×
Please verify
Each day we overwhelm your brains with the content you've come to love from the Louder with Crowder Dot Com website.
But Facebook is...you know, Facebook. Their algorithm hides our ranting and raving as best it can. The best way to stick it to Zuckerface?
Sign up for the LWC News Blast! Get your favorite right-wing commentary delivered directly to your inbox!
ArticlesSeptember 21, 2026
Of course, now Lindsay Clancy’s attorney wants the lone holdout juror investigated
Watch Louder with Crowder every weekday at 11:00 AM Eastern, only on Rumble Premium!
Check out our Election 2026 Dashboard to keep track ot the upcoming midterms!
In Massachusetts, juror intimidation is a felony offense. And while I am not saying the defense attorney in the Lindsay Clancy case is doing just that, if the shoe fits, it fits!
It should come as no surprise that Clancy’s defense does not like the fact that the lone Black juror voted against the best interests of Clancy. You see, unlike the feminist mob on the jury, he just could not get over the fact that Lindsay killed her three kids one by one. According to her defense, however, this means he is partial, may have lied to get on the jury, and subjected the defendant to a partial jury.
BREAKING: Lindsay Clancy’s defense attorney is asking a judge to question the lone holdout juror after her murder trial ended in a mistrial.@BryanLlenas reports the defense wants to examine whether Michael P. Desronvil was truthful on his juror questionnaire and whether he… pic.twitter.com/VreMNJQxB5
— Fox News (@FoxNews) September 21, 2026
Lindsay Clancy’s attorney wants the judge presiding over her case to investigate the lone holdout juror from her murder trial.
In a motion filed Friday, Sept. 18, Kevin Reddington asked Judge William Sullivan to review the juror’s cell phone data usage during deliberations.
The motion also requested that juror questionnaires be preserved and that the court provide under seal which background checks were conducted and if the juror was involved in any matter involving the Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office.
Two things come to mind when I read this. First, if there is a new trial, which justice does demand, this inevitably intimidates other jurors into thinking that if they don't vote in favor of the defense, they will be targeted. Second, how is this not considered jury intimidation? This is so infuriating it is not even funny.
So, what? Anytime a defense attorney does not like the outcome of a jury, are they just going to claim that there are some inherent biases that have yet to be uncovered?
Reddington further requested that Sullivan question the juror about whether he was truthful on his questionnaire and whether he received any outside information during deliberations.
People don't lie to get on a jury. That is not a thing. I just cannot deal with this level of evil.
- YouTube www.youtube.com
Latest
Don't Miss
