Sept. 2, 2026
Shocking Twist in Killer Mom Trial: Woman Has Video of Clancy Jurors
Apple Podcasts 
Spotify 
Castro 
RSS Feed 56 year old Dawn Light stood before another Massachusetts judge this morning facing the serious charge of juror intimidation after being caught by police filming jurors in the Lindsay Clancy trial. Prosecutors claim the retired nurse and mother was in a restricted parking lot and adamantly denied taking photos of jurors, only for police to find a video of them in her deleted files. Her attorneys claim it was just a misunderstanding, and that Light was only trying to get a picture of Lindsay Clancy.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
00:00:02
Speaker 1: Hey there, folks. It is Wednesday, September 2nd, and in the middle here of jury deliberations, we just got word that there is someone out there who has video of the actual jurors. Welcome, folks, to this kind of a jaw-dropping, unexpected update to this Lindsay Clancy trial. Robes, we knew The drama this morning in the courtroom, the judge had to bring the jury in and poll them because of some shenanigans outside because a woman was arrested the day before. All we knew before she just had a court appearance was that she was allegedly trying to get pictures of jurors. Rose, that is not any work. close to describing the seriousness of what this woman was doing.
00:00:47
Speaker 2: This is a big deal. We just watched her arraignment hearing. We are talking about 56-year-old Dawn Light. She is a retired nurse. She was described by her attorney as a pillar of the community. She raised her children there. She's lived in that area for 30 years. And her attorney claimed that She just wanted to get a picture of Lindsay Clancy.
00:01:10
Speaker 1: They actually hit us with what had happened was, and that was the answer. But Robes, again, someone trying to get pictures of a juror. There was much more to it than that. Again, Dawn Light just had an arraignment in that courthouse in which she stood in front of cameras and stood in front of a judge. And Robes, she had a plan in place. She had to go to restricted areas. She had to park in a restricted spot. She was directly looking at a door in an area the public does not have access to. Robes, this is something else. I thought it was just somebody running outside trying to... No, no, no, no. They do not have, the general public, the ability to get to the jurors where they come in and out. The lawyers, in and out.
00:01:58
Speaker 2: The media cannot get near there.
00:02:00
Speaker 1: Restricted. So, yes, Kevin Reddington comes out and voluntarily talks to reporters. That's the reason you haven't seen the prosecutors on film outside. Everybody goes to the back. This is where that lady was.
00:02:11
Speaker 2: Yes. And she knew what she was doing. Yes. And she's, well, her attorney said it was just a misunderstanding. She's a crime junkie. She's a former nurse. She wanted to get a photo of Lindsay Clancy. And when the police confronted her and.
00:02:24
Speaker 1: Said, show us your phone.
00:02:26
Speaker 2: This is where you're like, oh my goodness, this was intentional. They said, let us see your phone. We want to see who you were taking pictures of. She says, sure. Hands them her phone. Nothing. There's no pictures. Nothing to see here, officer. Innocent. I did nothing wrong. Then they said, let us see your deleted photos. And she said, what do you mean? I don't even know how to find my deleted photos. Yes, she told officers she didn't know how to access her deleted photos. Well, they did. And when they looked at her deleted photos, they found a video. And it was a video of the jurors walking out of the courthouse.
00:03:11
Speaker 1: Robes, that's terrifying. Robes, that's terrifying, the idea of that. No wonder the judge was pissed when we saw him walk in this morning. They have taken that video and they confirmed, in fact, she has video of the jurors. Robes, every step of the way now in her answers lets you know she was up to something else, baby. I'm just.
00:03:38
Speaker 1: I don't know how to get to my deleted phone. Why did she delete the video in the first place?
00:03:42
Speaker 2: She knew she did something wrong. Well, she knew she was doing something wrong and she knew she was getting caught.
00:03:49
Speaker 1: Robes, I'm trying to get a video of Lindsay Clancy. Lady, she's the one in the wheelchair. What are you talking about? Robes, this is... What was she planning to do with that video?
00:04:01
Speaker 2: Exactly, and that's the frightening thing. And so it's just, it's very hard when you hear her attorney describe her as just this wonderful woman who just has, who's a crime junkie, who's just interested in the case, who didn't do anything wrong. This is all a big misunderstanding. She didn't even know who she was taking pictures of or taking a video of. That just flies in the face of logic.
00:04:28
Speaker 1: It does. And Rob, they even said they have the surveillance video of her outside, like circling around. She goes into a restricted parking lot where she isn't supposed to be. She actually backs her vehicle into a parking lot, excuse me, a parking spot that she doesn't have access to or shouldn't, and gives herself a good vantage point of exactly where these people are coming in and out of.
00:04:52
Speaker 2: And look, she had her answer ready and quick when police came up to her and confronted her. And she said, I'm waiting to see if Lindsay Clancy would come out of the building. It's like she had her answer ready, even though to then realize they go back on her phone and see she has a recorded video of the jurors. That just makes everything else she's claiming suspicious.
00:05:14
Speaker 1: It is. Who knows? I don't know. We don't know what her intentions were, but her actions certainly suggest something. She had a bigger plan. You think a woman goes through all this and goes through restricted areas and does something she knows is wrong for the sake just of her own entertainment at home to show friends and family, hey, look at this video I got. Or was this immediately Robes going to be going? Up somewhere. Posted somewhere.
00:05:39
Speaker 2: Absolutely. And the fact that she knew that she was able to quickly put that video that she deliberately took into her device's deleted files or deleted photos. She knew what she was doing was illegal. She knew what she was doing was wrong because she put it in her deleted files and then denied to police that she was taking videos or photos of Of anyone other than Lindsay Clancy, who she hoped to see walk out of that back door. Basically, her actions and the cover up are, I mean, they're glaring. There's no other way to look at this and there's no other way to see what she was doing. And we don't know why. But it is fair to assume that she didn't have or she had plans to use that video for something. Why else would you want it?
00:06:40
Speaker 1: There's no reason, Robes. For curiosity. That's not a, I'm just dying to see what these people look like. Is she trying to see what they're, yeah, she doesn't have access to the courtroom. Maybe she's trying to monitor what they're wearing. You know, that's been a big thing lately. I don't know. This is terrifying. They use the word jury tampering in her arraignment today. Jury tampering.
00:07:02
Speaker 2: To think that this retired nurse, this 56-year-old woman who is a mother herself, could actually upend the trial. I mean, this type of behavior and this criminal activity absolutely could impact the jury and the outcome of this trial that we have all been watching. and waiting for word on for the past six weeks.
00:07:30
Speaker 1: Oh, to think some woman named Dawn Light could call to cut up in this process is wild to think. It was, I wrote that quote down from her attorney because we both looked up at each other. Quote, this is a complete misunderstanding.
00:07:43
Speaker 2: And that is where it's actually offensive to hear that. It really is. I mean, truly.
00:07:49
Speaker 1: Says she had no intention of interaction with the jurors.
00:07:53
Speaker 2: Okay, interaction, maybe not.
00:07:54
Speaker 1: That's what it says.
00:07:55
Speaker 2: But she was videoing them.
00:07:57
Speaker 1: Seeking a picture of Ms. Clancy. Says she understands, though, the magnitude of the charge and has agreed to stay away. Yeah, no kidding. No kidding there. I do agree. She's not a flight risk. She's been in the community for 30 years, so they didn't do the $ 50, 000 cash bond, so they're not going to have to hold her. I understand that to a certain degree. The other thing was, I'll go ahead.
00:08:19
Speaker 2: No, I was saying, I get that too. And that one of their big points was that because she is a retired nurse who lives on a fixed income, she could not afford the $ 50, 000 bond. So she would have to basically sit behind bars until mid-October when her next hearing is. That doesn't exactly seem like fair at that point. I mean, she isn't a flight risk. If she doesn't have $ 50, 000 to post bail... I think it can be fairly deduced that she wouldn't have the money to flee.
00:08:49
Speaker 1: And they made clear as well. This was a big one. And I even said maybe they should add some language to this. But she is barred from disseminating any video. The way they put it was pics or something. I said they better add, say, pics and video.
00:09:03
Speaker 2: Yeah, they said photographs. And they kept saying the iCloud because I don't know. How do you fully erase video that's been taken? I know that when you delete it, it goes into your deleted files, and then you can go through another step, I believe, to delete the deleted files. But who knows? This iCloud thing, I'm not sure. Could it be up on the cloud? Could she access it? Could she re-access it in any way, shape, or form? I think she knows now. People know her name.
00:09:30
Speaker 1: Yeah.
00:09:31
Speaker 2: They know who she is. They've seen the video she took, and that video may never or should never see the light of day. Yes. And I didn't mean that as a pun, but yes, her name is notable.
00:09:43
Speaker 1: Dawnlight. But, Rose, can you imagine if that thing gets out? There's someone, Rose, it was terrifying when I heard that. Someone has video of these people who are the center of the attention of the country right now. Robes, she knows what they look like. What was she going to do with that video? Was she working with somebody saying, well, you should make sure we get their pictures in case it doesn't go the way we want. Then we can dox these folks and come after them. But given what we now know from dawn light in the arraignment we just watched, what do you think the question was that the judge polled each of the jurors about this morning before they started deliberations? All right, we continue here on Amy and TJ after a very eventful morning in jury deliberations that you're supposed to be just sitting around and waiting, but it's been pretty eventful already this morning. And it started, of course, Robes with the judge coming in, immediately makes an announcement reminding everybody about statutes and rules and blah, blah, blah. What is he talking about? Yes, a woman was arrested the day before for all we knew at the time was trying to get pictures of jurors. Now we know Robes She had to get through secure areas. She put an effort into this and has video of actual jurors on her phone.
00:11:20
Speaker 2: On the deleted files section of her phone.
00:11:23
Speaker 1: What is it possibly that the judge had to ask each of those jurors this morning? He asked each of them one question. They acknowledged and went back. What is it he asked them?
00:11:33
Speaker 2: Was it basically, did the events of yesterday, knowing that someone... may have taken your picture, has that had any impact or influence on your ability to continue to deliberate?
00:11:49
Speaker 1: See, my question was, would he have alerted them? What could he ask them to find out what they knew without alarming them? Because if you're a juror right now and you find out somebody has you on video, you would freak out.
00:12:07
Speaker 2: So you think it's possible that they wouldn't tell the jurors that a woman has been arrested and charged for surreptitiously filming them as they came out of the courthouse?
00:12:22
Speaker 1: Isn't that going to have some kind of an undue influence on this juror? Because right now, Robes, they might not be aware. She was at a distance. They weren't looking that way. She was in a car. Yeah, they probably have no idea somebody was videoing them.
00:12:33
Speaker 2: She was trying to. Pull some P.I. thing. Thank goodness. And we don't actually even know who alerted police. There was just we only know that prosecutors said that state police who were a part of the security detail. So they obviously have. And this, I'm sure, has gotten more and more as interest has grown in this case. Part of the security detail for the courthouse, they were called by court officers because there was a report, we don't know from where, that someone may have been filming jurors in a parking lot outside the courthouse. And we don't know who saw her, but... So hats off to that person who ever noticed there's a blue Toyota parked in the employee parking lot in that restricted area that they're not supposed to be at. And there's a person inside that car with the phone up. It'd be someone like you, babe. You have your head on a swivel. You see these kinds of things that I don't even see at all. But it's someone who had your type of awareness.
00:13:35
Speaker 1: But that person was where they shouldn't have been. A car where it shouldn't have been with somebody just sitting in it with a camera up.
00:13:42
Speaker 2: To me, the most disturbing part, I shouldn't say it, but just the part that makes it all feel even more icky is that when police confronted her, the words by the DA today, the district attorney, was that she was adamant that she was not taking pictures of the jury. only to find out that she absolutely did and was and knew to put them in her deleted file before police came.
00:14:08
Speaker 1: Was this her first day doing this?
00:14:10
Speaker 2: And that we don't know. And that we don't know.
00:14:13
Speaker 1: She got caught on her first day doing this. I just wonder and you worry. Robes, what if she hadn't been caught? What if she left there, those grounds with that video and those pictures?
00:14:22
Speaker 2: It's frightening to think about.
00:14:23
Speaker 1: What would she have done with them? How different would this have been today? Robes, would they have had to call a mistrial? if these jurors' homes are starting to be, yeah, they would go home tonight, and I bet somebody would track them down by now. Babe.
00:14:37
Speaker 2: It is frightening, and it's so unfortunate. And look, it's understandable. She might have been released on her, on personal recognizance on her own in terms of just showing back up to court. She showed back up this morning. And she's supposed to be back in mid-October, but she is facing up to, what is it, two and a half years?
00:14:53
Speaker 1: Oh, I didn't catch that.
00:14:54
Speaker 2: Yeah, I believe. If she is convicted of this, this.
00:14:58
Speaker 1: Is a serious charge. Jury intimidation is the charge, isn't it?
00:15:00
Speaker 2: This is a very serious charge. And we heard the prosecutor, I think the prosecutor was a little nervous. Maybe she knew she was on national television in a way she had never been before, and she was... Definitely struggling with her word choice and had to ask for a moment because she kept saying this is so serious and then just would lose her train of thought. She wasn't able to.
00:15:23
Speaker 1: Took a water break, too.
00:15:25
Speaker 2: She needed to. She had a Marco Rubio moment where she had to. She had to take some water from the water bottle. But yeah, she talked about how they have taken extraordinary measures to protect the sanctity of the trial. So you've got the physical protection of the jurors, but also the sanctity of the proceedings. And she has upended all of that. And she chose to do that. And she put the entire process at risk by... her need for whatever reason to video these jurors. I mean, I feel like she should have had to have answered because no one's buying this. It was a complete misunderstanding, Your Honor. She was adamant that she wasn't taking photos or videos of the juror. That was a bold-faced lie, obviously. She was not seeking a picture of Lindsay Clancy and accidentally got video of the jurors coming out.
00:16:20
Speaker 1: Isn't that crazy? Come on. I'm just thinking about the next part.
00:16:23
Speaker 2: Robes.
00:16:24
Speaker 1: We all know what Lindsay Clancy looks like.
00:16:27
Speaker 2: Yeah.
00:16:27
Speaker 1: What money shot are you going to get? There is just not going to happen.
00:16:32
Speaker 2: We don't need a picture of Lindsay Clancy.
00:16:34
Speaker 1: We don't.
00:16:34
Speaker 2: Because she's been seen in court 24-7. I mean, any time the court is in session. The camera almost always trains its eye back on Lindsay Clancy. So that is not a valuable thing to have. And we know this because what do paparazzi try to get? Why do people hide to try and get these pictures? It's pictures that nobody else has. It's pictures of someone that people want to see. No one needs to see a picture of Lindsay Clancy because we see her every day in that courtroom. No one needs a picture of Kevin Reddington because we see him every day. Same goes for the prosecutors and the judge. You know who we don't see and we've never seen? The jurors.
00:17:14
Speaker 1: And of what value is that picture? It's just terrifying to think that there was actual video and it could have possibly gotten out and what that could have meant. So the stakes are really, really high. And it's causing people who are 50-something-year-old mothers with no criminal history to do this type of stuff. Who the hell knows why again, folks keep an eye on the feed because the last two episodes we put up, we didn't expect it because things are happening. Things keep moving as the jury keeps deliberating in this case. Kim, can you have an idea of the count as we are? What robes 20? They started about 23 hours. So they're up to 25.
00:17:48
Speaker 2: I think there are 25 hours and counting certainly more than a 24 hour day. Those jurors have been locked in together. trying to come to some sort of a consensus. But we will keep our eye on what's happening inside the courtroom. So please check back on our feed. We appreciate you listening to us. I'm Amy Robach, alongside TJ Holmes. We'll talk soon.
Speaker 1: Hey there, folks. It is Wednesday, September 2nd, and in the middle here of jury deliberations, we just got word that there is someone out there who has video of the actual jurors. Welcome, folks, to this kind of a jaw-dropping, unexpected update to this Lindsay Clancy trial. Robes, we knew The drama this morning in the courtroom, the judge had to bring the jury in and poll them because of some shenanigans outside because a woman was arrested the day before. All we knew before she just had a court appearance was that she was allegedly trying to get pictures of jurors. Rose, that is not any work. close to describing the seriousness of what this woman was doing.
00:00:47
Speaker 2: This is a big deal. We just watched her arraignment hearing. We are talking about 56-year-old Dawn Light. She is a retired nurse. She was described by her attorney as a pillar of the community. She raised her children there. She's lived in that area for 30 years. And her attorney claimed that She just wanted to get a picture of Lindsay Clancy.
00:01:10
Speaker 1: They actually hit us with what had happened was, and that was the answer. But Robes, again, someone trying to get pictures of a juror. There was much more to it than that. Again, Dawn Light just had an arraignment in that courthouse in which she stood in front of cameras and stood in front of a judge. And Robes, she had a plan in place. She had to go to restricted areas. She had to park in a restricted spot. She was directly looking at a door in an area the public does not have access to. Robes, this is something else. I thought it was just somebody running outside trying to... No, no, no, no. They do not have, the general public, the ability to get to the jurors where they come in and out. The lawyers, in and out.
00:01:58
Speaker 2: The media cannot get near there.
00:02:00
Speaker 1: Restricted. So, yes, Kevin Reddington comes out and voluntarily talks to reporters. That's the reason you haven't seen the prosecutors on film outside. Everybody goes to the back. This is where that lady was.
00:02:11
Speaker 2: Yes. And she knew what she was doing. Yes. And she's, well, her attorney said it was just a misunderstanding. She's a crime junkie. She's a former nurse. She wanted to get a photo of Lindsay Clancy. And when the police confronted her and.
00:02:24
Speaker 1: Said, show us your phone.
00:02:26
Speaker 2: This is where you're like, oh my goodness, this was intentional. They said, let us see your phone. We want to see who you were taking pictures of. She says, sure. Hands them her phone. Nothing. There's no pictures. Nothing to see here, officer. Innocent. I did nothing wrong. Then they said, let us see your deleted photos. And she said, what do you mean? I don't even know how to find my deleted photos. Yes, she told officers she didn't know how to access her deleted photos. Well, they did. And when they looked at her deleted photos, they found a video. And it was a video of the jurors walking out of the courthouse.
00:03:11
Speaker 1: Robes, that's terrifying. Robes, that's terrifying, the idea of that. No wonder the judge was pissed when we saw him walk in this morning. They have taken that video and they confirmed, in fact, she has video of the jurors. Robes, every step of the way now in her answers lets you know she was up to something else, baby. I'm just.
00:03:38
Speaker 1: I don't know how to get to my deleted phone. Why did she delete the video in the first place?
00:03:42
Speaker 2: She knew she did something wrong. Well, she knew she was doing something wrong and she knew she was getting caught.
00:03:49
Speaker 1: Robes, I'm trying to get a video of Lindsay Clancy. Lady, she's the one in the wheelchair. What are you talking about? Robes, this is... What was she planning to do with that video?
00:04:01
Speaker 2: Exactly, and that's the frightening thing. And so it's just, it's very hard when you hear her attorney describe her as just this wonderful woman who just has, who's a crime junkie, who's just interested in the case, who didn't do anything wrong. This is all a big misunderstanding. She didn't even know who she was taking pictures of or taking a video of. That just flies in the face of logic.
00:04:28
Speaker 1: It does. And Rob, they even said they have the surveillance video of her outside, like circling around. She goes into a restricted parking lot where she isn't supposed to be. She actually backs her vehicle into a parking lot, excuse me, a parking spot that she doesn't have access to or shouldn't, and gives herself a good vantage point of exactly where these people are coming in and out of.
00:04:52
Speaker 2: And look, she had her answer ready and quick when police came up to her and confronted her. And she said, I'm waiting to see if Lindsay Clancy would come out of the building. It's like she had her answer ready, even though to then realize they go back on her phone and see she has a recorded video of the jurors. That just makes everything else she's claiming suspicious.
00:05:14
Speaker 1: It is. Who knows? I don't know. We don't know what her intentions were, but her actions certainly suggest something. She had a bigger plan. You think a woman goes through all this and goes through restricted areas and does something she knows is wrong for the sake just of her own entertainment at home to show friends and family, hey, look at this video I got. Or was this immediately Robes going to be going? Up somewhere. Posted somewhere.
00:05:39
Speaker 2: Absolutely. And the fact that she knew that she was able to quickly put that video that she deliberately took into her device's deleted files or deleted photos. She knew what she was doing was illegal. She knew what she was doing was wrong because she put it in her deleted files and then denied to police that she was taking videos or photos of Of anyone other than Lindsay Clancy, who she hoped to see walk out of that back door. Basically, her actions and the cover up are, I mean, they're glaring. There's no other way to look at this and there's no other way to see what she was doing. And we don't know why. But it is fair to assume that she didn't have or she had plans to use that video for something. Why else would you want it?
00:06:40
Speaker 1: There's no reason, Robes. For curiosity. That's not a, I'm just dying to see what these people look like. Is she trying to see what they're, yeah, she doesn't have access to the courtroom. Maybe she's trying to monitor what they're wearing. You know, that's been a big thing lately. I don't know. This is terrifying. They use the word jury tampering in her arraignment today. Jury tampering.
00:07:02
Speaker 2: To think that this retired nurse, this 56-year-old woman who is a mother herself, could actually upend the trial. I mean, this type of behavior and this criminal activity absolutely could impact the jury and the outcome of this trial that we have all been watching. and waiting for word on for the past six weeks.
00:07:30
Speaker 1: Oh, to think some woman named Dawn Light could call to cut up in this process is wild to think. It was, I wrote that quote down from her attorney because we both looked up at each other. Quote, this is a complete misunderstanding.
00:07:43
Speaker 2: And that is where it's actually offensive to hear that. It really is. I mean, truly.
00:07:49
Speaker 1: Says she had no intention of interaction with the jurors.
00:07:53
Speaker 2: Okay, interaction, maybe not.
00:07:54
Speaker 1: That's what it says.
00:07:55
Speaker 2: But she was videoing them.
00:07:57
Speaker 1: Seeking a picture of Ms. Clancy. Says she understands, though, the magnitude of the charge and has agreed to stay away. Yeah, no kidding. No kidding there. I do agree. She's not a flight risk. She's been in the community for 30 years, so they didn't do the $ 50, 000 cash bond, so they're not going to have to hold her. I understand that to a certain degree. The other thing was, I'll go ahead.
00:08:19
Speaker 2: No, I was saying, I get that too. And that one of their big points was that because she is a retired nurse who lives on a fixed income, she could not afford the $ 50, 000 bond. So she would have to basically sit behind bars until mid-October when her next hearing is. That doesn't exactly seem like fair at that point. I mean, she isn't a flight risk. If she doesn't have $ 50, 000 to post bail... I think it can be fairly deduced that she wouldn't have the money to flee.
00:08:49
Speaker 1: And they made clear as well. This was a big one. And I even said maybe they should add some language to this. But she is barred from disseminating any video. The way they put it was pics or something. I said they better add, say, pics and video.
00:09:03
Speaker 2: Yeah, they said photographs. And they kept saying the iCloud because I don't know. How do you fully erase video that's been taken? I know that when you delete it, it goes into your deleted files, and then you can go through another step, I believe, to delete the deleted files. But who knows? This iCloud thing, I'm not sure. Could it be up on the cloud? Could she access it? Could she re-access it in any way, shape, or form? I think she knows now. People know her name.
00:09:30
Speaker 1: Yeah.
00:09:31
Speaker 2: They know who she is. They've seen the video she took, and that video may never or should never see the light of day. Yes. And I didn't mean that as a pun, but yes, her name is notable.
00:09:43
Speaker 1: Dawnlight. But, Rose, can you imagine if that thing gets out? There's someone, Rose, it was terrifying when I heard that. Someone has video of these people who are the center of the attention of the country right now. Robes, she knows what they look like. What was she going to do with that video? Was she working with somebody saying, well, you should make sure we get their pictures in case it doesn't go the way we want. Then we can dox these folks and come after them. But given what we now know from dawn light in the arraignment we just watched, what do you think the question was that the judge polled each of the jurors about this morning before they started deliberations? All right, we continue here on Amy and TJ after a very eventful morning in jury deliberations that you're supposed to be just sitting around and waiting, but it's been pretty eventful already this morning. And it started, of course, Robes with the judge coming in, immediately makes an announcement reminding everybody about statutes and rules and blah, blah, blah. What is he talking about? Yes, a woman was arrested the day before for all we knew at the time was trying to get pictures of jurors. Now we know Robes She had to get through secure areas. She put an effort into this and has video of actual jurors on her phone.
00:11:20
Speaker 2: On the deleted files section of her phone.
00:11:23
Speaker 1: What is it possibly that the judge had to ask each of those jurors this morning? He asked each of them one question. They acknowledged and went back. What is it he asked them?
00:11:33
Speaker 2: Was it basically, did the events of yesterday, knowing that someone... may have taken your picture, has that had any impact or influence on your ability to continue to deliberate?
00:11:49
Speaker 1: See, my question was, would he have alerted them? What could he ask them to find out what they knew without alarming them? Because if you're a juror right now and you find out somebody has you on video, you would freak out.
00:12:07
Speaker 2: So you think it's possible that they wouldn't tell the jurors that a woman has been arrested and charged for surreptitiously filming them as they came out of the courthouse?
00:12:22
Speaker 1: Isn't that going to have some kind of an undue influence on this juror? Because right now, Robes, they might not be aware. She was at a distance. They weren't looking that way. She was in a car. Yeah, they probably have no idea somebody was videoing them.
00:12:33
Speaker 2: She was trying to. Pull some P.I. thing. Thank goodness. And we don't actually even know who alerted police. There was just we only know that prosecutors said that state police who were a part of the security detail. So they obviously have. And this, I'm sure, has gotten more and more as interest has grown in this case. Part of the security detail for the courthouse, they were called by court officers because there was a report, we don't know from where, that someone may have been filming jurors in a parking lot outside the courthouse. And we don't know who saw her, but... So hats off to that person who ever noticed there's a blue Toyota parked in the employee parking lot in that restricted area that they're not supposed to be at. And there's a person inside that car with the phone up. It'd be someone like you, babe. You have your head on a swivel. You see these kinds of things that I don't even see at all. But it's someone who had your type of awareness.
00:13:35
Speaker 1: But that person was where they shouldn't have been. A car where it shouldn't have been with somebody just sitting in it with a camera up.
00:13:42
Speaker 2: To me, the most disturbing part, I shouldn't say it, but just the part that makes it all feel even more icky is that when police confronted her, the words by the DA today, the district attorney, was that she was adamant that she was not taking pictures of the jury. only to find out that she absolutely did and was and knew to put them in her deleted file before police came.
00:14:08
Speaker 1: Was this her first day doing this?
00:14:10
Speaker 2: And that we don't know. And that we don't know.
00:14:13
Speaker 1: She got caught on her first day doing this. I just wonder and you worry. Robes, what if she hadn't been caught? What if she left there, those grounds with that video and those pictures?
00:14:22
Speaker 2: It's frightening to think about.
00:14:23
Speaker 1: What would she have done with them? How different would this have been today? Robes, would they have had to call a mistrial? if these jurors' homes are starting to be, yeah, they would go home tonight, and I bet somebody would track them down by now. Babe.
00:14:37
Speaker 2: It is frightening, and it's so unfortunate. And look, it's understandable. She might have been released on her, on personal recognizance on her own in terms of just showing back up to court. She showed back up this morning. And she's supposed to be back in mid-October, but she is facing up to, what is it, two and a half years?
00:14:53
Speaker 1: Oh, I didn't catch that.
00:14:54
Speaker 2: Yeah, I believe. If she is convicted of this, this.
00:14:58
Speaker 1: Is a serious charge. Jury intimidation is the charge, isn't it?
00:15:00
Speaker 2: This is a very serious charge. And we heard the prosecutor, I think the prosecutor was a little nervous. Maybe she knew she was on national television in a way she had never been before, and she was... Definitely struggling with her word choice and had to ask for a moment because she kept saying this is so serious and then just would lose her train of thought. She wasn't able to.
00:15:23
Speaker 1: Took a water break, too.
00:15:25
Speaker 2: She needed to. She had a Marco Rubio moment where she had to. She had to take some water from the water bottle. But yeah, she talked about how they have taken extraordinary measures to protect the sanctity of the trial. So you've got the physical protection of the jurors, but also the sanctity of the proceedings. And she has upended all of that. And she chose to do that. And she put the entire process at risk by... her need for whatever reason to video these jurors. I mean, I feel like she should have had to have answered because no one's buying this. It was a complete misunderstanding, Your Honor. She was adamant that she wasn't taking photos or videos of the juror. That was a bold-faced lie, obviously. She was not seeking a picture of Lindsay Clancy and accidentally got video of the jurors coming out.
00:16:20
Speaker 1: Isn't that crazy? Come on. I'm just thinking about the next part.
00:16:23
Speaker 2: Robes.
00:16:24
Speaker 1: We all know what Lindsay Clancy looks like.
00:16:27
Speaker 2: Yeah.
00:16:27
Speaker 1: What money shot are you going to get? There is just not going to happen.
00:16:32
Speaker 2: We don't need a picture of Lindsay Clancy.
00:16:34
Speaker 1: We don't.
00:16:34
Speaker 2: Because she's been seen in court 24-7. I mean, any time the court is in session. The camera almost always trains its eye back on Lindsay Clancy. So that is not a valuable thing to have. And we know this because what do paparazzi try to get? Why do people hide to try and get these pictures? It's pictures that nobody else has. It's pictures of someone that people want to see. No one needs to see a picture of Lindsay Clancy because we see her every day in that courtroom. No one needs a picture of Kevin Reddington because we see him every day. Same goes for the prosecutors and the judge. You know who we don't see and we've never seen? The jurors.
00:17:14
Speaker 1: And of what value is that picture? It's just terrifying to think that there was actual video and it could have possibly gotten out and what that could have meant. So the stakes are really, really high. And it's causing people who are 50-something-year-old mothers with no criminal history to do this type of stuff. Who the hell knows why again, folks keep an eye on the feed because the last two episodes we put up, we didn't expect it because things are happening. Things keep moving as the jury keeps deliberating in this case. Kim, can you have an idea of the count as we are? What robes 20? They started about 23 hours. So they're up to 25.
00:17:48
Speaker 2: I think there are 25 hours and counting certainly more than a 24 hour day. Those jurors have been locked in together. trying to come to some sort of a consensus. But we will keep our eye on what's happening inside the courtroom. So please check back on our feed. We appreciate you listening to us. I'm Amy Robach, alongside TJ Holmes. We'll talk soon.