Latest / Sid & Friends In The Morning / Donna Rotunno | Criminal Defense Lawyer Unpacks the Lindsay Clancy Trial Fiasco

Transcript

Donna Rotunno | Criminal Defense Lawyer Unpacks the Lindsay Clancy Trial Fiasco · Sid & Friends In The Morning

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: My TV attorney is Donna Rotono. She's the best.
• 0:03
  Speaker 2: And I had to find her this morning. She's actually
• 0:05
  Speaker 2: vacationing in Italy, but she's still kind enough to join
• 0:09
  Speaker 2: me even on vacation. So Donna, good morning.
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: Ciao, Bella. How are you?
• 0:15
  Speaker 3: Good morning. Ciao. Ciao, Sid. I'm grateful to be with
• 0:19
  Speaker 3: you and looking at the beautiful mountains and vineyards in
• 0:22
  Speaker 3: Italy as we speak.
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: Where are you exactly?
• 0:26
  Speaker 3: I am right now. I'm in Chianti. We are outside
• 0:29
  Speaker 3: of Florence and we are, it's lunchtime here. So we're
• 0:33
  Speaker 3: going to have some lunch and enjoy, but I'm always
• 0:35
  Speaker 3: thrilled to be on with you, especially after a third
• 0:38
  Speaker 3: string quarterback bears win. Yeah.
• 0:41
  Speaker 2: I was going to ask you about that because when
• 0:43
  Speaker 2: I go to Israel, for example, not Europe, I've been
• 0:45
  Speaker 2: to Italy too, but Italy, I have difficulty finding these games,
• 0:49
  Speaker 2: and I just can't sit my whole term and watch
• 0:51
  Speaker 2: it on the phone. So I was in Israel a
• 0:53
  Speaker 2: couple years ago for the AFC championship game, and good
• 0:56
  Speaker 2: luck finding that at 3 o'clock in the morning. Were
• 0:58
  Speaker 2: you able to find a place to watch your beloved
• 1:00
  Speaker 2: Bears whoop up on the Eagles last night?
• 1:03
  Speaker 3: Well, you know, it was 2 a.m., so I did
• 1:06
  Speaker 3: not leave the hotel room, but I was able to
• 1:09
  Speaker 3: pull it up on the phone and watch some of
• 1:11
  Speaker 3: it in and out of sleep.
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: That's why I can never live anyplace else.
• 1:17
  Speaker 3: I know. I know.
• 1:18
  Speaker 2: That's why I love America, above and beyond President Trump
• 1:21
  Speaker 2: and all the freedoms we've got.
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: Football.
• 1:23
  Speaker 2: I can't watch football at 2 o'clock in the morning.
• 1:26
  Speaker 2: I can't even live on the West Coast. They play
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: their football games at 10 o'clock in the morning.
• 1:31
  Speaker 3: That's exactly right.
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: Not for me. All right, well, tell me this.
• 1:34
  Speaker 2: Again, you're on vacation in Italy, but I know you're
• 1:37
  Speaker 2: keeping up with this. You're on top of this like
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: nobody else. Tell me what this status hearing is all about.
• 1:43
  Speaker 2: It starts in about two hours in Massachusetts.
• 1:46
  Speaker 3: So a lot is expected to happen today. There are
• 1:49
  Speaker 3: three separate motions filed by the defense, and I think
• 1:52
  Speaker 3: now there's also a gag order that is something that
• 1:56
  Speaker 3: both sides, I think, are going to be arguing about
• 1:58
  Speaker 3: to the judge today. So one of the motions filed
• 2:01
  Speaker 3: by Kevin Reddington, who's Lindsey Clancy's attorney, is he has
• 2:05
  Speaker 3: filed a Rule 25 motion, and what that motion is
• 2:07
  Speaker 3: saying is, is that the court should find her not
• 2:10
  Speaker 3: guilty based on the fact that there wasn't enough evidence
• 2:13
  Speaker 3: to convict her at trial so that's number one i
• 2:15
  Speaker 3: don't think that's really going anywhere but kevin reddington has
• 2:18
  Speaker 3: a duty to represent his client in the best way
• 2:21
  Speaker 3: that he can and he needs to file these motions
• 2:23
  Speaker 3: and preserve her rights and so he's doing that the
• 2:26
  Speaker 3: other motion he filed is a double jeopardy motion which
• 2:30
  Speaker 3: is very interesting we saw this in karen reed as
• 2:32
  Speaker 3: well After a mistrial happened in her first trial. Again,
• 2:36
  Speaker 3: this is another motion I don't think is going to
• 2:38
  Speaker 3: be successful. Then there's a third motion that goes into
• 2:42
  Speaker 3: the juror conduct and things that happen in the jury room.
• 2:45
  Speaker 3: As we all know, this holdout juror. Michael Desrenville has
• 2:50
  Speaker 3: hired counsel. Mr. Reddington is asking for all this information
• 2:55
  Speaker 3: from the holdout juror. He wants his phone records because
• 2:58
  Speaker 3: there's been communication that he went on his phone during
• 3:01
  Speaker 3: jury deliberations, which of course should not happen. But, you know,
• 3:04
  Speaker 3: here's my question about all of this, that if this
• 3:06
  Speaker 3: had resulted in a guilty, I could understand this. But
• 3:10
  Speaker 3: the fact that this resulted in a mistrial, you know,
• 3:13
  Speaker 3: my question to Kevin Reddington would be, what remedy are
• 3:16
  Speaker 3: you seeking? I mean, it looks like he's asking for
• 3:18
  Speaker 3: an outright dismissal, which I don't think he's going to get.
• 3:22
  Speaker 3: The remedy, had there been a potential guilty finding, may
• 3:26
  Speaker 3: have been declaring a mistrial. But, you know, this notion
• 3:30
  Speaker 3: that it I'm not really sure what he's seeking other
• 3:32
  Speaker 3: than him asking the court to just completely dismiss the case,
• 3:35
  Speaker 3: which you would not do even if there was juror misconduct.
• 3:39
  Speaker 3: So there's a lot happening in court today. We are
• 3:41
  Speaker 3: also hearing that there's a good possibility that the motion
• 3:45
  Speaker 3: regarding the juror will get continued to another date. Now
• 3:48
  Speaker 3: that he has counsel, counsel may want to reply. But again,
• 3:51
  Speaker 3: his lawyer is not a party to these. proceeding. So
• 3:54
  Speaker 3: although the judge discretionarily can hear from him, it doesn't
• 3:58
  Speaker 3: necessarily mean that anything he says is going to make
• 4:01
  Speaker 3: much difference. So that's what I'm expecting today. But man,
• 4:04
  Speaker 3: there's been a lot of back and forth on this
• 4:06
  Speaker 3: case since this mistrial was declared and these lawyers going
• 4:11
  Speaker 3: back and forth with each other. I think it's going
• 4:13
  Speaker 3: to be very hard to not only pick a jury
• 4:15
  Speaker 3: in this case moving forward, but any case. I mean,
• 4:17
  Speaker 3: who would want to be a Quite the circus. And
• 4:23
  Speaker 3: it does not bode well, I think, for our wonderful
• 4:27
  Speaker 3: system of justice that we have.
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: All right.
• 4:29
  Speaker 2: So I know it's hard to predict these things, but
• 4:32
  Speaker 2: if you had to, Donna, when they finally do put
• 4:34
  Speaker 2: this thing together and we do it again, what do
• 4:37
  Speaker 2: you think the final outcome will be?
• 4:40
  Speaker 3: Well, I think if I was the government here and
• 4:42
  Speaker 3: I was representing the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and I was
• 4:45
  Speaker 3: the DA there, what I would do is I would say, look,
• 4:48
  Speaker 3: we have seen the community conversation about this. We've seen
• 4:53
  Speaker 3: that there was 11 of 12 jurors who felt that
• 4:56
  Speaker 3: this was a not guilty by reason of insanity. And therefore,
• 5:00
  Speaker 3: you know, I think even the prosecutors themselves, as the
• 5:02
  Speaker 3: trial progressed, realized that they kind of came at it
• 5:06
  Speaker 3: a little too strong in the beginning. And then they
• 5:08
  Speaker 3: gave an excellent closing argument saying, I would not be
• 5:10
  Speaker 3: surprised if the Commonwealth decided to choose, decided to charge
• 5:14
  Speaker 3: her with second degree murder rather than first. I think
• 5:17
  Speaker 3: they have a better chance, frankly, of a conviction on
• 5:20
  Speaker 3: a second degree than they do the first degree case.
• 5:23
  Speaker 3: I mean, remember, they tried to really paint her as this.
• 5:26
  Speaker 3: cold-blooded killer that planned this and it was very premeditated.
• 5:32
  Speaker 3: But I think based on the evidence regarding her mental health,
• 5:35
  Speaker 3: I think a second degree would make more sense if
• 5:38
  Speaker 3: you were truly looking for a conviction. So we'll see
• 5:41
  Speaker 3: what they're going to do. They may say, you know what,
• 5:43
  Speaker 3: we believe that this is a first-degree murder case all
• 5:45
  Speaker 3: along and we're going to move along with the same charges.
• 5:48
  Speaker 3: that we came forth the first time. So we'll, you know,
• 5:51
  Speaker 3: we'll see what they do, but I think that they
• 5:52
  Speaker 3: would have a better chance with a conviction on a
• 5:55
  Speaker 3: second degree if that's where they started.
• 5:57
  Speaker 2: Interesting to see that her ex-husband is now expecting his
• 6:00
  Speaker 2: first child with his.
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: New wife, Patrick.
• 6:03
  Speaker 2: That's 60 seconds to go. This Cornell story, not sure
• 6:07
  Speaker 2: if you're keeping up with this again, you're in Italy
• 6:09
  Speaker 2: enjoying yourself, but What a disgusting story, and it does
• 6:12
  Speaker 2: look like, at least, I haven't read into all of it,
• 6:15
  Speaker 2: and you know better than me, that Cornell may be
• 6:18
  Speaker 2: somewhat liable here. What is your opinion on this whole ugly,
• 6:22
  Speaker 2: ugly story, 2024 Cornell?
• 6:26
  Speaker 3: It is an ugly story. And, you know, remember, what's
• 6:30
  Speaker 3: legal and what's moral are two different things. And I
• 6:33
  Speaker 3: think that the decision by the prosecutors, and as you know,
• 6:36
  Speaker 3: I've tried more sexual assault cases than probably anyone you
• 6:39
  Speaker 3: can find. And the issue with sexual assault cases is,
• 6:43
  Speaker 3: you know, consent is always a defense. And I believe
• 6:46
  Speaker 3: that prior to making a decision about charges, when the
• 6:48
  Speaker 3: prosecutors decided You know, we're looking at all the evidence here.
• 6:51
  Speaker 3: They believe that this was a situation where consent was
• 6:54
  Speaker 3: given and it was never withdrawn. And now the reason
• 6:57
  Speaker 3: they're relooking at this is because of a civil lawsuit
• 7:00
  Speaker 3: that was filed. Now, of course, a civil lawsuit is
• 7:03
  Speaker 3: seeking monetary damages. And so They're saying that they're going
• 7:07
  Speaker 3: to re-look at the case and reopen it. But my
• 7:09
  Speaker 3: question would be, what information actually changed? What information is
• 7:15
  Speaker 3: different for the prosecutors other than this claim that she
• 7:20
  Speaker 3: was drugged? Now, I think that in the original investigation,
• 7:23
  Speaker 3: they believed... that it was a voluntary intoxication, which under
• 7:27
  Speaker 3: New York law makes a difference in terms of consent. So,
• 7:31
  Speaker 3: you know, we'll see what's going to happen here. You
• 7:33
  Speaker 3: also have to, and I am not questioning the victim
• 7:36
  Speaker 3: in any way, but what I am saying is, is
• 7:38
  Speaker 3: if information comes out during a civil lawsuit that was
• 7:41
  Speaker 3: different than what was told to police and criminal investigators,
• 7:45
  Speaker 3: you also have to look at that skeptically and ask
• 7:47
  Speaker 3: yourself why. So, you know, we'll see what they decide
• 7:49
  Speaker 3: to do, but they are reopening it. And if they
• 7:52
  Speaker 3: bring charges, then I'm sure we'll be talking about it.
• 7:54
  Speaker 2: And this young girl alleges that seven frat members at
• 7:58
  Speaker 2: Cornell drugged her and gang raped her, right?
• 8:01
  Speaker 3: Correct.
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: Aye, aye, aye. What a mess. All right. Terrible. Just terrible. Well,
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: you go enjoy yourself in Italy. It's so nice of
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: you to make time for me. I love you. You're great.
• 8:11
  Speaker 1: You really are.
• 8:12
  Speaker 3: Anytime.
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: All right. Go Bears. You're great.
• 8:17
  Speaker 2: Donna Rotuno right there calling us from Italy this morning.
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: She is really terrific on Fox News. Really great.
• 8:24
  Speaker 2: And commenting on both the Lindsay Clancy and Cornell trials.
• 8:28
  Speaker 2: Donna Rotuno live from Italy.
• 8:30
  Speaker 4: Thanks for listening to Sid and Friends in the Morning.
• 8:34
  Speaker 4: You can hear Sid and Friends in the Morning weekday
• 8:36
  Speaker 4: mornings at 6. If you like the podcast, share it
• 8:40
  Speaker 4: with your friends and listen anytime at wabcradio.com and download
• 8:44
  Speaker 4: the WABC Radio app. Hit that subscribe button on all
• 8:48
  Speaker 4: major podcast platforms. Plus, follow WABC on social, on Instagram, TikTok, Facebook,
• 8:55
  Speaker 4: and X. See you next time for a new episode
• 8:58
  Speaker 4: so you never have to wonder.
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: What the heck is going on here?