The attorney for the holdout juror in the Lindsay Clancy case said on Sunday his client had “a mountain of evidence” to support his belief that Clancy was criminally responsible for her children’s deaths. In a pre-released clip from a Fox News interview with Kayleigh McEnany, attorney Edward Paltzik said juror Michael Desronvil, whose…
Page A2From§Eachthe midnight edition — 28 September 2026
Holdout juror provided zero evidence during deliberations, his lawyer says he had a mountain of it.
As it ran on the front
On September 3rd, Lindsay Clancy's defense attorney told the court that a single juror stood between the panel and a unanimous verdict. The claim arrived in a note from the foreperson: the holdout was not following the judge's instructions on reasonable doubt. The jury was nine women and three men, weighing whether Clancy was criminally responsible for killing her three children.
A week later, September 10th, a name attached to the claim. Fellow juror Nick Dargie told reporters that the holdout, Michael Desronvil, had failed to provide any evidence to support his vote. The mistrial that followed rests on that account: one man's doubt, and by his own colleague's telling, nothing behind it.…
…(cont) Eight days after that, September 18th, Desronvil was moved to what his attorney called a "secure location," after details of the deliberations became public. The record does not say what he was doing in the jury room. It says why he needed protecting once people found out what had happened there.
Four days later, September 22nd, Clancy's attorney, Kevin Reddington, filed a motion asking Judge William Sullivan to investigate Desronvil over alleged cellphone use during deliberations. All together now — line one of that docket: a mistrial, caused by a single juror. Line two: that juror, according to a colleague, offered no evidence for his vote. Line three: a motion asking whether he was looking at his phone instead.
Today, September 28th, Desronvil's attorney, Edward Paltzik, gave a different account — not in a filing, but in a clip released ahead of a Fox News interview with Kayleigh McEnany. Paltzik said his client had "zero doubt" and "a mountain of evidence" to support finding Clancy criminally responsible.
The mountain and the zero belong to the same juror. One account came from the colleague who sat beside him through deliberations. The other came from his lawyer, on cable news, six days after the court itself was asked to check his phone. Neither account is evidence in any legal sense — one is an interview clip, the other is a claim made outside the courtroom. The motion about the phone is the only document in this docket that a judge has actually been asked to rule on.
Whatever the mountain contains, it did not make it into the room where the verdict was decided. What made it into that room, according to the person who was in it with him, was nothing at all.
“This lawyer waited until a judge was already checking his client's phone before he went on Fox and called it a mountain of evidence — that's not a legal filing, that's a press release with a law degree. The only document a court's actually looking at is the motion asking if the guy was scrolling his phone instead of listening to the case. A woman's fate gets decided by who's loudest on cable, not by what's on the record.”
“Look, "mountain of evidence" is standard legal terminology for "my client had a strong conviction," and a strong conviction is basically evidence if you think about it long enough. The cellphone inquiry? That's just due diligence — checking a phone isn't the same as saying somebody did something wrong. Did I just admit there's something worth checking? Strike that, my client's confidence speaks for itself.”
Earlier in this story
- Same $994 check counted down five times by one outlet: 15 days, then 8, 3, 2, then 4 By Ruth · the early bird edition, 27 September 2026
- Promised $5,000 each if Republicans hold Congress, 750,000 Americans are removed from their health coverage By Ruth · the noon edition, 23 September 2026
- GOP senator whose vote is needed to fund $5,000 checks says he won't fund them By Lou · the coffee break edition, 21 September 2026
- Treasury is examining whether the $5,000 checks can be issued without authorization from Congress, days after the president promised them at "100 percent" if Republicans keep Congress. By Lou · the breakfast edition, 20 September 2026
The receipts
Lindsay Clancy's holdout juror had "zero doubt" about his position, his attorney tells Kayleigh McEnany, citing "a mountain of evidence" for conviction.
· Holdout juror in Lindsay Clancy trial taken to ‘secure location’ after deliberations details made public from the morgue, 18 Sep 2026
· Lindsay Clancy defense attorney asks judge to investigate holdout juror over alleged cellphone use from the morgue, 22 Sep 2026
· Lone Lindsay Clancy holdout juror did not provide ‘single piece of evidence’ to support his vote: fellow juror from the morgue, 10 Sep 2026
· Lindsay Clancy's attorney wants the holdout juror investigated. Why? from the morgue, 22 Sep 2026
· Single holdout juror preventing unanimous verdict in Lindsay Clancy trial, defense claims from the morgue, 3 Sep 2026
This page is a back-issue: the story as it ran, receipts as they were. The current edition is at the front. The byline is a pen name for a column drafted by a machine and checked by the editor: how this is made.