Letter to the editor: Perhaps Clancy’s attorney, not holdout juror, should be investigated
· The Washington TimesOPINION:
Being a juror — especially on a high-profile case — is difficult enough. No juror deserves to be ostracized for disagreeing with the other jurors, and it certainly isn’t a crime to have a different opinion from one’s fellow jurors (“Lindsay Clancy’s attorney asks judge to investigate the lone juror who wanted to convict her,” Web, Sept. 21).
Nor should any juror and their family have to go into hiding because their name has been revealed.
The behavior of Lindsay Clancy’s defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, has been totally irrational ever since the judge declared a mistrial earlier this month, the result of a deadlocked jury. Mr. Reddington didn’t win the case, nor is holdout juror Michael Desronvil an obstructionist, as Mr. Reddington said.
People were interested in these podcasts
Mr. Reddington, 75, wants Mr. Desronvil to be investigated, perhaps it is Mr. Reddington who should be investigated. Due to his disgraceful behavior, he now runs the risk of being disbarred late in his career.
In the meantime, due to the outcome of this trial, it may be next to impossible to find 12 people who are fair, open-minded, impartial and willing to serve on another jury.
JOANN LEE FRANK
Clearwater, Florida