Reading Time: 3 minutes
After the Lindsay Clancy prosecution ended in a mistrial, the rogue juror spoke out.
Since then, mostly through intermediaries, he has continued.
In addition to sounding defensive over the way that other jurors characterized him, he has even seemed to imply that others behaved improperly.
Why were the Clancy jurors on their phones during the trial?
Lindsay Clancy jurors had full phone access the whole time?
Rogue juror Michael Desronvil authorized Ray Marcel, of Fugitive TV, to speak on his behalf.
In the aftermath of the Lindsay Clancy mistrial, he did just that while speaking to NewsNation’s Brian Entin.
“Michael told me almost everybody had their phone on them,” Marcel reported.
“It wasn’t like they took their phones away and locked them away,” he added.
Traditionally, banning jury members from researching the case through the media or by speaking outside of court is sufficient. Most juries are not sequestered and most juries are trusted with their devices.
“I mean, there were jury members, which I’m not going to say names, that were posting on social media allegedly while deliberations were going on,” Marcel then alleged.
(Posting on social media is not necessarily a violation of jury ethics — unless it pertains to the case, or violates a judge’s instructions.)
Marcel admitted: “I don’t know if they were allowed their phones, but they weren’t taken away.”
It would likely be improper phone use for a juror to research the case, read social media opinions on laws or evidence related to the case, or “livetweet” (on any platform) the events of a trial.
However, when jurors are allowed to use their phones, it’s usually just fine for them to discuss dinner plans, post about what video games they’ve been enjoying lately, or post thirsty emojis under NSFW photos. You know, the usual.
I’ve gotta say, this guy doesn’t sound like an impartial juror just trying to do his civic duty 😐
[image or embed]
— 𝙡𝙞𝙣𝙙𝙨🫗 (@mayerlingwaltz.bsky.social) September 21, 2026 at 2:14 PM
Did someone on the jury do something unethical?
Why is jury phone usage during the Lindsay Clancy trial a topic?
The defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, filed a motion to investigate Desronvil’s alleged phone use during deliberations.
While Desronvil has apparently been advised that this works in his favor — because he is being “singled out” — it seems that Reddington suspects that Desronvil may have violated jury ethics.
Juror misconduct can range from a casual mention of a case to a partner all the way to accepting a bribe or altering the deliberations because they want a book deal one day.
Often, a juror might receive clarification or perhaps an admonishment from a judge. In some cases, some behavior amounts to criminal misconduct. Jurors might risk a charge of contempt of court.
It is unclear if Reddington believes that Desronvil committed some specific electronic violation, or simply hopes to check.
If any member of the jury violated the rights of the defendant to a fair and unbiased trial, that would be a big problem.
As for Desronvil’s apparent insinuation that other members of the jury used their phones … it’s unclear what violations he is implying.
Much of the internet discourse about the trial was manosphere types and the broader far right either disputing the existence of postpartum psychosis, using its existence to try to repeal women’s voting, or both.
At any rate, the mistrial is a mistrial. A charge of contempt, if necessary, will not change anything for Clancy or anyone else.
Get the app — celeb news firstPush alerts the second a story breaks · 4.8★ · Free
Get the App
