Sept. 4, 2026
**BREAKING** Killer Mom Trial: Judge Gives Defense 1 Hour Before He Declares MISTRIAL
Apple Podcasts 
Spotify 
Castro 
RSS Feed The jury came back after nearly 38 hours of deliberations with a note that said “with a heavy heart” we are unable to come to a unanimous decision. After protest from the defense, Judge Sullivan said he had no choice but to declare a mistrial. But that didn’t stop Kevin Reddington who asked to appeal to a Supreme Court Justice to issue an emergency stay on the ruling, and shockingly, Judge Sullivan gave him one hour.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
00:00:02
Speaker 1: Hey there, folks.
00:00:02
Speaker 2: Friday, September 4th, a breaking and confusing situation in Massachusetts in the trial of Lindsey Clancy. A judge is ready to declare a mistrial, but he's giving it an hour. With that, welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ Robes. I have now never seen anything like this. The jury is deadlocked and has been. The judge came in and said, I'm ready to declare a mistrial. This just happened within three minutes ago. But Robes, the mistrial hasn't been declared yet.
00:00:36
Speaker 1: No, because Kevin Reddington is still fighting. He is fighting against the judge officially calling this a mistrial. And he is asking, he initially asked if he could file a petition tomorrow, Saturday, to try and stop this mistrial. The judge was like, you want to call the jurors back on Saturday? So the agreement has been that now Kevin Reddington is filing something. He has an hour to try and stop the judge from declaring a mistrial.
00:01:08
Speaker 2: Okay, so the reason this came up is the judge, the jury, of course, came back. Deliberations, they're on what hour? Ropes 38, whatever, 39.
00:01:16
Speaker 1: Yes.
00:01:16
Speaker 2: That they're on right now. They have been deadlocked. So they sent another note in. So that is what everybody just collected again for here in the past several minutes. The note says, and I quote, it is with a heavy heart that we report we have been unable to come to a unanimous decision and will not be able to. That's it. That's done. That should be a wrap. So the judge still robes. He let the prosecution speak on this. He let the defense speak on this. The prosecution quickly said, nope, we don't think you should send them back. But Reddington still was making arguments for why I think you should send them back one more time.
00:01:53
Speaker 1: Yes, because he said the first time the judge sent the jury back, it wasn't a formal charge. It wasn't a Tui Rodriguez. It wasn't an Allen charge. And so it was kind of just like, yeah, just keep trying. So he's basically arguing that that didn't count, that the only time he officially sent charged the jury to go back and deliberate was when he issued the tui rodriguez charge so kevin reddington is claiming that the judge can still send the jury back one more time under massachusetts law because of the way it was framed if he was.
00:02:29
Speaker 2: On technicalities that the judge wasn't buying the judge said nope statute doesn't allow me to do so so the judge these words came out of his mouth I don't have any choice but to declare a mistrial. He said, I am going to declare a mistrial at this point. Now, nothing has been gaveled in and it's not official because the jury hasn't come in and they haven't been relieved. So, Robes, as they're sending for the jury, Kevin Reddington gets back up to start making this argument. And the judge even said, yeah, you're supposed to do that already. He was like, oh, I got some more stuff here. So he gets up and starts making this argument, Robes. I've never heard of this before. He wants to now, before a mistrial is declared, go file an appeal. And apparently in Massachusetts, you are allowed to go appeal to one justice of their Supreme Court who could then give a last minute emergency stay and keep the mistrial from being declared. Robes, we are in a standstill for a mistrial. Babe, this is... I haven't seen this one.
00:03:35
Speaker 1: I have never even heard of this, let alone seen it. And this is the Friday before Labor Day weekend. And he is somehow going to find a Massachusetts Supreme Court justice... to hear his appeal, and the clock is ticking. The judge said, I will give you one hour. He said that at 11.30 p.m. Eastern time. That means if Kevin Reddington isn't able to make his case effectively to the Supreme Court justice in the next week, 55 minutes as of this recording, the judge is saying, I am going to declare a mistrial.
00:04:16
Speaker 2: Why would he give them this much discretion? I'm surprised. This is incredibly incredible.
00:04:27
Speaker 1: And a judge speak to each other the way they have, and it's been fiery, it's been tense, it's been argumentative, and the judge has not called out Kevin Reddington. He hasn't called him or even suggested that he's in contempt of court, but certainly with the way he's been behaving, it would have been justifiable for a judge to get really pissed off at a defense attorney acting this way, throwing his papers down yesterday, yelling in open court, and now stopping the judge as he's about to make a declaration?
00:05:04
Speaker 2: The judge didn't have to stop. He heard him out again. He heard him out again when he didn't have to. Rose, they're talking to each other. You just made me think of it. They talk to each other like brothers. They're arguing, but it's never necessarily fighting. But they're arguing and they're bickering, even poking at each other a little bit at times. Today, the judge was giving it back. Robes, this idea that he said, what I want you to do is hold off on the mistrial so I can file a motion. And the judge said, how are you going to do that? When are you going to do it? He said, I'll file it. Get it filed out today. They can hear it tomorrow. And the judge, and even we're all, it's a holiday weekend. You're going to go before a judge and argue something on a Saturday? And then to that point, Robes, if you lose, I have to bring the jury in here on a Saturday to declare a mistrial? That's not going to work. So he got annoyed, finally just said, you got an hour, dude. I'm surprised he gave him that.
00:06:00
Speaker 1: So he is looking, Kevin Reddington is looking, I'm surprised too, by the way, for an emergency stay. on the judge's order for a mistrial. And then what Kevin Reddington wants, if he gets this emergency stay, let's just say he finds a justice who will grant him this. Then he's talking about hauling these jurors back in on Tuesday, or do they have to go back and deliberate right now?
00:06:29
Speaker 2: Oh my God.
00:06:30
Speaker 1: Would the judge then have to give another Tui Rodriguez charge? to the jury and have them go back again this afternoon. And obviously if they came back again and said, we cannot reach a consensus, then he would absolutely declare a mistrial. But what is going to change? I guess I know Kevin Reddington is fighting for Lindsay Clancy, but we have seen this jury. It seems as though the majority and certainly the foreperson has done everything in her power to And we don't know what's going on behind the scenes, but clearly they have tried to get the judge to even be sterner or be more forceful in how he is describing what this juror needs to consider. And the juror has heard it all, certainly feels the pressure, and is refusing to change his verdict.
00:07:24
Speaker 2: After seven days, Robes, this is somebody that's not going to change. They've been, you know, they've been ganging up on this person for a while, you would assume. And after seven days, how long before this person cracks? I just don't think at this point they will.
00:07:37
Speaker 1: So I don't understand what Kevin Reddington thinks is going to change between now and three hours from now, now and four hours from now.
00:07:44
Speaker 2: He's trying to get. So this case, for all intents and purposes, is over. It just hasn't been gaveled and made official. He is trying to have an emergency stay, which stops the judge from declaring this mistrial. And I guess then Robes, he's going to then take his case for getting this juror kicked off to someone else. Robes, doesn't it now, okay, now, at what point, I go back to this juror, it feels like we are now manipulating an outcome because somebody doesn't like it. Like, we did this, we tried this, you didn't change your mind. We did this, you didn't change your mind. Now we're going to do something else until we get this one juror off this jury because we don't like something. Robes, I got a problem with that. This is our system. They're supposed to have the right to do this for whatever reason, like it, love it, hate it. Babe, now another step to once again target this juror. We're going to keep going until we get this person off so we can get the verdict we want because we don't think they're whatever. Robes, I would be shocked, but I've been shocked all the way through this case. Is a Supreme Court justice there going to step in and say, yeah, I see enough here. Stop everything. I don't know.
00:09:00
Speaker 1: I don't know what Kevin Reddington's relationship is. with any of the Supreme Court justices.
00:09:05
Speaker 2: Probably a good one, given.
00:09:06
Speaker 1: But he obviously has had a decades, decades, decades long career there in that state and probably knows a lot of folks. I don't know how much personal relationships come into this. I don't know how much just the legality of this, if it's just cut and dry, if there's a black and white answer. The judge seems to think that there is not a reasonable, I guess, motion here where you would have any justifiable reason to stop him declaring a mistrial. The prosecution is supporting the mistrial. The judge was, it seemed as though he was about to gavel it in.
00:09:40
Speaker 2: Robes, he used these words. Uh, I'm going to declare a mistrial at this point. He said that in open court.
00:09:49
Speaker 1: And Kevin Reddington starts waving his hands.
00:09:52
Speaker 2: And stops. Robes, I don't know. They say it's our justice system. This is how it works. But Robes, um, I know this isn't about being on one side or another. Robes, what do we, this is what we, it just seems crazy that this one person, we keep focusing on them because they keep saying we don't like Robes. how you're going about your job. And even the judge is saying the person has the right to do it the way they're doing it.
00:10:22
Speaker 1: All of that said, perhaps it is also our legal system doing what it's supposed to do, allowing this one hour period of time to transpire, to give the defense one last opportunity to have a higher court look at what's been going on in that courtroom and And that way the judge can feel like he gave the defense every single opportunity to pursue.
00:10:51
Speaker 2: They have the right to appeal, though, baby. They do. That's the thing. We are stopping the process because a judge is saying one thing, an attorney is saying another, and the attorney is winning. The judge could have stopped this a bunch of times. I don't get it. But the clock is literally at this point ticking on this trial. Robes, it's odd to be sitting here and have a trial that a judge has already said. He already said what the conclusion of this trial is. But we have to wait for a countdown before it officially happens.
00:11:38
Speaker 1: That's right, because we are waiting to see if Kevin Ruddington can get a Supreme Court justice, a higher court, to put an emergency stay on the judge issuing or declaring that this is officially a mistrial after a second note came from the jury saying, with heavy hearts, we cannot reach a consensus, nor will we be able to. And it's interesting, we're getting some color here. from inside and outside the courthouse. I mean, this is described as somewhat of a chaotic scene. The New York Times is reporting that court staff is now getting exacerbated with crowds that are pressing towards the courtroom door, trying to secure seats, actually yelling at spectators to retreat. The way it's being described from folks who are inside that courthouse is fairly, sounds chaotic, because folks, I don't think many people have seen anything like this before.
00:12:39
Speaker 2: I have not seen anyone appeal a decision that hasn't been made yet.
00:12:48
Speaker 1: That's about to be made.
00:12:50
Speaker 2: I haven't seen it. I guess it's legal. I guess it's okay. I guess it's part of the process. He's trying to get another judge to stop this judge from declaring a mistrial. I did not know about this, babe. This is new stuff to me. I am fascinated. We talked right before we came on. He said, Ro, what do you think is going to happen? You know what? Everything has shocked me. We talked about what might happen. What do you think they're going to say? What do you think? Didn't see this one on the bingo card.
00:13:19
Speaker 1: I haven't seen one legal analyst come close to guessing what comes next in this case.
00:13:24
Speaker 2: We shouldn't feel bad.
00:13:24
Speaker 1: We shouldn't feel bad because we've got former prosecutors and defense attorneys and all these folks who are certainly experts when it comes to our American justice system. And none of them have been able to predict the way this trial has gone. From, frankly, start to finish, this has just been a remarkableâ honestly, it's aâ I feel like civics classes, do they still exist in high schools? But I feel like this is a case that should be studied by anyone who is consideringâ just learning about our legal system. We're learning as we go, and perhaps even some people in the courtroom are learning about what is possible. I did not know that a defense attorney or an attorney at all could stop a judge almost in mid-sentence with gavel almost up in the air. That's kind of what it felt like. He was about to officially declare this case a mistrial.
00:14:18
Speaker 2: We've all said this to somebody before, and the judge said it to Kevin Reddington. some variation, but the judge said in court, I got the jury on the way in here now, and you want to bring this up? But then he let him. The jury was literally walking to the courtroom. And Kevin Reddington stood up. Again, Robes, whoever get in trouble in Massachusetts, he's our first call. This dude is fighting his ass off. Even after this was settled, he's fighting to keep it from being settled.
00:14:44
Speaker 1: He's still fighting for Lindsey Clancy. And you know, with everything that must have been going on in that deliberation room, those jurors, I bet you some of them are just chomping at the bit to tell all.
00:14:58
Speaker 2: They thought they were leaving.
00:14:59
Speaker 1: They thought they were leaving, and now they're probably like, what the actual is going on? All right, we're going to keep our eye on this courtroom. Please stay close to your phones and our feed because we will be updating you shortly. But with that, everyone, we always appreciate you listening to us. I'm Amy Robach, alongside TJ Holmes. We will be talking to you very, very soon.
Speaker 1: Hey there, folks.
00:00:02
Speaker 2: Friday, September 4th, a breaking and confusing situation in Massachusetts in the trial of Lindsey Clancy. A judge is ready to declare a mistrial, but he's giving it an hour. With that, welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ Robes. I have now never seen anything like this. The jury is deadlocked and has been. The judge came in and said, I'm ready to declare a mistrial. This just happened within three minutes ago. But Robes, the mistrial hasn't been declared yet.
00:00:36
Speaker 1: No, because Kevin Reddington is still fighting. He is fighting against the judge officially calling this a mistrial. And he is asking, he initially asked if he could file a petition tomorrow, Saturday, to try and stop this mistrial. The judge was like, you want to call the jurors back on Saturday? So the agreement has been that now Kevin Reddington is filing something. He has an hour to try and stop the judge from declaring a mistrial.
00:01:08
Speaker 2: Okay, so the reason this came up is the judge, the jury, of course, came back. Deliberations, they're on what hour? Ropes 38, whatever, 39.
00:01:16
Speaker 1: Yes.
00:01:16
Speaker 2: That they're on right now. They have been deadlocked. So they sent another note in. So that is what everybody just collected again for here in the past several minutes. The note says, and I quote, it is with a heavy heart that we report we have been unable to come to a unanimous decision and will not be able to. That's it. That's done. That should be a wrap. So the judge still robes. He let the prosecution speak on this. He let the defense speak on this. The prosecution quickly said, nope, we don't think you should send them back. But Reddington still was making arguments for why I think you should send them back one more time.
00:01:53
Speaker 1: Yes, because he said the first time the judge sent the jury back, it wasn't a formal charge. It wasn't a Tui Rodriguez. It wasn't an Allen charge. And so it was kind of just like, yeah, just keep trying. So he's basically arguing that that didn't count, that the only time he officially sent charged the jury to go back and deliberate was when he issued the tui rodriguez charge so kevin reddington is claiming that the judge can still send the jury back one more time under massachusetts law because of the way it was framed if he was.
00:02:29
Speaker 2: On technicalities that the judge wasn't buying the judge said nope statute doesn't allow me to do so so the judge these words came out of his mouth I don't have any choice but to declare a mistrial. He said, I am going to declare a mistrial at this point. Now, nothing has been gaveled in and it's not official because the jury hasn't come in and they haven't been relieved. So, Robes, as they're sending for the jury, Kevin Reddington gets back up to start making this argument. And the judge even said, yeah, you're supposed to do that already. He was like, oh, I got some more stuff here. So he gets up and starts making this argument, Robes. I've never heard of this before. He wants to now, before a mistrial is declared, go file an appeal. And apparently in Massachusetts, you are allowed to go appeal to one justice of their Supreme Court who could then give a last minute emergency stay and keep the mistrial from being declared. Robes, we are in a standstill for a mistrial. Babe, this is... I haven't seen this one.
00:03:35
Speaker 1: I have never even heard of this, let alone seen it. And this is the Friday before Labor Day weekend. And he is somehow going to find a Massachusetts Supreme Court justice... to hear his appeal, and the clock is ticking. The judge said, I will give you one hour. He said that at 11.30 p.m. Eastern time. That means if Kevin Reddington isn't able to make his case effectively to the Supreme Court justice in the next week, 55 minutes as of this recording, the judge is saying, I am going to declare a mistrial.
00:04:16
Speaker 2: Why would he give them this much discretion? I'm surprised. This is incredibly incredible.
00:04:27
Speaker 1: And a judge speak to each other the way they have, and it's been fiery, it's been tense, it's been argumentative, and the judge has not called out Kevin Reddington. He hasn't called him or even suggested that he's in contempt of court, but certainly with the way he's been behaving, it would have been justifiable for a judge to get really pissed off at a defense attorney acting this way, throwing his papers down yesterday, yelling in open court, and now stopping the judge as he's about to make a declaration?
00:05:04
Speaker 2: The judge didn't have to stop. He heard him out again. He heard him out again when he didn't have to. Rose, they're talking to each other. You just made me think of it. They talk to each other like brothers. They're arguing, but it's never necessarily fighting. But they're arguing and they're bickering, even poking at each other a little bit at times. Today, the judge was giving it back. Robes, this idea that he said, what I want you to do is hold off on the mistrial so I can file a motion. And the judge said, how are you going to do that? When are you going to do it? He said, I'll file it. Get it filed out today. They can hear it tomorrow. And the judge, and even we're all, it's a holiday weekend. You're going to go before a judge and argue something on a Saturday? And then to that point, Robes, if you lose, I have to bring the jury in here on a Saturday to declare a mistrial? That's not going to work. So he got annoyed, finally just said, you got an hour, dude. I'm surprised he gave him that.
00:06:00
Speaker 1: So he is looking, Kevin Reddington is looking, I'm surprised too, by the way, for an emergency stay. on the judge's order for a mistrial. And then what Kevin Reddington wants, if he gets this emergency stay, let's just say he finds a justice who will grant him this. Then he's talking about hauling these jurors back in on Tuesday, or do they have to go back and deliberate right now?
00:06:29
Speaker 2: Oh my God.
00:06:30
Speaker 1: Would the judge then have to give another Tui Rodriguez charge? to the jury and have them go back again this afternoon. And obviously if they came back again and said, we cannot reach a consensus, then he would absolutely declare a mistrial. But what is going to change? I guess I know Kevin Reddington is fighting for Lindsay Clancy, but we have seen this jury. It seems as though the majority and certainly the foreperson has done everything in her power to And we don't know what's going on behind the scenes, but clearly they have tried to get the judge to even be sterner or be more forceful in how he is describing what this juror needs to consider. And the juror has heard it all, certainly feels the pressure, and is refusing to change his verdict.
00:07:24
Speaker 2: After seven days, Robes, this is somebody that's not going to change. They've been, you know, they've been ganging up on this person for a while, you would assume. And after seven days, how long before this person cracks? I just don't think at this point they will.
00:07:37
Speaker 1: So I don't understand what Kevin Reddington thinks is going to change between now and three hours from now, now and four hours from now.
00:07:44
Speaker 2: He's trying to get. So this case, for all intents and purposes, is over. It just hasn't been gaveled and made official. He is trying to have an emergency stay, which stops the judge from declaring this mistrial. And I guess then Robes, he's going to then take his case for getting this juror kicked off to someone else. Robes, doesn't it now, okay, now, at what point, I go back to this juror, it feels like we are now manipulating an outcome because somebody doesn't like it. Like, we did this, we tried this, you didn't change your mind. We did this, you didn't change your mind. Now we're going to do something else until we get this one juror off this jury because we don't like something. Robes, I got a problem with that. This is our system. They're supposed to have the right to do this for whatever reason, like it, love it, hate it. Babe, now another step to once again target this juror. We're going to keep going until we get this person off so we can get the verdict we want because we don't think they're whatever. Robes, I would be shocked, but I've been shocked all the way through this case. Is a Supreme Court justice there going to step in and say, yeah, I see enough here. Stop everything. I don't know.
00:09:00
Speaker 1: I don't know what Kevin Reddington's relationship is. with any of the Supreme Court justices.
00:09:05
Speaker 2: Probably a good one, given.
00:09:06
Speaker 1: But he obviously has had a decades, decades, decades long career there in that state and probably knows a lot of folks. I don't know how much personal relationships come into this. I don't know how much just the legality of this, if it's just cut and dry, if there's a black and white answer. The judge seems to think that there is not a reasonable, I guess, motion here where you would have any justifiable reason to stop him declaring a mistrial. The prosecution is supporting the mistrial. The judge was, it seemed as though he was about to gavel it in.
00:09:40
Speaker 2: Robes, he used these words. Uh, I'm going to declare a mistrial at this point. He said that in open court.
00:09:49
Speaker 1: And Kevin Reddington starts waving his hands.
00:09:52
Speaker 2: And stops. Robes, I don't know. They say it's our justice system. This is how it works. But Robes, um, I know this isn't about being on one side or another. Robes, what do we, this is what we, it just seems crazy that this one person, we keep focusing on them because they keep saying we don't like Robes. how you're going about your job. And even the judge is saying the person has the right to do it the way they're doing it.
00:10:22
Speaker 1: All of that said, perhaps it is also our legal system doing what it's supposed to do, allowing this one hour period of time to transpire, to give the defense one last opportunity to have a higher court look at what's been going on in that courtroom and And that way the judge can feel like he gave the defense every single opportunity to pursue.
00:10:51
Speaker 2: They have the right to appeal, though, baby. They do. That's the thing. We are stopping the process because a judge is saying one thing, an attorney is saying another, and the attorney is winning. The judge could have stopped this a bunch of times. I don't get it. But the clock is literally at this point ticking on this trial. Robes, it's odd to be sitting here and have a trial that a judge has already said. He already said what the conclusion of this trial is. But we have to wait for a countdown before it officially happens.
00:11:38
Speaker 1: That's right, because we are waiting to see if Kevin Ruddington can get a Supreme Court justice, a higher court, to put an emergency stay on the judge issuing or declaring that this is officially a mistrial after a second note came from the jury saying, with heavy hearts, we cannot reach a consensus, nor will we be able to. And it's interesting, we're getting some color here. from inside and outside the courthouse. I mean, this is described as somewhat of a chaotic scene. The New York Times is reporting that court staff is now getting exacerbated with crowds that are pressing towards the courtroom door, trying to secure seats, actually yelling at spectators to retreat. The way it's being described from folks who are inside that courthouse is fairly, sounds chaotic, because folks, I don't think many people have seen anything like this before.
00:12:39
Speaker 2: I have not seen anyone appeal a decision that hasn't been made yet.
00:12:48
Speaker 1: That's about to be made.
00:12:50
Speaker 2: I haven't seen it. I guess it's legal. I guess it's okay. I guess it's part of the process. He's trying to get another judge to stop this judge from declaring a mistrial. I did not know about this, babe. This is new stuff to me. I am fascinated. We talked right before we came on. He said, Ro, what do you think is going to happen? You know what? Everything has shocked me. We talked about what might happen. What do you think they're going to say? What do you think? Didn't see this one on the bingo card.
00:13:19
Speaker 1: I haven't seen one legal analyst come close to guessing what comes next in this case.
00:13:24
Speaker 2: We shouldn't feel bad.
00:13:24
Speaker 1: We shouldn't feel bad because we've got former prosecutors and defense attorneys and all these folks who are certainly experts when it comes to our American justice system. And none of them have been able to predict the way this trial has gone. From, frankly, start to finish, this has just been a remarkableâ honestly, it's aâ I feel like civics classes, do they still exist in high schools? But I feel like this is a case that should be studied by anyone who is consideringâ just learning about our legal system. We're learning as we go, and perhaps even some people in the courtroom are learning about what is possible. I did not know that a defense attorney or an attorney at all could stop a judge almost in mid-sentence with gavel almost up in the air. That's kind of what it felt like. He was about to officially declare this case a mistrial.
00:14:18
Speaker 2: We've all said this to somebody before, and the judge said it to Kevin Reddington. some variation, but the judge said in court, I got the jury on the way in here now, and you want to bring this up? But then he let him. The jury was literally walking to the courtroom. And Kevin Reddington stood up. Again, Robes, whoever get in trouble in Massachusetts, he's our first call. This dude is fighting his ass off. Even after this was settled, he's fighting to keep it from being settled.
00:14:44
Speaker 1: He's still fighting for Lindsey Clancy. And you know, with everything that must have been going on in that deliberation room, those jurors, I bet you some of them are just chomping at the bit to tell all.
00:14:58
Speaker 2: They thought they were leaving.
00:14:59
Speaker 1: They thought they were leaving, and now they're probably like, what the actual is going on? All right, we're going to keep our eye on this courtroom. Please stay close to your phones and our feed because we will be updating you shortly. But with that, everyone, we always appreciate you listening to us. I'm Amy Robach, alongside TJ Holmes. We will be talking to you very, very soon.