Did Lindsay Clancy's Judge Just Take a Juror at His Word?

The foreperson on Lindsay Clancy's jury wrote Judge Sullivan twice during deliberations. She told him a juror acknowledged doubt but refused to apply it as the law required. Sullivan brought the jurors to the bench, asked if they could follow the law, and believed the holdout's answer. He never questioned the foreperson separately. The next day, the jury was 11-1 for acquittal and Sullivan declared a mistrial. Kevin Reddington has alleged the holdout had a phone in the jury room, was searching terms from the psychiatric testimony, and lied about his criminal history on his sealed jury questionnaire. Sullivan has denied every defense request to investigate. Bob Motta and Robin Dreeke break down whether Sullivan had an obligation to do more when his foreperson was asking for help, and what it means for Lindsay's retrial.

Listen Anywhere You Get Podcasts: https://pod.link/1655749292

Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod?sub_confirmation=1

Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/

Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/

Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/

Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod

X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod

This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.

#LindsayClancy #JudgeSullivan #TrueCrimeToday #BobMotta #RobinDreeke #TrueCrime #PlymouthCourt #JurorMisconduct #Mistrial #Retrial