Lindsay Clancy Retrial: Why Kevin Reddington Is Fighting to Stop It

After weeks of testimony, the Lindsay Clancy trial ended not with a verdict, but with a deadlocked jury 11-1 in favor of finding her not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility. 

Due to this hung jury, Judge William F. Sullivan had no choice but to declare a mistrial — or did he? 

As the case heads toward a September 29th status hearing, defense attorney Kevin Reddington is preparing to argue something rare: that the case should be dismissed entirely, and that a second trial should never happen at all. 

In this episode of Criminally Obsessed, investigative reporter Anne Emerson speaks with criminal defense attorney Jack Rice, who breaks down the legal reasoning behind Reddington's expected motion. Rice explains the double jeopardy and "manifest necessity" arguments at the center of Reddington's strategy, the claim that Judge Sullivan should have removed the holdout juror rather than declaring a mistrial, and why — despite the argument's logic — Rice believes it's ultimately a long shot. 

The two discuss whether a plea deal is realistic, why Clancy's current mental competency could complicate any retrial, and what to expect when the case returns to court. 

Subscribe to Criminally Obsessed for continuing Lindsay Clancy trial coverage, true crime investigations, courtroom analysis, and exclusive interviews that go beyond the headlines.