Chronicling the ongoing intersectional struggle to liberate women — progressively defined to include the legacy kind and the transgenders — from The Patriarchy™, one microaggression at a time.
Male juror throws lone holdout under the bus in news interview
Presumably, this guy hopes he’s going to get a pat on the head from the matriarchs for his show of servility.
Extremely defeatist behavior.
Sad!
Pro-Lindsay juror was 'devastated' by holdout's refusal to acquit pic.twitter.com/wE8K5qoIqi
— Thomas Paine Reloaded™ (@BenBartee) September 13, 2026
Related: 'HuffPost Personal' Cancer: A Tragic Tale of One Husband's Total Emasculation
Lindsay Clancy adorer not handling black identity of holdout well
The pro-Lindsay TikTok matriarchs have had a hell of a time coming to grips with the revelation that the holdout who cost their heroine her sweet vindication was, in fact, a black man.
This one, who identifies as a “non-practicing white,” despite being visibly distraught, recused herself from commentary on account of her race.
Lindsay apologist, a "non-practicing white," copes with the black identity of the holdout pic.twitter.com/tvNcEU2h7m
— Thomas Paine Reloaded™ (@BenBartee) September 13, 2026
Related: New Hollywood Hate Flick: White People ‘The Most Dangerous Animal on the Planet’
NBC doxes holdout juror
No good deed goes unpunished.
Sarah Anderson reported this story yesterday.
Via NBC 10 (emphasis added):
The NBC10 Boston Investigators are uncovering new details about the lone holdout juror from the Lindsay Clancy murder trial.
Court documents and interviews with family members reveal a history of domestic violence allegations. We discovered a pending eviction case tied to months of not paying rent.
The NBC10 Boston Investigators also found an active restraining order against him, while he was listening to evidence in the case.
Those details raise questions about the jury selection process and how the Plymouth County resident was picked for the high-profile case that ended in a mistrial.
NBC10 Boston has repeatedly attempted to contact the juror at home, where his landlord is currently trying to evict him.
We are not identifying him at this time because he has chosen not to speak publicly and the jury list is currently impounded*. However, we wanted to share the details that experts say should have raised red flags about how he filled out his juror questionnaire.
In September of 2021, the holdout juror in the Clancy case faced a criminal charge for assaulting his wife out of Brockton District Court.
According to a police report, the juror's 13-year-old nephew called 911 after he said his uncle grabbed his wife by the throat and threw her into a dresser.
*Note the little trick that NBC 10 did here, probably under legal advisement; they didn’t provide the name, but they gave more than enough evidence of his alleged legal entanglements for the highly motivated Karen sleuths out there to verify his identity.
I have seen the name reported, but I will hold off on publishing it here, because I haven’t been able to confirm its veracity.
In any event, his name is sure to come out, and he’s sure to get death threats, if he hasn’t already.
For the record, doxing jurors for the purposes of intimidating them is a crime in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Via Mass.gov (emphasis added):
Whoever willfully, either directly or indirectly: (i) threatens, attempts or causes physical, emotional or economic injury or property damage to; (ii) conveys a gift, offer or promise of anything of value to; or (iii) misleads, intimidates or harasses another person who is a: (A) witness or potential witness; (B) person who is or was aware of information, records, documents or objects that relate to a violation of a criminal law or a violation of conditions of probation, parole, bail or other court order; (C) judge, juror, grand juror, attorney, victim witness advocate, police officer, correction officer, federal agent, investigator, clerk, court officer, court reporter, court interpreter, probation officer or parole officer; (D) person who is or was attending or a person who had made known an intention to attend a proceeding described in this section; or (E) family member of a person described in this section, with the intent to or with reckless disregard for the fact that it may; (1) impede, obstruct, delay, prevent or otherwise interfere with: a criminal investigation at any stage, a grand jury proceeding, a dangerousness hearing, a motion hearing, a trial or other criminal proceeding of any type or a parole hearing, parole violation proceeding or probation violation proceeding; or an administrative hearing or a probate or family court proceeding, juvenile proceeding, housing proceeding, land proceeding, clerk’s hearing, court-ordered mediation or any other civil proceeding of any type; or (2) punish, harm or otherwise retaliate against any such person described in this section for such person or such person’s family member’s participation in any of the proceedings described in this section, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 10 years or by imprisonment in the house of correction for not more than 2 ½ years or by a fine of not less than $1,000 or more than $5,000 or by both such fine and imprisonment. If the proceeding in which the misconduct is directed at is the investigation or prosecution of a crime punishable by life imprisonment or the parole of a person convicted of a crime punishable by life imprisonment, such person shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 20 years or by imprisonment in the house of corrections for not more than 2 ½ years or by a fine of not more than $10,000 or by both such fine and imprisonment.
Of course, we can’t expect the Massachusetts government to pursue justice in this case with one percent of the zeal with which it prosecutes, for instance, nonviolent pro-life advocates standing passively outside of abortion clinics holding Bibles.
Some animals are more equal than others under progressive anarcho-tyranny.
Some get the long arm of the law; some get special privileges to dox jurors whose decisions they don’t agree with.
That’s called Democracy™, and we celebrate and cherish it here.
Except when we don’t approve of the outcome of a democratic election; then we run electoral interference and overturn the results.
Related: Quantitative Analysis Shows Google Steered 6 Million Votes to Biden in 2020
It’s complicated, our relationship to Democracy™ in this, Our Sacred Democracy™.
While confusion abounds, however, you would do well not to ask too many questions, or NBC might dox you, too.
