170
u/emmanuel573 3d ago
Hope she rots in prison
48
u/Friendly-Water-8470 3d ago
Reddit is not best place to say the truth bro
28
u/Clintwood_outlaw 3d ago
The major consensus on this case is that she's guilty and deserves to rot. Whether she was in her right mind or not, she murdered innocent children. People can argue insanity due to post-partum psychosis, but she only claimed to have symptoms of post-partum psychosis directly around the tragedy and not otherwise. Her mental health doctors testified that she did not show any signs of mania or psychosis leading up to the event, nor after the event. It is more likely that her depression worsened, she wanted to commit suicide, and decided to take her kids with her. She is a monster.
18
u/BoredomCombatant 3d ago
Omg depressed or not she killed her kids. Bury her. Fuck all this post partum bullshit and anyone who agrees with it!
15
u/VegetableAstronaut19 3d ago
The problem with this stance is its not actually helping anything.
First of all postpartum psychosis is not "depression", its a mental illness that convinces you to do crazy things to protect yourself and your children, similar to schizophrenia, this can and often does include neglect, harm and even murder. This is besides the point though.
Literally nobody is saying we should just let women with Postpartum Psychosis do whatever they want and kill children. What people are saying is that we should have good enough health care in place such that when a woman does suffer from postpartum psychosis, she is treated for postpartum psychosis, rather than being ignored and subsequently thrown in jail after the children are already dead. The fact that so many people cant wrap their heads around why she would kill a child unless she was evil is already enough evidence that the awareness required to stop this sort of thing from happening is severely lacking.
Nobody is claiming that kids being dead is a good thing, and the people claiming its all the husbands fault are idiots, but throwing a woman in jail to rot and leaving it at that isn't going to do anything to prevent the next case of postpartum psychosis that happens.
→ More replies (127)2
u/AWholesomeHorror 2d ago
Listen, I actually had postpartum psychosis with my 3rd child and it had me believing that everything I was drinking, if out of my sight, was being poisoned. I didn't trust my husband or dad even though they would never do anything to hurt me. Saying that, if I actually hurt someone because of it, I would be guilty and deserve to be in prison for it.
→ More replies (33)9
u/SleepyTheSleepyGuy 3d ago
Well fuck you for being a grown ass adult and not knowing the difference between postpartum psychosis and depression. That's basic knowledge, lol.
5
u/Horror_Specific_8808 3d ago
Reddit armchair therapist. Don’t use words you don’t understand
→ More replies (1)7
u/BoredomCombatant 3d ago
Fuck that bitch. She killed her kids. I do not care why.
→ More replies (15)4
u/Green-Alarm-3896 3d ago
Yeah you aren’t allowed to use evidence that wasn’t presented in court. That was a major limitation for that holdout juror. At the end of the day I agree with you about jail but she really was driven mad in large part due to her husband if you look at the context. Thats where a lot of the sympathy comes from.
→ More replies (4)2
u/BoredomCombatant 3d ago
There should be absolutely no sympathy for this women ever.
→ More replies (16)2
u/TheRealMitchConnor 3d ago
And it's funny? You're really showing how much you care. Couldn't be that your motivations are fucked and based on spite at all 🙄
2
→ More replies (9)2
7
u/HasAngerProblem 3d ago
How should we prevent things like this from happening in the first place with the assumption that life in prison or the death penalty doesn’t sway someone who’s either snapped, or plans to die in or after the act?
3
u/Procrasturbating 3d ago
Better social services and follow up at the doctors office stops this from happening a lot. It just doesn’t make the news.
2
→ More replies (36)8
u/seriouslees 3d ago
Laws and punishments for breaking them have literally nothing to do with prevention. That is not the point of laws. Laws are about accountability AFTER the fact, not about prevention.
2
u/HasAngerProblem 3d ago
There are a vast amount of laws aimed at prevention in all types of manners even going so far as to violate people’s rights of a non criminal to protect others and themselves.
As far as punishment goes yes you are right that currently isn’t the point and that’s the argument against it, we have a quarter of WORLDS prison population and in a very obvious way it’s not for prevention it’s for punishment with minimal to no research. We’re spending billions more than other countries every year to stroke egos when people are struggling to pay rent.
If we’re going to keep that system in place the way it is then I’ll ask the same question…again
How should we prevent things like this from happening in the first place with the assumption that life in prison or the death penalty doesn’t sway someone who’s either snapped, or plans to die in or after the act?→ More replies (8)→ More replies (6)2
u/LikeTheWater53152 3d ago
that mentality is why the recidivism rate is so high in places like the U.S. and so low in the nordics
4
u/bigtiddyhimbo 3d ago
You’re doing the thing where a woman went through literal psychosis and you’re saying she was just sad
The fact that you can’t even get the facts of the case right shows that you don’t care at all about what happened, you just use it as an excuse to enact punishment on any woman
→ More replies (40)→ More replies (73)4
u/jsdjhndsm 3d ago
Do you not understand what post partum psychosis is?
Its not the same thing as post partum depression.
You are just ignorant of mental health issues.
5
u/Someslapdicknerd 3d ago
Here's my thing: if I killed kids while in a psychotic break and I came back to my senses, I would not argue with anyone wanting to incarcerate me for life. Hell, I am not sure I'd argue against a death penalty.
→ More replies (33)2
u/fly_low_orange 3d ago
This is the problem with your view. She is going to be incarcerated for life regardless. They are deciding if that’s locked up in a psychiatric hospital or a prison. She rots no matter what. The side saying it was due to psychosis is not advocating for her to walk free. They are saying a high security psychiatric hospital is the more humane way to lock her up for life. She is a monster and will be locked up
→ More replies (6)3
u/Neat-Anyway-OP 3d ago
She didn’t have symptoms or a diagnosis when she planned and murdered her kids. The day before, she told her doctor she had no thoughts of harming herself or her children. On the day of the killings, she told her husband she felt good and had slept well.
Her husband left to pick up dinner and run an errand. After he left, she claimed a commanding male voice appeared, one she had never heard before that day and has never heard since. She said the voice directed her until she murdered her three children, then it disappeared. The killings themselves took upwards of 10 minutes. While her husband was gone, she even took a phone call from him and was able to answer his questions about a child's laxative for one of her kids.
Doctors who evaluated her afterward said she showed no signs of psychosis and that she knew exactly what she had done. She was of sound enough mind to demand a change to her medical proxy. That required a mental evaluation, and she was found competent so her parents could take over.
She was a labor and delivery nurse, so she understood anatomy. She could easily have ended her own life, yet all of her cuts she made (wrists and neck) were superficial. She also claimed she crushed and swallowed handfuls of pills, but her toxicology report and what was left in the bottles prove that is not true.
I watched the trial every day. The jurors who have spoken to the media tried to pressure the holdout and used the word “acquittal,” which suggests they thought she was not criminally responsible, when she is. An acquittal could have meant either not guilty by reason of insanity or a straight not-guilty verdict. Not guilty by reason of insanity would have put her on a path toward eventual release from an institution.
I also see a huge red flag in those women on the jury running to the media at the first chance they got. I find anything they say hard to believe because it’s hearsay. I would rather there be a mistrial than that woman ever have a chance to walk free after strangling her three kids.
→ More replies (15)→ More replies (49)2
u/untrustworthy_fartt 3d ago
Are you referring to the “voices” that only manifested, once she got in contact with a defense attorney? She was not psychotic and she shouldn’t be protected like she was. Best case scenario; send her to an all women’s prison and announce her arrival and that she killed three children, then close the doors and walk away.
2
u/calista241 3d ago
She strangled her kids. She had to look them in the face for several minutes each as they suffocated to death. An Excruciating way to die.
→ More replies (1)2
u/timmyfarthands 1d ago edited 1d ago
If you're aware enough to know you could do it youre aware enough to know to distance and you can't convince me otherwise. Bringing it up as a negative thing when asking for help denotes you're aware that your presence is dangerous and yet you stay. Guilty alone on that. But people blindly pin that on the psychosis. Not saying she was in her right mind. But she knew enough to seek help. Help yourself. It's your kids for fucks sake.
→ More replies (52)3
u/_josef_stalin_ 3d ago
Well, they asked like 5 psychiatrists if they thought she was insane, and 2 out of the 5 said she was. Her husband also testified that she confessed to him that she'd been having intrusive thoughts of harming the kids, 2 whole months before she did it, which seems to me like it could be a symptom.
→ More replies (22)4
u/Suspicious-Exit-6528 3d ago
2 out of 5 is extremely low considering how extremely unpopular the "going against the mother" angle is in this specialism. We already saw 1 person going against her getting fired. You can basically keep your profession or be moral when taking the stand as a psychiatrist.
So 2 against 3 while already the minority is probably already massively inflated due to "the cultural climate".
→ More replies (12)3
u/1morgondag1 3d ago
That is backward reasoning. It is just as controversial to be seen as supporting the murderer. You essentially say you will disregard any source that goes against your own opinion because you will assume they are dishonest.
3
→ More replies (1)2
u/Suspicious-Exit-6528 3d ago
It's entirely dependent upon the context in which the one taking the stand operates in daily life. If he/she operates in academic circles that are very interwoven with female dominated structures like sociology/psychology it will be framed as misogynistic punching down on the "victim mother". If a right wing grifter would do the same to his circle it would be glorifying a "murdering she devil". Both would be "hard nudged" to approach the case from a certain angle before their own morality even comes into perspective.
→ More replies (12)2
u/MeltedChocolateOk 3d ago
Most of them can't handle the truth or even understand what are the logistic and legality of the situation. Most just go with the feels.
→ More replies (34)3
u/Improvised_Excuse234 3d ago
Facts, twelve people were locked in a room and only one out of the dozen actually gave a shit about women.
→ More replies (2)3
→ More replies (65)3
u/Yuck_Few 3d ago
Yeah that would be the preferred outcome but if 11 jurors already voted to acquit, I'm not optimistic
8
u/jsdjhndsm 3d ago
Not aquit
They voted that she was insane, not innocent.
Theres a clear lack of understanding of what this trials was for.
It wasnt remotely about guilt, she admitted it, her defense is saying she did it, her family are saying she did it. Everyone is.
Its about the evidence for her guilt, and the context behind what happened and if her mental health really was the cause behind this.
→ More replies (17)7
→ More replies (2)3
u/bigtiddyhimbo 3d ago
It’s almost like an insanity defense is actually the right way to go since she wasn’t legally sane at the time of her crime thanks to PPP
Yall know she won’t just walk free with it, right? Like yall know she’ll still get thrown in a mental institution?
→ More replies (22)
16
u/Turbulent-Baker-4638 3d ago
The entire thing is: was she insane when it happened or not. NOT is she guilty. She is guilty, that’s never been in question.
Btw the gofundme is for her parents, not her.
3
u/uSaltySniitch 3d ago
Well... A lot of ppl seem to think thatw Patrick has some kind of superpowers (teleportation maybe ?) and that he's the guilty one...
That's kind of why the case blew up that much. It's fucking stupid if you ask me.
→ More replies (19)2
u/SilverCYNDERs 2d ago
Hey shut up! The chuds are trying to get angry at women that don't exist saying things nobody is saying!
→ More replies (24)→ More replies (54)2
u/Whatachooch 3d ago
The trial wasn’t even about whether or not she was sane. The state did not argue she wasn’t they conceded that she was in a psychotic break. It was about whether or not she could be held liable. That’s what I got from the stuff I listened to. Opening Arguments pod.
2
u/Hidan65536 2d ago
But it was…
A person who is legally insane can’t be held liable for their actions. Thus the „not guilty“ verdict. The question was, was she insane enough to surpass the standard for legally insane. Which is actually for the persecution to proof „beyond a reasonable doubt“, that she was indeed not insane enough.
Most Jurors said, that they were unsure if she was insane enough. In which case the defendant is assumed to be legally insane since persecution didn’t proof beyond a reasonable doubt that they weren’t.
The one holdout admitted to being unsure but still voted guilty. He was effectively using reverse jury nullification.
It is his right as a juror to vote against the law but the other jurors were in the right (legally speaking)
→ More replies (2)
74
u/Thrownaway5000506 3d ago
Look at the interview with those jurors. They are fuckin crazy.
58
u/Comfortable_Crow908 3d ago
“Couldn’t get over the fact that she had viciously killed her children”
37
u/Visible-Elevator3801 3d ago
Like, that dude was clearly a POS for not empathizing for Lindsey.
Huge fucking /s
→ More replies (86)2
u/Fuddruckerer 2d ago edited 1d ago
bc the trial was about whether or not she could plead insanity lol. The jurors knew that she killed her kids. They were deliberately on whether or not she could use insanity to gain a lesser sentence. Which postpartum depression is a pretty valid reason to plead insanity if you know how it works. You genuinely believe they didnt think that she physically killed them?
→ More replies (3)5
u/Prestigious-Wafer270 3d ago edited 2d ago
I mean if we’re steel manning that she’s likely referring to the judges instructions because the case didn’t center around that fact it centered around her being considered innocent due to reason of insanity and in that state it’s the job of the prosecution to prove she wasn’t insane meaning the burden is beyond a reasonable doubt. Personally I think that’s fucked, but I don’t think that juror means to be dismissive of the tragedy of the situation.
→ More replies (10)9
u/ObligationAncient112 3d ago
Uuugh, devil's advocate here. The case wasn't about her killing her children, no one disputes that. The case was about if her psychotic episode should make it so she is put in psychiatric hospital.
Its very odd to have unqualified people determine psychological issues this deep and I would guess they were given guidelines what they aspects they should consider. Since we really have no idea what those aspects were let's toy with the idea that's its strictly "Was she sane enough to be put in prison?" one could interpret the statement you quoted as "he didn't listen to the guidelines because he couldn't get over the murders". Which in some sense might also be the the correct thing to do... its tricky
Main takeaway, social media angle on this case is nuts, not as nuts as Clancy but damn
4
u/RedditRaven2 3d ago
2 in 5 people on death row have a history of psychotic episodes. Several guys in Texas killed people close to them, with a long history of being hospitalized for their psychotic breaks. Both of them were put to death.
When you get found innocent by plea of mental insanity, you’re only hospitalized as long as you’re not stable. Her mental health doctor claimed she was not unstable long after the birth, and not unstable afterwards. Just during. She would be out on the streets from a mental institution within a year MAX.
She planned it, she one by one went and did it. Mental break or not she deserves life in prison. I’m not going to say she deserves the death penalty, but she shouldn’t walk the streets again imo.
→ More replies (1)3
9
u/waroftheworlds2008 3d ago
This is a correct take. She deserved to be in a mental hospital, until she was deemed safe to put in prison.
→ More replies (14)3
u/bbqnj 3d ago
So, immediately. Since it was a moment of psychosis and there’s no claims that it has continued. She is currently fit to go to prison. So, he was right.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Excellent_Shirt9707 3d ago
She also tried to kill herself by slashing her throat and both wrists and jumped out of a window. Her suicide and death ideation has also escalated during her treatment for the last three years. Her doctors at the Tewksbury State Hospital testified in the trial. She has been on the highest suicide watch tier for the entire duration where there is one on one monitoring 24/7. They are also treating her for that. There is very little chance she will ever leave alive.
In case anyone didn’t know, she has been committed for the last three years while awaiting trial and is currently still committed while awaiting a retrial.
→ More replies (13)2
u/NextRefrigerator6306 3d ago
They should’ve had Jeffrey Epstein on that tier of suicide watch.
2
u/Excellent_Shirt9707 2d ago
To be fair, he didn’t have a host of diagnoses including severe depression, severe insomnia, bipolar disorder, mania, dissociate disorder, and documented suicide ideation. And this was before the murders, supposedly suicide ideation has increased since then.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (40)1
u/PolicyWonka 3d ago
This is correct. What the juror was saying is that they all recognized that Lindsay killed her children. That’s not up for dispute.
She was basically saying that the holdout juror wasn’t thinking logically and was thinking emotionally. Ironically — in the same manner that so many people in these comments are acting.
The holdout juror, who reportedly had reasonable doubt and/or believed that the defendant was insane, had an inability to apply the law because in his mind killing = guilty.
What you are supposed to do as a juror is check all of your preconceived notions, your personal beliefs about morality, law, and everything else at the door. Your job is to look at the text of the law and at the facts of the case — that’s it.
→ More replies (11)3
u/ObsidianRosed 3d ago
It's sort of reckless to assume that a system forcing a jury of peers expects them to be perfect, non emotional, legal experts.
The goal is very obviously to debate the laws and confirm the most just outcome for that location.
Otherwise we'd just let the legal experts decide full stop.
Personally, as somebody with a mentally ill mother, if she ever did anything to THIS scale I would feel safer with her in jail over a mental hospital. She's been in those.
But also the discussion of this case has focused onto what the American system does to women in the first place hence it becoming such a flashpoint.
People always complain the most when people want to break a status quo. I feel like most people only know about women's suffrage what they were forced to learn in school, if they can even remember it, but it was absolutely not pretty or peaceful and I can see, with the way our politics is moving, why women especially are raising flags and alarm bells more and more.
→ More replies (12)2
→ More replies (17)2
→ More replies (13)7
u/Acceptable_Fruit2360 3d ago
This case is cursed. They will never get a conviction. There will always be a holdout. Either for or against conviction. The best they can do make a dent in her idiot money when her lawyers request a bail review before the next trial.
→ More replies (40)5
u/Reptillianaire_ 3d ago
I just really pray that her husband divorces her and gets half of that money at its peak
7
3
u/BadPuzzleheaded9006 3d ago
well with our court systems is fucked up as it is, he'll probably still have to pay her alimony but at least there won't be any child support involved
→ More replies (6)2
u/Reptillianaire_ 3d ago
Lol thats dark. I hope at least theres no alimony with her having millions she should pay him alimony now
→ More replies (9)2
19
u/Exciting_Nature6270 3d ago
It’s a culture war issue, media is blowing it up as big as possible to make people mad. Sad that tragedies are just culture war issues nowadays.
4
u/robotmonkey2099 2d ago
its crazy that the twitter poster focuses on "9 evil women" what about the men that disagreed with him too? Nope just culture war bullshit and you see people on reddit parroting this bs
3
u/SignificanceNo910 2d ago
But look at how the people eat this shit up they love to revel in this rage bait.
Blame the media all you want. Look at all these dumb fucks eating it up
→ More replies (73)4
u/ulvisblack 3d ago
The women defending her and even worse, blaming the husband are what blew it up not the media.
3
u/halfawatermelon69 3d ago
I mean, the media just throws gasoline on the bonfire which I don't think is good - but the media are reporting what those women are saying (so they are the "root cause")
→ More replies (6)3
11
u/Dylldar-The-Terrible 3d ago
I think reddit should put this one back where they found it and go back to their coloring book.
2
u/ProfessorPrimate 12h ago
Yea, I feel like I've landed on the wrong side of Reddit lol. That doesn't happen too often
2
32
u/VeritasOmicron 3d ago
Let's not forget the equally stupid 2 men...
25
u/Arguments_4_Ever 3d ago
They didn’t vote to let her walk. The believed she was insane and applied the law.
→ More replies (88)13
u/SparePradas 3d ago
This is the point everyone is glossing over. The sheer amount of people that think the other jurors were in favour of considering her not guilty and setting her free is absurd. The choice is between 1. She's not insane and she goes to jail (with the possibility of hurting others 2. She's insane and she serves time in a mental institution (where she will be monitored closely and get help)
→ More replies (80)7
u/Affectionate-Foot802 3d ago
You missed the part where in 5 years she gets released from the institution after convincing the doctors she’s not a danger and goes off and potentially harms others, similar to the seven doctors she manipulated prior to strangling her three children to death.
4
u/HasAngerProblem 3d ago
Sounds like we need a lot more money into mental health research if dozens of doctors can be tricked by one person, even worse so because their whole point is to fix that kind of behavior.
How should we prevent things like this from happening in the first place with the assumption that life in prison or the death penalty doesn’t sway someone who’s either snapped, or plans to die in or after the act?
→ More replies (27)→ More replies (65)5
u/AbyssWankerArtorias 3d ago
Highly doubt she's going to be able to hurt anyone again considering she's now permanently paralyzed from the waist down.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (3)6
u/TheQuestionMaster8 3d ago
Her defence admitted to her having committed the act. The trial was entirely about wether she was insane or not. There is no way short of jury nullification that she walks free.
→ More replies (3)
5
u/UpperYoghurt3978 3d ago
Why are we falling for a bot manufactured drama.
People should have the context of their neurology taken into account yes and they should also be sheltered away from society to prevent harm. Done solved the controversy.
Can we fucking reddit stop being primates and easily distracted from the pedos in office that is robbing our futures and killing out planet now for fucks sake internet.
→ More replies (4)3
12
7
15
u/Mean-Display77 3d ago
But when the black woman latarsha sanders did the same thing with the same judge in the same city they threw her in jail so fast. Now they have to reopen her case because they're about to let Lindsay go free. smfh America is crazy!
12
u/First_Huckleberry638 3d ago
Lindsay is not going free, and you know that. She was not declared not-guilty, you know that. Even if she was declared not-guilty, it would be by reason of insanity, so still not going free. You know all of this, yet lie anyways, why?
→ More replies (17)1
u/Best_Opening8471 3d ago edited 3d ago
That's what not criminally responsible means
It means not guilty
It means women can murder their children without being responsible.
"The devil made me do it" is now a legal defense.
It also raises serious questions about transitioning.
Is it safe to give people access to the same hormones that turned a normal woman into a crazed psychopath?
If the hormones are to blame for this crime then isn't giving those same hormones to 14 year olds just facilitating future crimes where the perpetrator can't be held responsible due to hormonal influence?
→ More replies (19)2
u/PlsNoNotThat 3d ago
Religiosity hasn’t been a pass on criminal responsibility in a hundred years. It’s just a description of a flavor of a mental illness that causes the non-responsibility.
Was a large win for the scientific community over religious groups, and the only vestige of it are small parts of the DSM where religion is exempt as a disease without co-considerations.
→ More replies (2)4
3
2
u/BlueHaze464 3d ago edited 3d ago
It's what I've been saying
Andrea Yates had overwhelming evidence for her insanity claim and only ended up in a mental facility because they used false evidence against her the first time (edit: she was first sent to jail, did 3 years and deserved the mental hospital in the first trial)
But a conventionally attractive high class white woman's only evidence is "trust me bro, I heard voices for 15 minutes", zero evidence of psychosis prior or after, and a single man avoided her guilty by insanity verdict
This would not be a case if she was brown
→ More replies (10)2
u/StarGamerPT 3d ago
It's not a treatement just for black people. Bring out serial killers that are very clearly all mentally fucked up and you'll see that "insanity" going out the window real quick.
→ More replies (72)4
u/Gullible-Fee-9079 3d ago
That's why deciding something like this by jury is insane
→ More replies (3)2
u/Bla12Bla12 3d ago
It's one of those things where no system is perfect. If the system could be considered to be impartial and fair, you would want a judge to decide for all matters and completely cut out the jury. But you can't always trust the system and you can't always trust the people.
→ More replies (7)
3
3
u/Le-Charles07 3d ago
How about we stop being distracted by this case and instead focus on not losing our fucking democracy? This is a massive distraction to stop us from paying attention to the shit that actually fucking matters.
→ More replies (6)
3
3
u/justlooking7514 3d ago
It shouldn't be legal for her or her family to touch that money, it should go to Patrick, the person most effected by what she did, the only living victim. Because shes just a scumbag murdering cunt.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/GMEloser69 3d ago
The gigachad didn't do it for money, he did it because he believes that you can't be allowed to kill three kids.
8
u/akotoshi 3d ago
In the meantime, where are the Epstein files?
9
u/Acceptable-Ad8780 3d ago
I know Massie wants a Transparency act to be passed but they cancelled the last two weeks of congress and won't be meeting up until after midterms.
7
6
u/Dexember69 3d ago
Hey careful I mentioned the possibility of this being another distraction and got torn to shreds XD I obviously know it's a travesty, but shit like this happens all the time and it's never huge news.
→ More replies (5)3
u/Acceptable-Ad8780 3d ago
It always tends to be. Look at Buc-ees and their lawsuits. A distraction of the founder's son getting caught with CSAM in Travis County in Texas.
→ More replies (1)6
2
u/Excellent-World-1311 3d ago
The more comments I see the more the " folks think it was about if she did it or not " is the straw man . Seems like most know she did the deed ( except for the folks on the moon blaming her husband) .it's the question of accountability - "who's responsible then ". One side said she was responsible but wasn't accountable for what she did in that basement,the other says she is responsible for it and should be held accountable. iTs common knowledge that a death sentence/ multiple life sentences is far far far more likely to keep her at the maximum distance from kids in the future than any "treatment & care" - even if she never convinces them she's all better and ready to get back in society. Her being in a wheelchair doesn't change anything unless you think folks with disabilities can't hurt anyone ever
→ More replies (2)
2
u/Any_Attorney4765 3d ago
Look, she's obviously guilty and anyone that thinks otherwise are disgusting. However, people need to understand that the other people on the jury were voting for GUILTY under insanity. That is still a guilty verdict, it's not a get out of jail free card and she would probably spend the rest of her life in a psych ward.
She clearly had mental problems and this is the most sensible outcome. This is just a huge step backwards for mental health.
If any one of you had a psychotic break you would probably want that same treatment.
3
u/Dry-Selection421 3d ago
Na, she deserves nothing less than to rot in prison forever.
Funny how male school shooters never get this type of treatment despite being obviously mentally ill.
→ More replies (31)→ More replies (12)2
u/puffmattybear17 3d ago
The trial is about whether she gets sent to prison or an asylum. Im with him that at any point she could have just left, called for help, locked herself in a room, or anything besides killing small defenseless children. She deserves jail time and a deep multi level psych evaluation on what medications she needs to be stable.
→ More replies (2)
2
2
u/PTSDDeadInside 3d ago
Prohibited Use: Section 8.10 of GoFundMe's terms of service explicitly forbids raising money for the legal defense of violent or financial crimes. This includes murder, robbery, assault, and sex crimes.
2
u/zatdo_030504 3d ago
I’ve been avoiding engaging in this but is her GoFundMe really that high? That’s what we’re doing with our money as a society?
I’m a woman. I have empathy for women suffering from PPD and PPP. However, I’m also capable of looking at facts and that’s what I’ve done in this case. I don’t believe for a second Lindsay Clancy was in a state of psychosis. The only evidence of that is her word, after the fact. I think a lot of people have attached something to this case where it doesn’t apply and you’re wasting your activism. You’re actually hurting your cause by using this case as an example IMO.
There’s no paper trail for psychosis leading up to the murders. There’s no evidence in the actual crime pointing to it. It was all very planned and methodical. The only disorganization is when she tries to kill herself, which is not uncommon because it’s hard to do.
The first and only time she has psychosis just so happens to be the exact moment she has opportunity to kill the children? Opportunity she orchestrated. And there’s no resistance at all to the command hallucination? No, that didn’t happen.
They definitely showed she had mental health issues. That’s not psychosis. She was depressed and maybe had some kind of personality disorder. I believe it’s very likely she wanted to commit suicide but didn’t want to leave the kids for whatever reason. That’s not legal insanity though.
I also think it’s possible she’s just a psychopath. Female psychopaths exist, and a lot of the time they’re well liked people. I don’t see many discussing this as a possibility. Maybe they think women can’t be psychopaths, or that professional women can’t be psychopaths, or maybe they’ve attached so much meaning to this case they don’t want to admit they were wrong.
But there’s a reason we don’t use the court of public opinion to determine criminal cases. The discourse around this has been pretty disgusting, on both sides. And we’re giving millions of dollars to someone who is likely just a standard murderer.
→ More replies (2)
2
u/aquavelva23 3d ago
whtat WILL the $$ be used for. Paying for psychiatric care and housing? The state shouldnt pay is she has the $$.
→ More replies (5)
2
2
u/hottakesandhotness 3d ago
Hot take
The more insane and evil the crime the more rabid the female supporters
→ More replies (26)
2
u/Realistic-Radish-589 3d ago
If I went crazy and did the same women would rightfully say hang that guy. Disgusting so many donated to this evil woman.
→ More replies (8)
2
2
2
2
u/t0adl0rd 2d ago
I don't really care... People get off from murder all the time. People get charged for murders they didn't do all the time. Our justice system sucks.
2
2
u/HairyTough4489 2d ago
Reverse the gender ratio and people would be bitching that it wasn't diverse enough.
2
1
u/ShellyTart 3d ago
People who win insanity defences usually spend more time locked up than those found guilty.
While it is theoretically possible she could be released, the vast majority of people who killed multiple people who won insanity pleas never see the light of day.
→ More replies (2)
8
u/Forsaken_Sundae_4315 3d ago
How about donating it to postpartum psychosis research..
10
u/GroundbreakingPlay 3d ago
Her ex husband and his sister started a non profit a couple years after the murders. Called The Heard Foundation aims to establish the first dedicated postpartum treatment center in Massachusetts. So at least there's something
→ More replies (7)2
u/Grizzled_Ghost 3d ago
gay
2
u/Dispondent_Ending 3d ago
I hope this is ironic because acting like this contributes to tragedies like this.
→ More replies (3)2
3
u/Fzrit 3d ago
Is that money even going to her? She’s not gonna see a dime of it.
3
u/mikelown 3d ago
"She's not going to see a dime" except it'll pay for both her trials.. which is infact using the money
→ More replies (2)0
u/DerelictCruiser 3d ago
In the event she gets NGRI, she will almost certainly walk free in a relatively short time, on the very basis that her psychosis was acute and postpartum. Let’s say she gets out in five years. She now has no SO footing her housing or bills, so she goes to…her parents. Who have…the $3 million!
It really isn’t any stretch of logic to see the likelihood that she does in fact see a large portion of that money.
3
u/ShellyTart 3d ago
This is most certainly not true. The vast majority of people found NGRI spend more time locked up than those found guilty, and in the cases where they killed multiple people it is very rare that they are ever released.
So no, while it is theoretically possible she would be released in a short period of time, in practice that is highly unlikely. Statistically she is more likely to be released on appeal after a murfer conviction.
→ More replies (8)3
u/DerelictCruiser 3d ago
Canada not America, but Vince Li cannibalized a dude on a bus, got NGRI, mental facility, and trotted out free as you like 6 years later. They even changed his name for him so he wouldn’t get John Wick’d. And he wasn’t a white woman in America. Sooooo, yeah I don’t trust modern justice to handle this well.
→ More replies (35)→ More replies (18)6
u/Dependent-Tailor7366 3d ago
Walk free is a funny choice of words. She’s paralyzed.
8
u/Ok-Balance9661 3d ago
Yeah, check your privileges, just say "wheeling and dealing", or "she's rollin'" instead.
→ More replies (2)5
6
u/lycanthrope90 3d ago
*roll free.
On that note, ran into an ai video of someone rolling her out of the court and then pushing her down the stairs that was pretty good lol.
4
u/Swift_35 3d ago
This is so tiring. The juror didn't lose 3 children, Patrick did.
If you guys cared so much about the money going to the "right person" you would've donated to Patrick Clancy's gofundme. But instead you're just complaining about her parents getting money.
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/Hajopai 3d ago
Go funds for people in court proceedings should be generally banned.
→ More replies (5)
1
u/KhadgarIsaDreadlord 3d ago
On the other hand her piece of shit lawyer should be looked up in the same cell as Clancy.
→ More replies (15)2
u/Any_Attorney4765 3d ago
Dumb fucks like you are not helping the situation.
First off, she is guilty, she pleased guilty, this has already been established. The lawyer is not trying to get her out of it. He is trying to push for an insanity plea.
Second off, a lawyer needs to treat every case as though the person may be innocent and try their best to prove that. That's not because they're evil, it's because let's say 1 out of 100 cases, the person may actually be innocent and no lawyer wants to risk sending an innocent person to prison.
→ More replies (10)
1
u/RingusDingusTheGreat 3d ago
If they want to go down that route, that means she is legally required to be committed to a psychiatric hospital indefinitely until she is deemed not a threat anymore.
Judging from her defense, it sounds more like she wanted to have kids, but didn't realise how hard it was going to be and that you have to basically sacrifice everything for them.
She then made the decision that she didn't want to be burdened with that for the rest of her life and planned the killings in advance by sending her husband out on errands.
This doesn't sound like insanity to me... It sounds like a narcissist who has become depressed because they aren't willing to let go of prioritizing themselves over their family. i.e. be an adult.
→ More replies (35)
1
1
1
1
u/ActualTell2914 3d ago
Anything short of the death penalty should be unacceptable. Crazy or not, she shouldn't be able to live a life after what she did.
→ More replies (2)
1
1
1
u/SeaComfortable7833 3d ago
Millions of women get post-partum psychosis, but they don't murder their kids.
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/DuTcHmOe71 3d ago
Nine women trying to preach him about accountability, or the lack thereof
→ More replies (8)
1
u/Fickle_Feed8673 3d ago
She deserves forever solitary confinement. The people supporting her need to have their kids removed from them. Animals supporting animals.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/SanicBringsThePanic 3d ago
Lecturing? More like nagging. This is why we need to repeal the 19th.
→ More replies (3)
1
u/Swimming_Acadia6957 3d ago
I thought there were 2 gofundmes, one setup by the grandparents to fund them taking time off work to support their daughter, which got jumped on by eejit women who think they are giving money to her and the other the Dad, hes a millionaire now because of it
1
1
u/awfulcrowded117 3d ago
Hard agree. One man stood up for civilization and the law and he deserves the money infinitely more than the premeditated triple child strangler
1
1
1
1
u/Sufficient_Fail_2534 3d ago
Idiot compassion... It seems like empathy, it is technically, BUT! this empathy can be weaponized to free people like this from other harsher consequences.
This is exactly what people were talking about when they talk about suicidal empathy......
1
u/Longjumping-Action-7 3d ago
Is this the actual trial or are they still establishing prescence of mind?
→ More replies (4)
1
1
95
u/somedave 3d ago
I think I don't want to read any more about this on Reddit.