Friday on FNC’s “Hannity,” long-time legal commentator Nancy Grace said that Kevin Reddington should have been held in contempt of court for his antics following the Lindsay Clancy mistrial announcement in Plymouth, MA.
“Nancy, you’ve seen a lot of courtrooms,” guest host Jason Chaffetz said. “Give us your top line. What’s your takeaway from this verdict, mistrial?”
Grace replied, “Well, I believe Judge Sullivan got it right when he told the jurors to think back on Winston Churchill, who fought against the Nazis and the Germans and even parliament and said, ‘You must brace yourself to do your duty.’ And that is what this lone juror did. As much as that guy right there, Kevin Reddington, wants to throw a fit, Kevin Reddington, AKA, drama, out on the front of the courthouse steps and in the courtroom treating the judge like that, he should have been held in contempt. The judge has quite the judicial demeanor. I don’t know that I would have had the patience that judge had for Reddington. But that said, think about it — brace for duty. That juror stood strong. Nothing in the law says that you must bend to the will of the other jurors when it’s against your conscience. And that juror held out.”
“If Reddington doesn’t like it, sour grapes. And what does he do? Go out and whine on the courthouse steps,” she continued. “I’ve had a lot of criminal cases, including murder cases, where the defense took up an issue that they didn’t like the judge’s ruling on for certificate of immediate review. That means you just go straight to the supreme or the appellate court and you say, this is what the judge is ruling. I think it’s unconstitutional. This is why. Give me an immediate response. That’s what happened today. It’s not out of the ordinary. But what is out of the ordinary is the judge says, okay, we’re declaring a mistrial. Bring in the jury. And at that moment, that precise moment as the jury is coming in, he goes, wait, immediate review. And he just happened to have a multi-page document ready for the court in which he claims the juror was biased against the mentally ill.”
“If you read his — what Reddington said with no factual basis at all, he’s claiming a constitutional bias against the mentally ill,” Grace added. “It’s all technical legal term, Jason. B.S. And this will be retried again. And if you listen, every defense attorney that comes on the air says, oh, no. It’s not going to be retried. They’ll never get a verdict. Well, you know what? Retrials work in the favor of the state. So, buckle up. It’s going to be a bumpy ride, Reddington.”
Follow Jeff Poor on X @jeff_poor
Read the full article here