Tell Me You Wouldn’t Be Asking Questions About Motive

Tell Me You Wouldn’t Be Asking Questions About Motive This is where the Clancy holdout-juror story goes from strange to seriously uncomfortable. We are now talking about the lone juror at the center of an 11–1 split while reports are circulating about: a domestic-violence history, a current restraining order involving another family member, and an eviction case alleging six months of unpaid rent. And my immediate reaction was: That is a LOT of personal pressure surrounding one person who suddenly became the single vote capable of stopping a verdict. To be clear, those circumstances do not prove he was paid, influenced, bribed, or intentionally “threw” anything. But do they create obvious questions about vulnerability, outside pressure, motive, and whether this juror should have been scrutinized more closely before being seated? Absolutely. Because when one person becomes the difference between an 11–1 NGRI split and a mistrial, and afterward you learn that person was dealing with major legal and financial problems at the same time? People are going to ask uncomfortable questions. And I think they should. #LindsayClancy #HoldoutJuror #lindsayClancyTrial #lindsayclancycase #CourtTok