Lindsay Clancys lawyer bashed Americas juries and battered another pillar of justice

Lawyers are supposed to protect and defend America’s justice system. Kevin Reddington, the Massachusetts attorney defending Lindsay Clancy, seems more like an abuser thereof.In what law professor Jonathan Turley described as “a breathtaking abandonment of restraint and decency,” Reddington went after the lone holdout juror in the case of the killer mom — a (so far) unknown figure who we’re told was one of the panel’s three males. Reddington, in an unhinged press conference after a mistrial was called, accused the dissident of stealing his fellow jurors’ time: “They know that they were robbed by one man for whatever his agenda was, who stole seven weeks of the life of these other jurors.”He also charged the holdout with hostility toward the disabled — that is, toward the crazed defendant.Citing the Americans with Disabilities Act, Reddington claimed that leaving a man who didn’t buy Clancy’s insanity plea on the jury was like leaving a racist on a jury. “The scene was a fitting end to a visceral trial,” Turley observed — “but it added a vindictive element that should prompt Judge William Sullivan to call out the seasoned defense attorney.”Reddington’s inflammatory comments fueled a crowd of Clancy’s supporters, who condemned the local district attorney for, in their view, caring only about the three dead children, and not the suffering of the mother — you know, the one who admitted killing those children.Well.  Traditionally, lawyers don’t attack jurors. Citizen jurors are an important, in fact essential, part of our justice system, and those who serve on juries are performing a public service (for a pittance in pay). In the short term, Reddington’s remarks risk poisoning a future jury pool in Clancy’s case — by making future jurors in a retrial afraid to stand by their own views for fear of being hung out to dry.Or maybe they’re designed to do that.His accusations put a target on the holdout juror’s back �...