Megyn Kelly Urges Lindsay Clancy’s Lawyer to ‘Take the L’ While Guest Says Kevin Reddington Could Claim Double Jeopardy

Journalist Megyn Kelly urged Lindsay Clancy’s lawyer to accept defeat in the sensational case after the dramatic mistrial declaration for the Massachusetts mom who killed her three yong kids.

Speaking with a panel of guests on The Megyn Kelly Show Friday, Kelly said attorney Kevin Reddington should understand that the case is “over.”

Reddington’s desperate, Hail Mary decision to appeal as Judge William Sullivan declared a mistrial led to an hours long delay before a judge on the state’s top court rejected the move, allowing Sullivan to move forward and end the case.

While Kelly urged Reddington to “take the L,” and attorney and former Florida state Senator Dave Aronberg agreed Reddington should move on, legal analyst Phil Holloway had a different view:

MEGYN KELLY: Sorry, Kevin. Like, you did a great job. Getting 11 of those jurors on your side actually will probably change your client’s fate in a very favorable way.

But you know, Phil, this guy’s got to learn to take the L.

DAVE ARONBERG: Or take a W.

KELLY: It looks like this trial judge will be his trial judge his second time around.

So, you really don’t want to alienate him completely.

PHILL HOLLOWAY: I don’t think he’s taking an L. And I’m not, there may not be another trial with this or any other judge because, see, here’s what Reddington’s actually doing.

He’s not necessarily playing the game that we think he’s playing. Because there’s the short game which is now, which is today, and then there’s the long game.

And so he knows that he either had to, he got it was 11 to one. He was very, very close to just winning outright and he could taste it.

And so his goal was either to get the juror removed or in some way, maybe get an alternate on there so that he could get the 12 to agree to not guilty.

But in the alternative, and since that’s not going to happen now, mistrial has been declared, he’s obviously opposed the mistrial.

He’s opposed it vigorously and he’s raised a lot of other issues, frivolous and otherwise as part of it, including this effort at going to the appeals court.

So now what’s going to happen? He says he’s ready for trial. He wants to go right away week after next.

But I don’t think he really does want because what you’re going to see between now and next week probably is you’re going to see something, we would call it here in Georgia a plea in bar.

He’s going to say that the second trial is barred on the grounds of double jeopardy. And here’s why.

He’s going to say that because this was a mistrial, then it was done over the defense’s objection that the, it would be a manifest necessity is what you have to have, to have a retrial over the defense objection.

And so he’s going to say that even though this was a jury, mistrial based on not reaching a verdict, he’s going to say that it was still error and that in order to try her, there has to be a manif
est necessity, which he’s going to say there is not.

Because he’s going to allege these errors by the court that were not opposed by the prosecutor. So that’s in a nutshell where he’s going.

He’s going to try to get his cake and eat it too. He’s going to try to get his win now from the court of appeals.

Kelly disagreed, saying, “These appellate courts are not actually looking to to perform colonoscopies on every decision the trial court makes.”

Watch above via YouTube.

New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters"
Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!