09/11/2026
đ¨ CLANCY UPDATE: TURNS OUT REDDINGTON WASNâT JUST MAKING NOISE â HE WAS BUILDING A RECORD.
After the mistrial, Reddington is now asking Judge Sullivan to enter a finding of NOT GUILTY BY REASON OF LACK OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY rather than allow Lindsay Clancy to be tried again. This isnât simply âthe jury was 11â1, so she should be acquitted.â An 11â1 jury is still a hung jury. There was no unanimous verdict. His argument goes to something much bigger: whether the Commonwealth presented legally sufficient evidence to prove criminal responsibility beyond a reasonable doubt.
But remember what happened BEFORE the mistrial. When Reddington believed that one juror was acknowledging reasonable doubt but refusing to properly apply the law, he fought about it on the record, in open court. He objected. He challenged how the Court handled the jury notes. He challenged the instruction. He made his position clear. He preserved the issue.
That matters because appellate courts generally do not exist to fix arguments nobody raised. Preservation matters. The record matters. And Reddington was building that record while everyone else was waiting for a verdict.
Now jurors are speaking publicly and describing an 11â1 split, with allegations that the lone holdout would not meaningfully engage with the evidence or explain the basis for his position. Does that retroactively create an acquittal? No. Does it automatically prove juror misconduct? No. But it certainly adds another layer to the fight over what happened before Judge Sullivan declared a mistrial.
Ordinarily, a genuinely deadlocked jury creates âmanifest necessityâ for a mistrial and permits a retrial without violating double jeopardy. But Reddington preserved his argument that this wasnât simply 12 jurors honestly evaluating the evidence and reaching different conclusions. His position was that there was a problem with one jurorâs willingness to apply the law.
That distinction could matter.
So Reddington isnât just preparing to defend Lindsay Clancy in Trial No. 2. Heâs attacking whether the Commonwealth gets a Trial No. 2 at all.
This is why trial lawyers preserve the record. Sometimes youâre arguing to the judge sitting in front of you. Sometimes youâre talking to the appellate court before the appeal even exists.
September 29. Pay attention.
