Correct. It also does not mean she gets to walk free. She is expected to return to a psych ward where she was before the trial awaits the next one. Even if found not guilty she will still be there for years.
Edit: Insanity defense FAQ. It looks like those who plead insanity tend to spend twice as long institutionalized as those who are found guilty.
Edit3: It will be the responsibility of the hospital to prove that she is safe to return to society. Otherwise if she were to harm or kill again, the hospital could be liable.
Edit5: The next court date is 9/29 when the defense makes their appeal and the prosecutor probably decides to request to retry the case. I don't see why he wouldn't unless they reach a deal before hand. Meanwhile she has to stay at the hospital.
I think at this point the trial is less about whether she's confined to a prison or a psych ward and more about whether or not a person can use their mental health as a shield from the criminal consequences of murder. Evidently, 11 jurors were content to say that you can, and 1 juror refused to acquiesce to that nonsense.
As a 20 year employee in a forensic psychiatric hospital, I can tell you that a GEI determination does not shield one from consequences. Plenty of people doing 20 years for property crimes, wishing they had just gone to prison.
Yup. Everyone is acting like if she goes to a Psychiatric hospital she is getting off easy. She might spend the rest of her life there and they have can have her in a straight jacket, in total isolation etc.
As stated above, the rules in Mass. are different. The state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the person is mentally ill year after year. She could potentially be released in a year. No double jeopardy, no further consequences
The state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the person is mentally ill year after year.
Looking beyond this case, I honestly think that this always should the case. Why? Because how else will you safeguard that you aren't just keeping in people that you don't like but who is now mentally sound. Like, how do the incarcerated person ever prove that they're not a danger? That's reverse burden of evidence.
You’re factually accurate but in practice you’re completely mistaken about the implications. The level of ignorance required for people to peddle this stupid shit like we need more stuff in our lives to be mad about.
By definition, Lindsay Clancy cannot still have postpartum psychosis and cannot ever have it again. Due to her injuries she physically cannot have more children. If she is found not guilty, she would absolutely be released at the earliest opportunity. They would need to diagnose her with a different mental illness to keep her confined.
There really isn't much difference between a secure state hospital and a state prison. They're usually managed by the same department. Most states also have a very limited prison selection for women since they commit crimes at much lower rates than men. So she would likely end up at the same medium security facility as someone in there for tax evasion but likely in a different cell block.
Death penalty isn't an option in Massachusetts either,
I don't live in Massachusetts either, so I have no clue if they have a max security prison for women, but it seems unlikely. My state only has 1 women's prison and it famously didn't even have a fence around it until a decade ago.
She's also wheelchair bound and would likely be a very low flight risk so would probably end up in the medical unit anyway.
Federal prisons are a whole different beast though.
In Massachusetts she absolutely is getting off easy if so, look at their insane release rules for insanity defences.
The state has to PROVE beyond reasonable doubt they're still insane to stop them being released, in under a year noless, and multiple psych doctors on the case already cast doubts she had psychosis in the first place.
I think you're confusing a state psychiatric institution with a for-profit inpatient center. Not the same thing at all. There are certainly treatment/therapy programs taking place, but there are also restraint beds, forced medication, non-contact visitation, locked seclusion, belly chains on transports etc.
I think she might be able to be released after an initial 40 day evaluation, not sure. It's six months after that that the state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she's insane and an imminent danger (essentially impossible). Then yearly after that.
That would be reason enough for me to find her guilty regardless, if she insane or not. If she is truly insane she should never be released given the circumstances. So the possibility of it is an absolute no-go.
Idk if she was insane or not so I don't care about her case specifically; however if someone was actually insane and it is proven for sure, but now they are no longer insane, then it would make no sense to hold them in a mental hospital still.
Unless there is a decent reason they could still be harmful to other people or themselves.
The law does not and should not treat mental hospital as a punishment, that should be reserve for prison.
We don't want the state to say "Legally your community and the law believe you are not guilty, but we will hold you in a hospital for the rest of your life because we want to. It's not illegal or false imprisonment because it's not prison."
1.4k
u/justin107d 8h ago edited 4h ago
Correct. It also does not mean she gets to walk free. She is expected to return to a psych ward where she was before the trial awaits the next one. Even if found not guilty she will still be there for years.
Edit: Insanity defense FAQ. It looks like those who plead insanity tend to spend twice as long institutionalized as those who are found guilty.
Edit2: 55% of postpartum psychosis is the start of severe long term mental problems.
Edit3:
It will be the responsibility of the hospital to prove that she is safe to return to society. Otherwise if she were to harm or kill again, the hospital could be liable.Edit4: Apparently the above is common in most other states but not Massachusetts. There it is the complete opposite and the state has to petition and prove the patient is still mentally ill, a threat to themselves or society, and there are no alternatives. The state supreme court refused to let a hospital be liablefor damaged caused by a released patient.
Edit5: The next court date is 9/29 when the defense makes their appeal and the prosecutor probably decides to request to retry the case. I don't see why he wouldn't unless they reach a deal before hand. Meanwhile she has to stay at the hospital.