INSTANT REACTION: Mistrial Declared In Lindsay Clancy Case

**Matt Walsh** (0:00)
Now, we've all heard the radio ads about owing the IRS money. They try to scare you and frighten you in the calling. Well, tax relief advocates is different. If you owe the IRS 5,000, 50,000 or 500,000, TRA has a solution to resolve your tax problem. Don't lose hope. TRA could reduce or even eliminate what you owe. Their passion is taxes and helping regular people and businesses fix their IRS mess. They have over 1,000 five-star Google reviews and A plus with the Better Business Bureau. You don't have to be afraid of the IRS anymore. Real tax relief programs are available that can give you a fresh start, so don't wait. Go to tra.com. It's tra.com or call 800-575-1753.
Again, that's 800-575-1753.
Tax Relief Advocates, Real Solutions for Real People. The Lindsay Clancy trial has reached a conclusion for now anyway with a mistrial, and I will give my instant reaction and analysis of this news, which comes to us after an absolutely bizarre and unprecedented string of events that are almost hard to believe. But the only reason that we ended with a mistrial at the end of all this madness is simply because of the actions of a lone, heroic male juror, as we now know. A lot of people speculated the jury of nine women and three men would break down to men against women. Well, it turns out we were right in assuming that every single woman on the jury would want to acquit a mother who brutally slaughtered her children. But we were wrong to assume that all three men would stand strong for justice and common sense. As it turns out, only one man did. And because of this one man, Clancy did not get away, not entirely, not yet anyway, with brutally murdering her three children. Apparently, only one male member of the jury was willing to reach the obviously appropriate verdict in this case, which is that there is no excuse, either legally or morally, for the premeditated and systematic execution of your children. Based on all the information we have, this lone male juror was able to withstand a campaign of public intimidation by the defense attorney in this case, as well as the jury foreperson. The nine women on the jury and the two other men were apparently not only willing to absolve Lindsay Clancy of these barbaric murders, but they're also willing to pressure the lone holdout when he didn't agree with them. And thank God he fought back. We simply cannot live in a country when murder is considered justifiable because a woman claims that she was insane at the time. It's an incoherent standard, by the way, the insanity standard, as we'll discuss in a moment. And at least for now, there's still a possibility that Lindsay Clancy will face justice for what she did. We'll have to hear from the state about if they're gonna refile the charges and what the charges will be, and hopefully they do. And the thing is, if you had asked me a week ago, I would have said that a mistrial in this case, instead of a guilty verdict, would be a travesty and a tragedy.
And it is, I mean, it still is. But now that we know that we were one sane member of the jury away from a full acquittal, away from a woman admitting that she murdered her children and waltzing away scot-free, the mistrial seems, in that case, by comparison, like something of a win, or at least closer to a win than the alternative. Clancy's odious defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, did everything in his power to corrupt the process and force the acquittal by any means necessary. When the jury returned today to say that they were still deadlocked, that the lone male juror was not intimidated by Reddington or the foreperson, Reddington initially demanded the jury be sent back to continue deliberations. In other words, he wanted the judge to tell the jury for a third time that he would not accept a hung jury. And of course, that would be coercive and inappropriate, so the judge declined. He announced his intent to declare a mistrial, and then Reddington walked all over the judge and demanded an hour to file an emergency appeal before the trial was finalized. Because you see, apparently, when you don't get the verdict you want, you get to demand that an appeals court remove whoever is on the jury that disagrees with you.
You get to claim that he's not following the law because he came to a different conclusion about the case.
That logic makes perfect sense to Lindsay Clancy's lawyer and to the brain-rotted legions on TikTok, and a lot of people in the media too. That's where the judge should have denied the appeal and ended the circus for good. But instead, he gave him an hour to do this appeal on the absurd grounds that the lawyer didn't get the verdict he wants, and so he gets to appeal it. And as if the appeal wasn't nonsensical enough on its face, it somehow gets worse. So Fox News obtained the emergency appeal that was filed to the Massachusetts Supreme Court. This, again, is from the defense. This is their appeal to try to stop the jury from being, to try to stop the mistrial. And what they argue in this appeal, and I'm not making this up, they argue that the lone juror is engaging in a line of reasoning, which, quote, reflects a bias against those who are suffering from debilitating mental illness, a protected category under both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Yes, the defense seriously argued that by voting to send a woman to prison for killing her children, he was discriminating against the disabled.