The Lindsay Clancy Holdout

The identity of the lone holdout in the Lindsay Clancy jury – the lone black male – was easy to find after the Boston NBC station reported on Friday that he faced domestic violence allegations and a pending eviction case. Although the reporter chose not to identify the juror because “he has chosen not to speak publicly and the jury list is currently impounded,” his name was published on X on Sunday. You can find it if you look.

We discovered his name rather easily on Friday evening by reviewing Brockton, Massachusetts police logs and cross-referencing those against Massachusetts court records. That research didn’t take long but we chose not to release the name. He was called to serve on the jury and chose to keep his name private – a choice that should have been respected by others.

It’s as if the media wanted his name out there but also needed deniability. Sloppy work if they really wanted his name to be a secret. Or, more than enough details to encourage the public to ruin the juror’s life.

The juror was accused of throwing his wife against a dresser in 2021 and later assaulting his nephew (the very nephew that reported the incident with his wife). He’s also facing eviction after being behind rent by approximately $12,000. A protective order was issued after he assaulted his nephew. The criminal charges for the alleged assault against his wife were ultimately dismissed after they divorced, with the wife telling the local news that she did not want to testify in his criminal case because “she was worried about losing custody of her daughter.”

That explanation makes zero sense. If there is one truth in family court, it is that the victim of domestic violence will get custody of the children. Ryan Kath, the oblivious NBC Boston reporter who broke the story, failed to follow-up on that obvious contradiction.

That doesn’t mean the juror didn’t throw his wife into a dresser (or assault his nephew), but at a minimum it’s an issue that needs further inquiry. A reporter isn’t doing their job if they don’t ask these questions.

He was a juror the defense wanted.

The irony of the holdout’s race and background is that Lindsay Clancy’s defense would have wanted him on the jury. They would have salivated. It is correct to assume, until proven otherwise, that the defense knew of the juror’s criminal history – as a standard practice, lawyers run checks on prospective jurors. This is especially true in high-stakes cases where your client faces life in prison.