was surprised that it

34:42was 11 to 1 in favor of a not guilty my reason of insanity that criminal responsibility so I I think that Tim Cruz would be it would be silly for him to go back go go against her again on first degree murder charges because I think he risks the you know getting a divided jury again and another mistrial that doesn't look good or even you know a not guilty so why not drop it down and I think that I think Lindsey Clancy based on what I've seen just reading these chats I think she'd be much better off in front of a judge I really do and and I have a question so I've heard maybe this is a rumor but is judge Sullivan retiring in June 7 million Californians depend on community health clinics for their care but Proposition 44 cuts billions from clinics under 44 hundreds of clinics will close and health services will be eliminated that's why Prop 44 is

35:44opposed by nurses doctors and patients vote no on the clinic shutdown proposition no on 44 ad paid for by no on Prop 44 stop the attack on patients and community health clinics sponsored by California Primary Care Association Advocates ad committees top funders ultimate health services in California Primary Care Association Advocates I love football season the games the rivalries the food getting everyone together no game day feels complete without a trip to total wine and more I can find everything from cold beer and canned cocktails to wines and spirits for the whole crew and if I want to bring something different to the watch party the total wine team always has ideas plus it's nice knowing I'm getting the lowest prices get your game day lineup ready at total wine and more spirits are not sold in Virginia North Carolina drink responsibly B-21 you're listening to a quick ad you know what else is quick selling your car on Carvana just put in your vehicle information and we'll give you an offer done no hassle no negotiation no guy from an online listing lowball in you which means by the time I'm done explaining this you could have

36:46basically done it still haven't started hey better late than ever sell your car today on Carvana pick up fees may apply he has to retire sometime in early spring or so he turns 70 sometime around April, May, or June I'm not sure but it's in early late spring I think so around that time correct yeah as judges in Massachusetts it's silly but they have to retire by age 70 right listen look at me I felt both of us we fell off a tree ripened we were too ripe at the age of 70 we fell off the tree and we just rounded out looking we have no life we have no vibrancy we're mashed potatoes yeah judge me as do you think he wants to try this case like if he could stay on is there any is there any sort of deal where he can extend it six months to retry this case he could be a recall judge I don't think that he would have the I don't think that he would do it on that

37:52basis I think he would take the case he could he could walk away from this case and he has a right to it let another judge take the case for if it's if it's going to be a retrial my feeling is that he would believe and he correctly believes that he knows so much about the case that he that the the theory of the case the rule of the case has been established with all the pretrial and I think he would have a sense of obligation to take it even though it would be very stressful and the teaking form to do so he's that kind of guy he's a good person yes yes here's a curve ball it may be because he is he he has a reputation as a judge muse is saying of being very since here he has an opinion a merited opinion for having great judicial integrity what if he was hit with a motion to recuse or what if he decided to recuse on his own because in theory everybody's entitled both sides are entitled to a totally impartial

39:00arbiter he may feel and I you know I don't know him you do I think it's I think it's not chance he it's it's time for him to step away I don't know I think that there are three people the prosecutors the defense counsel a judge himself that would have to wrestle with that issue and so whether or not personally you want to continue with it like judge like like the judge would because it is it's it's it's a burden on him and he's trying to wrap up his career but I agree with you that there may be some ethical issues or not ethical issues but some potential bias issues that would rate would be raised my feeling is that everyone would be very comfortable with him if he chose to do it that's just a visceral response Jay I just have a feeling that they would let me speak into Kevin Reddington who is turning 76 and he is far from mashed potatoes by the way christian muse they said that your mashed potatoes but with bacon bits sour cream and a little red

40:00garlic so they're slicing you up here is Kevin Reddington in court and then I must go to Margaret because I'm getting a hate messages that I am letting the men speak more than I know that's okay okay no no no no no I'm really happy with that here is here is red yesterday inside the court room so I asked the court to hire him back to the evidence that was presented and ask yourself where's the evidence that she did this where is the evidence that she did this you have a situation where Patrick comes home you're on a recalls the evidence that he indicates that when he came home that he enters the house he puts the food down on the table comes back from the restaurant it's quiet eerily quiet as the government indicates in their motion that he then indicates that he goes upstairs into the bedroom after yelling downstairs to the basement there's

41:02no response he goes upstairs and when he goes upstairs he goes into the bedroom and your owner will recall that the evidence is that he's able to make an observation that the window is open it's called in the room he sees blood my memory is that it appeared as old as sprayed on the walls in fact your owner will recall it was not sprayed on the walls it was a lot of I would say copious blood drops on the floor and on the mirror when you consider the evidence that the government has you have the exercise bands you have the the woefully deficient DNA you have the woefully deficient fingerprinting you have the horrific ridiculous investigation using the term loosely by the police there was no investigation it was not even a horrendous investigation there was no investigation and then you ask yourself some questions that we always do as defense attorneys prosecutors investigators so when he goes into the bedroom there's a lock on the on the on the mark is blood

42:08he's able to use some type of a little key in spite of the lock jowl lock that was on the doin on opens the door goes into the room goes into the room now the evidence is that she cut her wrists cut her throat standing in front of the mirror blood drops then went over to the window and propelled herself out of the window you're on a herd evidence that she indicated that the screen was cut you're on a ralso heard evidence that in fact the screen was not cut you want to can infer obviously as a rational jury could infer that in fact this is a false memory that she had because she believes that the screen was cut and it wasn't but in any event she propels herself out the window and sustains the injuries that your owner is well aware that she sustained she then is on the ground she has no shoes on why does she not have shoes on it's 30 something degrees outside this no it's the winter she has no shoes she's wearing black socks where is the

43:12blood on the black socks where's the blood on the shoes when did the shoes get taken off in why I mean Margaret McLean this is absolutely fascinating I mean the first one of the first thoughts I have is why why didn't he argue this in the first trial instead of stipulating to everything let's start there well that's because the judge didn't bifurcate the trial so what he's doing here is again going back to what Judge Mew said is it's he's arguing and I think he's writing ten is a fantastic lawyer he is doing his he's done a great job for his client right by the way there are people in the chat who are like he's the worst to turn I know I know you might hate them that's okay he's that only a stop but no you can't say this guy is the worst this guy is a very very he's a great lawyer yeah yeah if I get in trouble he I'm gonna call him so but basically we're talking again

44:14he's arguing that Massachusetts rules of civil procedure rule 25b argument and he's arguing the law which is Commonwealth versus Vladimir it's a let him or it's a 1979 case in the law states that that a judge shall enter a finding of not guilty if the evidence is insufficient and as a matter of law you know they have to consider to I'm like lose my my my the law states sorry that a judge shall enter a finding of not guilty if the evidence is insufficient as a matter of law to sustain a conviction on the charge so that's ladder more and he's arguing for a directed verdict I mean basically renewing his motion for a directed verdict asking the judge to consider the light and the light is the evidence in most favourable to the Commonwealth and again he's just guiding his eyes and crossing his teeth so here he's arguing you know he's arguing the facts

45:15like the the the the the facts as to whether she did it or not and then he also argued that the Commonwealth didn't present enough evidence on the whether Lindsey Clancy was was sane or not right so so he's basically saying you know you can stop this trial you can stop all of this right now because there's no evidence that she actually did it and there's no evidence that she did not that she was a member commonwealth has a burden to prove beyond reasonable doubt that she was sane there's no evidence that she was sane and there's no way that he's saying are my doctor Reznik was just the best in the world very reliable but the two the two or three schmucks the worthy experts for the Commonwealth they're not reliable so you can actually dismiss this right here and now and end it be under rule 25b but there's no way the judge would do that but I I can see what he's doing is he's arguing both for purposes of this motion and that's why I think people

46:17heard that first part of it and were like oh god we use he pointing the finger at Patrick and no he wasn't he was just doing the best for his client and Margaret let me ask save this question will come to this for a judge mues and a second but Margaret I don't think anyone was expecting Kevin Reddington to argue the way he did yesterday so you've got to be on your toes as a prosecutor and ADA Shannon Buckingham she called the she just bounces up I mean I think she's doing they're doing a good job too and she just called his argument quote unquote laughable saying the record is voluminous supporting the lunz Lindsey Clancy killed the children she wasn't you know there might be another prosecutor who might be intimidated by a guy turning 76 he's tried just about every type of criminal defense case in the Commonwealth but she just got up and said look this is laughable um so what does the judge do with that well I also think that she said listen he's stipulated to to this in in the first trial he stipulated to the to the idea that

47:19she she she admitted that she killed her kids so you know judge this this is she he's laughable it's basically ridiculous but then she went through and she did argue um her side of the motion which was simply there was enough evidence that um she pointed actually I remember to the DNA she said there is DNA evidence and that Lindsey Clancy's DNA was found on the ends of the exercise bands which is shows that she's the one that pulled them so she did go through some of that evidence I don't know if she was prepared to do that but then of course she said as far as Lindsey is the sanity the um we had experts who formed the opinion that she was knew what she was doing at the times as she knew that what she was doing was wrong and then she pointed to the rational behavior of Lindsey just prior to and after the event so she did come up with enough evidence certainly for the judge decide the motion in her favor yeah yeah I would agree with that for sure um judge

48:22muse to you there was just a question from Beth then and it's a good one and it's sort of simple which are usually the best questions there it is how does bifurcation help the defense is it because they now essentially you've got two facets to a case it's instead of one is that why they're approved for the government you got to prove both both sides well as the practical matter I mean as a as a general matter I think it would say it's always helpful to be able to separate the issues it doesn't mean it would have to go to to a a separate jury although it could as a general rule it can be helpful to the defense because you're isolating and kind of pigeonholing exactly with the facts and issues will be and it gives gives you a lot of guidance plus if you don't hit if you don't get number one causation then you don't have to reach number two which is the criminal responsibility I don't understand how it would benefit this particular case if we had a rule that permitted bifurcation because as I said earlier I think the entire case is is blended

49:27together that the jury should hear how horrible and it's painful for me to even say it but for how also horrible these children died because it's so out of the box for the mother that loved the children and I mean Kevin Reddick had made a point to say watch this picture of the family together in 30 or 60 days later this is the result and how did it happen is what his question was and he answered it for the jury by saying that she had this psychosis that resulted from post-podum conditions etc and in that she is a bona fide candidate for that diagnosis so to answer the question I don't I don't see how it would be helpful in a future trial and I don't and I don't and as Jay indicated earlier it's not required and and from a strategic point of view I don't see how it would be helpful but with that last question I'm gonna have to jump out only because I

50:29committed to this time period and I have some responsibilities to a wonderful wife and a family that I've been pushing down but you know we will we will get you back on soon but when is game two tonight by the way gentlemen yes it is it's a depressing thought fortunately I'm on the plane tonight to Europe and that's why I'm departing and I'm looking to be aware so I will not be able to witness yeah save yeah hey Chris remember though when when the Redsox or when the Yankees are up three nil three nothing the Redsox went for an arose so no I know I know a lot of that those are happy days but you know those those were those brief moments in the sun this is a storm this is a situation with the northeast stuff so well safe travels judge hey thank you all I appreciate my good nice to see you this new fashion way Jay I'll see you soon and Joe I'll hope to come back to see you again 100% safe trip 7 million Californians depend on community

51:33health clinics for their care but proposition 44 cuts billions from clinics under 44 hundreds of clinics will close and health services will be eliminated that's why prop 44 is opposed by nurses doctors and patients vote no on the clinic shutdown proposition no on 44 ad paid for by no on prop 44 stop the attack on patients and community health clinics sponsored by California primary care association advocates ad committees top funders ultimate health services in California primary care association advocates I don't know about you but I get pretty excited when football season rolls around that's why I always make a stop at total wine and more before kickoff whether it's craft bourbon cold beer or ready to drink cocktails it's easy to build a lineup that keeps everyone happy and when I'm getting everything ready for game day it's nice knowing I'm getting the lowest prices make total wine and more part of your game day tradition spirits are not sold in Virginia in North Carolina drink responsibly be 21 avoiding your unfinished home projects because you're not sure where to start thumbtack knows homes so you don't have to don't know the difference between matte paint finish and satin or what that clunking sound from your dryer is with thumbtack you don't

52:37have to be a home pro you just have to hire one you can hire top rated pros see price estimates and read reviews all on the app download today there he is judge muse feel like he's uh you know like you're hanging with the Kennedys when you're hanging with judge muse it's uh one in the same it feels like but uh judge j to you judge j's uh New Yorker or not that I'm a jersey guy but New York jersey same difference um so rule 25 like like Margaret I'm a New Yorker who came to Boston and state yeah yeah you're there you're there um see now look at this let me bring this up to COE uh when she says this I'm loving the Boston vibe she's really saying I'm loving the Kennedy hyana support vibe I'm loving Jay look it took some take these takes the comment down right away loving the JFK junior vibe uh judge Blitzman uh so what is the so he basically took it under advisement the rule 25 directive verdict uh in your opinion what is the chance that that uh

53:42gets ruled in the affirmative and then let's go on to also um Marty Weinberg double jeopardy same thing that is going to be argued on November 2nd um he's the best of the best but it's uh these are both extreme uphill battles correct so I agree with Margaret uh unsurprisingly that uh I'm surprised the 25 the rule 25 motion is uh it's a long shot I mean uh and judge muse commented on this as well circumstantial evidence uh is every bit as probative as direct evidence jurors are told when they're in paddled in a jury you'll hear two types of evidence direct evidence when somebody sees something or hears something uh uh witnesses to something and circumstantial evidence we your draw inferences each one it can be as as compelling as the other we as lay people when we hear the phrase oh a circumstantial case that that doesn't mean anything well it's really not

54:46the case so I think heaven really is preserving the record uh and as as regards the uh as regards this uh the uh you know can you have it both ways can you say well uh I didn't do it but if I did do it I was insane uh ordinarily we say that's you know that's that doesn't make sense that's counterintuitive in fact the classic opening line in an insanity defense is something like this ladies and gentlemen this is not a question of who committed the crime it's a question of why was the crime committed that's the classic textbook opening line in a criminal responsibility defense now I don't uh I'm not aware of what Kevin opened with it might have been something in that ballpark I don't know uh I think technically he's he's right in terms of his legal argument that while there's strong circumstantial evidence is argued by the DA's in the case she did not explicitly confess

55:51she is saying by reason of her mental illness that she has no memory of what it happened so I mean that's that's how Kevin is trying to thread the needle I don't think it's a winning argument I think as I indicated in the beginning he's making it in part to preserve the record maybe he invisions changing the way these cases are tried in this state but uh I think the uh as regards your other question about the double jeopardy argument that goes back to the whole juror inquiry and I think bringing in Marty Weinberg who was an expert in this area he was seated at council table with the Kevin uh yesterday uh obviously as part of that endeavor as I indicated he worked with he worked on the Karen Reed defense uh in a similar way though I don't think uh that defense will prevail I think the issue I think that ship sort of sailed

56:51when judge Sullivan covered his bases when he exercised his discretion to bring all 12 jurors in and ask them if they could follow his jury instructions on a reasonable doubt and then re-instructed unreasonable doubt now there are some people who would wish and argued that what Kevin Sullivan excuse me not Kevin Selvaye Paula which Sullivan should have done was to conduct a voidier of all 12 jurors then uh prior uh I mean when I say then I mean at the time that the first juror note came in about jurors saying that there was a juror who had a doubt but would not follow the reasonable doubt instruction then as we know Judge Sullivan uh focused on the word the word reasonable as opposed to reasonable doubt uh after he had uh and then conducted or conducted uh that interview of the 12 jurors it was a very very perfunctory examination that was

57:52the issue that went to the single justice just when let decline to intervene she felt that Judge Sullivan did not abuse his discretion and not wanting to go further into the sanctity of the jury room the deliberative process and I think uh while other judges in that situation might have conducted a voidier of all 12 I think when I say that ship is sailed I think it's very very unlikely that our Supreme Judicial Court is going to find that Judge Sullivan abused his discretion and that's the standard it's not a question of whether or not Judge Mews or I or uh or you Margaret if you were a judge would have exercised your discretion in a different way it's a question did he abuse his discretion and that's a very very high burden to overcome uh I think the more interesting ground is going to be potentially and we don't know this that's what makes this interesting

58:53what did this hold out your actually say or did not include on that juror questionnaire form because if he had indicated and you don't you know you could serve on a jury if you have a restraining order against you you could serve on your on a jury if you have a conviction um but would that if and I don't know maybe he did fill out the juror questionnaire but how do you feel that out accurately perhaps that would have led to a a vetting of that juror before in panelman and if there was any if there was a centella of any bias against women or any domestic violence history uh there's a strong chance well there's not a strong chance we know that Attorney Reddington would have patchfully been arguing that he not be seated for cause and even if that didn't happen he probably would have exercised one of his preemptory challenges each side is a lot automatic challenges to jurors provided that they're not race-based so that to me is is is is the

59:56more interesting avenue and I don't know I mean I don't know what he what that juror put on the juror questionnaire did he answer that did he answer the questions or did he leave it blank did he uh did he answer them dishonestly I have no opinion I have no idea so I'm sort of in a way and see if in fact uh he did uh disemble meaning if he was dishonest in some way or didn't answer it I think that is more provocative uh and I think that would really create a real real conundrum a real problem as to how to proceed because you know now that this that juror that juror's been discharged there's no remedy other than the remedy that Duredington and Weinberger arguing for if in fact uh including that juror uh allowing him to be on the panel if he had a bias that was undetected uh had a substantial effect on the outcome then they actually have a very interesting

1:00:57double jeopardy argument but that's really really speculative we don't know yet uh and that's why I'm really intrigued to see what's going to come up come up during this uh November 2nd hearing what do you think Margaret well I think you're absolutely right and I it's interesting because if in fact he he was truthful and he checked the box that he was arrested before and he was subject to an order with domestic uh restraining order then Kevin Reddington already saw it right so that'll be interesting to me the other interesting thing that nobody's really raised and uh maybe maybe I'm wrong about this but it makes me think I've seen some interviews with the spokesperson for this juror and that person has said that the juror is very very uh religious I guess very Catholic and remember that mortal sin thing that came out like twice yeah um is you know could you make the argument right that well by the prosecution brought up mortal sin improperly and this guy

1:02:01so religious so Catholic that maybe that's why he's he just couldn't do it right he had to vote um well that's really that's really uh that's really uh interesting Margaret I like that I like this it's very insightful and and there's an example of how how a curative instruction to a jury meaning disregard the elephant in the room disregard the inflammatory or improper comedy you just heard really doesn't work with real people you can't pretend you can't unhear something and uh and that and and it may who knows I mean that's interesting that's that's yeah I would at least if I'm writing ten I would at least bring that up and one in emotion and you know who knows where that could go but um if he yeah and I keep going back to if the juror did lie on his questionnaire and of course writing to him would have liked to have possibly dismiss him for cause what is the remedy here will double jeopardy attach um in this

1:03:05particular case normally as you said the remedy would be a mistrial do a do a do over but it's very interesting I I don't know I think the um it'll be quite a a unique legal argument I can't wait for November 2nd I couldn't wait for yesterday and now I'm what can't wait for November 2nd my own thoughts are if you're if you're gonna vet this juror I think you have to vet the other 11 too if you can do it that way but let me um I've got two other pieces or one of them we're gonna end with the loan holdout but uh if I don't play the videos uh I will get uh he in the house because uh the COE's pulling uh uh the video so let me let me let me this is now Kevin Reddington after court and then we'll uh whip through a couple other things very quickly here we go and what do you make out of the cabinet spot that the gag war is there for a file what are you doing I'm doing all right how you doing anything on the gag war I think they they've come up with this okay look I am really tired of reading that I am attacking this juror I am ripping the juror I

1:04:11am shredding the juror I'm not doing anything with the juror I filed a motion weeks ago based on what was reported by the four lady and as amplified by the other gentleman didn't indicate it about the scrolling it's not my fault that the juror deals with this guy from Houston who is not a serious president um who ends up making statements repeatedly continuously just fanning the flames to hear himself talk and keeps talking about the juror in hiding as he's looking at 400 grand apparently on his go fund me going ahead and he making statements please I am not attacking anyone they're really tired of it so I don't need any gag orders either Kevin what's Lindsay's reaction to today I don't expect a vote for his reaction to you I mean how do you feel

1:05:19the rule of 25 the motion has failed with double-deafs and what why would it be different this time you have to judge Kevin will you ask for a bifurcated trial if this goes to a retrial I would would had you hope they move a little bit further along today than it did that's up to the judge I know Kevin how do you like the new bronco Kevin how do you like the new bronca by the way have the exact same car in the exact same color I'll just bounce right this is now the lone juror here he did speak he provided a video statement to Sean Hannity of all people this is Michael Desfernaville the lone hold out we are not outing him because his name has been out there for weeks now but here we go there's a Michael Peggy Deserunville also known as the lone juror I know the whole focus has been on me

1:06:22but we want to reel everything back and put the focus on the three angels that is at hand the ones that can't speak for themselves the ones that can't defend themselves and the one that can't fight the battles and those are Kora Dawson and Callin a little bit about me I want to thank God for my Catholic faith see I want to thank God for blessing me with the ability to love my daughter and I'm foremost I would like to thank everyone every individual they have support me throughout this difficult situation your prayers your emotional support yes a like psychological support is a tremendous to my heart that I feel that I sense that I know I do want to thank you from the bottom of my heart thank you all right Margaret you get the first shot at this first you see Reddington saying I'm tired of being told that I'm singling this guy

1:07:27out he in his mind he's just doing what he needs to do and then you've got this lone hold out juror saying yeah you know I just want the focus to be on the three children 7 million Californians depend on community health clinics for their care but Proposition 44 cuts billions from clinics under 44 hundreds of clinics will close and health services will be eliminated that's why Prop 44 is opposed by nurses doctors and patients vote no on the clinic shutdown proposition no on 44 ad paid for by no on Prop 44 stop the attack on patients and community health clinics sponsored by California Primary Care Association advocates ad committees top funders ultimate health services in California Primary Care Association advocates I'll admit it I'm one of those people who gets excited for football season way before the first kickoff that's why a trip to total wine and more has become part of my game day routine I can get the cooler ready with my favorite beers and ready to drink cocktails I'm usually picking up enough for everybody so it's nice knowing I'm scoring the lowest prices this season make total wine and more part of your

1:08:29game day tradition spirits are not sold in Virginia and North Carolina drink responsibly B 21 I'm pretty confident talking into a mic hey I'm doing it right now but home projects a second guess everything is that noise normal is that water damage who do I even call that's where thumb tack comes in just upload a photo or voice note and it uses AI powered search to match you with the right top rated local pro so instead of guessing you get clarity and can hire with confidence for your next home project try thumbtack hire the right pro today yeah and then he said he emphasizes faith in God and you know I know there's a lot of Catholics in this area and all that but I think it's an interesting thing to explore I mean how I mean how can I don't know how how much you can explore that though because you've got the sanctity of the jury but now he's come out so did I don't know I mean I actually have to ask Judge Blisman what do you think is there any way

1:09:30to explore if his religious because there's a separation of church and state so that mortal sin could that have made a difference here with this one juror well again that's really provocative um I don't know I think there's going to be I mean I think this is uh first of all addressing what reddinton said in terms of his being attacked he's not the person who outed this individual it was not attorney reddinton who revealed his identity he never would have done that he couldn't have done that he couldn't could have lost his ticket to practice law if he had done that it was a local Boston TV station so a lot of the attacks for how uh this will uh this doxing doxing jurors will intimidate people from wanting to do their civic duty from serving uh I don't think that's a trivial to a defense attorney who zealously doing his job uh and I think he's right when he said

1:10:35that he's the motions he has filed uh have been based solely on what was presented in the court room he's not the one that has shared this gentleman's identity um you know the uh I could understand having heard him speak now uh perhaps why he was a holdout he has sincere beliefs he has strong convictions and each one of us are entitled to them uh with those uh beliefs uh affected by uh what the judge agreed was an improper comment by the prosecutor about moral sin that could be part of the limited juror inquiry to me again it goes back to this really I'm not saying a case of this complexity is simple but in spite of everything that gentleman just said a question I would ask him and I would never do it in public I would only do it if I was the judge in this in the in the in the privacy of an in-camera proceeding uh meaning just with the

1:11:41attorneys not the public um in which I focused on the juror questionnaire uh was that filled out honestly back to me is a simple question now if the juror questionnaire is blank regarding that information that speaks for itself uh after the statement after the fact uh statements about uh belief etc don't change that reality then again and and so you know I think Margaret what I have to believe there's a question about that because had the had that questionnaire been filled out accurately I got a hunch they would have a substantial question of what whether this gentleman would have been in paddled in the first instance right once he was in paddle any sitting juror is entitled to and should follow the uh their convictions should follow the evidence

1:12:41here she's but judge what if he tells you in that in-camera hearing that you have that he didn't filled out honestly or truthfully then what then I think you got a uh you know then you got a bit of a CF you know uh yeah a cluster you know yeah yeah yeah and then and then and then that becomes the issue then then the attorneys gonna argue then they're gonna argue that the the there was not manifest necessity uh to have declared a mistrial uh and then retrying him a retrying excuse me a misclansy functionally would be double jeopardy that would be it that would be an interesting I mean finding the gentleman two thousand dollars that you know who cares about that you know the issue is did did his beat would what he had been seated on that juror and uh did that cause substantial uh did that substantially affect the outcome of the verdict that would be a dilemma

1:13:42yeah uh real quick since uh Texas boy mama b just reminded me uh no show tomorrow got family obligations friday one o'clock calm the oldest shoe crime podcaster in america my mother who and I was talking a lot yesterday and she sent me a voicemail stop talking and I posted that voicemail on Instagram then she said because you get the text now through AI she called me she said why would you post a private voicemail I said I wrote a book about you and every chapter begins with a voice message from you uh so why would you think any differently but she's joining me one o'clock friday and so along with the woman named Sarah Reeves Sarah Reeves is a member of the church that calip Flynn and a lay a botaner and Ashley Flynn went to so uh she and she has not wonderful things to say about what was going on behind the scenes there so she's going to join carman i friday at one but no show tomorrow and uh steep call and working to get some uh calip Flynn

1:14:44jurors and uh maybe even calip Flynn's parents so we're working on all of that so I appreciate Texas boy mama bee uh reminding me to bring that up uh marga real quick there's two other things that were tabled uh yesterday limited relief from impounded records uh some juror-related material remain sealed and impounded and the defense said they want some limited access he says I'll deal with that November second and also this is interesting uh Kevin Reddington uh wants juror notes uh I don't know if this is reddington or because a Boston Globe also had yeah lawyer there but juror notes and sidebars I think they want uh in the public and that's also tabled uh what's going to happen with that I mean this is now everyone wants everything public yeah I think they're they're specifically talking about those two notes that the jury four person sent in about the one juror not being able to being unable to follow the law and reasonable doubt so I think they want to see that I'm not sure if the attorneys have seen that yet and I think they're also looking for

1:15:49the recordings of the sidebar conference that that went on at that time so uh the Globe feels that it's in the public's interest that they should be able that we should all be able to see that in the interest of justice I don't think that will be allowed uh possibly maybe the uh you know I don't and I'd say maybe the attorneys will be allowed to see them only in camera but not the public we're not the attorney the attorneys have seen the impound the impound the notes and the impound the notes are part of the trial record that the appeal will be looking at I think right allowing those into the public domain uh would be questionable I doubt it's going to happen under the under the first amendment even the public's right to know uh uh I think given the sensitivity of this issue uh and the fact that these motions are pending regarding those notes I think underline uh the sensitivity of the issue you know and the public courts and trial courts are really really reluctant

1:16:54to pry into the deliberative process unless there's a strong invitation to look in and you know that was exactly the issue uh that was raised by that first juror note it wasn't a question you know questions are usually read out in court this wasn't no this was saying hey look this uh this one juror is not following the reasonable doubt instruction low it low he has a doubt again we keep coming back to that uh that uh that didn't cut it understandably for Judge Sullivan because the note didn't say that he had a reasonable doubt but was not following the reasonable doubt instruction uh that for that first note indicated that they were statements made to the other jurors and now the other jurors come forward unfortunately after the fact after they were just charged and said yes he was saying he had a reasonable doubt so could something can the case turn on something so semantical it's not being reasonable doubt on that first note but you know it

1:17:56will be hard again for uh the the the public court to say that given the information that Judge Sullivan had in the moment that he didn't that he abused his discretion so to me the ball game comes back to this uh you know what the this big issue of how did he fill out the juror questioner and by the way you know I've read a lot of these articles uh in the globe now you know criticizing uh the doxing the outing of this juror uh uh you know whether or not I think the focus should be on whether and at the media should have identified this gentleman I agree not not not and I think that's that's that's a necessary conversation but it's but it's but attacking attacking the lawyers on who were trying to do their job under incredible pressure uh yeah I you know in large park as I was a trial attorney before I was a judge uh I don't think that's I don't think that's

1:19:00uh I don't think that's appropriate yeah I agree with you 100% yeah let let's let's end on this here so uh I said that end with a lonehold out juror this is essentially what uh just a rile everyone up on the way out uh Michael Desternaville the uh lonehold out juror this this is what Kevin Reddington wants he wants and by the way I'll I'll preface it by saying there was a comment in the chat that said look I don't if I'm called for jury duty I don't ever want to be a juror because of what just happened so Kevin Reddington wants a led cell phone used during deliberations his confidential juror questionnaire whether the questionnaire answers were truthful his conduct during deliberations he but he literally wants to see the phone mark right you know he wants to access the phone the only way uh I think that that is a reasonable request is if eleven other jurors have to go through the same process and even then I don't think it's

1:20:02reasonable because now you're impacting potential jury pools not just in the commonwealth but all over the country I mean yeah I guess if I'm a first amendment attorney I'm arguing you know no way this is this is there right um but what's going how's this all going to end Margaret because it's got a ripple effect well beyond uh limit county well beyond the commonwealth uh in your final thoughts well my my thought on that is first of all I don't think that we we should be looking into their phones regardless but I was I also served on a jury in Massachusetts a federal and the federal juror I swear I had to hand my phone in um as I recall it was back in 2009 but I don't think they should have them at all in the deliberation room during the trial or during deliberations what's when you walk in a federal court they take it right away but go that's what I mean I don't know if they yeah because I was a juror again back in 2009 but I remember we did not have our phones but I think it's just too much of a risk that somebody is going to google

1:21:06something extraneous or you know what if what if somebody's googling what's postpartum psychosis versus postpartum depression so that would not be right but just take the phones away it's kind of nice not to have a phone yeah by the way uh Caleb Flynn yesterday when they went to deliberate for the four minutes that they deliberated the judge said make sure the bailiff gets your phones before you go into the room so no hi oh they're taking them good yeah yeah um so there you go that's Margaret McClain by the way you better please I don't say better often but you better like and subscribe to her youtube channel because she's up in this a lot it's the Margaret McClain show but I just want to underscore that look you can't I don't think you can just single out the lonehold out chair you get to do this for him you got to do it for all 12 on the jury uh his honor Jay Blitzman a Yankees fan by the way ordered my son their heart to get I had a search high and low but I just got my son the Aaron judge high top air Jordan cleats for Yankees

1:22:12uniform all rise for the judge all rise for that judge and we will rise for you as well Jay Blitzman you get the final word here on how this all continues to play out well my final words are it's been great to be on the show again and especially great to meet you Margaret a lot of fun and I I really enjoyed some of your your comments very provocative I'm thinking about that moral sin thing a lot good at least I I was I had a call today so I was worried I'm like oh no I'm I'm with two judges my head's not right so you're calling what did you do to me but thank you I enjoyed being on with both of you it was great and of course I was Joel but you have the best guest Joel you really do thank you thanks thanks thanks to a team effort here so I appreciate it shout out to the mods by the way no show tomorrow back Friday with Carm she's back so join us there's a few people one name Carm Oprah Elvis Carm join us in love y'all see see you Friday

1:23:22you seven million Californians depend on community health clinics for their care but Proposition 44 cuts billions from clinics under 44 hundreds of clinics will close and health services will be eliminated that's why Prop 44 is opposed by nurses doctors and patients vote no on the clinic shutdown proposition no on 44 ad paid for by no on prop 44 stop the attack on patients and community health clinics sponsored by California Primary Care Association Advocates ad committees top funders ultimate health services in California Primary Care Association Advocates