Finland has overhauled security along its eastern frontier after what officials describe as Russian efforts to unsettle European countries, recently finishing a new fence designed to strengthen control of the border with Russia.

The country has built about 124 miles of fencing on the Finnish-Russian border. Petri Hakkarainen, political director at Finland’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs, told News Media that the barrier serves as an additional safeguard against the arrival of unauthorized migrants directed from Russia.

“We have in the past witnessed Russia’s attempts … to instrumentalize migrants at the Finnish border,” Hakkarainen said. “Basically pushing migrants towards our borders, forcing us then to take them on.”

Hakkarainen said a rapid surge in arrivals can place major pressure on Finland’s asylum system, requiring authorities to handle a high volume of applications and potentially creating broader instability if the numbers become large enough.

Finland responded by shutting its entire land border with Russia in 2023. Moscow quickly protested the decision, characterizing the move as “Russophobic.”

The Kremlin said it “deeply regretted” the closure, arguing that Finland had abandoned decades of pragmatic and mutually respectful ties in favor of what it called an anti-Russian political approach.

Finland’s 833-mile boundary with Russia is the longest shared by any European Union or NATO country. The newly completed border fence adds another layer of protection alongside the crossing closures.

With Russia still engaged in a grinding war in Ukraine, Western officials have accused the Kremlin of conducting broader campaigns to destabilize Europe. Those alleged efforts range from disinformation operations to state-backed economic pressure aimed at weakening public confidence.

“We think it’s important to listen to those of us who live next door to Russia,” Hakkarainen said. “Listen to our analysis of the situation: We consider Russia to be a long-term threat to transatlantic security — not only to Ukraine, not only to Europeans, but to transatlantic security as a whole.”

Finland launched the border fence initiative after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, a landmark conflict that prompted the historically neutral Nordic nation to join NATO in April 2023.

READ MORE: Brittany Snow Reflects on 17 Years of Eating Disorder Recovery

Moscow has long viewed NATO’s eastward expansion as a direct security threat, using it to justify reinforcing its Western defenses. 

When Finland officially joined the alliance, Helsinki saw an immediate reaction. Over 1,300 migrants without visas arrived at its eastern border.

Finland accused Moscow of weaponizing migration as an act of “hybrid warfare,” a charge the Kremlin denied.

Closing the border checkpoints has proven “very effective,” Hakkarainen noted. Beyond physical barriers, Finnish lawmakers passed the Border Security Act. 

The temporary law allows border authorities to restrict asylum applications and turn back migrants if a foreign actor attempts to destabilize the country by funneling people across the border.

While the law sparked some initial debate over potential human rights and international law violations, Hakkarainen emphasized that national defense took priority.

“We take these concerns very seriously,” he said. “But national security and our own sovereignty … weighed more heavily in this conversation, though there is broad majority support for the act.

“We take our security and preparedness very seriously. 

“I would say not despite that, but because of that, we are able to lead very normal lives here — regardless of the neighbor we have.”

The lone juror who declined to acquit Lindsay Clancy has said he never wavered in his belief that she should be found guilty, despite fellow panel members urging him to support a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity in the deaths of her three children.

The juror, identified by NewsNation as Michael P. Desronvil, said he had no uncertainty about a guilty verdict, contradicting previous comments from jury foreperson Roni Carlson.

Desronvil claimed that he was repeatedly interrupted when he attempted to lay out alternative interpretations of the evidence during deliberations, saying his concerns were rooted in what had been presented at trial.

Still, he told NewsNation that the physical evidence, testimony from key witnesses and the prosecution’s case led him to conclude that Clancy understood her actions and had planned to kill her children: five-year-old Cora, three-year-old Dawson and eight-month-old Callan.

Speaking separately with Ray Marcel of Fugitive TV, Desronvil said he remained convinced that Clancy could distinguish right from wrong at the time of the killings.

Marcel said the juror told him that the evidence he reviewed left him certain of Clancy’s guilt. According to Marcel, Desronvil believed she was not legally insane and was aware of what she was doing.

Although Marcel did not air their conversation, he said the holdout juror spoke with him by phone for more than an hour. Desronvil reportedly felt compelled to address the case after other jurors criticized him publicly following the trial.

Marcel said Desronvil believed some public accounts of his role on the jury were incomplete, misleading or false. That included claims that he had harbored reasonable doubt over Clancy’s guilt, an assertion the juror rejected.

Clancy’s trial sharply divided opinion after she admitted strangling her three children, but pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity. 

The jury ended in a controversial 11-1 deadlock. Podcast host Marcel said the holdout juror told him their 40-hours of deliberations were contentious from the outset. 

Since the verdict, there has been a wild social media race to identify him publicly. 

NBC Boston published details of domestic violence allegations against him, but did not reveal his identity. They stem from a dispute involving his ex-wife. 

In his phone call with YouTube host Marcel, the juror explained his decision to convict was based on ‘preparation she [Clancy] did’ before killing her children, including sending her husband Patrick out for errands before attacking the kids. 

The holdout juror also said he had been stunned by the vitriol he faced after he voted to convict Clancy, and felt the backlash from his fellow jurors was because he was a ‘black Republican,’ Marcel claimed.

After NBC Boston that the holdout juror was accused of domestic violence, which he was arrested but never prosecuted for in 2021, questions swirled over how he was admitted to the case – as potential jurors are required to disclose if they have ever been arrested or charged with a crime in the past.

Marcel said the holdout juror insisted that he never lied to the court, and he ‘checked the box he was supposed to check’ on juror questionnaire forms, but was selected anyway. 

He said the holdout juror told him the allegations stemmed from a turbulent ‘fraudulent marriage,’ and their relationship rapidly deteriorated when Desronvil allegedly discovered she was an illegal immigrant. 

‘He didn’t know that, and he told me that’s pretty much when everything hit the fan,’ Marcel said on his YouTube show. 

MORE STORY: Anthropic Says Claude AI Is Helping Build Its Own Next Version

He said the holdout juror told him that his former partner raised domestic violence allegations in retaliation after he filed for divorce.

In 2025, the holdout juror was also alleged to have attacked his nephew by shoving him to the ground and striking him in the face, according to reported restraining order documents obtained by NBC Boston.

The juror was also not prosecuted over that incident, the outlet reports, and Marcel said the juror told him that he did not want to get into those allegations beyond saying that ‘the truth will come out.’

Jury foreperson Roni Carlson previously told NBC10 that the holdout juror ‘admitted he had reasonable doubt,’ but Marcel reported this was disputed.

‘He felt that she was sane when she did it. And that’s exactly what he told me,’ Marcel recalled in an interview with NewsNation. 

Desronvil reportedly insisted that despite the deliberations ending in deadlock, the jury was not unanimously against the holdout juror from the start and their conversations began with just eight jurors wanting to acquit Clancy. 

‘They were doing their best to convince,’ Marcel said, adding that two of the jurors were undecided, and the holdout juror had at least one other person who also believed she was guilty. 

Marcel said Desronvil told him the other juror was on his side ‘until the last moment,’ at which point she ‘caved and voted with the rest.’

‘He said he didn’t know if it was due to the pressure (from the other jurors), but he didn’t care,’ Marcel continued. 

‘He said he knew that she was guilty because of the evidence that he saw. He felt he was not insane at the time and knew what she was doing.’ 

Over 40 hours of deliberations, Marcel said Desronvil told him the conversations grew agitated, and at one point he used a water bottle and a piece of string to demonstrate the force Clancy would have used to strangle her children to death.

‘He tied a string around the water bottle, and did it to set and example and show people, “Imagine the water bottle as their little necks,”‘ he recalled. 

Asked what convinced the holdout juror of Clancy’s guilt, Marcel told NewsNation that he was told that he felt ‘she was sane by the preparation she did’ before strangling her children. 

Marcel told NewsNation the fact Clancy took her time’ strangling each child, some in separate rooms to the other also helped sway Desronvil’s decision.

‘The preparation showed that she was sane and knew what she was doing, pretty much knew right from wrong, before she did what she did,’ Marcel said. 

Marcel explained he decided to share the juror’s perspective amid the huge response and vitriol directed at the holdout juror.

‘No matter if you agree with him or not, his name shouldn’t have been put out there like that,’ the Fugitive TV host said. 

‘No juror should be put to the forefront like that, because it’s their civic duty to do that, and they should be protected. He never asked for any of this whatsoever.’  

A California mother of three was killed in a suspected DUI hit-and-run Tuesday night, allegedly by a driver who had previously been convicted of DUI.

Fernando Saldana, 26, of Escondido, was arrested after Vanessa Wheyland was struck near Redwood Avenue and Carlsbad Boulevard, close to Tamarack Beach.

Authorities said Saldana left the scene following the collision.

“Last night, Vanessa was tragically struck and killed by a driver, leaving behind her loving husband and three children,” Nicole Check wrote in a GoFundMe created for Wheyland’s family.

Wheyland was discovered in the roadway with major injuries shortly before 8 p.m., after what friends said had been a family walk. She was transported to a local hospital, where she was pronounced dead.

Investigators located Saldana just over a mile from the crash scene using evidence recovered at the scene, tips from community members and automated license plate reader technology.

His prior DUI conviction is particularly significant in the case. Under California law, prosecutors were able to file a second-degree murder charge under the “Watson Murder” doctrine because of that earlier conviction.

Saldana was also arrested on allegations of leaving the scene of a collision resulting in injury or death, driving under the influence causing injury or death, and gross vehicular manslaughter.

ALSO READ: John Gotti’s Grandson Carmine Agnello Marries Assault Accuser

“Vanessa was a devoted wife, an incredible mother, and a cherished friend whose love and presence touched so many people,” Check wrote.

A proud San Diego State University graduate, Wheyland was also the CEO of Wheyland Electric, a prominent electrical contracting company serving Carlsbad and the wider San Diego area.

The Carlsbad Police Department has not released any information regarding Saldana’s citizenship status. He was booked into the Vista Detention Facility and is set to face a judge Friday.

One Instagram user pointed to California’s laws after Wheyland’s death, writing: “So sad- CA needs tougher deterrents and stronger laws.”

The deadly crash has also fueled frustration among neighbors who told NBC 7 they have seen several crashes along the roadway, including fatal crashes, with each loss devastating the community.

A memorial has been set up for her at Tamarack Beach, where loved ones plan to hold a vigil Thursday night.

“Her family was her entire world, and this devastating loss has left everyone who loved her heartbroken,” Check wrote.

The sole juror who prevented a unanimous finding that Clancy was not guilty by reason of insanity is now speaking out for the first time. Michael P. Desronvil rejected fellow jurors’ assertions that he had voiced uncertainty about the prosecution’s evidence during deliberations.

In a statement to NewsNation, Desronvil said he remained convinced that prosecutors had established Clancy understood her actions when she strangled her three young children in January 2023.

“I didn’t have any doubts. As I tried to explain different possible theories during deliberation, I kept getting cut off as if I had doubts based on the evidence present,” Desronvil said.

“Based on all the physical evidence, key witnesses, and what the prosecution presents, I thought it was enough proof that she knew exactly what she was doing and planned,” he added.

Desronvil’s account clashes with statements from other members of the jury. Following the mistrial, fellow jurors said he seemed to concede that reasonable doubt existed, yet would not join the remaining 11 jurors in concluding that Clancy was legally insane at the time of the killings.

The panel was split 11-1, with Desronvil alone favoring Clancy’s conviction rather than accepting the insanity defense. Judge William Sullivan subsequently declared a mistrial.

MORE STORY: Texas Man Executed for Killing 3 in 2005 Burglary After Final Words

Desronvil’s public comments arrive as Plymouth County prosecutors consider whether to try Clancy again. Her defense team has also raised the prospect of resolving the matter without putting the case before another jury. Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley previously told News Media that prosecutors must now determine whether a new jury could be persuaded unanimously to reject Clancy’s insanity defense after the first panel was unable to reach a verdict.

“The question is whether they could ever get a jury, particularly in Massachusetts, that would unanimously vote against this defendant,” Turley said. “For prosecutors, they have to weigh that, but they may find the alternative equally unappealing — to simply walk away and say, ‘There are three dead children here, but we just don’t think we could ever win this case.'”

Clancy, a former labor and delivery nurse, admitted killing her children — Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months — but argued she was not criminally responsible because she was suffering from severe mental illness at the time of the killings. Prosecutors argued she planned the murders and understood the wrongfulness of her actions.

Judge Sullivan has ordered jurors’ identities and questionnaires sealed, citing safety concerns following the high-profile mistrial. Clancy is due back in court Sept. 29 as prosecutors determine whether to seek a retrial.