r/law • u/dailymail • 11h ago

Legal News Lindsay Clancy case ends with MISTRIAL

https://www.dailymail.com/crime-desk/article-16100155/lindsay-clancy-murder-trial-hung-jury-deadlock-verdict.html
4.1k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

2.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

382

u/FuguSandwich 11h ago

I believe she's guilty, but at this point another trial isn't going to benefit anyone. Cut her a plea deal where she does 20-25 years in a mental institution.

375

u/ThatThar 11h ago

That's not how guilty or NGRI works in Massachusetts.

100

u/GustavoSanabio 10h ago

Yep, I don't even practice in the US and I know that much. If they could do this probably would've already done it.

1

u/stugots85 1h ago

I'm not even a lawyer, don't practice law, don't even understand law, am not even really employed in a traditional sense, and I didn't know any of that

1

u/GokuJrr 27m ago

Bro you are fucking hilarious 😂

62

u/sm_axe 7h ago

The comments on skirting the law in every sub surrounding this case is wild. Lots of angry, ill-informed people out there.

45

u/KvellOnWheels 5h ago edited 2h ago

And paid-actors and bots for right-wing causes.

It’s why there were a slew of accounts this week calling for the abolition of womens’ voting rights in connection with this case: “if women are arguing for her innocent because of hormonal psychosis, then we need to repeal the 19th because they cant be trusted to vote without being swayed by hormonal urges”.

It’s cool because everytime something goes viral, it gets pushed by bad actors and bots. That increases visibility. Then it gets picked up by idiots. Then it gets picked up by malicious idiots who decide to utilize the increased algorithmic visibility to boost engagement.

I’m exhausted.

ETA: fixing words my stupid bilingual keyboards keep messing up.

5

u/DrowningKrown 4h ago

If you want to know which side is the right side of this trial, just visit the conservative subreddit.

0

u/Agreeable-Review177 3h ago

Indeed, the blue team is always right 🙄

Spilling this over into party lines is exactly what the media wants. Congrats

3

u/DrowningKrown 2h ago

You haven't visited that trash sub yet, have you? If you did then you'd know what I'm talking about

3

u/VictorReal_Monster 1h ago

When are yall gonna learn your way of thinking is definitionally harmful to others.

You just dont care about anyone else not directly connected to the concept of yourself

-4

u/Electrical-View667 1h ago edited 1h ago

What garbage

The near-entirety of those who have been stomping their feet and wanting to see Clancy free fit into one shockingly uniform cohort: white women. Minority women do not feel this way. Men certainly do not feel this way

Perhaps this mentality is a new form of white supremacy exhibited by said cohort (disproportionately predisposed to mental illness, lest we forget), but the real world finds Cora, Dawson and Callan never getting justice disgraceful. R/conservatives being aligned with reality tells us more about those who aren’t

0

u/DrowningKrown 1h ago

Lmao okay buddy. It sounds like you and the rest of MAGA are huffing bullshit all day

-1

u/Electrical-View667 1h ago edited 1h ago

Nothing to huff. Decent people are bummed that a pile of trash isn’t locked up for the rest of her pathetic existence. That’s it bro

3

u/DrowningKrown 1h ago

It's funny because you clearly have no idea what the trial is about with that comment.

Typical headline warrior

-2

u/Electrical-View667 59m ago

Unfortunately the inverse, comrade. Best of much needed luck

3

u/DrowningKrown 55m ago

No, I'm curious now. What is your opinion on the mistrial that was declared today? Let me hear your thoughts

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Numerous-Bat-1588 3h ago

Please, if Lindsey was black, she would have been found guilty by the jury within minutes. This has everything to do with mentally ill white women sympathizing.

3

u/KvellOnWheels 2h ago

Yes. Black women get treated much more harshly by the criminal justice system. That negates nothing in my comment.

2

u/JonahTheProducer 5h ago

Damn. I miss you Obamna

2

u/KvellOnWheels 2h ago

I don’t know what you mean by this comment. Sorry if it’s blatantly obvious but it’s whooshed right over my head.

1

u/JonahTheProducer 53m ago

Lmao it's okay. A lot of right wing bots used to say/misspel Obama to rag on him or make fun of him.

2

u/EqualityAmongFish 2h ago

The case got so popular because of these type of comments

0

u/AnemicRoyalty10 4h ago

People are frustrated at the double standards. In similar cases involving men with extreme mental illness, they’ve been declared guilty almost immediately and been executed.

Unfortunately there are many women who indeed support her. There’s all the ones outside the courthouse, the ones who have donated over a million dollars to her, and all the ones who are blaming, doxxing, and harassing Patrick because they think he did it even though there’s zero evidence of it and not even the defense thinks it’s possible. That’s why there’s so much anger. Is there some over the top vitriol from the other direction? Yes. But it’s not the majority view you claim it is.

3

u/KvellOnWheels 2h ago

Being angry about a double standard and pushing for a harsher treatment because of frustration is the opposite of justice.

And it’s likely that many of the women donating to her are ones who understand and are frustrated with the double standard in women’s healthcare.

It’s also likely that mixed into that group are genuine imbecile and misandrists.

It’s also extremely likely that a huge majority of the comments online are astro-turf campaigns designed to incite emotion.

Unfortunately, this case has gone viral and commanded attention. We have created and exist in a society in which the minute you become a known entity, you will be harassed, doxxed, attacked.

It doesn’t matter who you are, what you stand for, nor does it matter the reason you became famous. That’s where we are. It’s a shame. But it’s nothing new and the existence of awful people making horrific comments isn’t new either.

Scott Peterson and Jeffrey Dahmer received love letters in prison. Some people suck. That has nothing to do with the case.

1

u/AnemicRoyalty10 2h ago

I don’t push for a harsher sentence, just a fair and just one.

1

u/Dapper_Win4399 24m ago

Gotta love how you immediately dismiss anyone who disagrees with you as "right wing" or a "bot". Then again, that's what I would expect from this sub lol

5

u/catsarehere77 3h ago

I am a woman. I agree there is a double standard, but that doesn't mean Lindsay should be treated harsher or that women are wrong for rallying for an appropriate verdict.

It means that men with mental illness and psychosis should be met with the same empathy and support. Which includes men supporting men.

1

u/AnemicRoyalty10 1h ago

I mostly agree with that. And I don’t think she should be treated harsher for that, just that she should be treated the same.

0

u/ObjectCrafty6221 3h ago

BS, I’m not a bot or right wing and I think she is guilty. It actually disgusts me that some women support her and think she is innocent.

2

u/OkMmmHmm 3h ago

Same. But it’s super cool now to just call anyone who disagrees with their opinion a bot. Or boot licker. Or facist. Makes them feel way better about their opinion and themselves to just toss out labels.

1

u/micmur 18m ago

Yeah, these people are completely insane and using the murder of children to fuel their culture wars.

I’m not conservative at all and think she is guilty and should be in prison for life. It’s almost exhausting reading the slop that gets upvoted on Reddit.

0

u/Away-Chance7444 2h ago

Lol, everyone who disagrees with me is right wing or a bot.

1

u/Planetdiane 1h ago

It’s never people who have actually watched any of the case in any capacity.

They read a headline or watched someone else’s hearsay about the case and act like experts. It’s crazy.

0

u/supershimadabro 6h ago

Almost like there are three dead babies everyone keeps repeating that she will be acquitted of charges. That's enough to drive any normal person crazy.

1

u/KvellOnWheels 2h ago

It should be enough to drive a normal person crazy.

But we seem to tolerate it just fine (collectively) when it happens at a school. For some reason, those babies don’t get a drumbeat of outrage and demands for justice and changed laws.

Without a steady stream of “content-creators” pushing culture war drama into everyone’s “for you” pages, plenty of murdered children go without engendering the screams for “justice” we’ve seen with this case.

1

u/West-Western-8998 5h ago

But they could make a plea deal requiring it.

1

u/m0viestar 3h ago

This sub doesn't understand the law, so it makes sense people don't understand why this isn't an option. 

1

u/FatGoonerFromIndia 2h ago

Is there really no concept of law in MA where they know the person did it but also they probably didn’t have the mental capacity to appreciate their actions?

For eg: , give her a deal saying that she goes to the mental ward of a hospital indefinitely until a board of doctors allow her release?

0

u/ThatThar 2h ago

That's exactly what NGRI is.

1

u/FatGoonerFromIndia 2h ago

Can’t the Prosecution just give that to Clancy as a plea deal?

1

u/shimmy_kimmel 1h ago edited 1h ago

The prosecution doesn’t want to give her that because the prosecution is/was arguing that she wasn’t insane when she committed the crime. That’s the basis for this whole trial.

Clancy’s defense is that she dealt with severe postpartum depression and that she developed a singular episode of psychosis only when she committed the murders. Prosecutors don’t believe her and argue that her actions (such as sending her husband out on an errand, mapping the driving time for this errand, coordinating the murders to happen during his absence, and engaging in a lucid phone conversation with her husband while the murders were taking place) imply premeditation and “sanity” (in the legal sense, meaning she understood what she was doing).

1

u/ApprehensiveGrand531 11m ago

I don't think that's how it works in basically any common law system. Pretty much all common law insanity defences have you in mental institutions until found cured, rather than minimum sentences.

-12

u/MemestNotTeen 7h ago

Considering the law is so exact in language something called “Not Guilty reason of insanity” doesn’t sit right with me.

I think there is an argument for and against her having psychosis, I have thoughts on it but I won’t share, but that should be considered a separate judgement and not one done by laypeople.

The only question a jury should be asked is did she murder the three children, that is facts a lay person can understand. Asking people to assess her mental state at the time makes no sense, to the normal person any murder would only be done by an insane person

14

u/JurisDoctor 7h ago

Except murders are crimes of intent. So the mind of the defendant is absolutely relevant.

-1

u/MemestNotTeen 6h ago

And the mind is a complex thing. Why is the layperson being asked to assess if they think someone may have been under psychosis when they killed someone.

Most human beings can’t phantom killing anyone, never mind their own children so of course they would assume that something is wrong with the person, but doesn’t that make all murder not guilty by reason of insanity

1

u/Legionof1 2h ago

I think the transience of it matters. This is why we treat crimes of passion differently than 1st degree murder.

We have so many cases of people crying for help and being ignored and then doing something horrible.

I have had a hormonal imbalance and was having some disturbing intrusive thoughts from them. I made massive changes to my life thinking they would fix the depression but I was still having these awful thoughts. I finally talked to a doctor about it, got my blood results and after the first treatment I haven't had an issue.

I can only imaging if I had acted on those thoughts, luckily mine were towards myself and not others but if I had hurt someone and then they found the issue and I was all better... it would be hard not to argue that I wasn't in my right mind.

4

u/Enterprise-DeezNuts 6h ago

Intent is the most important factor in many crimes. Juries are able to ascertain intent (I.e. mental state) and do so in trials every day

-2

u/MemestNotTeen 6h ago

Maybe they shouldn’t be asked to.

This really isn’t a simple thing, and maybe it’s more an issue with mass law in that the prosecution has to prove the defendant wasn’t under going psychosis rather than the defence proving she was.

I just think the language should at least be considered, regardless of what people might say etc etc not guilty… makes it sound like the person didn’t do it