The Lindsay Clancy Jurors' Shocking Admissions

0:00Hello. Sorry, we're booked out at least three weeks. Yep, sorry. Another one you had to turn away? Yeah, third one today. And I'm not going to have the available cash or time to hire more help until after busy season. I don't think you can wait. Got any ideas? Get business financing through Capitas. Easy application, no hidden fees, and really fast funding. Oh yeah? How fast are we talking here? This little is 24 hours. You know, let me call that guy back. Stop turning down work. Start growing. Get the funding you need at capitas.com. Welcome to the 3 Martini lunch. Grab a stool next to Greg Corumbas of Radio America and Jim Garrity of National Review. 3 Martini's coming up. So glad you're with us for the 3 Martini lunch. It is Wednesday and Jim. We closed yesterday with the chaser of Lindsay Clancy's attorney saying that he was asking President Trump for a pardon. We pointed out that these are state charges, not federal charges. Not much the President Trump can do about that.

1:02But Kevin Reddington saying in a subsequent interview, apparently, that he's really just asking Trump to put pressure on the prosecutor not to retry this case, which we'll get to end just a second. But kind of the story really getting attention from yesterday is the fact that a number of the jurors have spoken out now. Three of them gathered together to speak with a local station in Boston, and then another one did so anonymously. Two of these comments, and there's actually a lot of them that are getting a lot of attention. But here's the jury for a woman talking about how she thought the holdout juror had finally relented and she was so excited to pronounce the not guilty word. He had reasonable doubt. He admitted he had reasonable doubt. After we watched that video of the interview, I think that's when it was. He admitted he had reasonable doubt. And I started filling out the forms. I was so excited. I actually did with three forms I had a fill out, and I started filling them out. I wrote my signature on each one. And then he said, but I'm still not going to say that she's not guilty by reason of

2:06incident. And so we'll see if this holdout juror ever speaks about this. My guess is he probably won at least for a while. But I don't know that he would necessarily use the term reasonable. They probably said he had some doubt. But however that goes, the woman who's probably really regretting speaking out yesterday on camera is this woman. We read to him on numerous occasions the definition of a reasonable doubt from Judge Sullivan's instruction. He actually said one day in the end, well why don't we have the judge come in and read it again? And we were like, no, we have it in front of us. We don't need that. And we would highlight it. And so and so, this is the definition of a reasonable doubt. But he had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children. Yeah, you just just stuck on that part about how Lindsay viciously killed her kids so weird that he would focus on that point. The juror that did not go and put her name on the record, she's still anonymous to some

3:08extent, saying that she was originally going to vote to convict, but then was convinced that acquittal was the best way for Lindsay to get help. And perhaps the thing that was most revealing is that she said multiple jurors on both sides seemed pretty clear that they had their minds made up from the get go here. So Jim, what do you make of all this? Well, first of all, regarding Reddington's gamble that by calling for a pardon that Trump legally can't give, that really, it looks like this is basically trying to get it on President Trump's radar screen. President Trump talked about it very briefly on Friday during an availability with reporters. He basically just said it was a very sad situation. There was certainly no indication that Trump had any interest in intervening in any way. But I figure if you're Reddington, it's a low risk high potential reward scenario in which you try to put this on the President's radar screen, somehow convince him that this is a, you know, travesty of justice and that Lindsey Clancy, I don't know if he's going to say that she was prosecuted by sleepy Joe.

4:09I don't know if he's going to say that, you know, she's really into crypto. Like, like, just try to play up to Trump's sympathies and see if you can get Trump to call up the local DA and say, you shouldn't put her through another trial. I think the odds of Trump doing this are exceptionally low, probably like 5%. But if you're Reddington, why not try the Hill Mary Pass? Why not, you know, like what do you have to lose by doing this? And I would say like most, in most scenarios, it's unthinkable the President would do this with Trump. It's highly unlikely, but he pardons people, he commutes people. We've seen if you get the right person into, you know, whispering into Trump's ear, he can be convinced of this sort of thing. So it's not, it's not nearly as crazy and moronic as it seemed yesterday. If this is kind of the ricochet bank shot, if you get Trump to put some sort of pressure on the local DA, who by the way is a Republican. I, I, you know, I don't think it's going to work. As for the jurors, during the trial, Greg, when you and I were talking about this, we heard about people saying, oh, it's 11 to 1. Some of the jurors are wearing pink.

5:09It means they sympathize with Lindsey Clancy. And my attitude was, you never know what's going on inside of jury room. You never know what's going on inside of jurors' mind. So this was all kind of premature. Well, it's now no longer premature. They have gone on the NBC affiliate up in Boston and done that interview and Greg. I have seen more logical reasoning and clearer, tougher judgments from care bears. This, this is just, like, this lived down to every stereotype of a presumably liberal, middle-aged or older woman from the Massachusetts area. I'm not going to make talk about the forms and the way that, you know, the, the, the pronunciation there. And I think the clips you played were pretty bad, but there were even worse ones in the one who kept coming up, kept emphasizing how the prosecutor was harsh on a woman who had already admitted she had murdered three or four children, strangled them, right? One by one. Yeah, there was no compassion from the district attorney or the prosecutor.

6:09Are prosecutors supposed to be, the other things, at one point, she lamented that the prosecutor was biased. This is not news reporting. This is not like what, you know, the judge is supposed to be unbiased. The jurors are supposed to be unbiased. And boy, after this interview, there are reasons to wonder about that. But like the prosecutor is not, I want the prosecutor to have a strong point of view of what happened and how the jury should, that's kind of in the job description. I don't, and, and so it was just utterly baffling that these, with these women just lived down to every stereotype. Now, they had the choice to render their verdict. And by the way, if it had said something more along the lines of the fact that she took these actions is clear, but under Massachusetts law, where the prosecutor has to prove the sanity of the defendant, I felt like I had no, like, you could at least see the logic there. But when you keep emphasizing about how harsh the prosecutor was and how Lindsey Clancy deserved compassion, that really makes me think you went into this with a really excessive

7:13empathy, you know, some would say toxic or suicidal empathy towards the defendant in this situation. This interview will do damage to the faith in the US criminal justice system. Now here's the thing, you and I are old enough, we remember OJ, right? We remember cases where people thought, oh, this is definitely going to be, you know, the jury, the evidence is overwhelming and the jury comes out and comes out with a different decision. And let's find out this was a hung jury, not a hung defendant. And we're going to, you know, there's probably going to be a second trial. Ed Moore, see over a hot air is speculating that what we're seeing from Reddington is this effort to basically taint the jury pool as much as possible to basically make this as high profile, bring the political lightning rod of Donald Trump into it. He's clearly, you know, but the only thing I don't quite get with Ed is that like Trump is very unpopular in Massachusetts. As any Republican is. So it's kind of a question of like how would appealing to Trump to pardon her, make jurors more, I don't quite get the logic there.

8:15But, but either way, I think that this is, I, a lot of people in my world are buzzing about this interview. And again, I think before they came out and made, by the way, people say, oh, you know, these women had to, you know, be on a jury for seven weeks and it was really rough. Hey, you know what? They made the decision to sit down for this interview. They sat down for the interview and walked through their decision making and really seemed to believe that they were being very persuasive and understandable and that everything, you know, that everything they were saying was logical and clear. And it isn't at all. And I think they look like they went into it with way too much empathy and just a knee jerk skepticism of everything the prosecutor said. And this stunning, one point they said, the prosecution didn't prove that she was a bad mother. She wasn't a trial for being a bad mother. She was a trial for three counts of murder that she already confessed to, you know, I, it is utterly baffling. And so it is, you know, I thought we were done with this story late last week. And I think this interview has the power, has the potential to make this a much more lingering

9:16cultural memory in Americans lack of faith and other Americans capacity to serve on a jury. Exactly. So yeah, when you're like, the prosecution wasn't compassionate enough towards the defendant. It's almost like the OJ jury where a couple of them are like, well, we didn't want more riots in LA. So we, we acquitted, well, that's, that's not your job in this case. And so the prosecution's biggest failure was jury selection. It seems like in this case and some others. Greg, who they reject. Yeah, that's a good question. Unbelievable. All right. Well, let's get that bad taste out of our mouth. And for that, there's no better source than Lorine Coal. Lorine Coal is better for you chewing gum that uses the same mineral your teeth are made of to support daily enamel health. Greg, we may never understand the minds of jurors, but we can understand nanohydroxyapatite. Yes, nanohydroxyapatite is the mineral that your enamel is actually made of. And Lorine Coal's strengthen your enamel and repair any damage to it. It comes in tons of flavors, including mint, cinnamon, bubblegum and berry, and they have

10:17a really great fluoride-free toothpaste as well. Yeah, I love the raincoat, the toothpaste. I love the raincoat, the gum, the pieces seem small. And you're like, is this going to be enough to give me good flavor for a long time? Absolutely does. A great recommendation there on the gum. And it improves your teeth at the same time. What's better than that? So right now Lorine Coal is offering our listeners up to 50% off at buy Lorine.com slash 3ml. That's buy Lorine LAR, ian.com slash 3ml for 50% off. Listen, as students and young adults, interview all respected CEOs on our national radio show, www.leaders.org to learn secrets for success and how to use them to propel their careers. This was super interesting and especially to see that everything can lead to something else like a cooking lid, do you to be the founder, the president of a business and even like your activities in high school, middle school, like led to this moment. Adeline, what are you looking to do with the rest of your life? You have a sense of that? No, not really, but I'm exploring a lot of interests right now and enjoy music and languages,

11:21so I think maybe something in that area. Right, somebody that's interested in languages and music, do you think there's any hope for them? Oh my gosh, I mean in our world today everybody speaks different languages and they work with people that speak different languages, they have different cultures. That's great. To hear more and to help us introduce your high school, GED, Work Ready and College students to our CEOs, visit our website at realworldleaders.org. That's real world leaders that O-R-G. Well Jim, if Mr. Reddington is looking for a response from President Trump on influencing the DA or I'm sorry, the Commonwealth's attorney up there in Massachusetts, he's probably at least going to have to wait till after the Republicans midterm convention, which begins tonight in Dallas. It's a two day affair, usually a national convention is four days, but midterms, two days seems quite enough. Trump will speak on both nights, JD Vance, I believe will speak at least once and then a lot of the candidates, both incumbents and challenging candidates will be out there

12:21as well. On the surface, Jim, this doesn't seem like a terrible idea necessarily. It's always hard for the president's party to have a lot of momentum in the midterm election season. Their president's been, you know, the target of a lot of criticism from the left and from the media for a long time. So this is your chance to get your message out unfiltered. The problem is a couple different things. Number one, they're going smash up head to head against the start of the NFL season. Tonight is Patriots in the Seahawks and then tomorrow night you've got Rams 49ers from out in Australia. So a lot of people are going to be focusing on that. Secondly, they've got a little bit of a dilemma. On the one hand, they want to feature Trump prominently because there's a lot of Trump voters that didn't necessarily show up for the midterms in 2018 and 2022. And Obama had the same problem. Happens all the time. But at the same time, Trump's approval ratings are in the mid-30s in a lot of polls. And so other people you want to vote for you might not love that so much. So what's your take on the mini convention here? Well, when I first heard about this, I was like, oh, you know, this is an interesting idea. It is kind of strange that we have the conventions and presidential years.

13:24The midterms, which are almost as consequential. There is no national event saying this is what we are. This is what we've done. This is what we stand for. This is what we want to do. Ever since 1994, people have said, ah, why don't Republicans come up with another contract with America? And the idea of having a very clear national brand identity for your party makes a lot of sense. So I was open to it. Well, when I saw this was up against not one, but two nights of the start of the NFL season. And you and I could rant about the decision to play a game in Australia, which is Thursday night's game is that, you know, like that's a whole separate thing. But like, that's a terrible idea. Like you're, you know, it's not like you're expecting huge ratings for this. You know, most Americans are in a comes to prime time or not interested in watching a bunch of politicians speak. But nonetheless, this is just not a, like, oh, you're, you're, you already, I don't understand what I couldn't have done this the previous week. I don't understand why they can't do this next week. It just seems like a very odd timing. The other thing, which is at least on the announced list of speakers, I suppose, has a chance that they change between now and then Trump is speaking twice.

14:24As you said, Vance is supposed to speak the second night. Other speakers over the nights will include Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Attorney General Todd Blanch, HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr., Mehmet Oz, the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare services, Caroline Levitt, Scott Turner and Donald Trump Jr. Hey, Greg, what offices are they running for? They're not on the ballot, right? And so my first thought was like, each one of those speakers is taking up air time from a candidate who probably could use the national exposure because you never know who's going to go up there, give a great speech, have a great moment and suddenly have this huge surge of fundraising and things like that. The other thing is that for obvious reasons, they have Republican leadership speaking, Mike Johnson, John Barrasso, Tim Scott, Steve Scalise. None of these guys are in competitive races and are ones who really, you know, need to worry about it too much. So you look over this list of speakers and it's like, are you, are you really spotlighting the ones who have the most to benefit from a national audience?

15:26And my suspicion isn't a lot in too many cases. No, I don't know if there's necessarily, I also kind of wonder if one night's versus two nights was such a good idea. The established precedent for a four-night convention in a, in a presidential year, if it's a current president, you do, you do Biden on the first night, so to speak. You do a former president on the second night. You do the vice presidential nominee, the third night, you're the presidential nominee, the fourth night. And this kind of this established rhythm to it. With this one, you probably could do this all in one night and you probably get more attention. I don't know if you get nearly as much attention on the two nights. But then the other thing is like, again, you're up against NFL football both nights. So I just kind of don't see, it feels like a good idea that is not being executed correctly. We'll see how it goes. We'll see how the ratings are. We'll see if any candidates come out of this with a huge surge of media coverage or donations or things like that. But it just feels like a bunch of odd decisions that are probably going to mitigate the effectiveness of an event like this. Yeah. C-SPAN will provide Gavill to Gavill coverage if you're interested and maybe they'll archive it.

16:27But the timing, why not next week? Last week, maybe you're bleeding into Labor Day Weekend or whatever, but there's no reason to make it. Go ahead to head with NFL football. You've been running into a Thursday night NFL game no matter when you do it, but that's more manageable than opening week where you know you got to work in our game. Tuesday night Wednesday night. Yeah. Monday night was with Labor Day. Okay. Although honestly, maybe everybody else was like, I don't know, it just kind of feels like a weird decision to pick these two nights. So the opportunities there articulate it well and stay on message would be my advice to everyone involved there. But we'll see how it goes. All right. In the meantime, ZackDack, making sure that you are in tip-top shape. Hopefully you're all cut up on your appointments. But maybe you need to go to a specialist in your natural, which one and people have recommended a couple different ones. Go to ZackDack. Look at all those reviews. See when the appointment's available there. Book it without having to call anyone. Look, ZackDack just lets you search and compare local in-network doctors and then book without even making a call. You know, Greg, if your midterm convention lasts more than four hours, you should see

17:28a doctor. And ZackDack lets you search and compare local in-network doctors, whatever insurance you have. They have more than 150,000 providers within more than 200 specialties across all 50 states. Their website has tons of reviews from real patients and detailed doctor profiles will help make sure you choose the one who's right for you. Look, your health matters. And taking care of yourself shouldn't be all that complicated. So find and book the right doctor with ZackDack. Head to ZackDack.com slash 3ML to get started and check that appointment off your to-do list. That's zoc. D-O-C dot com slash 3ML. All right, Jim, onto our third martini now. Big fight brewing on social media among different people on the right over the weekend. And it's still going to some extent. Vice President JD Vance, who we said, will be speaking at this midterm convention down in Dallas, has suggested the idea that federal dollars.

18:29That right now are set aside to help two working parents to free daycare costs ought to also be used to help families with a stay at home mom with rising costs. It's harder and harder for one parent to stay home, but that's a major priority for many families. And so Jim, some people are saying, look, as long as we're incentivizing money to help families, why not help these families? We can't really kill the program. So we might as well make sure that those with more traditional approach to work and staying at home can benefit from this as well. Others are saying, no, this is welfare expansion, basically. And so the real goal here should be to kind of scrap the program, let people get their tax dollars back and spend them how they want to. So I don't know that Vance is going to be able to codify this in any way, but there is the ability and the executive branch to kind of shuffle it around without congressional authorization. What do you expect to happen here in Howdy-City? I would characterize myself Greg as skeptical, but willing to hear more. We've only seen a couple of news articles about this.

19:32We haven't seen the actual text of how this would work out. One detail that just jumps out to me is, we've told you know, the idea of staying home to take care of a child, they haven't specified what child is. So is it anyone from zero to 18? Is it above a certain age? And, you know, I have a 16 year old. So if I can benefit, like it doesn't require nearly as much care as infants or toddlers or kindergartners or you're too adorable moppets, but nonetheless, if I could get, oh, okay, I'd be fine, that'd be great. But no, a bit more seriously, this would pay parents about $9,000 a year and per child. So if you got two kids at home, I might be like, this is not like a deduction in your taxes or something like that. This is a tax, this is like direct, here, why I'm from the government, here is your check. And I think if you're conservative, that should make you a little under. I'm not comfortable with this attitude of, well, big government is here to stay. So we might as well use it to reward our constituents and groups that support our party as opposed to groups that support the other party.

20:32When I see people say, look, because you know, you add, you basically, once you create this, you know, our experience of federal government, and I'll, all entitlement programs Greg is that this increases dependency upon the government. And once you enact it, it becomes absolutely impossible to ever repeal an extraordinarily difficult even trim in the slightest. 1994 welfare reform might be one of the few examples of that. And so I just look at this, and I feel like this is a deception, and when I hear the folks who are more populist, they say, of course, I'm not deceiving you. I'm engaging with you with the human being. Why would I deceive you? In honor of that age 24, this just feels like creating another entitlement that is likely to benefit a group of people who tend to vote Republican, but are not guaranteed to vote Republican. And the other thing which I, when you create something like this, you then, you know, almost always there's some sort of income cut off. And the question then is, have you now created a disincentive to take that promotion or or get that better paying job because then you're losing your $9,000 per kid payment from

21:33the federal government? I get, I'm willing to hear more. I realize this is, you know, at this point, we just kind of have the broad contours or sketch of this program. But I'm highly skeptical and this just kind of feels like, well, we can't fight big government, so we might as well use it to benefit people we like. And the tax code is tricky, but as we've said many times, and we're not certainly not the first ones to say it, whatever you tax, you're disincentivizing, whatever you, you know, give money to, you're incentivizing. And so, you know, we want to incentivize what works best for families across the board. We certainly want to make sure that if the goal is for one parent to be able to stay home that that's the case, but I think ideally you would want them to just get back as much of their own money as humanly possible and make that work rather than rely on a government program. But we'll see exactly how this works and whether the president actually moves forward on it. Right. Didn't the debt just passed 40 trillion? 40 trillion. Right. Like one of those, like where, you know, I realized some of this is existing money in an existing program that already goes to support, you know, single parents, okay, all right, I get

22:34that. Is this really the time to start saying, hi, I'm from the government. I'll give you more kinds of money in new and different ways of handing out more money to more people. This doesn't strike me as philosophically anywhere in the direction we ought to be heading in. Now, they claim they're just shuffling around the existing money, but, well, do you think a Democrat, a Democrat, a Democrat, a Democratic president? We'll look at that that way. No, no, no, no. Completely. Absolutely. All right. In a moment, a meme comes true. If you like True Crime, you'll love the Miracle Files podcast. We share real stories with the suspense of True Crime, but we'll leave you with a sense of light and hope. Like the college wrestler who fought a grizzly, the woman who was dead for nearly an hour, or the child lost in a dark mind for days. These are the kind of stories that remind us, miracles are real. Subscribe to the Miracle Files, wherever you get your podcasts, and join us on this thrilling journey of faith and miracles. All right. Jim yesterday was a primary day in New Hampshire.

23:40No big surprises. Easy wins for John Snewton, Chris Papis. So they'll clash in the Senate race this fall for the retiring. Jean Shaheen. There are now only two states left to have their primaries. Next week is Delaware on Tuesday. And today is Rhode Island. So that old meme of, hey, you know, that's going to be so crowded on Election Day that these folks are going to vote on Tuesday. And these folks are going to vote on Wednesday. Well in Rhode Island today, you actually are voting on Wednesday. So first of all, Greg, do you think anybody in Rhode Island showed up yesterday at the polling place? I don't know. Like, where is everybody? Hello? Is it? Hello? Is anybody in there? You show up to the school and like, why are you a grown adult walking around the elementary school? So that's problem number one. Problem number two, like I'm assuming people will turn up today. So I guess I don't hear any controversy about this, but this just does a really weird that they would do it on Wednesday. It's not like yesterday. I know, you know, Labor Day was Monday, but I like, this is a very bizarre sense of like, we're just going to do it to be different, you know, the way that like Arizona is like,

24:42yeah, we're just not doing daylight savings. No, it's too hot anyway. We're just going to, you know, let's, we're not changing the clocks too much trouble. We're just not doing it. Which every time I flat Arizona is fun because I always want to ask people, okay, but what time is it really, you know? And then finally, Delaware, what's going on? Like, you know, you're showing not just the home state of Joe Biden, but the electoral reflexes of Joe Biden. It's, it's September 9th. What do you do? You're not even having your primary until next week. Do you hate general election seasons? Do you love primary campaigns? What is the thinking here? You know, I don't know. I don't know. We don't need any federal legislation to standardize this. It just seems late because. Craig, do you have some like, primaries? And this really is like March? Yeah. Oh, yeah. It's a long primary season for midterms. Kind of, you know, get together. States. Yeah. Yeah. More consequential midterms in a long time too. A lot of incumbents, but biting the dust in both parties. So, yeah. So, Rhode Island listeners, you do have a primary today. So, remember that.

25:44And we'll see what goes on after that. So Jim, have a good day. See you tomorrow. See you tomorrow, Greg. Jim Gerdy, National Review. I'm Greg Carumbus of Radio America. Thanks so much for being with us today. Please be sure to subscribe to the Three Martini lunch. If you don't already, tell your friends about us as well. We'd love to have them listening. Thanks also for your five star ratings and your kind reviews. Get us on your home devices. All you have to say is play Three Martini lunch podcast. And follow us both on X. Jim is at Jim Gerdy. I'm at Greg Carumbus. Have a terrific Wednesday and join us again Thursday for the next Three Martini lunch. So, are you gear on the chequery? And then roll around on the ground. Now, get up. All you gear that's on the ground, that's what you're not going to have in a fight. Gun talk should be in your podcast feed. Check out Gun Talk Nation. What's it like to be blown up? You know, if it's like C4, it's almost like a smack. Hunting. Yeah, we talk about that too. On your crosshairs, I like a thin crosshair. And you really date yourself by calling things crosshairs. You're reticle, whatever. Have some fun and stay informed with the Gun Talk podcast.