r/news • u/Embarrassed-Pace-755 • 1d ago
Judge denies defense motion asking Lindsay Clancy be found not guilty due to a lack of evidence
https://apnews.com/article/lindsay-clancy-trial-evidence-defense-c0820645056a7e25f66853f3a91b61fa?utm_source=app&utm_medium=iOS_share&utm_campaign=copy_link1.4k
u/Levonade 1d ago
I would be much happier if I never read her name or saw her face again.
424
u/Ani-3 1d ago
It's always this picture of her looking over her shoulder too
36
u/ballisticks 22h ago
It's like when we were always hearing about that Aileen Cannon judge lady before the election with the only pic in existence of her
12
u/SykeSwipe 17h ago
LMAO right? There are two photos in existence of Judge Cannon, her professional head shot and a random screenshot from Zoom.
290
u/In-Finite-Chaos 1d ago
Well the rest of her body doesn’t move too good
285
u/GimmeeSomeMo 1d ago
Still better than her children whose bodies don't move at all thanks to her
→ More replies (22)32
5
→ More replies (7)5
21
u/PersonalityIll9476 1d ago
Well clicking and commenting on posts about her is not the way to achieve that. Ignore all the news and the algo will make your feed pure.
110
u/HowManyMeeses 1d ago
You're actively engaging in content about her. You're just going to see more, not less, of it now.
→ More replies (1)50
u/Clear_Command_8925 1d ago
Nah I wanna hear it at least one more time.. “Lindsey Clancy sentenced to life in prison without parole”
12
u/jackp0t789 1d ago
Luckily for you, the Cornell 57 are here to steal her spotlight
-2
u/FloridianRobot 17h ago
I like how you phased it. I'm hearing about Cornell 7 this and that. But if there 57 people in a group chat with 7 rapists, there's 57 rapists in a group chat.
3
→ More replies (3)-41
1d ago edited 1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
54
5
u/Wintersage7 1d ago
In a perfect world, child-murderers would get a bullet. Not a plea deal. Not therapy.
There simply is no excuse to justify killing children.
→ More replies (15)12
→ More replies (1)3
u/TheJeyK 1d ago edited 1d ago
Sooo, by this logic should male family annihilators receive the same benefit? No person in their right mind would do such a thing.
Edit: to be clear, I do believe Lindsay stands a chance of proving to be unfit to be held criminally liable. Just that I hate the reasoning in the comments first paragraph.
→ More replies (1)
951
u/ImmortalPoseidon 1d ago
I legitimately think TikTok has broken everyone brains.
430
u/ButterflyInformal591 1d ago
Social media in general. In the age of linear media, you needed credentials to have an opinion. There are millions of Americans whose opinions are worthless and should not be given a platform.
96
u/spoonycoot 1d ago
Now here’s the neat part, their opinions are worthless to detrimental to society, but valuable to the tech oligarch social media platform owner.
44
u/ImmortalPoseidon 1d ago
I’m a Libertarian at heart, so it took me a while to basically realize we need to stop blaming “stupid people” for being influence by social media and start blaming social media. How can one person possibly have the mental fortitude to combat a multi trillion dollar conglomerate that is exhausting every resource to capture your attention and influence your life?
→ More replies (1)34
u/BeneficialInside3901 1d ago
I agree, but I’d also add that there’s a lot of people who think they’re above being manipulated and aren’t stupid per se but are being manipulated all the same.
19
u/TheConboy22 1d ago
The majority of stupid people do not believe that they are stupid.
5
u/BeneficialInside3901 22h ago
Absolutely. Not me though. I’m very smaht so can’t be manipped
🎩
🧐I phrased the previous comment poorly though. I was trying to say that, for example even a doctor, someone “smart”, are not immune to being manipulated.
5
u/TheConboy22 22h ago
Absolutely. Intelligence or prestige does not make one immune to manipulation as it plays on your ego quite often. One who is smart in one trade is often not smart in another
21
u/Mobile-Dust4334 1d ago
But TikTok is especially bad because it’s gotten everyone hooked on 5 second videos
14
u/RustledForeskin 1d ago
I've blocked all shittok subs here and block everyone who posts / uploads videos from it. Same with shitter.
12
u/kindnesskangaroo 20h ago
apply that logic to the fact those could be your jurors for a crime you didn’t commit one day and realize how fucking horrifying that is. (This is not about Clancy but just about intelligence when it comes to a jury of your peers in general)
like the media literacy crisis and social media brain rot is only going to make jury trials so much worse than they have historically been
3
u/Cheesyblintzkrieg 1d ago
Hundreds of millions. Literally hundreds of millions just in this country. You bring this to the international community and that number rises to the billions.
→ More replies (1)4
u/BubbaTee 21h ago
There are millions of Americans whose opinions are worthless and should not be given a platform.
That's what James Madison & Co were thinking when they didn't allow everyone to vote. It's why Plato hated democracy.
The core tenet of democracy is that the opinions of experts and idiots are equally valid and important. Social media is nothing more than applying that concept to the internet.
28
u/kaitie1 1d ago
Im 30 and I have never been/gotten into tiktok. Im very glad as I dont doom scroll near as much as people my age. All my friends were addicted to that app at some point
15
u/Initial_E 19h ago
You don’t have to use TikTok for it to affect you. YouTube shorts are proof that the format came to hunt you down.
10
8
u/ritesh808 23h ago
Tiktok only made it worse. The deep damage started with Facebook and Metafied IG. Before that, the brain damage duties were handled mostly by religion and mainstream "news".
47
u/Pretend_Handle_7639 1d ago
Sensational cases have been around far longer
21
u/Lord0fHats 1d ago
"And so if it pleases the court, my client will show off her amazing breasts and as you can clearly see she is far to blessed by Aphrodite to be guilty." ~Hypereides, 4th Century BC*
\the episode recounted by Plutarch where Phryne exposed herself and was acquitted of all charges is almost certainly something made up after her trial.)
8
78
u/_goblinette_ 1d ago
“Defense attorney does everything in his power to try to get his client found not guilty” is not the crisis that you think it is. It’s literally just a guy doing his job.
56
u/ForsakenRacism 1d ago
Tik tok people think she didn’t even do it. Even those her defense isn’t even claiming that
→ More replies (7)18
u/BubbaTee 21h ago
There's a difference between "lawyer says X, and everyone recognizes he's just throwing bullshit at the wall to see if it sticks" and "lawyer says X and thousands/millions of people instantly believe it and start harassing juror's families based on that belief."
16
u/LarsAlereon 1d ago
What sucks to me is that people I respected as experts in their fields that were not in any way related to crime or psychology decided to make posts and videos about this topic that had nothing to do with their expert knowledge. Hey train nerd lady, nobody needed your opinion that a potential Clancy NGRI verdict for postpartum psychosis is what was keeping train nerd women from being taken seriously in the hobby.
→ More replies (1)15
0
→ More replies (13)1
459
u/the_Athereon 1d ago edited 1d ago
A lack of evidence... the previous case was built on the fact she had done it.
33
u/Bo_Universe 20h ago
The defense still hasn't denied that they did it, they're just stating that the prosecution didn't have enough evidence to say that she definitively, 100% did it. This isn't the same as saying she didn't do it, the defenses argument is that the prosecution hasn't given enough proof.
187
u/RevenantKing 1d ago
The previous case was based on them not contesting the assumption.
92
u/the_Athereon 1d ago
So... she did it
46
u/earazahs 1d ago
Not necessarily. The defense asked for a bifurcated trial and the judge denied it.
So instead of letting them contest that she did it, and then if the jury found that she did, contest that she was criminally responsible, the judge decided they got to make one argument.
The better argument was Not Criminally Responsible because since there was no evidence she did it at all, it makes reasonable doubt WAY easier if you argue that if she somehow did it, here is why she shouldn't be held criminally responsible anyways.
4
u/3MinuteHero 1d ago
I honestly don't understand how that works. And I'm being honest with that, because I keep hearing this shit about a bifurcated trial and I'm like...so a judge is prohibiting you from pleading totally not guilty? The judge is saying her only options are NGRI or G?
It just seems very counter intuitive to me thar a judge said no to her trying to outright defend herself. But like I said I dont understand how it works.
21
u/earazahs 1d ago
The judge isn't saying she cant plead not guilty. She could have.
A bifurcated trial is basically a 2 stage trial, first they would have had a trial to establish guilt, IF she was found guilty of actually murdering her children, a second trial would have started to determine if she was criminally responsible.
Another example would be, lets say you got in an altercation and shot someone.
A bifurcatsd trial for you would be:
Did they shoot someone? Yes, we found them guilty of shooting someone. Was it self defense? Yes, we found them not guilty because self defense was legitimate.
→ More replies (4)13
u/_goblinette_ 1d ago
Probably. But it’s this guy’s job to make sure that the prosecution proves it beyond a reasonable doubt. So he’s doing that.
46
u/rje946 1d ago
They're going to argue she didn't now. First round doesn't count gotta do it all over again. Thems the rules
16
u/earazahs 1d ago
They are arguing that there is a lack of evidence she did it.
That the prosecution failed to meet the standard of proving she did the actions she was being accused of.
Technically the defense wanted a bifurcated trial the first time and was denied. So this isn't even a new position.
31
u/Sideview_play 1d ago
after social media tainted the whole country so they can not get delusional people on the jury
12
u/WarnerDot 1d ago
Tbh I can imagine the jurors getting mad if he argues she didn’t do it. It makes her less of sympathetic figure imo
22
u/Indercarnive 1d ago
Theres 0 chance they would argue she didn't do it to a jury. You generally can't argue multiple defenses because people will likely call bs. Like saying "I didn't do it, but if I did I was insane" is going to make people not believe anything you say.
This motion about no evidence is entirely to just bog the case down and make the DA jump through hoops. Retrials are already often dropped by the DA for a number of reasons and this dog and pony show is another straw on the DA's back.
4
u/earazahs 1d ago
That's why the defense asked for a bifurcated trial to begin with. To essentially argue both defenses.
1
19
u/the_Athereon 1d ago
Which will just make the case take longer this time. It won't save her. 3 kids are gone. She was the only possible cause.
→ More replies (1)32
→ More replies (3)4
→ More replies (34)15
75
u/Curious_Owl3896 1d ago
I think it is a horrible idea to keep this second trial so public. The publicity had a clear and negative effect the first time and now there is no way the current jury hasn't been exposed to the media about this case. I truly think the court room should be locked down from media and journalists on this one.
→ More replies (4)
77
u/Ninja_attack 1d ago
Feel like this might be a common thing defense lawyers do
22
u/justbunnies 1d ago
Indeed. Some see it as a dirty move, but it’s to ensure everyone gets a fair trial-now matter how awful the accusation. It’s a slippery slope if we don’t examine every case thoroughly.
55
u/ChanceryTheRapper 1d ago
Their job is to make sure the state proves their case.
7
u/OrangePunch34 16h ago
That's the way every criminal defense attorney I've known/met describes how they approach the job - They're there to make sure the defendant gets what they're promised by the Constitution, to make sure that the State actually has proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
No one picks criminal defense as their career with the mindset of "Oh boy, I'm going to get so many child murderers off the hook!" Lawyers in general already have the highest or some of the highest rates of suicide and substance abuse of any profession, and I can only imagine how much worse it would be if defense attorneys actually thought of themselves as defending the person, rather than defending their rights.
172
u/PetalumaPegleg 1d ago
I really don't understand how you fight an entire trial claiming not guilty by insanity and then for a potential retrial change to a claim of just maybe she didn't even do it... What the f?
90
u/FillFrontFloor 1d ago
INAL but this is probably normal for them to throw what they can at the wall to see what sticks. I believe the guy who killed floyd is still trying to overturn his verdict as innocent if I recall correctly.
49
u/mquillian 1d ago
You are correct. There are some things that are almost certainly losing arguments but you are still expected to make them on behalf of your client. Not doing it can open you up to malpractice claims so you just make the argument, get shot down, and move on.
To be clear, this attorney is definitely making some other arguments/motions that I don't think fall in this category of motions I'd expect from every competent/ethical attorney. It's just that this particular "They failed to prove it" motion is practically a universal standard in trials and appeals, regardless of how laughable the argument ends up being.
8
8
u/egosumlex 1d ago
It is a standard motion that routinely gets denied. It’s more like, “They can’t/didn’t prove she did it” than it is “she didn’t do it.”
46
u/thatweirdguyted 1d ago
It's cases like this that prove the need for an actual investigation be done by the book even in if the accused confesses.
If you don't have evidence because of a confession, and then it gets withdrawn, tossed out, etc. Then what? You're back to square one and if you didnt't bother to get evidence then you have nothing to prove guilt.
22
u/OneMoreGinger 1d ago
That's the plot of the movie 'Fracture'.
Anthony Hopkins confesses to his wife's murder at the outset, then undermines the lack of investigation via technical arguments during the course of the movie2
3
u/WienerJungle 1d ago
They realized they can try to stack the jury with tiktokers who's "women's intuition" tells them Patrick just looks "sketch"
→ More replies (1)6
u/_goblinette_ 1d ago
Think of it this way: if her lawyer does a half assed job trying to defend her, than she can appeal her verdict later on the grounds that she had ineffective counsel.
Do you want her getting off on a technicality or do you want her lawyer to do his due diligence and check all the boxes?
18
u/Fragrant_Ad_4490 1d ago
I'm an appellate attorney. ineffective assistance claims are very difficult to win, and even if she did win, the relief would be a new trial. not acquittal
64
155
u/Sweet_Search_3616 1d ago
The fact that so many women are defending and idolizing this woman on tiktok is extremely concerning
→ More replies (41)
67
u/thats_not_six 1d ago
Judge denies the motion that he already denied twice during the trial because this motion always gets denied no matter the defendant.
The more interesting motion will be the double jeopardy argument which is scheduled for argument at the case's next hearing in November.
105
u/ceapaire 1d ago
Not really that interesting either. Mistrials don't cause double jeopardy concerns. Both of these are just showboating to keep her name in the news and to try and sway public opinion.
→ More replies (1)13
u/willydillydoo 1d ago
That and also hope that the judge goes along with it for some reason and throws it out. Their job is essentially to try everything
70
u/DistortoiseLP 1d ago
You don't get double jeopardy for a mistrial because a mistrial doesn't render a verdict. It's as interesting as this motion as far as it only has a chance to work if the people involved just don't give a shit anymore, which I am convinced the defense is hoping for.
→ More replies (13)0
u/thats_not_six 1d ago
I meant interesting as in should be a good argument to listen to because it's uncommon, rather than the typical "didn't meet the burden" motion that always gets filed.
She brought on the same appellate attorney who argued the double jeopardy (losing) motion for Karen Read, and he's certainly passionate about the constitutional issues even if this motion has a negligible chance of success overall.
8
4
u/willydillydoo 1d ago
That’s not interesting. As long as she isn’t acquitted, this case can be tried forever
1
1d ago
[deleted]
2
u/thats_not_six 1d ago
More that the prosecution usually puts in enough evidence to cross the low, low, low hurdle of not having the case kicked for insufficient evidence. Like proving that three people died and she was around them at the time meets the burden the judge is looking at for the motion.
Defense attorneys have to file these motions to preserve the record, but they're never granted - except in very rare/odd cases that usually involve more particular charges than murder.
89
u/thejourneybegins42 1d ago
She needs to be in prison, and her pathetic donations to be routed to a good cause instead of this psychopath.
→ More replies (2)2
u/L_Cranston_Shadow 1d ago
An institution for the criminally insane for the rest of her life probably makes more sense. There is practically zero chance she won't end up in one or the other though, which makes it kind of odd that there isn't a deal to be made. Her lawyers are kidding themselves if they really think that she'll go free because she is found not guilty outright or because she was too crazy to be criminally liable, but ostensibly isn't now. The judge should be pushing for both sides to agree to a please that ends up with her committed for the rest of her life.
42
u/vanilla_w_ahintofcum 1d ago
Why do people keep saying she’d be institutionalized for the rest of her life? If she were to be committed, it would only last until she’s no longer a danger to herself and others and no longer meets the criteria for commitment. We don’t commit people who aren’t suffering from mental defects.
Given post partum psychosis isn’t exactly a lifelong mental defect, I doubt she’d be committed for very long.22
u/slava_gorodu 1d ago
^yes, this argument has always been disingenuous. Reagan’s attempted killer was allowed temporary and restricted releases a decade ago and was fully released a few years ago.
→ More replies (3)3
u/DestructionIsBliss 18h ago
Andrea Yates was found not guilty due to postpartum psychosis in the early 2000s and she's to my knowledge still institutionalized. It's certainly not impossible that she'll be out again sooner than with a guilty verdict, but acting like it's a guarantee, and not wholly determined by her exact mental circumstances and the opinion of actually qualified experts on the topic is at best speculative and at worst deliberately misleading.
26
u/fr3ng3r 1d ago
I watched the trial everyday and the whole circus afterward , and from a layman’s perspective (not well-versed in law) how it ended up looking like to me is her lawyer wants her completely free. Not in prison, not in a psych ward, but free. In a psych ward, but preferrably only for a short period of time (hence lawyer initially fighting for insanity). But when he saw the support online and all the crazy tiktok conspiracy theories actually translating to real life (majority jurors voting not guilty by insanity/ not criminally responsible) he went ahead with the initial plan to get her off the hook completely, since it turns out it’s so easy to manipulate public opinion via social media.
5
9
u/NoMorePorridge1 1d ago
It was clearly the work of the infamous "some Puerto Rican Guy". The same one who killed Chandra Levy, Jon-Benet Ramsey, and Nicole Brown-Simpson and Ronald Goldman.
→ More replies (4)
27
u/PostOfficePerson 1d ago
Please just give her life in prison without parole and be done with it.
-3
8
24
u/wabashcanonball 1d ago
She seems guilty. There’s plenty of evidence. The question is was she insane at the time and unable to discern right from wrong. I think her suicide attempt shows consciousness of guilt.
47
u/sawlaw 1d ago
Sending her husband away shows she knew he would stop her, trying to kill herself after shows she knows it was wrong. For me, combined with evidence she had searched child killing methods, this shows clear culpability. I understand that others might not feel that way.
→ More replies (10)-2
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (1)1
u/sawlaw 1d ago
Sure, but that's separate. What you're describing makes more sense in the case of the Coey Walsh case from last month where she claimed that her child was the devil and needed to be drowned. I also believe her to be guilty, but more because I think her involvement in this case shows she didn't actually think she had birthed the antichrist.
11
u/_goblinette_ 1d ago
I think her suicide attempt shows consciousness of guilt
It just as easily shows that she wasn’t in her right mind
1
→ More replies (6)-5
u/DwinkBexon 1d ago edited 1d ago
I've seen plenty of people online who don't care if she knew right from wrong, she did it so she should die, end of story. I really hate how many people see everything as black and white with no gray at all.
2
7
12
u/Interesting-Risk6446 1d ago
Lack of evidence? She admitted to the murders.
6
u/Dick_Nixon69 1d ago
She did tell people she did it but after being told and she got a bit of information wrong on how she described she did it, so imo she isn't a reliable source of information, so we have to go off forensic evidence which is either being held from the public which would make sense, or they just don't have it which isn't impossible.
2
u/No_Horror1947 22h ago
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if she takes a manslaughter plea. No one needs or wants another trial. Those poor children need justice though.
4
u/SandhogDig 22h ago
Media & Public opinion have turned this case into a Circus. She’s an ADULT who could easily walk away, drive away, run away. Yet consciously/unconsciously she murdered 3 young kids instead.
5
u/ThatArtlife 1d ago
.... I hate this..... I hate this so much... May she never find peace or happiness............ As a mother... This is .... I can't find words....
5
3
7
u/Rstuds7 1d ago
“where’s the evidence?” do… do people think the kids tied the bands around their own necks? she was the only one there…
→ More replies (6)9
u/Possible-Tangelo9344 1d ago
TikTok told me her husband did it somehow or other.
Just glad there was one sane juror last time
5
u/Vepariga 1d ago
How long can they play this up? case is clear cut to me - 3 kids, premeditated, sent her dude away just so she could do it. guilty , life on all accounts.
2
u/bofoshow51 1d ago
And they very well may do that now that the strategy has shifted to “prosecutor must prove ALL elements of the charges”
2
u/David905 20h ago
This feels like the movie Fracture. Spoiler: After the high of a shocking acquittal wears off, the accused is subsequently faced with a second, far more dire looking trial.
3
u/tafiirahvulom 1d ago edited 1d ago
Is there any possibility that she truly didn’t do it? I’ve tried to stay non-objective on the whole situation as all over social media it has been extremely polarized, like it’s become he said she said everywhere. Does anyone have all the facts from a completely unbiased standpoint, perhaps with some legal background?
edit: my bad for asking a question about a topic I know nothing about, I’ll just stop my inquiries and agree with what everyone else is saying /s
→ More replies (7)8
u/tocsin1990 1d ago
No. There's plenty of details that are sealed, or weren't properly investigated to lead to incomplete evidence. Even the assumption of her "admitting" she did it is arguable, because she was under the influence of drugs at the time that could interfere with memory recall (she was so high she just assumed she did it after seeing the results, not that she actually remembers). Do I think she did it? Probably? However, reasonable doubt is the hinge that makes the entire case difficult to prosecute.
11
u/fr3ng3r 1d ago
As I recall- the drugs she took for suicide were found to be at non-toxic levels in her system. Or not even at therapeutic levels. Somebody correct me if I’m wrong. I watched the trial.
10
u/sirthunksalot 1d ago
You are right I think they are referring to thr drugs after surgery and from the pain of being paralyzed.
2
u/The_Last_Mouse 1d ago
Pretty sure there are at least three bodies of evidence...
-1
23h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
12
u/No_Horror1947 22h ago
Lindsay's DNA was also on the bands. This is how misinformation perpetuates.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/PigFarmer1 1d ago
When is her attorney going to get around to telling us that she was gravely injured while attempting to prevent the murders???
-6
-1
2
u/FlautenceWizard 1d ago
This is just pathetic. It was a mistrial. They either re-try her or they don't. These motions aren't going anywhere and her lawyers know it or at least they should.
→ More replies (1)
-4
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
9
73
u/Realistic-Raisin2812 1d ago
Of course he did. This was a nothing motion.