This is what concerns Nancy Grace about Clancy jury deliberations

0:00Lost in all of the court trauma is the very reason for this trial. There they are. Three young innocent kids were strangled to death in their own home by their own mother. When will they get the justice they deserve? Joining us now with more, the host of crime stories on Fox One, the one and only Nancy Grace. Nancy, we've got a lot of drama about the mama, but we don't hear a lot about those kids. And it's not a question, let's remind everybody, for the thousandths time, it's not a question that their mother caused their deaths. The only question that remains is whether she should be held accountable and if so, at what level? What was your reaction to what happened today in the courtroom? Number one, I can't believe that everyone is taking the word of reddington about what's going on in the jury deliberation room. Just because a juror isn't voting the way reddington wants him to, does not mean that under our constitution, you could boot him off the jury.

1:00That's not how it works. And he knows that all of this is damaging the process. First of all, you got that dawn light, 56 year old female out in a restricted area, getting close enough to the jury that she can video them. And then when she said, my coming, she hides it in deleted files and then tells a different story that she thought she was videoing, Lindsey Clancy. Hey, they don't look anything alike. So you've got that one. They're running from the cameras up in a restricted area. The jurors are not being protected every day. There are all those people out there. And God bless them. They've got to write to their opinion, wearing pink and support of Lindsey Clancy. Nobody's wearing a special t-shirt for Dawson, Korra or Callan. What about them? They're just getting lost in the sauce. All I hear about is Lindsey Clancy. Yesterday, Reddington wore a jacket out like it was a badge of courage that had her mascara

2:01on it because she cried. I guess she did cry. Her children are dead. And she did it. Now Reddington wants a holdout, Girard thrown off. That's not how the law works. So I wouldn't take Reddington's word for what's going on in that jury deliberation, Redd. And perhaps, Nancy Grace, that's why the judge is going to talk to the jury again at 9 a.m. tomorrow. Are you at all concerned that now we're facing a long weekend? If and only if it's an 11 to 1 with one holdout, let's say Reddington gets his way on this one. Are you worried about the pressure that on human beings to just quote, get it over with and get this one person to see it their way? Yes, I really am because you've got them being videoed. You've got them being pressured by people from outside the courthouse. You've got Reddington talking about the one holdout like he did something wrong and throwing him off the jury on national news.

3:04What if that one Girard is sticking to his convictions, what he believes and will not go along with what other people are saying? That's allowed in the dream. You know, Greg Girard and I are long time colleagues all the way back to court TV and he's right. You can turn around a whole jury, one person can, but when everyone does it a great, it is not unanimous. There will be a hung jury. If that happens, it will have to start all over again. And the fact that Reddington boasts that, hey, I'll try it again next week. Please, everybody knows the state cannot organize 80 plus witnesses and 300 exhibits over the weekend. He knows that's not going to happen. So saying that is an empty promise slash threat, save it, Reddington. Focus on what's happening in the courtroom. Not your press conference is on the courthouse steps. And Nancy, if in fact it is a hung jury and the prosecution goes ahead and retries the case, there is a world in which people, there is a mindset where the prosecution has a better

4:09chance on the second go around because the element of surprise to the defense is less. They can rectify some of their mistakes and some people say there have been more than a few in the way they prosecuted this case. Do you agree with that? And if you were prosecuting this case, what would you do differently? Well, number one, I would go to trial immediately. Be careful what you ask my dear, for you will surely get it. Reddington wants a quick trial fine. You'll get it. I think that if anything, I would stress the victims suffering more because it's easy for all these people to stand outside and see if pink outside the courthouse and feel badly, four lazy clansies. Surely she must have been crazy instead of focusing on what she did deliberately and methodically to those three innocent children, including a little baby putting them face down so she wouldn't have to look at them in the eye as she murdered them.

5:13Nobody wants to think about that because it's an odious, it's an offensive, it's an upsetting thought. But that is the duty of the jurors. Maybe they don't want to think about that. Maybe it's more convenient for them to think, oh, she must be crazy rather than think about the harsh truth about what happened to these children. Well, certainly was part of the evidence presented. I mean, she stopped the trial when they were going over in detail, which she had done to her daughter, the oldest one. She had them stop the trial because she was so emotional. And in that prosecution closing arguments, they did emphasize Nancy that she kept pulling and pulling and strangling her kids to death and then strangling limb babies and leaving the, I guess, what she used to strangle them on them. So all those details. Thank you so much. Thank you so much for all of your announcements. Next Killing M. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. And that is part of the evidence. All right. Thanks for watching. Check out my new podcast hanging out with me, Sean Hannity. The big interviews, the debates you won't get anywhere else.

6:16Like and subscribe for new episodes every Tuesday and Thursday.