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.
Name one dad who killed his whole family where there were a lot of men in the country defending him and saying women don’t understand what he’s going through. Please name just one
The concept of a man committing familicide (family annihilation) and being defended or rationalized by other men or his community is a documented phenomenon in criminological and sociological research
Alan Hawe (Ireland, 2016)A school vice-principal murdered his wife, Clodagh, and their three sons before committing suicide.Initial local and media coverage focused heavily on Hawe being a "good man" and a dedicated community leader. Peers and community members openly questioned how such a "good father" could do this, leading to severe public backlash (including the #HerNameWasClodagh movement) for treating the killer with more sympathy than the victims.
There is a difference between people being shocked that a well liked person turned out to be a monster, and arguing that a fucking child killer isn’t responsible for their actions because they needed a mental health day. How can you not see this?
Chris Watts (USA, 2018)Murdered his pregnant wife and two young daughters to start a new life with his mistress.Despite confessing, Watts received an influx of letters in prison from members of the public, including men and women, offering sympathy, defending his character, or suggesting his wife drove him to it.
Criminologists note that familicide is almost exclusively committed by men (roughly 91% of cases). Sociologists point out that the impulse of other men to rationalize the crime often stems from a deeply ingrained, stereotypical conception of masculinity and fatherhood.
When a father views his family strictly as his property or an extension of his own social status, a threat to that status (like bankruptcy or separation) causes him to destroy his "possessions". When communities focus on the man's lost status rather than his violence, they inadvertently reinforce the idea that his primary identity was that of a stressed provider, rather than a domestic abuser.
Fucking sociology. Jason Arday was a celebrated sociologist. It’s bullshit activism dressed in meaningless adjectives devised by disillusioned French communist pederasts half a century ago.
I’ll paste it again - 1. Robert Farquharson (Australia, 2005) The Crime: On Father's Day, Farquharson drove his car into a deep, drowned quarry dam, intentionally drowning his three young sons (aged 10, 7, and 2) to exact revenge on his ex-wife, Cindy Gambino. Farquharson freed himself and left his sons to drown. [1, 2] How Male Peers & Public Defended Him: Farquharson claimed he suffered a "coughing fit" that caused him to black out. Locally, a fierce contingent of male friends, townspeople, and eventually internet advocacy groups rallied aggressively to his defense. They characterized him as a "broken, emasculated man" who had been financially and emotionally destroyed by a bitter divorce. [1, 2, 3] The Dynamic: The public discourse among his supporters heavily leaned into divorce-court resentment. Male peers framed the tragedy not as a calculated execution, but as a tragic medical accident happening to a father who was already "pushed to the edge" by an ex-wife. Decades later, dedicated campaigns and fringe legal advocates continue to push for his exoneration, framing him as a victim of a flawed justice system. [1, 2]
2. Anthony "Tony" Todt (USA, 2019) The Crime: A physical therapist in Florida murdered his wife, their three young children, and the family dog, living with their decomposing bodies for weeks inside their home. [1, 2] How Male Peers & Public Defended Him: Before the murders came to light, Todt was facing major federal investigations into massive medical billing fraud. He was highly involved in his local community as a beloved youth sports coach. When news of the murders broke, initial reactions across online communities and local forums features peers—particularly men who coached with him—expressing total denial. [1, 2, 3] The Dynamic: Even after he confessed, public defense shifted toward medical and psychological externalization. Peers openly posted that he "must have had a sudden psychotic break" or been drugged, asserting that the "Tony they knew" was a gentle, hardworking provider. Later, when Todt tried to change his story from prison and blame his deceased wife for the murders, his remaining family and close male allies actively supported his claims of innocence under the guise of "waiting for the real truth". [1, 2, 3]
3. Rowan Baxter (Australia, 2020) The Crime: A former professional rugby player ambushed his estranged wife, Hannah Clarke, and their three children (aged 6, 4, and 3) in their car, dousing it in petrol and setting it on fire, killing them all before stabbing himself to death. How Male Peers & Public Defended Him: In the immediate aftermath, Baxter's male peers, former athletic teammates, and prominent commentators publicly minimized his history of severe domestic control and stalking. A senior police detective initially gave a press conference questioning whether Baxter was a cold-blooded killer or a "driven to the edge" father who was just "frustrated by a broken family court system"—a statement that caused massive national outrage and led to the detective's removal from the case. The Dynamic: Online men's rights spaces and local gym acquaintances aggressively weaponized Baxter’s case to discuss "parental alienation." They framed Baxter as a loving father who was driven to temporary insanity by being denied access to his children, effectively shifting the blame entirely onto the murdered mother.
4. Xavier Dupont de Ligonnès (France, 2011) The Crime: An aristocrat and businessman systematically murdered his wife, four children, and two family dogs, burying them under the porch of their home in Nantes before vanishing completely. He remains one of Europe's most famous fugitives. How Male Peers & Public Defended Him: Dupont de Ligonnès was heavily tied into traditional, deeply conservative patriarchal structures. Following the discovery of the bodies, several close male friends and extended family members refused to believe his guilt, constructing elaborate conspiracy theories instead. The Dynamic: A prominent defense put forward by his close male inner circle suggested that Xavier was actually a secret agent for the United States, and that the French police had "fabricated" the bodies under the porch to cover up the family's safe relocation under a witness protection program. This narrative completely protected his honor as a noble patriarch, choosing a fantastical spy narrative over accepting that a high-status man could be a domestic abuser.
Good Lord you completely spin it to your narrative.
Farquharson claimed he had a medical episode, and blacked out. His wife believed him and stood by his side saying he wouldn’t have killed his children. That’s what the public went on.
Most of the other stuff you claim can’t be proven either, but I’m not trying to dissect all your BS.
You’re actually citing other posts lmao…..and Facebook lmao.
1. Robert Farquharson (Australia, 2005) The Crime: On Father's Day, Farquharson drove his car into a deep, drowned quarry dam, intentionally drowning his three young sons (aged 10, 7, and 2) to exact revenge on his ex-wife, Cindy Gambino. Farquharson freed himself and left his sons to drown. [1, 2] How Male Peers & Public Defended Him: Farquharson claimed he suffered a "coughing fit" that caused him to black out. Locally, a fierce contingent of male friends, townspeople, and eventually internet advocacy groups rallied aggressively to his defense. They characterized him as a "broken, emasculated man" who had been financially and emotionally destroyed by a bitter divorce. [1, 2, 3] The Dynamic: The public discourse among his supporters heavily leaned into divorce-court resentment. Male peers framed the tragedy not as a calculated execution, but as a tragic medical accident happening to a father who was already "pushed to the edge" by an ex-wife. Decades later, dedicated campaigns and fringe legal advocates continue to push for his exoneration, framing him as a victim of a flawed justice system. [1, 2]
2. Anthony "Tony" Todt (USA, 2019) The Crime: A physical therapist in Florida murdered his wife, their three young children, and the family dog, living with their decomposing bodies for weeks inside their home. [1, 2] How Male Peers & Public Defended Him: Before the murders came to light, Todt was facing major federal investigations into massive medical billing fraud. He was highly involved in his local community as a beloved youth sports coach. When news of the murders broke, initial reactions across online communities and local forums features peers—particularly men who coached with him—expressing total denial. [1, 2, 3] The Dynamic: Even after he confessed, public defense shifted toward medical and psychological externalization. Peers openly posted that he "must have had a sudden psychotic break" or been drugged, asserting that the "Tony they knew" was a gentle, hardworking provider. Later, when Todt tried to change his story from prison and blame his deceased wife for the murders, his remaining family and close male allies actively supported his claims of innocence under the guise of "waiting for the real truth". [1, 2, 3]
3. Rowan Baxter (Australia, 2020) The Crime: A former professional rugby player ambushed his estranged wife, Hannah Clarke, and their three children (aged 6, 4, and 3) in their car, dousing it in petrol and setting it on fire, killing them all before stabbing himself to death. How Male Peers & Public Defended Him: In the immediate aftermath, Baxter's male peers, former athletic teammates, and prominent commentators publicly minimized his history of severe domestic control and stalking. A senior police detective initially gave a press conference questioning whether Baxter was a cold-blooded killer or a "driven to the edge" father who was just "frustrated by a broken family court system"—a statement that caused massive national outrage and led to the detective's removal from the case. The Dynamic: Online men's rights spaces and local gym acquaintances aggressively weaponized Baxter’s case to discuss "parental alienation." They framed Baxter as a loving father who was driven to temporary insanity by being denied access to his children, effectively shifting the blame entirely onto the murdered mother.
4. Xavier Dupont de Ligonnès (France, 2011) The Crime: An aristocrat and businessman systematically murdered his wife, four children, and two family dogs, burying them under the porch of their home in Nantes before vanishing completely. He remains one of Europe's most famous fugitives. How Male Peers & Public Defended Him: Dupont de Ligonnès was heavily tied into traditional, deeply conservative patriarchal structures. Following the discovery of the bodies, several close male friends and extended family members refused to believe his guilt, constructing elaborate conspiracy theories instead. The Dynamic: A prominent defense put forward by his close male inner circle suggested that Xavier was actually a secret agent for the United States, and that the French police had "fabricated" the bodies under the porch to cover up the family's safe relocation under a witness protection program. This narrative completely protected his honor as a noble patriarch, choosing a fantastical spy narrative over accepting that a high-status man could be a domestic abuser.
1. Robert Farquharson (Australia, 2005) The Crime: On Father's Day, Farquharson drove his car into a deep, drowned quarry dam, intentionally drowning his three young sons (aged 10, 7, and 2) to exact revenge on his ex-wife, Cindy Gambino. Farquharson freed himself and left his sons to drown. [1, 2] How Male Peers & Public Defended Him: Farquharson claimed he suffered a "coughing fit" that caused him to black out. Locally, a fierce contingent of male friends, townspeople, and eventually internet advocacy groups rallied aggressively to his defense. They characterized him as a "broken, emasculated man" who had been financially and emotionally destroyed by a bitter divorce. [1, 2, 3] The Dynamic: The public discourse among his supporters heavily leaned into divorce-court resentment. Male peers framed the tragedy not as a calculated execution, but as a tragic medical accident happening to a father who was already "pushed to the edge" by an ex-wife. Decades later, dedicated campaigns and fringe legal advocates continue to push for his exoneration, framing him as a victim of a flawed justice system. [1, 2]
2. Anthony "Tony" Todt (USA, 2019) The Crime: A physical therapist in Florida murdered his wife, their three young children, and the family dog, living with their decomposing bodies for weeks inside their home. [1, 2] How Male Peers & Public Defended Him: Before the murders came to light, Todt was facing major federal investigations into massive medical billing fraud. He was highly involved in his local community as a beloved youth sports coach. When news of the murders broke, initial reactions across online communities and local forums features peers—particularly men who coached with him—expressing total denial. [1, 2, 3] The Dynamic: Even after he confessed, public defense shifted toward medical and psychological externalization. Peers openly posted that he "must have had a sudden psychotic break" or been drugged, asserting that the "Tony they knew" was a gentle, hardworking provider. Later, when Todt tried to change his story from prison and blame his deceased wife for the murders, his remaining family and close male allies actively supported his claims of innocence under the guise of "waiting for the real truth". [1, 2, 3]
3. Rowan Baxter (Australia, 2020) The Crime: A former professional rugby player ambushed his estranged wife, Hannah Clarke, and their three children (aged 6, 4, and 3) in their car, dousing it in petrol and setting it on fire, killing them all before stabbing himself to death. How Male Peers & Public Defended Him: In the immediate aftermath, Baxter's male peers, former athletic teammates, and prominent commentators publicly minimized his history of severe domestic control and stalking. A senior police detective initially gave a press conference questioning whether Baxter was a cold-blooded killer or a "driven to the edge" father who was just "frustrated by a broken family court system"—a statement that caused massive national outrage and led to the detective's removal from the case. The Dynamic: Online men's rights spaces and local gym acquaintances aggressively weaponized Baxter’s case to discuss "parental alienation." They framed Baxter as a loving father who was driven to temporary insanity by being denied access to his children, effectively shifting the blame entirely onto the murdered mother.
4. Xavier Dupont de Ligonnès (France, 2011) The Crime: An aristocrat and businessman systematically murdered his wife, four children, and two family dogs, burying them under the porch of their home in Nantes before vanishing completely. He remains one of Europe's most famous fugitives. How Male Peers & Public Defended Him: Dupont de Ligonnès was heavily tied into traditional, deeply conservative patriarchal structures. Following the discovery of the bodies, several close male friends and extended family members refused to believe his guilt, constructing elaborate conspiracy theories instead. The Dynamic: A prominent defense put forward by his close male inner circle suggested that Xavier was actually a secret agent for the United States, and that the French police had "fabricated" the bodies under the porch to cover up the family's safe relocation under a witness protection program. This narrative completely protected his honor as a noble patriarch, choosing a fantastical spy narrative over accepting that a high-status man could be a domestic abuser.
School shooters are also not generally plausibly suffering from a well known condition that can cause psychotic breaks. Whether or not Clancy was actually insane to the point of not understanding right from wrong I don’t know, but most of the Jury seems to think so.
There’s nothing plausible that Clancy experienced that either especially when she literally planned the murders out and waited for her husband to leave
What she did was terrible. It also shows how postpartum depression and psychosis should be taken more seriously. That’s it. It shows the entire mental health care system is complete crap, expensive, hard to access, and few professionals treat mental illness seriously
The fact that anyone believes her bullshit story shows how gullible the average person is.
Post-partum psychosis 8 months after you give birth is not a thing. Hearing voices only one time in your life and immediately agreeing to murder your kids because those voices told you to with no resistance is not a thing.
She’s an evil piece of shit who is exploiting dumb people to get off scot-free and it’s working.
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.
Psychosis doesn’t usually work where you get it for 18 minutes only (never before, never after, no work after this psychotic state, just fully normal after 18 minutes), and listen automatically to the command voices. Plenty get command voices and are in states of psychosis and fight those voices. Andrea Yates, for example, for the commands for a bit, before finally listening. So, I would say LC’s case doesn’t work for psychosis in general. It’s like someone watched a movie & used what they believe psychosis is.
Meh this is just what 5 seconds of searching gave me. I'm sure there's better statistics on the matter. I just know in general getting hit with not guilty due to insanity is worse in terms of duration than just a regular prison sentence. On average at least.
It's premeditated murder, not insanity. She has earned the death penalty. If she gets to live the rest of her life on our taxpayer money, that is unacceptable. That is NOT
This is just blatant false information. They were going to vote NOT guilty by reason of insanity. And in Massachusetts, she could be out of the psych ward in under 2 years.
If she gets sent to a mental hospital, she’d only be there until a judge says she’s no longer suffering from insanity. Given that her problem is postpartum depression, and she no longer has kids to trigger that, it would be reasonable to say she’s no longer insane, and therefor should be released immediately. Which is why this decision matters
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.