Kevin Reddington, the outspoken attorney representing Lindsay Clancy, made a direct public plea to President Trump on Tuesday morning, urging him to consider a pardon for the Massachusetts mother accused of killing her three young children.
Appearing on “Good Morning America,” Reddington was asked what could come next for Clancy after her closely watched case ended in a mistrial on Friday. “Mr. President, I would hope that you would consider this young lady — the type of person she is and what she’s been through — and consider a pardon,” he said.
The 75-year-old defense lawyer said he hoped Trump might take another look at the case, noting that the president had already “felt compelled to speak out” about it. Reddington did not reference Trump’s earlier remark that Clancy would have to “pay the price” for the deaths of her children: 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson and 8-month-old Callan.
Trump, speaking to reporters last week, described the case as “a horrible tragedy.”
“Look, she did a horrible, horrible thing. Can’t be worse. But you’ll find out what the price to pay is. There’ll be a price. It’s going to be [a] mental institution or jail or something,” Trump said at the time.
Reddington’s unexpected appeal came near the close of a short television interview in which he repeatedly defended Clancy’s character, calling his controversial client “a wonderful, wonderful person.”
He described her as “just a wonderful neighbor, friend, wife, mother,” adding that he has developed “a very strong bond with Lindsay.”
Reddington also addressed his earlier comment that the outcome had “crushed” District Attorney Tim Cruz, saying he wished he had been more “circumspect” in the moment, though he stopped short of apologizing for the boastful wording.
“That’s just bravado,” he said with a smile, blaming it on the “emotions” of finishing a “six-, seven-week trial.”
“I don’t regret saying it at all,” he insisted, while conceding he “perhaps could have been a little more circumspect” and just said he “did a good job” with his defense.
He also tried to defend himself from the outrage he sparked by so aggressively blaming a juror for not sideing with the others, leading to the mistrial with a 11-1 split.
Here’s the latest on Lindsay Clancy’s murder trial:
“I would defend that individual’s right to be a holdout for forever, that’s part of our judicial system. I respect that and I would certainly defend his right to do that,” he said.
His frustration with the lone holdout – who he said he didn’t think was living out a “12 Angry Men” scenario – was because of a note from the jury forelady that said he “had doubt but would not apply reasonable doubt” to his vote on the verdict.
“That’s not right, and that’s why I was upset,” he said.
