Lindsay Clancy juror breaks silence after mistrial, says defense actions made him feel exposed
TheGrio...
Michael Desronvil said a defense motion and courtroom references to his gender made him fear he could be identified after the mistrial.
Michael Desronvil did not volunteer to become a public figure. He says Lindsay Clancy’s defense attorney made him one anyway.
In his first televised interview, the juror whose vote produced a mistrial told Fox News host Kayleigh McEnany that he felt scared after attorney Kevin Reddington filed a motion asking the court to investigate him, TMZ reported.
The filing sought two things: a review of Desronvil’s cell phone usage during deliberations, and answers about whether he had been truthful on his jury questionnaire. Both requests target the integrity of his service rather than his conclusion, a distinction that has done little to shield him from public attention.
What troubled him more, by his account, was something smaller. Desronvil said Reddington repeatedly referred to him as “he” while addressing the judge in open court. With only three men seated on the twelve-person jury, that single pronoun narrowed the field considerably. He said it gave anyone with bad intentions a path toward identifying him and potentially showing up at his home.
He was careful to note the limits of what followed. Desronvil said he received no physical threats despite the fear, a clarification that distinguishes anxiety about exposure from anything that actually materialized.
He also described the experience of hearing Patrick Clancy’s 911 call as surreal, recalling the desperation audible in a father’s voice over the deaths of his three young children. That recording was among the most difficult evidence presented during the trial.
Despite everything that followed, Desronvil told McEnany he would serve again if called, an answer that complicates efforts to paint him as someone who regretted the position he took.
His stance on the verdict has not shifted either. He previously rejected claims that he disregarded reasonable doubt, maintaining he believed the killings were carefully planned. Other jurors have offered a conflicting account, alleging he refused to move even after acknowledging doubts about the case. Those competing versions remain unreconciled, and no mechanism exists to settle which is accurate.
The disagreement sits atop the central dispute of the trial itself. Clancy’s defense has argued she was experiencing postpartum psychosis when her children died, while prosecutors contended she understood her actions throughout.
The case remains unresolved. A judge declined earlier this month to dismiss the murder charges, and Clancy is scheduled to return to court Nov. 2, with prosecutors expected to indicate whether they intend to retry her.