Holdout Juror’s Lawyer Tells Kayleigh McEnany He Will File Bar Complaint Against Lindsay Clancy Attorney: “100%” — Says Reddington “Lost His Mind”

The attorney for the lone holdout juror in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial sat down with Fox News’ Kayleigh McEnany and did not mince words.

Edward Paltzik told McEnany that Clancy defense lawyer Kevin Reddington should face a bar complaint for his conduct toward holdout juror Michael Péguy Desronvil, the only juror who refused to let a mother who strangled her three children walk on an insanity claim. Asked whether he intends to file that complaint, Paltzik answered, “100%.”

According to Fox News, Paltzik accused Reddington of conduct that “is not consistent with the standards of professionalism that we expect from members of the bar.”

McEnany:
Do you intend to file a bar complaint?

Paltzik:
100%.

McEnany:
So, you’ll be filing a bar complaint. Will there be defamation lawsuits against any party that you can speak about at this moment?

Paltzik:
It’s a bit early to talk about lawsuits, but I can say this: Kevin Reddington’s conduct is not consistent with the standards of professionalism that we expect from members of the bar. It is inconsistent with what we expect from members of the bar, and I’ll expand on that.

If you’re an officer of the court and you have taken an oath to uphold the United States Constitution—you’ve sworn to defend the Constitution—and then you get out there right after a trial and you attack a juror, but then you don’t stop. You continue to attack the juror. You’re attacking the juror outside the courtroom, inside the courtroom, everywhere.

Kevin Reddington is not behaving rationally anymore.

WATCH:

EXCLUSIVE: The attorney for the lone holdout juror in the Lindsay Clancy trial speaks to Fox News for the first time, telling Kayleigh McEnany that Clancy’s lawyer, Kevin Reddington, could face a bar complaint over his conduct involving the lone holdout juror, Michael Desronvil.… pic.twitter.com/OxQWAVJjFl

— Fox News (@FoxNews) September 28, 2026

Lindsay Clancy, 36, is accused of strangling her children, Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and 8-month-old Callan, at the family’s Duxbury, Massachusetts home on January 24, 2023.

Prosecutors said she sent her husband out on errands, used exercise resistance bands, then tried to kill herself. The defense argued she was not criminally responsible because of postpartum psychosis. As The Gateway Pundit has noted in prior coverage, Clancy was never diagnosed with postpartum psychosis.

After five weeks of testimony and seven days of deliberations, the jury deadlocked 11-1. Judge William Sullivan declared a mistrial on September 4. Eleven jurors were ready to find her not guilty by reason of insanity. Desronvil would not go along.

The Gateway Pundit reported when Desronvil finally spoke for himself. In a statement first given to NewsNation, he said he “didn’t have any doubts.”

“As I tried to explain different possible theories during deliberation, I kept getting cut off as if I had doubts based on the evidence presented,” he said. “Based on all the physical evidence, key witnesses, and what the prosecution presented, I thought it was enough proof that she knew exactly what she was doing and planned.”

That is not a man who “refused to follow the law.” That is a man who looked at three murdered children and refused to pretend the evidence was not there.

Then the smear campaign started.

Fellow jurors went on television. They called him arrogant. They claimed he admitted reasonable doubt and then would not vote their way. NBC Boston and other outlets ran with it.

Desronvil was identified, doxxed, and threatened. He had to relocate. Paltzik has called him an “American hero” and a “champion of justice.”

The Gateway Pundit also reported that Desronvil is a devout Catholic, the son of a Haitian immigrant, and a black Republican who believes he was targeted in a jury room stacked with Democrats. In this country, that combination is enough to make you the villain on cable news.

In the exclusive interview that aired Monday on Fox & Friends, McEnany pressed Paltzik on the jury foreperson’s claim that Desronvil would not apply the reasonable-doubt standard.

Paltzik’s answer was blunt: “Zero doubt. No doubt.”

When McEnany asked whether his client had evidence to back that up, Paltzik said, “A lot of evidence. A mountain of evidence.”

He described the deliberations as an “intense experience” with “unimaginable” pressure. Most people would have folded, he said. Desronvil did not.

“Michael did not because he is an uncommon man,” Paltzik told McEnany. “He’s an extraordinary man, and what he did was extraordinary. He is a brave man, he’s a courageous man, he’s a kind man, a decent man, but he’s also a man who cares about the law.”

Paltzik said the trial, for his client, was never about “Lindsay Clancy’s needs.” It was about three children who never got a voice.

“Michael wanted these three innocent children who never had a chance to have a voice, have a legacy, and to be remembered,” he said. “And that’s what this trial is about. It’s about three innocent children who were murdered by their demonic mother. And this shouldn’t be controversial.”

McEnany said she spoke with Desronvil briefly off the record before the interview and was “immediately struck” by how logical, methodical, and kind he was, and that he kept bringing the conversation back to the children, not to postpartum talking points.

Reddington “lost his mind,” Paltzik says

Paltzik did not treat Reddington’s post-trial conduct as ordinary advocacy.

“Ever since the moment he learned that Michael was not going to side with him, I believe that Kevin Reddington lost his mind,” he told McEnany.

He went further: “Kevin Reddington is just upset that he lost out on his legacy moment. He was one vote away from winning a trial that would have been the capstone of his career and he didn’t get it, and he lost his mind because of it.”

Paltzik said Reddington is “off the rails,” “not behaving rationally anymore,” and “clearly attacking the Sixth Amendment” and “the right to trial by jury.”

That is the heart of this fight. After the mistrial, Reddington publicly accused Desronvil of having an “agenda” and of having “robbed” the other 11 jurors. Then he asked Judge Sullivan for a limited inquiry into the holdout — questionnaires, alleged cellphone use during deliberations, and old court records, including claims about a domestic-violence history.

As The Gateway Pundit reported last week, Reddington styled the target as “Juror Doe” while still hunting the one juror who would not acquit. Paltzik has called that filing a “Looney Tunes” motion and “a full-frontal attack on the U.S. Constitution.”

On Fox, Paltzik rejected the smear file as well. Asked about domestic-violence and restraining-order allegations that have been repeated in local coverage, he said: “Never happened. Every single allegation against Michael is false. Fabricated, never happened, categorically false.”

He also said it was “horrifying” that Reddington referred to the holdout as a man while the jury was still supposed to be anonymous, shrinking the pool and, in Paltzik’s view, helping to out his client. “Kevin Reddington did not do that for any legitimate purpose … the purpose all along was to out Michael.”

The latest defense request, Paltzik warned, would set a “nightmarish precedent”: take the holdout’s phone, haul him into court, and teach every future juror that standing alone can get you investigated.

“We’re not going to have a criminal justice system if jurors are afraid of reprisals,” he said.

Reddington’s answer: “Shut up,” “foul individual,” “obstructionist”

Reddington has not been quiet either.

The Gateway Pundit reported over the weekend that Reddington told Fox News Digital that Paltzik should “shut up,” called him a “foul individual,” and rebranded Desronvil from holdout to “obstructionist juror.”

“I think Ed ought to learn how to go into the courtroom and articulate his position rather than be a histrionic individual that’s just mouthing off for the media,” Reddington said, according to Fox News.

He insisted every motion he filed is “legitimate” and “based on sound law, facts, jury questions.”

Paltzik’s reply, also to Fox: he is not backing down “one inch.” He said Reddington “was doing his job but the problem is it’s off the rails now.” His advice: stop whining and prepare for a retrial. “You only got 11, you needed 12.”

When McEnany asked about defamation suits, Paltzik said it is early — then circled back to the bar. Reddington’s conduct, he said, falls short of what the profession requires. Filing a complaint: “100%.”

What happens next

Clancy is due back in Plymouth Superior Court. Local reports Monday said prosecutors and Reddington have discussed adjourning the motion to investigate Desronvil, at least for now. Prosecutors still have not said whether they will retry the case.

That is the real question the activist jurors and the defense would rather not face. If the evidence was so weak, why is the man who voted guilty the one being hunted? If the insanity defense was so obvious, why did it take a media tour, a doxxing campaign, and a motion for a juror’s phone to explain away one vote?

Paltzik’s message to Reddington and to anyone who thinks the murder of three children is a postpartum policy seminar was simple: “You will never break Michael, because Michael is indestructible.”

One juror held the line. The system should protect that, not punish it.

Watch Paltzik’s interview with Kayleigh McEnany here.

Watch the full interview below: