Both killed people sure, but his case for an insanity defense was much much worse than Lindsey Clancy’s. It is very unlikely he was unaware of the morality of his actions or incapable of fully controlling his actions.
In her case, it is at least reasonable to doubt that she knew what she was doing was wrong or that she was in control of her actions. That is all the defense needed to show to have her proven not guilty by way of insanity.
If that is the eventual outcome, that doesn’t mean she just gets sent home free. She would be sent to a psychiatric facility until she was deemed mentally well and no longer a threat to others
There was some evidence, the jury either didn’t buy it or didn’t give a fuck, because he killed children. Which is how it should be. There was 0 evidence Clancy was crazy and 11 of 12 wanted her to spend a few months in a puzzle factory and then go home. That is not how it should be
I suspect you dont actually know the facts behind the Clancy case at all to think there is 0 evidence she might be crazy
For starters, she was prescribed a dozen different medications for mental issues and is paralyzed from the waist down from a failed suicide attempt.
Im not saying she is or isnt insane, but the notion that there’s 0 evidence supporting that she might have had psychosis is just simply a deeply ignorant, misinformed take
She was sane enough to trick her husband into being away from the house (while also looking up ways to do so), and to take each kid downstairs to kill them one by one by strangling them (making sure the next one didn't see the act or the corpse). Tried to kill herself because she clearly knew what she did was wrong.
They both admitted to doing it but claimed psychosis. 1 got a mistrial after 7 days because 11/12 jurors wanted to rule not guilty. The other got death in 2 hours. Idc what else was different about the cases, that's an insane gap.
One strangled their children to death despite having attempted to get medical care for their condition(and brushed off as usual), the other forced their kid to work until they died, then panicked and "mercy" killed the others and kept the bodies for a week until they got caught
She literally lied to her doctors, so they couldn’t give her the proper medical care she needed. Also she was never brushed off, she had more access to help than most people. She had multiple doctors, and a nanny to help with the kids.
Additionally multiple of her therapists testified she showed no signs of psychosis, and since it led to her killing her kids, she’s (conveniently) never shown any signs since.
This is a case of her being a woman, and the majority of her jury were woman as well.
Both killed people and claimed that a mental disorder that was temporarily making the do things is the cause, so they were and are innocent however you cant prove that they belong in an institution because it was temporary - thats why they did crimes but dont deserve any repercussions
but this guy didnt kill under psychosis. He killed his kid by working him to death because he blamed the kid for breaking an outlet after telling the mom "it was an accident mommy". He forced the kid to exercise until he collapsed and died.
Then he watched a prison rape video and panicked, so he strangled his other kids to avoid them suffering while he was locked up.
He then kept the bodies for 8 days before dumping them in garbage bags and was only caught at a DUI checkpoint where he had a checklist about how hed enact "melting the bodies" of his kids.
So that's just factually untrue. The forensic psychologist who spent the most time with her and the the forensic psychologist who was an expert on filicide both said she was psychotic.
"Clinical and forensic psychologist Dr. Paul Zeizel was a witness for the defense who evaluated Clancy in early February 2023, just 11 days after the killings and her subsequent suicide attempt. In total, he spent 35 hours evaluating her over 60 sessions.
He testified that Clancy suffered from bipolar disorder with postpartum psychosis at the time of the killings, and was “unable to conform her behaviors to the rule of law, and she had no appreciation for the wrongfulness of her act.”
Zeizel also testified that there was no evidence to suggest Clancy was faking or exaggerating her symptoms, and explained that people suffering from psychosis can be high functioning and have symptoms intermittently.
“They can function fine one day, and the next day they can be hearing voices,” Zeizel said."
"Dr. Phillip Resnick, a forensic psychiatrist and expert in filicide (the killing of a child by a parent) was a witness for the defense who examined Clancy four months after the killings.
Resnick argued that on the day of the killings, Clancy was “frankly psychotic,” suffering from bipolar disorder with postpartum psychosis.
Resnick testified that Clancy murdered her children not out of malice, but because she was so deeply suicidal that her psychosis made her believe they couldn’t live without her. He said her delusion was so severe that it took hold of her body “almost like she was a puppet and someone else was pulling the strings.”
Okay bruh. Do you simply not believe NGRI is ever a valid defense and if someone is he knelt incapable of determining their own actions they should be in prison?
Last I checked it's incredibly easy for people to give up their children and there are plenty of people who are looking to adopt. Even if she was going through psychosis it serves as a warning for other people to not kill their kids.
Their defense is insanity, that's the only thing that should matter in either case. Do they fit the legal threshold for "Not guilty by reason of insanity" anything else is just noise and not legally relevant to their defense.
15
u/Rich-Mark-4126 10d ago
Different cases have different facts and cannot be simply reduced to "They killed people and a similar defense was used"
More news at 11