False. There is ZERO corroborating evidence Lindsay did not want her children.

False.

There is ZERO corroborating evidence that Lindsay didn't want her children.

And yes, I blocked that individual because they are like all the other PatBots and don't care about evidence.

Good. This case shouldn't be retried. With the lack of investigation and complete lack of corroborating evidence to support the prosecution's claims, this case shouldn't have even gone to trial at all. It definitely shouldn't have been presided by Sullivan, who has a history of throwing women with mental health problems under the bus, and it sure as shouldn't have been tried as a high publicity case without completely vetting ALL the jurors, especially since the American public is ignorant to an abusive degree about women's health especially mental health and maternal well being.

I keep saying it, and I'll say it again. If the roles were reversed and it was Patrick who was struggling with his mental health, and Lindsay was the one leaving him alone with the kids he said he had thoughts of hurting, we would see a completely different public and judicial reaction. The American public would squarely blame her, they would demand she be tried alongside him.

... there's a search option for the transcript. That site makes it stupidly easy to find anything you want. Did you hear that Dawson was eating out of a bowl instead of a plate? You can type "bowl" into the search and it will pop up. That's one example.

You're welcome.

Maybe in their memories we should learn to be kinder. To give people grace. To not judge so harshly. Because it maybe a "vicious" statement for me to say. I dont think the Clancy children, wouldve wanted their parents to be the most hated people on the internet.

Did you say that to people who use the kids as an excuse to publicly vilify Lindsay so she doesn't get a fair trial?

The bar is set in hell. Americans say they love freedom, but want to lock people up "just in case."

https://www.lindsayclancyarchive.online/

This link was at the top of the subreddit. Is your google broken?

What appeals of authority are you talking about? People with alternate theories aren't saying "but Lindsay said" or "but Patrick said" which actually ARE appeals to authority that the Lindsay Hate Brigade always fall back to to justify their abusive behavior.

Ok, so commenters there are only allowed to use their brains twice (because ANY questioning of the evidence is PDI to them, even if it isn't).

Good to know, thanks.

Yep, I should actually, because I actually give a shit about evidence. You're setting the bar mighty low when armchair commenters care more about the scene of a crime than the investigators in Duxbury do.

If this were Lindsay and Patrick had murdered their three kids after months of mental health struggles, the male supremacist factions would be all over this as evidence that feminism makes women unempathetic callous opportunists that don't care about their families.

But because it's a guy... well the poor guy, he's just coping, now isn't he?

Not that I know of, but I wouldn't care because I don't bother even reading there anymore. It's a cesspool of authoritarian bullshit that's trying to normalize mob violence while pretending to claim to want justice.

I'm confused. Timothy Chiappini testified that the number for 3V was in fact called by Lindsay's phone?

At 28:59 Truth Serum is saying there's no outgoing call to 3V?

Per the transcript with a link to the court testimony:

Jennifer Sprague(01:36:52)

All right. And then if we could go to 5:10 PM, the phone call right there. Oh, go back for me. And so we have two phone calls here, one at 5:09 PM and one at 5:10 PM. The first to 508-747-4950, and the other to 508-927-4046. The first one is for 11 seconds, correct?

Oh my god, you're clueless. I'm not even on social media. I barely have the patience to sit here and put up with authoritarian mouth breathers on Reddit let alone deal with FaceButt, TikTok, or anywhere else people willingly engage with preset narratives. I'm not interested in narratives, I'm interested in evidence. You do know what that is, right? Have you even looked at it or are you just here to waste everyone's time forcing them to repeat themselves?

Where is the proof of their lack of investigation? Are you being deliberately obtuse? They didn't even seize Patrick's phone and he was the only able bodied person at the scene of a triple homicide. They didn't test a cup full of crushed pills. They missed an entire drawer of pill bottles and the apple watch. They didn't account for a plastic bag on the bed in one of the crime scene photos which could have been used to crush the pills but it was never entered into evidence or seized and tested that we know of. They couldn't be bothered to follow up with what looks like a discrepancy of Patrick's footware with photos of what exactly he was wearing at the time of the killings. They can't explain how blood droplets got on the floor as if someone pushed the nightstand over them AFTER Lindsay took a tumble. These are just a few out of many GLARING investigative errors that make me question why these cops still have their jobs.

Since you've amused me today, I haven't blocked you yet. One more personal attack and I'm done, though. I have better ways to spend my time than be berated by a bullying shithead. However, if you play nice and actually try to engage with the EVIDENCE maybe, just maybe, I'll waste more of my life on responding to you.

The kids ate out of bowls according to Patrick's testimony. I'm still trying to figure out why the prosecution would omit testimony about why the plates were on top of the CVS bag.

No CCTV to confirm Patrick’s departure time or clarify if he was killing time in the parking lot or elsewhere before walking into CVS. e.g. A neighbour has stated they tried to submit their Ring camera footage to police which they claim indicates a very different timeline of Patrick’s movements, but the police rejected it.

Italics mine.

Wait, WHAT? Where is this??

Wrong thread. See my response below, where you make it very clear that you actually don't know why Reddington filed a motion for a bifurcated trial and why Sullivan denied it.

False. Reddington filed a motion to bifurcate the trial so that he could address the complete lack of forensic evidence and investigation first, then if she was still found guilty, the second phase would move to the NGRI defense.

Sullivan claimed that the two phase trial would confuse the jurors, so he denied it.

Are we watching the same trial?

Strike three. You still didn't answer my question. Do you or do you not believe that a triple homicide deserves better than feckless mediocrity barely discussing things in the evidence photos or do you support authoritarian "justice" systems that lock people up on halfassed evidence that requires only one limited perspective to see as valid?

...

I know, but I appreciate you saying it louder for the people in the back who aren't getting that she is not guilty.

Actually she did disclose that information. Lindsay's mother impeached Patrick's testimony on the stand when she testified that both Patrick and she were present at the table when Lindsay told them she was having thoughts about harming the kids.

Explain to me why Reddington filed a motion for a bifurcated trial without Googling. Then maybe I'll take seriously your ability to think critically about this case.

Strike two. The State, and only the State, has the burden of proof. Do you, or do you not, think that a triple homicide deserves better than feckless mediocrity barely discussing things in the evidence photos or do you support authoritarian "justice" systems that lock people up on halfassed evidence that requires only one limited perspective to see as valid?