Lindsay Clancy’s defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, is rejecting claims that he changed his legal strategy when he told a Plymouth County judge this week that prosecutors had not proven his client killed her three children.
Reddington raised the argument Tuesday in Plymouth, Mass., during Clancy’s first court appearance since her trial ended in a mistrial. Speaking afterward with Fox News contributor Billy Bush on the “Hot Mics” podcast, Reddington said he has questioned the strength of the Commonwealth’s case since the beginning of the proceedings.
“That’s exactly what I was saying,” Reddington said. “I’ve been arguing that from the very beginning. I argued it in a closing argument to the jury. I argued in our motions.”
In court, Reddington pressed Judge William Sullivan on what he described as insufficient evidence against his client. “Where’s the evidence that she did this?” he asked, before listing what he called gaps and faulty statements in the prosecution’s case. “Where is the evidence she did this?”
The argument came as part of a Rule 25 motion, which asks a judge to find a defendant not guilty because the evidence presented at trial does not meet the legal standard for conviction.
No Ruling Yet
Judge Sullivan did not rule on the motion Tuesday. He instead pushed oral arguments on several pending motions, including the Rule 25 request, to Nov. 2.
Bush said he was left without the answers he expected. “He didn’t get any answers on the insufficiency of evidence,” Bush told Fox News Digital. “He wanted, immediately, her to be declared not criminally responsible because of that. I think that was a stretch. He probably knew it.”
Bush noted other matters remain unresolved as well, including arguments from double jeopardy expert Martin Weinberg, which were also postponed to November, and questions over alleged juror misconduct. “That was punted to Nov. 2,” Bush said. “And the alleged juror misconduct, we didn’t get anything on that because Judge Sullivan, he’s Reddington told us, impounded that information. We want to see the jury questionnaire. Everybody wants to see it.”
Sullivan declared a mistrial on Sept. 4 after jurors spent roughly a week deliberating without reaching a verdict.
A Common but Rarely Successful Motion
Carol Erskine, a retired Massachusetts judge and child welfare advocate following the case, said Rule 25 motions are routine in criminal trials but rarely succeed.
“He is arguing that [they] did not prove each and every element as required by law,” Erskine told Fox News Digital. “I understand why people don’t get this, but he had to argue sufficiency of evidence under Rule 25(b)(2) case law. He told the judge he asked for a Bowden instruction and was denied, which meant he was challenging the poor investigation/search at the home by police. It’s a very nuanced argument.”
Plymouth County prosecutors offered a sharply different view of Reddington’s motion, calling it “a laughable argument” and asking the judge to deny it.
Clancy is scheduled to return to court on Nov. 2 for the motions hearing. No date has been set for a possible retrial.
Outside the Courtroom
Bush said Reddington has become a familiar figure to those covering the case outside the Plymouth courthouse, earning nicknames like “Big Red” and “Shreddington.”
“Big Red goes out to the parking lot,” Bush said. “He talks to the different people who are covering this in their own way. He asks them questions about themselves. He sits there in a lawn chair, having coffee and connecting with everybody.”
Bush said many of the women following the case closely support Clancy but have also grown attached to her attorney. “They support Lindsay Clancy,” he said. “But they love Reddington because he’s the man who’s fighting for her. And they’re all seeing him as that guy, ‘Geez, I’d like that man fighting for me someday, if I needed it.'”
