Villain or Hero? How the Left and Right Covered the Lone Holdout Juror in the Lindsay Clancy Trial

Whiplash437/X

Was the lone holdout juror in the Lindsay Clancy trial a villain, a hero, or just a man fulfilling his civic duty? Here’s how the media has covered the now-identified juror, Michael Desronvil.

When 48-year-old Michael Desronvil refused to join 11 fellow jurors in finding Lindsay Clancy not guilty by reason of insanity for the 2023 killings of her three children, his vote forced a mistrial after a week-long deliberation and made him the subject of some of the most intense media scrutiny in recent history.

Lone holdout jurors have drawn widescale criticism from the media before. What sets Desronvil’s case apart is that coverage of how he was portrayed was split along partisan lines. Left-leaning outlets largely amplified fellow jurors’ accounts of what happened in the deliberation room, while right-leaning outlets cast him as a principled dissenter under attack from the media.

Before he ever spoke publicly, both sides decided who he was based on their view of the trial. To many on the left, who saw Clancy as a mother failed by the lack of postpartum healthcare within the medical system, he was the juror who stood in the way of an acquittal. To many on the right, who saw the killings as a crime that demanded accountability, he was a hero standing up for her children.

On the Left

Domestic violence allegations raise questions about holdout juror in Lindsay Clancy trial (NBC News, Lean Left bias)
Mudslinging/Ad hominem: The reporting of the juror’s pending eviction and unpaid rent have no bearing on the issue of whether his jury questionnaire was filled out honestly, since being behind on rent isn’t something jurors have to disclose. These details are included to discredit him personally, and neither tells readers anything about his fitness to serve or how he deliberated.
Flawed logic: The reporter is connecting domestic violence allegations and an active restraining order to how the juror deliberated, when there’s no evidence that they’re connected.
Viewpoint placement: Readers learn in the last graf that NBC 10 can’t confirm how the juror answered his questionnaire, after an entire article building a case against him, which includes an expert saying his answers “should have raised red flags.” The dismissal of his 2021 charge also only gets one line, further in the story. Under Massachusetts law, Desronvil’s previous court history doesn’t disqualify him from being seated.
Clancy juror claims holdout didn't show 'single piece of evidence' explaining vote (ABC News, Lean Left)
Viewpoint omission: The article relies on juror Nick Dargie’s account of what happened in the deliberation room without any other testimonies.
Unsubstantiated claims: The article repeats other jurors’ claims that the holdout juror “would not change his position favoring conviction, despite expressing reasonable doubt,” without offering any other evidence or perspective.
Word choice/viewpoint placement: The juror is painted as “the lone holdout juror who prevented a unanimous verdict,” which makes it seem like he is an obstacle rather than someone following the rules of the courtroom and sticking to his convictions.
The article includes Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy Cruz’s statement near the bottom of the article. But it gives Dargie the last word, ending on his claim: “I think nine times out of 10, I think a jury would come back with not guilty by reason of insanity.”

Additional articles on the Left:

On the Right

Lindsay Clancy holdout praised as 'American Hero' by lawyer who says he represents him (Fox News, Right)
Bias by omission: The article doesn’t include any information from the NBC10 investigation of Desronvil or fellow jurors’ comments, and instead focuses on his defense, portraying him as a victim who has to be in hiding following the media attention.
Slant: The article includes his attorney Edward Paltzik’s statement, which called him an “American Hero and Champion of Justice.” Paltzik also said “Please pray for him and help us protect him.” This raises Desronvil’s profile to that of a public martyr who is being persecuted by the public and media.
Photo bias: The article shows a photo of Desronvil cradling a sleeping infant, presumed to be one of his children, which can make readers draw sympathy for him.
The Lindsay Clancy Holdout Reveal The Left Never Saw Coming (Daily Wire, Right)
Spin: The headline promises a “Reveal The Left Never Saw Coming” and treats the revelation of the fact that Desronvil is black as a “gotcha” to the left, since many on the left were critical of him before knowing anything about him.
Unsubstantiated claims: The article says leftists "supported Clancy and ripped the holdout juror,” but didn’t link to any posts on X or quote any of them. The only support is a post from Daily Wire host Matt Walsh (Right bias), who claimed the juror was “hounded by bossy white women,” positioning the only black juror on the bench against the others.

Additional articles on the Right:

How the left and right portrayed Desronvil

Left-leaning outlets aired fellow jurors’ claims that Desronvil had “admitted reasonable doubt” but refused to apply it, and an exclusive NBC Boston report dug into his past, including a 2021 domestic assault charge that was later dismissed and a restraining order that was active when he was seated. An investigation into a lone juror’s court history prior to the individual speaking publicly or identified appears to be unusual.

On the other hand, right-leaning outlets and figures cast him as a principled dissenter, with his lawyer calling him an “American Hero” on Fox News (Right bias). Even Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, offered him “asylum” after the trial if he was “being harassed.”

Desronvil, who first spoke of his experience to Kayleigh McEnany on “Fox & Friends" in October, said he never had reasonable doubt and found Clancy to be "methodical" in how she killed her kids. Before then, left-leaning outlets in particular had repeatedly published fellow jurors’ claims that he had admitted to having reasonable doubt during deliberations.

The way the trial was reported – which evidence and testimonies from the prosecution and defense was amplified – added to the frenzy. For example, outlets on the left and right ran stories highlighting comments from Lindsay Clancy’s former mother-in-law, Susan Clancy, during her testimony for the defense, in which she said Clancy was “begging for help.” Amplifying certain parts of a testimony over others is slant, a type of media bias in which some details of a story are emphasized over others. During the same period, the New York Post (Right bias) called Clancy a “killer mom”, while ABC News (Lean Left) led with the headline “Lindsay Clancy's mom and sister testify, describe her as a 'loving mother'”.

A history of lone jurors hounded by the media

There have been a few high profile cases in recent history where a lone juror faced media backlash.

In 2013, an Arizona jury convicted Jodi Arias of murdering her ex-boyfriend. In 2015, a second jury, seated only to decide her sentence, deadlocked 11-1 in favor of the death penalty. Since a death sentence in Arizona requires a unanimous jury, the decision went to the judge, who sentenced Arias to life in prison without the possibility of release.

Coverage from both the left and right of the holdout juror in that case, known as Juror 17, was similar to the scrutiny of Desronvil. Fox News ran several wire articles from the Associated Press, with one titled, “One angry woman saved Jodi Arias; hung jury voted 11-1 for death penalty.” Most other coverage mainly centered on the 11 jurors’ account, with outlets reporting that they believed the holdout was biased because she was a domestic abuse survivor (Arias claimed her ex-boyfriend abused her) and had seen a movie about the case. Juror 17’s name was also leaked and the reporters dug into her ex-husband’s ties to the prosecutor.

TV host and former prosecutor Nancy Grace told Phoenix radio station KTAR at the time that if the other jurors’ accounts were accurate, the holdout should have been removed from the jury. A similar incident surfaced in the Clancy case, when defense attorney Kevin Reddington asked the judge to investigate Desronvil and have him removed, a request that was widely covered.

In 2004, former Tyco executives Dennis Kozlowski and Mark Swartz were tried on charges of looting roughly $600 million from the company. Juror number 4, identified as Ruth Jordan, was reported to be holding out for acquittal after she appeared to make an “OK” gesture toward the defense. While deliberations were still underway, The Wall Street Journal (Center bias) reportedly leaked her name in an online report, even though journalists traditionally avoid identifying jurors until the trial is over. A local New York paper also reportedly ran a drawing of her on its front page under the headline “Ms. Trial” and called her a “paranoid socialite” and a “batty blue blood,” – types of media bias known as ad hominem/mudslinging. After Jordan reportedly received a threatening letter, the judge declared a mistrial.

In 2010, former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich was tried on corruption charges, including trying to sell President Barack Obama’s vacated Senate seat. After jurors told reporters that a lone holdout had blocked conviction on the most serious charges, media outlets identified her as JoAnn Chiakulas, a 67-year-old retired state employee. Coverage branded her a “Blagojevich apologist,” and she was hounded by reporters in the weeks after the verdict.

These aren’t the only examples, but they are among the most aggressive cases of juror coverage in the past two decades.

The Clancy case also spurred a flurry of commentary from outlets across the spectrum, much of it about questions larger than Desronvil. Massachusetts law required prosecutors to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Clancy was criminally responsible at the time she killed her three kids: either that she was not suffering from a mental disease or defect when she killed her children, or, that despite one, she still had the capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of her actions. Whether Desronvil believed they met that burden came down to how he weighed the evidence, including competing expert testimony about postpartum psychosis.

While that question of Clancy’s fate in the eyes of the law divided the public, it should not have determined how Desronvil was covered. U.S. law requires juries to come to a unanimous decision for serious criminal offenses, which gives every juror’s vote equal weight. Days after a mistrial was announced, the lone juror’s identity and court record became national news, and he had become a symbol of the country’s deep divide over questions of mental illness, criminal responsibility, and maternal mental healthcare.

Jamie Krstev is a Bias Research Editor for AllSides. She has a Lean Right bias.

Reviewed and edited by Henry A. Brechter, Editor-in-chief (Center), and Emily Allen, News Editor (Left).

Media Bias,Criminal Justice