The lone holdout juror in the Lindsay Clancy trial intends to file a bar complaint against Clancy’s lawyer, Kevin Reddington, and wants him suspended or disbarred, according to the juror’s lawyer. Edward Paltzik told TMZ, and the New York Post repeated, that his client Michael Desronvil believes Reddington targeted him after the mistrial.
No complaint has been reported as filed. If one is, most of what happens next will be invisible to the public for a long time, and the complaint will face a question Paltzik’s statement does not answer: which rule it says Reddington broke.
What the juror’s side is saying
According to TMZ, which attributed the account to “sources familiar with the situation,” the juror and his legal team believe Reddington publicly identified him, accused him of violating his juror’s oath without evidence, and made comments meant to ridicule him. They want Reddington “suspended, disciplined, or even disbarred.” The New York Post reported that Paltzik told TMZ that Desronvil will file the complaint, that Paltzik has spoken with State Police and the district attorney about his client’s safety, and that Desronvil wants to return to “normalcy.”
These are one side’s characterizations, relayed through the press. We have found no public response from Reddington. What the court record shows is narrower. Reddington’s September 21 motion asked Judge William Sullivan to conduct a “limited inquiry into Juror Doe,” review the juror’s questionnaire, and obtain phone records, and the supporting memorandum and exhibits were impounded. The motion used a pseudonym. The juror’s name became public through other channels, as we reported on September 13. The motion will be heard September 29.
Kevin Reddington is presumed to have complied with the Rules of Professional Conduct unless and until the Board of Bar Overseers and the SJC find otherwise.
Who can file a bar complaint
Anyone. A complainant does not have to be a client. Complaints go to the Office of Bar Counsel, which investigates under Supreme Judicial Court Rule 4:01, § 8(1). After investigating, bar counsel may close the complaint and tell the complainant why, resolve it informally, or recommend an admonition, formal charges, or discipline by agreement. A complainant whose matter is closed can ask a Board member to review that decision.
What a complaint would have to allege
A bar complaint succeeds only if it describes conduct that violates a specific rule. Three are the obvious candidates, and each has limits.
Rule 3.5, contact with jurors. After a jury is discharged, a lawyer may not communicate with a juror if the communication is prohibited by law or court order, if the juror has made known a desire not to communicate, if it “involves misrepresentation, coercion, duress or harassment,” or if the lawyer initiates it without required notice. Nothing reported suggests Reddington contacted the juror at all. He went to the judge.
The comment to Rule 3.5 is relevant for a different reason. It says “common-law principles bar inquiry into the contents of jury deliberations and the thought processes of jurors, but not into extraneous influences.” That line is roughly where Reddington’s motion has to land to succeed in court, since it asks about phone use during deliberations rather than how the juror reasoned. Whether the motion is well founded is for Judge Sullivan on September 29. A lawyer asking a court for relief through a filed motion is the ordinary way to raise a juror issue.
Rule 3.6, trial publicity. A lawyer in a case may not make an out-of-court statement that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know will be publicly disseminated and “will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding in the matter.” The rule then lists things a lawyer may say, including information in a public record and the scheduling or result of any step in the case. A complaint built on this rule would need to identify specific public statements by Reddington and explain how they risked prejudicing the Clancy proceedings, which include a possible retrial.
Rule 8.4, misconduct. This catch-all includes conduct “prejudicial to the administration of justice.” It is often cited alongside a more specific rule rather than alone.
Why the public may never see it
Bar complaints are confidential. Under Rule 4:01, § 20(1), the Board and bar counsel must keep “all information involving allegations of misconduct by a lawyer” confidential until one of three things happens: the lawyer resigns, the lawyer agrees to public discipline, or bar counsel serves a formal petition for discipline. Most complaints never reach any of those points.
There is an exception that could matter here. Under § 20(2)(c), bar counsel may disclose “the pendency, subject matter, and status of an investigation” if “the investigation is based upon allegations that have become generally known to the public.” A complaint announced in advance through TMZ and the New York Post may qualify. Disclosure under that provision is permitted, not required.
The complainant’s protection has a limit
Rule 4:01, § 9(1) makes complaints to the Board or bar counsel “confidential and absolutely privileged,” and the complainant “immune from civil liability based upon his or her complaint.” But the immunity “shall apply only to communications to the Board or the bar counsel and shall not apply to public disclosure of information contained in or relating to the complaint.” What a complainant or his lawyer says to the press about a complaint is outside that protection.
How this interacts with Reddington’s existing case
Reddington already faces a separate, public petition for discipline filed by bar counsel on June 23, 2026, with four counts involving two former clients, including former Fall River Mayor Jasiel Correia. That petition is public because it was served. Under § 8(3)(a), a lawyer served with a petition gets at least twenty days to answer, and charges not answered are deemed admitted. The matter then goes to a hearing committee, a special hearing officer, or a Board panel.
A new complaint from the juror would not be added to that petition automatically. It would begin as a confidential investigation by bar counsel. Nothing about the June petition makes a new complaint more or less likely to succeed on its own merits.
Frequently asked questions
Did the Clancy holdout juror file a bar complaint against Kevin Reddington?
His lawyer, Edward Paltzik, told TMZ that Michael Desronvil will file one seeking suspension or disbarment. As of September 25, 2026, no filing had been reported, and bar complaints are confidential until formal charges are brought.
Can anyone file a complaint with the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers?
Yes. Complaints go to the Office of Bar Counsel, which investigates and may close the matter, resolve it informally, or recommend discipline or formal charges under SJC Rule 4:01, section 8.
Are bar complaints public in Massachusetts?
Not until a petition for discipline is served, the lawyer resigns, or the lawyer agrees to public discipline. Bar counsel may disclose the existence of an investigation if the allegations have become generally known to the public.
Is a person who files a bar complaint protected from being sued?
For the complaint itself, yes; it is absolutely privileged. That immunity does not cover public statements about the complaint.
Is the juror complaint related to Reddington’s existing bar case?
No. The June 2026 petition for discipline involves two former clients and predates the Clancy trial. Any complaint from the juror would start as a separate confidential investigation.
Sources: TMZ (September 24, 2026) and the New York Post (September 25, 2026) for the juror’s side’s statements, which are characterizations by his lawyer and unnamed sources, not findings; we found no public response from Reddington. Text of SJC Rule 4:01, sections 8, 9 and 20, and Rules of Professional Conduct 3.5, 3.6 and 8.4 read at mass.gov. The June 23 petition as described in our earlier reporting. Kevin Reddington is presumed to have complied with the Rules of Professional Conduct. General information about Massachusetts law, not legal advice.