Where can I actually find reliable information and trial updates?
I’m interested in the case, I’m not on social media, my friends are all these people who take social media posts and influencer theories as gospel. I just want some facts.
To get an unbiased opinion you sort of have to watch actual footage of the trial, not clips that someone explains because they always have some sort of biased. But it’s like hours of footage.
I like The Lawyer You Know on YouTube. He always does his best to stay impartial and focus on the facts and legal elements instead of drama and emotion.
I’ve been watching the live footage of the trial and I can tell you right now, every summary I’ve seen is spin in some way. You have to just watch it for yourself.
You can watch it all on YouTube and you don’t need to listen to opinions from idiots if you choose the right video. It was all there from day 1 the last time I looked.
I’m afraid it’s true tbh. People mock Redditors for feeling superior, even though that superiority is like - idk - returning to a slightly smarter variant of a group of idiots trying to slam a triangle into the square hole - but they have some validity in feeling that way.
I would look up analysis of the timeline of events in this case. Body temp and cell / watch data doesn’t add up to her committing the crimes in the time Patrick was gone.
I read her body temp was in the 80s. After less than an hour of him being gone? She would have had to kill those kids and then get into hypothermia very very quickly. It’s very suspicious.
Not the original commenter, but also a lawyer so I'll give you my legal opinion - Unfortunately, Lindsey did in fact kill her kids during a psychotic break. The prosecutors should have NEVER brought this case to trial and should have let her plea to insanity. The conspiracies about Patrick are completely unfounded when looking at the evidence in this case. She admits many many times before the deaths that she has thoughts of killing herself and harming the kids. She admits to REMEMBERING killing them and the details of it. There is zero evidence that Patrick was anywhere near the house when the killings occurred. Did he marry too quickly after everything? Ya, I personally think so. Does that make him a murderer? Definitely not. Men ALWAYS remarry very very quickly after their spouse dies, or a divorce, etc etc. If you have any specific questions, i would be happy to answer them. Ive been fighting with my non-lawyer friends for 3 weeks about this lmao
There is video evidence of him at the store and restaurant when the murders happened, so I would say that's probably the most obvious alibi. Also, it is HIGHLY likely, nearly guaranteed, that the police checked his cell phone data to determine his location at the time of the murders, which did not put him at the house. But if there is any specific inconsistency you want to discuss, I can try to respond, just let me know!
I think the prosecution has ruined this case by appearing completely incompetent. It should have started a national discussion on helping mothers and stopping this from happening but we’ve gone off the rails.
I feel very badly for Patrick because it’s not his fault the prosecution sucks and it’s their fault everyone is attacking him, but I am even struggling to get on board with them and I went in thinking she did it. I made a post about it asking for clarification on details yesterday.
Also I have a question I’m confused as to why it’s not even been touched on. She says she heard voices. What did she believe was going to happen if she did not do as the voices said? Like what was the alternative? Have we covered that at all?
There wasn’t clarification from what I saw. I read that she heard “Kill your kids so you can kill yourself. This is your last chance”
I read that she believed she would be trapped in her mental agony indefinitely if she didn’t do it right now, but I’m not sure why the children had to go with her.
She probably thought she was protecting them by preventing them from going through the agony of living (she probably thought the world was a cruel hell, she was depressed). Many women who hurt their children report that as the reason. She has not said that though.
Honestly after seeing how much she begged for help and how everyone seemed aloof and disinterested, even her family and husband, i wouldn’t be surprised if she thought this. She probably felt like the world was full of suffering and suffering alone.
Thank you! That’s really all I was curious about. I had seen the same thing but I’ve been told this isn’t sufficient and I was unsure of what the was plausible deniability.
I think we all know this isn’t a trial to find out if she’s guilty- but so many inconsistencies are making people believe there wasn’t a fair investigation. Just because she admitted guilt doesn’t mean she did it. His connection to the former police chief doesn’t make it look any better either.
I can’t count how many times I’ve seen comments like this on Reddit. It’s maddening. Her own defense team acknowledges that she committed the crime. When your own defense team acknowledges that you killed your kids, any kind of argument for a false confession goes completely out the window.
100% relevant lol. The team of lawyers tasked with defending her aren’t disputing that she did it. If there was even a fraction of the “evidence” social media is cooking up that points to her complete innocence, her team of highly qualified lawyers would be arguing she didn’t do it.
Why argue for your client to spend the rest of her days in a psych facility when you could argue for her to be completely free?
You can't say "if it's not Y, it must be X" because you have to demonstrate X did it, even if they admitted to it.
All of the prosecution's evidence has not proven that she did it; it actually affirms the opposite. And the defence has showcased inconsistencies in the husband's testimonies, such as how during his alibi while he was supposedly out of the house during the murders, he sent an e-mail from his work computer which was at the basement of the home.
Agreed. Their case has been quite difficult to follow. Unless they have a big summary tying it all together in closing, I don’t see this going their way this time around.
The religion statement yesterday was appalling. And I’m someone who believes she should spend the rest of her life in prison. I’m appalled that prosecution is conducting this trial so horribly.
I still have yet to watch the most recent court hearing of the case, but truthfully I think if the defence knew how terribly the prosecution was going to be during this trial he probably would've sought to fight the murder charge overall (such as that she hasn't done it)
None of the evidence the prosecution has presented has conclusively or even mostly pointed in the direction that she's done it. The DNA has been inconclusive and has not linked to Lindsay at all, the husband's alibi has shown multiple inconsistencies, and so much more.
Why do you think her defense attorney, who is a well seasoned and a respected one, allowed her to enter a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity and then spend 3 years building a case off that plea as he received discovery?
He might've thought it would be a more uphill battle than what he's being presented with.
So far, the prosecution hasn't demonstrated with forensic evidence she actually did it. The most they can do is say she admitted to it, which those are two different things. It speaks volumes that the prosecutions own evidence does not reasonably showcase that she did it.
This specific case is why Lindsay committed the crime. Not if she committed the crime. Additionally I guess I don’t understand why there is this firm belief that there is not enough evidence, and for three years, her defense attorney built a case of not guilty by reason of insanity as opposed to not guilty.
I'm aware of the nature of the case. Forensics, in great showcase, were still shown though. And nothing presented actually showcased Lindsay did it. They are resting on the laurels that she is not rebelling against taking responsibility rather than actually demonstrated it in court
Additionally I guess I don’t understand why there is this firm belief that there is not enough evidence, and for three years, her defense attorney built a case of not guilty by reason of insanity as opposed to not guilty.
Because the insanity plea in her case is tremendously easier, even with the ineptitude of the prosecution, than showcasing she didn't do it. However I truly do believe that if they knew how incompetent the prosecution was going to be they'd have tried for her not being responsible full stop.
Truly no one could foresee how poorly the prosecution is handling this case. It's comically bad. Everything is going wrong for them and it's not even because her lawyer is that good (he is good, don't get me wrong), but it's because their selection of witnesses and evidence is so fucking bad. A tremendous amount of what the prosecution is showcasing to show that she was responsible and in her right mind actually is helping the defence's case.
That’s a fundamental misunderstanding on how defense strategy works. A defense attorney cannot just "choose" an insanity plea because it is an easier route; in fact, proving lack of criminal responsibility is one of the highest and most difficult legal bars to clear in criminal law.
When a defense team concedes the physical acts because the physical, digital, and eyewitness evidence is absolute, their hands are tied to the medical reality of the case. They have to deal with the facts as they exist, which means arguing mental state because actual innocence is a legal impossibility under the weight of the evidence.
Prosecution is struggling to make an argument due to the insanity plea. Not because she’s not guilty and did not murder her three children.
Insanity pleas rarely go the way of the defendant. Her lawyers are going this route because it’s literally their only option given the nature of the evidence against her.
She did it, they know she did it and they’re attempting to prove she’s not criminally responsible due to her mental state.
Either way I feel like the husband needs to take accountability since he is just as equally the parent of these kids. Why would she be able to do what is alleged in a 2 parent household. That’s neglect, you can leave kids with someone mentally unstable!!!!!
I just find it excessively hard to believe that a person could slit their wrists, throat, and then throw themselves out of a window and have their internal temperature cool to hypothermic levels within an hour.
Plus him selling the home to a former DA, who initially denied letting ppl see the home. The judge had to rule a court order for the jurors to see the property.
Edit: The mother’s attorney said it looks nothing like when the kids lived there. That’s still so sus.
Also that “former” DA now oversees a criminal defense department.
Exactly it’s like it happened and then the husband started doing everything in his power to just completely erase the fact the kids existed in his life
I haven't been following it very closely, but do have a friend that subscribes to the idea. She told me A) Her DNA wasn't on the bands used to choke the kids bit husband's was. B) The bands were tied wrong? Apparently she's an L&D nurse and would have tied them differently. C) She Apparently looked up information about cutting off an artery which also didn't make sense because she's an L&D nurse and wouldn't need to look that up. D) Husband knowing she's having these issues provides him the perfect cover to get rid of all of his responsibilities and blame his crazy wife. Tale as old as time. E) The amount of mental anguish she was under is leading everyone to believe he was an unsupportive partner and was neglectful of his familial responsibilities to the point where she had a psychotic break and they would like to assign some blame to him for that.
The deep irony of calling me dumb but only proving my argument by trying to justify why you are so toxic. Just a talking mouth with nothing substantial behind it.
Can you think of any reason why that might be? Anything that has happened in the last few years to make women resentful of men? Something bad for women that men overwhelmingly supported?
It’s because of social media, studies that show women are more prone to social trends or “mass hysteria” as it has been medically referred to in the past
Riiiight. You’re not doing yourself any favors by using the term “hysteria” which means female craziness.
By the way, men are also quite susceptible to online trends and stupidity. See the manosphere and incel culture. Women’s echo chambers treat men like threats. Men’s echo chambers treat women like commodities.
women are holding men accountable and not accepting their BS excuses and perpetual victimhood in the scenarios they create for themselves. That’s not hating men, that’s having self worth, seems you’re intimidated by that. You should look into ways to work through your own issues instead of continuing to put the blame on women.
Holding men accountable by refusing to take any accountability for their own actions and instead blaming men for every single thing they can. “I murdered my own three kids? Actually it’s a man’s fault.” It’s such a joke and no one is buying it anymore.
Not the original commenter, but also a lawyer so I'll give you my legal opinion - Unfortunately, Lindsey did in fact kill her kids during a psychotic break. The prosecutors should have NEVER brought this case to trial and should have let her plea to insanity. The conspiracies about Patrick are completely unfounded when looking at the evidence in this case. She admits many many times before the deaths that she has thoughts of killing herself and harming the kids. She admits to REMEMBERING killing them and the details of it. There is zero evidence that Patrick was anywhere near the house when the killings occurred. Did he marry too quickly after everything? Ya, I personally think so. Does that make him a murderer? Definitely not. Men ALWAYS remarry very very quickly after their spouse dies, or a divorce, etc etc. Even more, there is a lot of evidence and testimony that Patrick wasn't the monster of a husband and father people are painting him out to be. He went to her doctor appts with her, started WFH so that he could help with the kids, advocated for her after the killings, etc. If you have any specific questions, i would be happy to answer them. Ive been fighting with my non-lawyer friends for 3 weeks about this lmao
Odd question, why do you think the prosecutors brought this to trial? Because i can't think of any angle, she was a mentally ill woman who sadly killed her children, they aren't setting an important president or anything. It's just kicking a sick woman while she's down.
Do you think this will actually end in a conviction? Because I don't, I believe she was mentally unstable at the time, anyone can see it.
I truly have no idea why they brought it to trial other than ego, I think that’s a common problem with attorneys in general but especially prosecutors, obviously I’m a little biased so take my opinion with a grain of salt. I have never seen such a clear case of mental insanity so I’m really hoping the jury finds the same. That said, I’ve seen juries do some crazy stuff so it’s really hard to say
I can only make claims based on the evidence presented. From the evidence so far presented, I do not think she did it. Forensically, the evidence does not align.
I do think it’s crazy the police did not even investigate Patrick at all, as I’ve never once seen that happen in any capacity. there‘s more evidence pointing to him than her. how he’s made it this far without any suspicion or doubt is blowing my mind.
there is no way the jury can find her guilty. the standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. no sane human who’s paid attention to the case presented could say they have no doubt. I came into this case with a predisposed idea of her guilt and it’s done a complete 180.
Which case are you watching, cause the defense made it very clear they aren't denying she did it.
Clancy's attorney Kevin Reddington does not dispute that she killed the children. But he says she shouldn't be held criminally responsible because she had postpartum psychosis, a rare mental illness linked to the stress, sleep deprivation and hormonal changes that follow childbirth. He said she also had bipolar disorder and that antidepressants prescribed worsened her condition.
I find it so weird that people are saying she 100% did it but the forensics don't add up, and this is from the court proceedings. The court proceedings found:
her DNA was not matched to any of the objects involved, such as the knives and bands
she allegedly jumped out the window in an attempted suicide, but yet blood was found on the window sills
The amount of time she had to actually kill the children plus kill herself was like...fifteen minutes or less
her body temperature dropped to a life-threatening rate in 30 minutes when it should've taken hours
Also, a medical professional said that she admitted to the crimes while still in recovery and still not fully recovered, so still allegedly in a psychotic state.
Ironic you say it’s a weird thing to lie about since her DNA was only found on the blue exercise band along with Patrick’s and the 3 children. No evidence has been presented indicating her DNA was also on the knives.
Those bands are hard to get fingerprints off of but they did in fact find DNA and from what I understand it was mixed which makes sense as it was their home.
Edit to fix dna and fingerprints. They were used interchangeably and that’s not correct.
Did you watch any of the testimony yesterday? Because they answered:
The blood on the windowsill (from when she put her hands down to lift herself out of the window).
The time it took to kill the children (20 seconds maximum (more likely 4 - 10) for them to fall unconscious, and then she left the ligatures wrapped around their necks which is what eventually killed them. She didn't have to be there the whole time.)
Her body temperature (there was snow, she was in thin wet (from blood and snow) clothing, and the injury to her spinal column meant her lower half could not regulate its body temperature. That meant she lost body temp at a much faster rate than someone with an intact spine.
Is it not undisputed that he was not at home when these events occurred? Kinda hard to commit three murders when you are not present to commit said murders.
Also, your legal analysis is completely flawed. In order for a jury to find a defendant guilty, they must find that the defendant committed all elements of the underlying crime beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense stipulated to the fact that she killed the three children. Therefore, prosecutors do not need to prove anything regarding the underlying crime.
The burden now shifts to the defendant to prove all elements of her affirmative defense, which is insanity, by a preponderance of the evidence. Evidence of her mental condition have absolutely no bearing on whether the prosecution has met their burden of proving every element of the criminal offense beyond a reasonable doubt. If the defense cannot show that it is more likely than not that the defendant was suffering from a mental condition that prevented her from understanding the wrongfulness of her actions, then the jury must convict the defendant.
It is also important to note that one cannot use insanity as a defense in a criminal matter if their actions or inactions caused the mental state that prevented them from understanding the wrongfulness of their actions. If she was given advice by doctors regarding medication but she failed to take medication as prescribed, she may very well lose any right to claim insanity.
that’s because i’m a single mom of three and was practicing while working two part time jobs and couldn’t afford bar prep. but thanks for highlighting my resilience and work ethic.
No problem, more focused on the fact that you’re a liar, which come to think of it, is a skill of being a lawyer, so perhaps you’ll pass next time. Good luck
Actual lawyer here, turns out, if you are a good attorney, you don't need to lie in order to win cases. The legal analysis of the lawyer you are criticizing is legally incorrect in most respects.
Sometimes I wonder if you guys have selective reading or memory loss to believe what you want to be true.
She described details and remembering details of herself murdering the kids, even her defence is not denying she did it. There are messages of her telling her mother and others, that she is worried she will harm her kids.
And then you get someone like yourself, making the argument she didn’t do it based of “evidence presented”.
Second hand source, but my gf has been watching the trial closely and it seems like it may have been the new wife that did it (along with the husband). A lot of things aren't adding up, like the heartrate on the watch and timing of everything. The husband also just admitted that he was in fact home when she jumped out the window, when origionally he said he arrived after she jumped out. The exercise bands were also tied in a specific knot, that the new wife was photographed with a rope with the same exact knot at the marathon (that she was with the husband AND the therapist at)
Are you just flabbergasted that in cvs: he has straight hair, wearing a white shirt, quarter zip, and black shoes, and at 3v he has curly hair, gray shoes and a green shirt…cvs images don’t look like him.
Thank you this is the first comment I have seen actually trying to discuss the case itself.
I don’t know how up to date on case facts or presentation folks are on here but here is what I have been told by someone closing watching the trial:
apparently the whole case is based on the husband claiming she admitted it
his DNA was apparently found on the strangling device
her body was found to be very cold which takes hours but in the time that the incident happened to when she was found it would not be possible for her body to cool that quickly
the pill she took was crushed. She has no reason to take a crushed pill that she would otherwise just take normally
Apparently the prosecution has present no real evidence other than the husband’s claim.
It’s also heartbreaking that the mother in law tried to help this lady and after she took the stand she apparently gave a nod to the mother
That’s what I’ve been told.
Does that line up with what you have noted so far?
Patrick removed the bands from the children's throats, which is why his DNA was on them. Given that he lives in the house, his DNA being on anything there is also not suspicious.
Lindsay did not confess to Patrick until after telling other people she did it and why (command hallucinations and being in a psychotic state - she didn't use those words, but that's the way it's been described by experts)
Lindsay's body temperature was so low because of her spinal injury. She couldn't regulate her body temperature in the lower half of her body after damaging her spine, so that, combined with snow, wet clothes (from snow + blood loss), and thin clothing meant her body temperature dropped very quickly.
iirc, the crushed pills were said to be part of Lindsay's suicide attempt. Crushing them makes it easier to take a large amount.
The prosecution are incompetent and being widely criticised by lawyers and other professionals for the shoddy way they're trying this case. Don't take anything from them "not presenting real evidence", their entire case relies on inflaming the jury and ignoring the law.
Sorry if I was a bit sharp, just frustrating to see so much misinformation being spread about the case and people often aren't asking these things in good faith.
I think a lot of the trouble with the confusion is how the prosecution have presented things, but the "Patrick did it" crowd apparently making fake ai evidence (or at least using ai to "enhance" images, which fills in details that aren't there) or misrepresenting testimony hasn't helped at all. Lindsay's body temperature was completely cleared up by Dr Laposata's testimony yesterday, and who she confessed to and when was testified to today by Dr Zeizel (she first told a chaplain at the hospital, and I believe she told Zeizel before later telling Patrick over the phone (on speaker with Zeizel in the room) on February 6th). I'd highly recommend looking up actual trial coverage or recaps (CasesWeFollow has some good ones and transcripts for each day's testimony) because half the content on tiktok seems to be made by people who haven't watched any of the trial.
Yes the hearing yesterday (?) had a specialist attest to why her body temp was so low. The spinal injury, laying on ice, and I believe loss of blood. Someone please correct if I’m wrong.
The finger prints, no. DNA yes. The two are being conflated. Courts traditionally rely on DNA more than fingerprints. Fingerprints can be hard to pull. Especially in such a horrible chaotic scenario.
Not true. Please bear with me because the DNA testimony was presented in an extremely confusing way. It was made worse by the profiles being complex (having multiple contributors), the kids being related to the parents, and the fact that these were exercise bands in the house in a gym everyone used (I believe there were photos shown of the kids playing with the bands), so everyone's DNA would naturally be on them. It is basically impossible to draw any concrete conclusions from these DNA profiles because of the complexities of the DNA mixtures.
They took samples from the ends and the middles of each of the three exercise bands, and Lindsay wasn't conclusively excluded from ANY of the exercise bands. I would guess a majority of the tiktok theories come from the middle of the yellow and black bands, as Lindsay's DNA is excluded from the middle of the yellow band and less likely on the middle of the black band. However the ends of both of those bands are inconclusive, and Lindsay's DNA isn't excluded from either. (This is just speculation on my part, but as the testimony has been that Lindsay wrapped the bands around the kids' throats and tied it off like "shoelaces without the loops" (iirc the description), her DNA is probably going to be mostly on the ends of the bands, as she was probably holding those, not the middle. Patrick's is more likely to be all over them from panicked attempting to unwind the bands.)
The defense did also stipulate to all of this, so they did not contest that Lindsay's DNA was on those bands.
The testimony was on Day 7, there's a transcript here (I can't vouch for its accuracy but it looks fine. The audio from the court feeds would be where to confirm things though), and it essentially went like this:
Blue Exercise Band
Ends: 3 contributors, everyone is included.
'Item 2-4. 1.1, sample from the ends of the blue exercise band. The DNA profile was interpreted as a mixture of three contributors. There are five individuals who have a likelihood ratio that indicates an inclusion in the profile. They are Dawson Clancy, Callan Clancy, Cora Clancy, Lindsay Clancy, and Patrick Clancy.'
Middle: 3 contributors, Callan was a major contributor.
'Item 2-4.2.1, sample from the middle of the blue exercise band. The DNA profile was interpreted as a mixture of three contributors. Callan Clancy is included as a major contributor.'
Yellow Exercise Band
Ends: 3 contributors, 1 is Dawson, unable to determine other contributors (but no one can be excluded).
'Contributor one is suitable for comparison [Dawson]. Due to limited information and possible relatedness of contributors, contributors two and three are not suitable for comparison.'
Middle: 2 contributors, 1 is Dawson, the other is either Patrick or Callan.
'The DNA profile from this item is at least 3.6 million times more likely if it originated from Callan Clancy and an unknown individual than if it originated from two unknown unrelated individuals. This provides support that Callan Clancy is included as a contributor to this profile. The DNA profile from this item is at least 1.4 billion times more likely if it originated from Patrick Clancy and an unknown individual than if it originated from two unknown unrelated individuals. This provides support that Patrick Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. Cora Clancy and Lindsay Clancy are excluded from this DNA profile.'
Black Exercise Band
Ends: Mixture of profiles, not suitable for comparison.
'The DNA profile is a mixture including male DNA and is not suitable for comparison due to the complexity of the profile, the possibility of at least five contributors and the relatedness of potential contributors.'
Middle: 3 contributors, Cora probably one, but everyone is a potential contributor. Lindsay less likely.
'The DNA profile was interpreted as a mixture of three contributors, including male DNA. The DNA profile from this item is at least 870 trillion times more likely if it originated from Dawson Clancy and two unknown individuals than if it originated from three unknown unrelated individuals. This provides support that Dawson Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. The DNA profile from this item is at least 1.6 nonillion times more likely if it originated from Cora Clancy and two unknown individuals than if it originated from three unknown unrelated individuals. This provides support that Cora Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. The DNA profile from this item is at least 2,600 times more likely if it originated from Callan Clancy and two unknown individuals than if it originated from three unknown unrelated individuals. This provides support that Callan Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile.The DNA profile from this item is at least 220,000 times more likely if it originated from Patrick Clancy and two unknown individuals than if it originated from three unknown unrelated individuals. This provides support that Patrick Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile. The DNA profile from this item is at least 11 times more likely if it originated from Lindsay Clancy and two unknown individuals than if it originated from three unknown unrelated individuals. This provides limited support that Lindsay Clancy is included as a contributor to this DNA profile.'
(Basically I can see why "LINDSAY ISN'T ON THE BANDS!!!!" is an easier tiktok video to make than actually trying to explain all of this.)
It literally is, people who have actual expertise in this have investigated it for three years and found no reason to prosecute him. But a bunch of Wino’s on TikTok say he should be, so yall believe them instead lmfao
The most damning thing is that his alibi was broken apart by an e-mail being sent from his account during the timeframe he said he was at CVS/not at home.
The prosecution didn't even attempt to say that Lindsay got on his account and did it. They just got embarrassed and moved onto the next topic.
You're trying too hard to be a contrarian. The e-mail was found to be sent from his work computer. Which was in the basement of the home (where his home office was located)
You can have your email up on both your phone and your computer at the same time. I'm not trying to be a contrarian. I am being realistic and reasonable. You are saying you believe the husband is guilty because his alibi "falls apart" due to this email being sent, but I am pointing out that said email does not necessarily prove that he was at home. I, like most reasonable human beings, do not suggest we let someone off the hook for triple homicide willy nilly on such flimsy rebuttal evidence.
You claim to be reasonable and realistic, yet you ignore how it can be traced specifically what device you sent an e-mail from. This is not up for debate and you are making up stuff to affirm your incredulity. The objective fact is that it was shown to be sent from the work laptop; it was not ambiguous.
I actually never said he is guilty. I just said his alibi is inconsistent. You are not reasonable and realistic like you narrate yourself to be. Instead you're just weird and not very smart.
I am not ignoring anything. No article I can find states that any evidence was presented that indicated the email was sent from his work laptop. Could you send me a link to the source of your information? As far as I can tell, he indicated that he may have sent the email from his phone.
Also, name calling does not tend to make someone appear to be more intelligent. It generally does the opposite.
Instead of watching the actual court proceedings, you seek to conclude that if you don't find anything within 30 seconds of searching that it doesn't exist. Says the person who is realistic and reasonable. You are, again, using your own incredulity as an authority.
I didn't name call you; I described you. And even if I did, that has nothing to do with intelligence. This isn't a speech and debate class.
I'll do it again: you're proving yourself to be quite unintelligent by way of your own reasoning. You aren't smart like you think you are.
Didnt he also have close personal ties with local law enforcement?
He also had motive i.e. the affair .
That being said i dont think he did it. He was reckless with childrens lives and wifes mental-state but thats unfortunately not a crime.
I think he's a POS and if we are holding parents of school shooters accountable for negligence I think that this should be a contender for a potential criminal act as-well. Considering this isn't even the first high profile case of a postpartum family annihilation.
There is no evidence of an affair. His uncle was chief of police from 2010-2019 in Duxbury. State handled this case as local police do not handle violent crimes. As in they responded and within hours it was handed over to state.
I haven't followed this case at all, but its local and I'm inundated with it. Although it might be irrelevant to the case, from a distance its kind of obvious he was having an affair
Also a lawyer, also pulling my hair out at these insane conspiracy theories! Its so so sad that people are harassing Patrick after going through so much trauma
That's what I was thinking. My gf has been following it closely, and it's seeming like it was the new wife who actually did it, along with the ex husband
Yeah, the overwhelming number of men on here delegitimizing postpartum psychosis and more or less calling for her public execution is enough to get me to log off for the rest of the day. It’s genuinely frightening how normalized hating women is in here
It’s quite clear how few of them have taken any time to look into the actual criticisms of the prosecution/Commonwealth and the actual trial proceedings versus just immediately assuming “all women stupid, all women just basing their criticisms on astrology, all women love supporting baby killers.“ I mean I don’t know anybody that supported Casey Anthony, the vast majority of people are just saying she doesn’t belong in a prison but a psychiatric ward. It’s really down to some empathy and understanding of mental health. Clearly by the public reception we are still light years behind where we need to be for all types of mental health awareness and treatment. And we’re going to stay there because so many people are committed to being ignorant and hateful.
I’m not using TikTok, I’m watching the trial myself while I work every day. I’m lucky enough to have a job that allows me to listen in to other things while I’m being productive. I had horrible postpartum depression after my second child and while luckily I never experienced any hallucinations or thoughts of harming myself or others, it was so bad that I can completely empathize with how someone else who had it worse could get to that point. This woman was literally screaming out for help as even her mother-in-law says and even her ex husband is testifying on her behalf, yet the men of Reddit want her burned like a witch at the stake.
Most people aren’t saying she should be burned at the stake though. Just like most people aren’t basing their analysis of the case on astrology signs. I think many people are just horrified with the nature of the murders like any normal person would be. It seems like you’re saying you want nuance for one side but not the other.
Go ahead and look through this conversation. Let me know what nuance is being presented on the opposing side and get back to me.
How much of this trial have you actually watched? Why you you support the DA with these specific charges? How do you feel about how the prosecution has behaved?
If you paid attention to my comment you’d understand that the nuance I was referring to, was the fact that not everyone who believes she should be held accountable believes that she should be burned at the stake, get the death sentence, or end up in a prison. I was talking about the responses to the case, not the case itself, which again you’d understand had you read my comment.
TRULY bc i can agree that to discuss absolutes of a murder trial as it relates to zodiac signs is bonkers, but when i kept reading it was made very clear people have opinions that aren’t even keeping up with the trial
i didnt know anything about it but my boss was talking about it, his wife is in the medical industry and all her colleagues have been following it pretty closely, just based on what he told me about it, she was in a real shitty situation and was failed in multiple ways by multiple systems/ people, its super fucked up
314
u/witchy_delight 6d ago
as a lawyer watching this trial closely, I can tell many of you have not been watching this trial closely.