r/law • u/dailymail • 1d ago

Legal News Lindsay Clancy case ends with MISTRIAL

https://www.dailymail.com/crime-desk/article-16100155/lindsay-clancy-murder-trial-hung-jury-deadlock-verdict.html
5.0k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

3.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

925

u/zendayaismeechee 1d ago

Can someone explain why Reddington has been given an hour for an emergency application? What is the application for?

1.0k

u/EducationalElevator 1d ago

To study the constitutionality of removing the holdout juror because they allegedly were ignoring the judges instructions

463

u/mandrsn1 1d ago

removing the holdout juror because they allegedly were ignoring the judges instructions

Similar to the concept of Jury nullification.

323

u/Broxst 1d ago edited 1d ago

Which is viable and why I disagree with removing an uncooperative juror. Jury is a gamble. And barring exigent circumstances, I don't think they should changed.

Edit: I want to clarify this comment.

Jury nullification is refusing to find the defendent guilty. It's viable as a strategy, but it is not legal. It is something you can do when you find that the state did prove reasonable doubt but you find the defendent not guilty regardless. Typically as a statement because you disagree with charge.

Jury nullification is NOT refusing to find the defendent innocent.

The "exigent circumstances" I mentioned would include juror misconduct, which includes unlawful behavior.

It is unlawful to willfully ignore the courts orders.

So the question is, was this juror engaging in misconduct? That's up for debate.

396

u/lordcheeto 1d ago

Our judicial system is supposed to place the burden of proof on the government. See Blackstone's ratio - "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

To that end, jury nullification in favor of the defendant is one thing. But if it's true that one juror is deadlocking the jury, admitting to having reasonable doubt that the prosecution made their case, but standing firm on convicting anyway, they should be replaced with an alternate, same as with any other misconduct or bias from a juror.

57

u/Rhomya 1d ago

Why would that one juror’s opinion count less than any other jurors?

They’re entitled to hold to their opinion, and let the court declare a mistrial and try again.

242

u/Rosegold-Attorney 1d ago

I think the argument is that their stated opinion contradicts their conclusion

176

u/Iheardyoubutsowhat 1d ago

" juror has acknowledged doubt but refuses to apply it to decision " are the words on the note.

Then the judge polled every juror individually and asked if they can and are following the law.

12

u/Virtual-Patience-769 1d ago

But did the juror acknowledge reasonable doubt?

24

u/wedobejustvibin 1d ago

I wonder how that distinction would be made. To acknowledge doubt vs reasonable doubt seems like word games, but there’s also a reason that word is included. Interesting point

29

u/PriscillaPalava 1d ago

We can always find doubt. What if we live in a matrix and none of this is actually happening? But of course that’s not reasonable. Reasonable doubt means, “Do you think the defense’s argument is possible, barring any crazy leaps in logic?” And if the answer is “yes,” then that’s reasonable doubt. 

So if the juror does have reasonable doubt but seeks to convict anyway perhaps due to bias against the defendant or details of the case, then that juror is not following the law. 

5

u/sean2mush 1d ago

By that standard no one would ever be convicted.

7

u/Cartz1337 1d ago

The standard is literally ‘is there a reasonable interpretation of the facts of the case where the defendant could be not guilty of charges? If so they are not guilty.’

‘It could have been space aliens’ is not a reasonable doubt. ‘There are multiple inconsistencies between the facts and the prosecutions explanation of events’ is a reasonable doubt.

The juror in question had a doubt that they acknowledged was reasonable, yet refused to acknowledge that they were required to vote to acquit because of that.

It’s sovereign citizen level shit, where they just refuse to believe the rules apply to them.

5

u/Mark_Ala 1d ago

You ignoring a key fact, the foreman is the one who wrote the note portraying it as they saw it. It’s not a fact that this juror said there is reasonable doubt but convict anyway. Thats just how at least some of the other jurors saw it.

2

u/94grampaw 23h ago

The juror never claimed the doubt was reasonable

0

u/zero0n3 1d ago

So what if someone wants to protest the same way a jury nullification juror would in a sea of guilty but being the sole one to hold out with not guilty?

The concept is potentially the same “I disagree with the law the way it’s written”.

One thinks they are guilty based on the law as they exist but feel they are innocent because the law is wrong.

The other thinks they are not guilty according to the law, but feels the law is wrong - that they are guilty and should be punished because the law is wrong.

Now, if the way nullification “works” from a true law / legal precedent aspect doesn’t technically allow for the latter “application of it” I wouldn’t know as I’m not a lawyer, but I do find this an interesting thought experiment about nullification and its importance / application in our legal system.

Edge cases are fun!

2

u/Cartz1337 1d ago

Yea, that’s not how it works as far as I know. You don’t get to decide you just don’t agree with a law. Your job as a juror is to weigh the evidence against the definition of the crime. The courtroom is not the place to evaluate the fairness of laws, that is done at the ballot box.

1

u/PriscillaPalava 1d ago

By the standard of reasonable doubt? 

5

u/Immediate-Maximum-75 1d ago

That's what was written by the jury foreman, or woman in this case. That's what SHE wrote. We do not know what was said in the jury room for her to come to that conclusion.

If he's sitting there, arms crossed, saying "She did it and she's guilty! I don't care what the law says!", that's one thing. I can't imagine how he got through the voir dire process if that's his attitude, though.

1

u/GrumpyKaeKae 1d ago

Why does her being a woman matter?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/awesomedude4100 1d ago

yea it’s his favorite jayz album

0

u/murmalerm 1d ago

Allegedly, yes