Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Judge Declares Mistrial in Lindsay Clancy Murder Trial. Aired 3:30-4p ET

Aired September 04, 2026 - 15:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[15:30:00]

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you ever consider reaching a free agreement (INAUDIBLE), the second trial?

KEVIN REDDINGTON, CLANCY'S DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Did Mr. Cruz say anything about that from here?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No, no, no. He refused to answer the question. He said he's not sure that he's going to decide whether he has a decision to make.

REDDINGTON: If I was Tim Cruz, I would probably say I don't think I want to do a retrial because he's going to lose.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you planning on starting to lay the groundwork --

REDDINGTON: You say what?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you starting to lay the groundwork in this case for maybe some constitutional issues you were seeing? Are you planning a federal appeal?

REDDINGTON: Dana Goldblatt from Northampton is the attorney that's handling any appellate issues that we have. She's a very, very, very sharp appellate lawyer. She feels strongly that we have a very, very good double jeopardy argument right now because of the significant mistakes that have been made up to this point, which you all witnessed.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Have you ever had a juror removed before?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Have you ever frustrated with the judge's decision not to question the holdout juror, not to toss him ultimately?

REDDINGTON: It's easy to Monday morning quarterback. I think that, as he said, I wanted him to have a little more pizzazz. He did his best.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Have you ever had this with all your other cases? You've had a legendary career. Who was different about this?

REDDINGTON: She's like a daughter to me.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's emotional.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Have you ever tried to have a juror removed before in a trial like this? What stands out for you as a juror?

REDDINGTON: No, I don't think so, honestly. I don't. No.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Have you ever tried to have a juror removed like that before?

REDDINGTON: That's what I said. No, I don't believe so. No, I don't believe I did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can you talk a little bit about that jury (INAUDIBLE)?

REDDINGTON: Again, if I were representing you and you told me what you wanted to do during the trial, I wouldn't tell all these people what you told me. That's law school 101.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: How do you feel about all the inconsistency?

REDDINGTON: He's got to, you know, that's his testimony. People get nervous when they testify. They say things and they get confused.

It's not easy to be on that witness stand, just ask Dr. Mack.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: In the overall investigation, do you think there was a lack of investigation?

REDDINGTON: It was a horrible investigation. As I said, it was not even an investigation. What was in the cup?

Does anyone know? Crushed what? Where is the pill crusher?

It's not there. Where's the residue? It's not there.

Who put the pill crusher somewhere? It's not outside. It's not on the floor.

It's not in the drawer. So where did that go? Why didn't the police test it?

We don't even know what was in that residue. We don't know about the door with the child safe. I could go on and on and on.

It was a horrific investigation.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm asking the same question I asked DA Cruz. If you guys go to a retrial, how do you ensure that you get an impartial jury given this media coverage and social media coverage that we've had over the past several weeks?

REDDINGTON: That's a good question. We have faith in the empanelment process. We ask the jurors under their oath if they have heard about the case or know about the case. And I think obviously in this case they will. But that doesn't mean that they're disqualified. They still are able to be good jurors if they feel that they don't have an opinion that would deprive the person of a fair trial.

The fact that you know about the Unabomber doesn't mean that you couldn't sit in his trial as a fair juror.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Would you request a bench trial? Is that something you're considering for early trial?

REDDINGTON: Again, you'd have to ask Mr. Cruz because I can't do a bench trial on a first-degree murder. If it's a second-degree murder, I could consider a bench trial.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: If it was second-degree murder, would you request that? Or something a lesser --

REDDINGTON: I kind of like the jury, actually, after this trial. But that's something that we'd consider.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Kevin, did the holdout juror have specific beliefs about mental health? You referenced that in your motion.

REDDINGTON: I have no idea what that guy was thinking of. I have no idea why he did what he did. I have no idea.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Kevin, do you think Patrick has any responsibility in this tragedy?

REDDINGTON: I think Patrick, you heard the 911 call. I think you can judge his credibility by that 911 call. I don't know what is in Patrick's mind.

He testified, and the jury was able to evaluate him.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Kevin, the poor man, he's been accused of murder over the course of your client's trial.

REDDINGTON: Not by me.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Of course not by you, by people on the Internet. Can you respond to that? Can you dispel that?

REDDINGTON: People on the Internet, they're going to say.

[15:35:00]

You know, regarding the people on the Internet, I certainly don't dismiss them. It's amazing how they're able to ferret out facts and they do investigations. It's just truly amazing, this whole concept of the Internet, it really is.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you have a message for the people that have come up with those conspiracies, Kevin? I was just going to ask you, I mean, this is a crazy swarm of media. We've been here since week on, as Deanna mentions, that we would walk with you to your car. I mean, this is quite something. What do you make of this spectacle this has become?

REDDINGTON: I don't think it's a spectacle. I think you all represent the people with different interests. What am I trying to say? People that watch television, they have different --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (INAUDIBLE)

REDDINGTON: I figured it would have some connection with people dealing with postpartum depression, postpartum psychosis, and then medical and psychiatric care.

I didn't realize that it would be like this.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Kevin, does the jury get any care after this? All the hard stuff they had to go through, they spent seven weeks.

REDDINGTON: They give them $50 a day to sit there and go through this horrific stuff. No, they don't give them any counseling. They don't give them any care.

They don't give them anything. They just say thank you for your service and see you later.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did you meet with them today? Would you like to meet with them?

REDDINGTON: I would like to meet with them. I'd like to meet with him.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What would you say to him?

REDDINGTON: I'd ask him why.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Would you like to dispel some of the rumors that we're seeing online about Patrick Clancy potentially being involved in this? Do you have anything to say about that?

REDDINGTON: I said what I want to say regarding that in the trial, and we'll see where the case goes in the next time around, if, in fact, it does go to trial.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Kevin, for everything the trial brought up, we heard from the district attorney, the victims are the children and not your client. Your response to that?

REDDINGTON: Yes, my response is, why did he have to look down and read off their names? And my client is well aware of the fact that her three kids, who she loves dearly, are the victims of this case.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Kevin, can you touch on, again, your team and some of the people that have come out to support you?

REDDINGTON: Do I have to give you a hug?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. REDDINGTON: Yes, sure. Paul Zeisel, psychologist, my man. Mr. Moshe, a good friend of mine. My right arm, here. A fellow who does all of the phone dumps, all of the technical stuff, Mr. Marino, without whom I would not have been able to handle any of that process. Bob Jones, who I could call him at 1 o'clock in the morning and say, Bob, I need this done, I need that done, and it would be in the courtroom the next day.

Including, I might add, the very last thing when I said, oh, I have it here. It's because he just brought it in, and I think Donna, someone told me that it came in and it was there, and I pulled it out of the thing and we had it. Leo Nardo, Nardo Associates, who's my agent, as it were, and Patrick.

We all know Patrick.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He gets you coffee.

REDDINGTON: Oh, no, we weren't going to say that.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Kevin, you said you have another murder case coming up. Is that going to affect any retrial? Who is it?

REDDINGTON: Usually it depends. Yes, Kelsie Cote, it's out in the western part of the state, Pittsfield. Very nice young lady.

I'm ready to go on that, too, and they've been very patient. So, between Lindsay and Kelsie, I'll get it done.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you feel like someone trying to push the commonwealth to try to push the trial as much as they can? Or do you think they'll try to push it?

REDDINGTON: Like to push it off father?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, do you think the commonwealth would try to push it out farther?

REDDINGTON: I think they'll probably try to rag the puck for a year or two or three or four, but no, we're going to move this in the fall. I'm not going to have Lindsay sitting there under a cloud of a first- degree murder indictment when she won the case and everybody literally in the world knows that she was acquitted.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Kevin, did you know the two prosecutors are mothers themselves? Did you know they have kids at home?

REDDINGTON: I know Shanan, and I know attorney Sprague. And quite frankly, we go back a number of years. I've had cases with them in the past.

They've always been honorable prosecutors to deal with, and they do a good job.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Kevin, you know Judge Sullivan is facing mandatory retirement. Do you have any concern about getting him in there before he's out? REDDINGTON: I'm going to try to hire him and see if he'll work for me. That's when he gets out and he's retired. No, Sully, he's a great guy.

He was a wonderful defense lawyer before he became a judge, and as I said, he's got great respect amongst the prosecution, among the defense bar. Everybody loves him. He's a fair guy.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Kevin, what do you think shocked you most about the way this trial went down? Was there one moment that you were like, wow, I have not run into this in my entire career?

REDDINGTON: Yes, with the witness that kept looking up to the heavens for an answer. And then we'd wait for like two minutes while he'd stare at the ceiling. Yes, that was a little awkward.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I have a question for you.

[15:40:00]

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:

Moralizing. Is it to come that close you know, this case all these weeks have come down to one during the fight, all the way the evidence, how the moralizing --

REDDINGTON: It sucks. It's the best thing I can say. It really does. But not for me.

It's what I do for work, for Lindsay. My heart breaks for her. She deserved that acquittal that she should have had.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Kevin, this has become such a big thing. So much chatter online, conspiracies, et cetera. If there's one thing people at home can take away from this case, Lindsay's story, what would it be?

REDDINGTON: Be careful of who you choose for a psychiatrist. If you see that they advertise that they're an expert in a particular field, check their background. Just don't blindly believe what you see online.

And maybe don't do the Teletubbies that much.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What do you think about the holistic remedy? Because you know, in Asian culture, Tai Chi and --

REDDINGTON: I used to do Tai Chi.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

REDDINGTON: I had Master Bao Hsien-Mak as my -- yes. Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I was teaching at Harvard Tai Chi and holistic origami and food medicine instead of relying on chemicals and medications.

REDDINGTON: Very good.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So how can we change that so people can actually go through therapy, have a village, have a support system? Can you imagine?

Lindsay has a support system. She has families who are already immigrant moms, don't have a support system. And they are ashamed for talking about postpartum depression because it's a cultural signal.

REDDINGTON: I think a lot of women are ashamed to talk about it. Yes. I think that they are marginalized, and I think that clearly and unequivocally women are afraid to even speak.

That they're having, let's say, the dark thoughts because they're worried about losing their children. One of the things that I try to at least touch upon in the trial that is really, really of significant interest is other countries, the way they treat women that are postpartum, that have problems. They don't rip the children away from the mother.

They don't put the mother in jail. They keep them both together. They keep them in a safe environment.

They keep them with good medical care, psychiatric care, and they are light years ahead of us in this country.

[Speaker 13] Is there anything over the course of this trial that the press has not asked, that you wish you had?

REDDINGTON: I don't think so. No, you guys have been pretty thorough.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is there anything happened inside of the media? Didn't get to listen in to that you wish we also heard?

REDDINGTON: No. I've got to go. He's telling me to wrap it up. Let's go.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What do you do tonight?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No swarming today, please. No swarming. No, no.

REDDINGTON: It's Friday night, our weekend.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you, Kevin.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: All right, we're hearing there from the defense attorney for Lindsey Clancy, Kevin Reddington, saying that he said Lindsay's not doing -- he said she's not good, her parents are not good, and he says that the jurors were robbed by one man for whatever his agenda was who stole seven weeks of the life of these other jurors who were so attentive. He said that the jurors appeared defeated sitting there, and that he says he hopes that guy can sleep at night.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: He also deferred when asked what his message to that juror would be. Interesting that he had those kinds of reflections on this juror's decision to disagree with the 11 others on the jury, and yet for Judge William Sullivan, who ultimately went against Reddington's requests, the defense's requests, to dismiss that juror, he said of the judge, he's one of the best judges, he showed extreme compassion, he's fair. He also said he didn't know if there was a retrial that they would get jurors who weren't aware of this case anywhere, even as far as Japan and India.

Let's get some thoughts from Jean Casares and Laura Coates, who have been watching this closely. First to you, Jean, what stood out to you from what we just heard from defense attorney Kevin Reddington there?

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, besides the facts of what he said, I think there's so -- he is going to talk to the potential jury pool from now until when a retrial happens, if it does, talking about she already won the case, she was already acquitted. But I took note with the personal attacks on this one juror, who was a deliberating juror, because in this country we actually -- there's an unspoken rule that we don't talk against jurors. It is -- our jurisprudence allows for jurors to make their own decisions in a jury deliberation room.

[15:45:00]

And with a retrial, other people are going to have to step forward to say, I will be a juror in this case, and could that influence at all those that may want to do jury service right here in Plymouth County?

KEILAR: I think it's a really good point, Jean, because we're in a time where a lot of people -- and, Laura, maybe you can speak to this, too -- who are just doing a service that normally doesn't get a whole lot of attention can really be disparaged and to a really terrible result, right? So what do you think about him singling out that juror, who, by the way, social media has as well, and there'll be so much curiosity around that juror, because that's the thing about a jury. There are 12 individuals, Laura, who may come to different conclusions, and there's still a whole lot about deliberations here that we do not know and may never know the full extent of.

LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: It is unequivocally wrong to try to disparage a juror for deliberating in a way that the judge himself concluded was appropriate to allow that person to stay. There's a reason we do not show jurors who are in the courtroom. We cover so many trials.

We cover them when we have cameras in the courtroom. What we do not do is try to dox them. We don't try to identify them by their gender, by their race, by their age, by anything identifiable, because we do know that they're performing a civic duty.

And a judge, a judge that he said he had respect for and said later that he'd want to hire him now that he's at the mandatory retirement part of his career, that concluded that that juror could continue to deliberate and did not have an independent decision made to simply have them swapped out for an alternate. I thought it was wrong of the defense counsel to say that. I also thought that there was a moment when this defense counsel could have addressed what one of the journalists asked him in the crowd with respect to anything he wanted to say about the grieving father, Patrick Clancy.

He chose not to. He chose not to talk about, obviously, what his words were with his client. He should not about her decision to testify or not.

All he said it was tongue in cheek that she had turned him on to rascal flats. And the reason I point that particular part out is because many people, given the weight and the gravitas and the overall sadness involved in the killing of three children, would be not to be glib and tongue in cheek. But remember, he has a job to do still as a defense attorney.

And he is speaking to potential jurors. He wants them to believe that there was not an effective investigation. He wants them to believe that it was the health care system that's on trial.

But who was on trial? His client. And she remained so until the next status hearing happens.

SANCHEZ: Laura, Jean, please stand by. Let's go back to Dave Aronberg and Judge John E. Jones. First to you, Judge, curious to get your thoughts on Kevin Reddington specifically singling out this juror.

JOHN E. JONES III, FORMER U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE, PENNSYLVANIA: Boris, you know, when a case is still live, which this is because it was a mistrial, counsel should follow the rule that less is better. And I thought it was an unusually long narrative by Mr. Reddington. I think he should have cut that off probably a third of the way in because you get nowhere by answering those questions ad nauseum.

And particularly, as my colleague said, vilifying a juror. But there's something else that jumped out at me. He talked about double jeopardy.

I think you picked up on that, which is interesting. And what that predicts, I think, is that the defense is going to file motions and say that the errors were so grave or error was so grave in the trial that it's tantamount to a not guilty verdict, which, of course, would bar a retrial because of double jeopardy. I'm not sure what the exact legal argument is, but you can see that there's going to be some post trial maneuvering that's going to go on even before this case goes to retrial. If it does.

KEILAR: Yes, he was talking about the appellate lawyer they are working on that part of it. And he said that they think they have a good double jeopardy argument because of significant mistakes made up until now. I mean, he's obviously kept kind of pushing that and it hasn't gotten anywhere as he was trying to delay a mistrial being declared.

Dave, I wonder -- and you talked about this a little bit earlier -- but it was very clear listening to the D.A. Tim Cruz. He's still, as I guess he should be doing, leaving the door open to a retrial. We know there's a status hearing on the schedule for the end of the month.

But you heard Reddington there saying that if he were Tim Cruz, I'd say I don't want to do a retrial because he's going to lose. [15:50:00]

He's making the case that Lindsay Clancy was all but acquitted because there were 11 jurors who, in his mind, were siding with her. Although, to be clear, there's a lot of details we still do not know about the deliberations here. What did you think?

DAVE ARONBERG, FORMER STATE ATTORNEY OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA: A lot of trash talk by this excellent defense lawyer. But in the end, I think he was ahead right until the closing statements. And he was so meandering in his closing statements that I think he lost that one juror.

So if he wants to blame the juror for his own mistakes, then it's a bad look. You don't blame the juror, and you don't accuse the juror of committing crimes. He actually stood before the judge and said that that juror lied under oath.

That's a felony. That's a crime. That's what he accused him of.

In the brief to the Supreme Court today, he actually said that the juror's reasoning reflects a bias against those who suffer from debilitating mental illness in violation of state and federal law. Are you kidding me? Where's he getting that from?

It's a bad look for him for an otherwise very fine defense lawyer. And I didn't like how he trash talked the prosecutor, a very noble public servant who's trying to do his job. And instead, he makes fun of repeatedly for having to look down at the names of the child victims while he then goes ahead and makes the joke about rascal flats.

I mean, come on. You don't have to make it personal. And I think when he does that, it cheapens the whole process.

It doesn't make him look good and it makes it a little less likely that you get a deal instead of in lieu of a new trial. I think eventually there will be a deal. I think Tim Cruz is enough for professional to put this aside.

But it's just not a good look we saw in that press conference.

SANCHEZ: Dave Aronberg, Judge John E. Jones III, thank you both. I want to go quickly back to Jean Casarez and Laura Coates.

Jean, before we wrap up for this coverage for this hour and what we watched, you've been watching this trial since the beginning. I just wonder what your reflections are, given that now we've learned that there's a mistrial and that it is possible that in a matter of months or weeks, we could be back in court again watching this all play out once more.

CASAREZ: Well, the potential jury pool was sure watching today, no question. And I definitely believe that the defense attorney was playing directly to that potential jury pool right there. You always need a cooling off period. This is a small community versus a larger community in Massachusetts. And the potential jurors that will come to this courthouse will be oversaturated with information. Can they be fair and impartial?

You'll have to try to find jurors that are not stealth jurors that want the publicity involved with all of it. So I think the cooling off time has to take some time in all of this. But I think the one thing that stands out to me from today actually was the elected district attorney, because this case turned in a direction so that the names of Cora, the names of Dawson, the name of Callan, they were very rarely mentioned except by the prosecutor at pivotal points in that prosecution.

But those are three children that were not allowed to lead their lives. And whatever the facts are, whatever the truth is, they are not with us anymore. And as the elected district attorney said, it is our duty to represent the victims.

And these were victims. And we have that duty. We will continue to have that duty.

KEILAR: Laura, your thoughts?

COATES: I honored that as a prosecutor and that struck a chord with me because those are the three victims in this case. And both things can be true, that you can, on the one hand, try a criminal matter. And on the other hand, have a conversation about the mental health treatment that people receive in this country and the discussions about postpartum psychosis and the experience of women after giving birth.

But I can't lose sight of the loss of life for those three children, nor can I lose sight of the presumption of innocence for that woman, the defendant, Lindsay Clancy, who tells you why this was an insurmountable hurdle for those 12 jurors.

SANCHEZ: Laura and Jean, thank you so much for your coverage. Obviously, a huge day in court and at times difficult to follow these emotional developments.

KEILAR: Yes, the breaking news here, the judge in the Lindsay Clancy murder case declaring a mistrial. And we'll be right back.

[15:55:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KEILAR: As we are following our breaking news here, the judge in the Lindsay Clancy triple murder trial declaring a mistrial. President Trump was actually asked about this a short time ago, and he weighed in.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: While we were here with you, a mistrial was declared in the Lindsay Clancy trial. Have you been following that trial? Have you watched any of it? DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, it's hard not to. It's on television so much. It's hard not to follow it.

I've followed it pretty much, but it's a shame. It's a horrible tragedy. It's a horrible tragedy.

I see what's happened, and it looks like it's a hung jury. And I think the judge just said it's going to be a mistrial. I assume there's going to be another trial.

It's a terrible situation. Look, she did a horrible, horrible thing. It can't be worse.

But you'll find out what the price to pay is. There'll be a price. It's going to be mental institution or jail or something.

But I guess they're going to go through another trial. It's too bad.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: The president there weighing in. Clearly a case that has polarized the nation, that has received national attention. The next hearing is September 29th, and the question is, will there be a retrial?

Some experts, including Dave Aronberg, who we were speaking to a moment ago, suggest that it is more likely that there will be some kind of plea deal between the defense and prosecution. Hard to imagine how you get there, just given some of the public comments made by both sides, including defense attorney Kevin Reddington, who suggests that, in his words, the world knows that Lindsey Clancy was acquitted, say for one juror that he argued in court broke the law and did not deliberate in good faith.

KEILAR: It's interesting, he also brought up in his comments there, after this mistrial was declared, he was asked about a bench trial. And he said, well, there can't be a bench trial if it's a first-degree murder charge.

He said if it was second-degree, there could be a bench trial when there was this discussion about, how do you find a jury who actually hasn't heard of this, who doesn't have an opinion? Because that's really, I think, what President Trump's comments speak to there, which is just that this trial has been the source of such great debate between Americans. I mean, people all over the world, in fact.

Americans are really seeing this through the prism of their own experiences, their own perspectives, and so you have so many people just opposed to each other and how they see it.

SANCHEZ: No doubt. And you see that literally as the district attorney, Tim Cruz, is answering questions, there are people yelling.

[16:00:00]

It has brought an intense focus on the well-being of women after giving birth. And obviously, we can't forget the impact that it had on these young lives, the children of Lindsay Clancy, who, unfortunately, were killed.

KEILAR: Cora, Dawson, and Callan, and they are the true victims here. That is something that was driven home there in the comments that we were hearing after the trial. We'll be right back with more news after this.

END