Lindsay Clancy’s defence lawyer, Kevin Reddington, has responded angrily to criticism from Edward Paltzik, the attorney representing the lone juror who opposed an insanity verdict in Clancy’s murder trial. Reddington defended his post-trial motions seeking an inquiry into the juror, saying they were legally justified and part of his duty to represent Clancy.

Paltzik accused Reddington of attacking the constitutional rights of jurors and criticised him for publicly discussing the holdout after the mistrial. Clancy, who is accused of strangling her three children, faces a possible retrial after the jury deadlocked: eleven jurors supported a verdict of not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect, while one juror believed she was guilty of murder. Massachusetts does not impose the death penalty, despite Paltzik reportedly calling for Clancy’s execution.