CLANCY CASE: AN IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT IN THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY CHALLENGE On October 6, Judge Sullivan effectively granted the relief sought by the defense in their motion at the September 29 hearing by amending his prior impoundment orders. Juror notes, the court's responses, and sidebar discussions surrounding the mistrial may now be disclosed, with juror-identifying information redacted. This is an important first step in the defense's challenge to whether the mistrial was declared without manifest necessity. These records may reveal what the court knew, what alternatives were considered, and why the mistrial was declared. In my analysis of this particular issue on The Justice File just two days ago, I explained the constitutional issues surrounding the impoundment orders and identified this likely outcome writing: "One possible middle ground would therefore be a partial grant: disclosure of appropriately redacted material necessary to litigate the constitutional issues while maintaining the impoundment of juror identities and unrelated deliberative material." The court has now taken that approach. Read my full legal analysis from October 5 and why this matters to the defense's double jeopardy claim as well as issues related to the juror questionnaire and alleged cell phone use here: thejusticefile.com/2026/10/0…