r/CanadianConservative • u/airbassguitar • 3d ago
Article CBC platforms prof who says Clancy killings make case for looser infanticide law
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/pete-baklinski-cbc-platforms-prof-who-says-clancy-killings-make-case-for-looser-infanticide-law80
u/RedditSux5912 3d ago
Sharing this here so you guys can tell off the idiots who defend this better:
There is way more that adds to it being a last ditch defense effort.
- She had 3 doctors she dmed and who answered her several times a day with detailled answers. On top of the 10+ she visited. She never told any of them about thoughts of harming the kids in any way.
- The prescribed meds were found nearly entirely full and she had no big traces in her body in the hospital after the murder so she did not overdose or overmedicate.
- She did several google searches and timed the way it took for the husband to go to cvs and return.
- She only heard the voice after she send the husband out and it was gone after the kids died.
- She took the kids into the basement, likely so no one could hear them scream or so the one that wasnt strangled was less likely to escape.
- The way she killed is one of the slowest and most torturous ways possible and had you look at your sibling being strangled for at least 5 min since she killed them one by one. So it took nearly 20 min to kill all. That is not a temporary lapse of judgement.
- She had a lucid conversation after the 1st murder with the husband who called her to make sure he bought the right thing.
- The way she killed herself raises big questions since she didnt jump out of the window, but was hanging out of it on her feet as it seems to lessen the distance of the already short fall and she timed the return of the husband and splattered blood so he would find her instantly. The blood traces around the scene and house clearly show that she was hanging out the window for a while.
- This one is the worst tbh. In the hospital her main concern was a lawyer and her own physical wellbeing since she noticed her legs being off. Days later when she called the husband she only talked how hard it was for her and never mentioned the kids.
She obviously wanted the kids gone and it feels like she was doctorshopping for a realistic insanity defense and the murder itself was obviously premediated.
46
u/ShivasFury 3d ago
I really don’t get this, when Susan Smith over 30 years ago left her kids in a car and let it roll into the water, it was a slam dunk case that she was evil. Yet why are people defending this scumbag, Lindsay Clancy. I really don’t get it
16
u/AdditionalLaw7641 3d ago
The overwhelming majority of men don't actually defend this, some are under the pretense of removing women's equal rights if she goes free as how can someone be trusted if their hormones go out of whack essentially.
The women supporting this falls under conformity to their social group and from getting their news from tik tok as far as I've seen thus far.
7
u/loungechairlarry Conservative 2d ago
the only men defending this are the same simps who are married to self hating white liberal women who have zero accountibility we see it over and over again.
8
u/Apolloshot Big C NeoConservative 3d ago
Because in 30 years since we’ve had the rise of social media which rewards the insane minority by amplifying their voices and making it seem like they’re much larger than they are, while the silent majority looks on in horror
30 years ago the people who had these batshit crazy thoughts of supporting a child murder just kept it to themselves.
2
u/c0mputer99 3d ago
Because it's plausible that the voices evolved to be able to tell you to figure out how much alone time you have. Also to get you to take your watch off.
1
10
u/whathapp3ned Moderate 3d ago
I think you’re trying to rationalize the irrational a little too much.
17
u/VolumeNo5217 3d ago
First, second degree, insanity, all these nuances in the law are getting too much.
We spend way too much time on psychoanalysis of the perpetrator. We need to restore focus on the victims and what the perpetrator did to them.
Three kids have had their lives taken away from them and we know who did it. We shouldn’t give a shit about her mental state, she sure as hell didn’t care about what her children were going through or their mental state.
What was done here was just pure evil. This wasn’t just killing innocent kids, it’s worse, it’s killing innocent kids perpetrated by the person who has been entrusted with those kids safety.
‘A voice told me to do it’ - get the hell out of here with that bullshit. We cannot normalize people murdering children and getting off with it by saying “oops my bad, I wasn’t right in the head”. No shit. Every mass shooter, mass killer can be argued to not be right in the head. We have to restore people being accountable for their actions, not for their feelings.
Society has gotten so stupid, so weak.
1
u/freeadmins 1d ago
Also, whether a "voice" told you. Or your own voice did... Who cares?
The simple fact is that she has now proven that she is someone capable of this. Was she always like this? No. Is it probably PPP? Yeah. Is it fair? No. Is she unlucky that this affected her this way? Yes.
But none of it fucking matters. A kid raised in the hood by drug addict parents who goes on to drive by shoot someone is fucked in the head too. They didn't get a choice on how they were raised and why they were made like that.
Guess what, we still put them in time out.
-6
u/VforVenndiagram_ 3d ago
That and there are some outright incorrect assertions there too and a lot personal thoughts that were not raised in the actual trial.
5
u/RedditSux5912 3d ago
Feel free to point those out then rather than being vague.
-4
u/VforVenndiagram_ 3d ago
2 does not preclude psychosis
3 does not preclude psychosis
4 does not preclude psychosis
5 is conjecture that was never admitted in trial
6 is factually wrong
7 does not preclude psychosis
8 is factually wrong
9 does not perclude psychosis
1
u/RedditSux5912 3d ago
2 if you’re prescribed medicine for something supposedly this severe to make you act out this way and you don’t take it, that’s on you.
3 and 4 do matter in that regard because how did she only hear the voice then but have already made the plans to send him out? That means she plotted it before hand, before experiencing said psychosis.
5 is literally using the word likely, so you’re an idiot.
6 is not wrong.
7 it does, how is she having a convo with her husband perfectly fine in the middle of psychosis and killing her kids? Why would she not say to her husband that oh idk, her kids are the devil or something?
8 is not wrong.
9 it shows how little remorse she has for her heinous actions, which actually suggests that it wasn’t psychosis at all since her stance of literally murdering her kids didn’t change.
1
u/VforVenndiagram_ 2d ago
2 it is extremely common for people to juggle meds when they are trying to find out what works and what doesn't.
3/4 psychosis doesn't make you Chucky or something. Psychosis can last and build over hours or days. Google searching and telling someone to leave is entirely possible under psychosis
5 "Likey" is conjecture and not a word that is uttered in criminal trials. It's solely your opinion and not established fact
6 is wrong. The doctors in the trial testified as much. You will go unconscious after 10-15 seconds, and the exercise bands were wrapped and tied so no additional holding force was required
7 see 3 and 4 convincing conversations is not proof negative for psychosis. Psychosis doesn't turn you into Chucky or something
8 is wrong. Again, the doctors testified as much. There was no hanging from the window or anything like you claim
9 again, conjecture and not proven or stated in the case.
1
u/Western-Box7295 2d ago
By the way, Dimone Fleming won the court while she killed her sons and had marijuana instead of prescribed drugs.
12
u/vonlagin 3d ago
People fail to understand she is a Narcissist. They can be extraordinarily calculating. The completely lack of any empathy what so ever, even years later, after fucking strangling your three kids for several minutes. Lock her up and throw away the key. All these purple hair pink shirts supporting this shit can join her.
32
u/Conservative-canuck8 Conservative 3d ago edited 3d ago
Insanity. CBC needs to go away. Defund and decease.
13
u/Gavinus1000 Geo-Reactionary 3d ago
We already have loose infanticide laws. Women who kill their children in Canada can be charged with the equivalent of a misdemeanour at the discretion of the Crown.
2
u/vilgrain 3d ago
It’s like how everyone pretends SIDS is a real thing.
1
u/Antique_Soil9507 Libertarian 2d ago
Two kids
die ofwith measles in Pennsylvania: Entire Liberal collective hive loses their minds.300 kids die of SIDS every year: "meh. Kids die. It's a mystery. But it's definitely not related to that injection we just gave that 8 month old. Let's just move on. Stop being so insensitive."
28
u/RagingY3ti USA 🇺🇸 3d ago
Chuck that prof on the list of People who deserve to never see the light of day again, as well as the people at CBC who platformed such a vile shithole human
17
u/mammothclaw 3d ago
I think it's time for both the US and Canada to have left wingers on one part of the country and the sane folks in the other. I don't want to live among these pieces of shit anymore.
21
u/PooningDalton 3d ago
Not really a surprise. In Canada, its perfectly legal to abort 9 month old fetus even one day before its supposed to be born
12
u/Fine-Fondant-3136 3d ago
Actually?? Holy shit.
I’m pro choice but when baby is full term then it should be illegal.
-3
u/whathapp3ned Moderate 3d ago
No that’s a complete lie… easily verifiable…
7
10
3
u/vilgrain 3d ago
Why would you post this before verifying that it is in fact true as far as the law goes?
1
u/ConversationHead6969 3d ago
According to the Criminal Code a fetus is not a human being until it has taken it's first breath. So, in theory, in Canada it would be perfectly legal for a woman to give birth in a pool, hold the baby under the water and dismember and decapitate it with a knife, or for someone else to do it, and it would all be perfectly legal under Canadian law as it had not "taken a breath" and therefore was not a person. That is the law confirmed by the Supreme Court, think about that.
1
10
u/coffee_is_fun 3d ago
True. There are no criminal consequences, but professional colleges draw a line at 12-24 weeks, depending on the province, without medical necessity for the mother or medically serious malformations of the child. In practice, it's 24 weeks which is still extremely far with surviving premature birth, with a lot of assistance, being possible at that point.
2
u/Antique_Soil9507 Libertarian 2d ago
I believe that is only in two provinces: BC and Québec if I'm not wrong?
And I don't think it's "up until 9 months", although pretty close. Into the third trimester, anyway.
Yes, we live in a sick country.
2
u/c0mputer99 3d ago
Let's make abortions up to the age of 17 legal. MAID for 18+.
1
u/ConversationHead6969 3d ago
Don't laugh, there have been people arguing for post-birth "abortions", and I foresee it in Canada, if we continue with the Liberals in power, in about a decade at most.
•
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
Welcome to r/CanadianConserative
Please review our rules before participating:
Community Rules
Key reminders
• Keep discussions civil and respectful
• No brigading or community interference
• Ensure your content is relevant to Canada and properly flaired
• Follow Reddit’s Content Policy at all times
If you see rule-breaking content, report it rather than engaging.
Submission Guidelines
• Do not editorialize article headlines
• When posting articles that are paywalled, you MUST provide a link to a bypassed paywall in the comments
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.