The dumbass women defending Clancy is insane. I also disagree with insanity pleas. I don’t care how or why you murdered your 3 kids, you should be executed. 

iclfan2 wrote:

The dumbass women defending Clancy is insane. I also disagree with insanity pleas. I don’t care how or why you murdered your 3 kids, you should be executed. 

Saw people trying to explain it to the women defending her this way.

Blaming child murder on PPD and hormones is about as dumb as if men blamed, and therefore got away with, rape due to testosterone.

iclfan2 wrote:

The dumbass women defending Clancy is insane. I also disagree with insanity pleas. I don’t care how or why you murdered your 3 kids, you should be executed. 

I saw these women.  Cheering like they are at some kind of rally.  Its no longer enough in the state of Massachusetts that a mother can kill her child at any point in the womb.

I would have given her insanity until I heard the closing arguments. Everything she did ahead of time like the Google search’s and such put it over the top that she knew and was of right mind when she did it. 

She’s also paralyzed from the waist down and in suicide watch so her life probably sucks no matter what happens. 

The Charlie Kirk case is also open and shut just like the Luigi case was. The people protesting these things are obsessed and let politics run their lives

I don't know, it's not like she just goes home and on with life if she's acquitted - it was jail or the mental institution.

I didn't follow the case closely enough to have an opinion.  The prosecution claim was that she knew what she was doing and could have stopped, which is a key distinction vs. insanity pleas.

It occurs to me this may be a case of jury nullification, except the one juror who held out.  And then you have the other jurors and defense attorney claiming he ignored instructions (I guess the presumption is he actually had reasonable doubt, but refused to acknowledge it). 

But maybe that one juror was actually the one who got it right?  I think it's interesting the judge wasn't willing to dismiss the juror, which I think maybe indicates his position wasn't as off the rails as depicted and, actually, the judge viewed it as a valid position.

And, the media can GFT.  ABC nightly news described it as "one male juror prevented her acquittal".  Sure, just the facts. Pure objectivity.  When names come out, that guy is going to get all kinds of threats and complaints to his employer.

gut wrote:

I don't know, it's not like she just goes home and on with life if she's acquitted - it was jail or the mental institution.

I didn't follow the case closely enough to have an opinion.  The prosecution claim was that she knew what she was doing and could have stopped, which is a key distinction vs. insanity pleas.

It occurs to me this may be a case of jury nullification, except the one juror who held out.  And then you have the other jurors and defense attorney claiming he ignored instructions (I guess the presumption is he actually had reasonable doubt, but refused to acknowledge it). 

But maybe that one juror was actually the one who got it right?  I think it's interesting the judge wasn't willing to dismiss the juror, which I think maybe indicates his position wasn't as off the rails as depicted and, actually, the judge viewed it as a valid position.

And, the media can GFT.  ABC nightly news described it as "one male juror prevented her acquittal".  Sure, just the facts. Pure objectivity.  When names come out, that guy is going to get all kinds of threats and complaints to his employer.

It wasn’t ABC News that leaked it was a male juror it was the defense lawyer I’m pretty sure.

The defense lawyer did it. And it wasn't really a "leak". When he was making his case against a mistrial, he referred to the juror as a he. Maybe it was accidental, maybe it wasn't.  

I think with social media being the entity that it is, with a case as fraught with emotions as this was bound to be  - this jury should have been sequestered. And now it wouldn't do any good to sequester the next jury because it's such a high profile case. Even being exposed to the tiniest bit of reactions is enough to poison the well. 

Whatever the outcome, this case will set a precedent. And we won't be able to consume any type of media without seeing cases of mothers killing their babies. That's the future.

I'm not saying the ABC news guy "leaked" anything, his reporting basically said "MAGA incel denies acquittal".  And he also didn't say "the defense claimed..."   There's a clear agenda identifying the juror as a man.

LOL, the media has no problem assuming gender when it fits a narrative.

gut wrote:

I'm not saying the ABC news guy "leaked" anything, his reporting basically said "MAGA incel denies acquittal".  And he also didn't say "the defense claimed..."   There's a clear agenda identifying the juror as a man.

LOL, the media has no problem assuming gender when it fits a narrative.

Yeah, I know you didn't. I guess I was really referring to all the medias using the word "leaked". 

On a separate but related note - did ya'll see where all these women are now forming "covens" ? They seem to think that by joining forces they will be astrologically able to get Lindsey acquitted and Patrick Clancy charged for the murder on the babies and attempted murder of the wife. 

An old family friend (long since adopted into our family as an aunt) is low key hoping they can do it. The angel on my right shoulder is telling me to be gentle and kind towards her, but the devil on my left shoulder is telling me to knock a lung loose. 

And people wonder why so many want to repeal the 19th haha!

Speaking of court cases seeing the crazies on x and tiktok turn on Karmelo Anthony after the leaked texts is pretty funny

sportchampps wrote:

Speaking of court cases seeing the crazies on x and tiktok turn on Karmelo Anthony after the leaked texts is pretty funny

Google isn't working very well right now for me (plus some sites that say they have the texts are blocked on my work laptop).

So what were the texts that were leaked?

3 of the jurors on the Clancy jury came out and did an interview. They look to be exactly what you would expect to come out and bash a guy for wanting her to be held accountable. 

jmog wrote:

Google isn't working very well right now for me (plus some sites that say they have the texts are blocked on my work laptop).

So what were the texts that were leaked?

The threats to his girlfriend and saying things like he'd like to lick someone's blood off his blade (not exact wording). There is more but I can't remember them. I will edit in the rest in a few minutes.

Edit for the link FOX news had about his texts and pictures:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/karmelo-anthony-photographed-guns-docs-reveal-alleged-history-rage-threats-violence.amp

Turns out both Metcalf and Anthony were troubled youths. Metcalf spray painting racist tripe, hitting a girl in the stomach and calling a teacher a bitch. He was no angel. 

jmog wrote:

Google isn't working very well right now for me (plus some sites that say they have the texts are blocked on my work laptop).

So what were the texts that were leaked?

The ones I saw that really had people in an up roar was his comments on black women. 

CenterBHSFan wrote:

The threats to his girlfriend and saying things like he'd like to lick someone's blood off his blade (not exact wording). There is more but I can't remember them. I will edit in the rest in a few minutes.

Edit for the link FOX news had about his texts and pictures:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/karmelo-anthony-photographed-guns-docs-reveal-alleged-history-rage-threats-violence.amp

Turns out both Metcalf and Anthony were troubled youths. Metcalf spray painting racist tripe, hitting a girl in the stomach and calling a teacher a bitch. He was no angel. 

I was able to see some of that, it does look like both boys were/are POS's.

iclfan2 wrote:

3 of the jurors on the Clancy jury came out and did an interview. They look to be exactly what you would expect to come out and bash a guy for wanting her to be held accountable. 

I just saw those clips. They were mad at the one holdout because he didn't have compassion for Clancy (not the job of a juror) and he wouldn't listen to what the nurses in the jury had to say. And to that second point the judge instructed them to only take into account the evidence presented in the courtroom. The nurses on the jury did not testify as part of the prosecution or defense, so why would they lean on them so heavily? 

Meanwhile, they completely disregarded the cunning in Clancy's setup for the act. 

And since there has been a copycat baby killer.  Corie Walsh. A mother from Illinois killed her baby the same day she had a group chat about the Clancy case. They are saying she now has Grief Psychotic Disorder. 

Jesus Christ. 

CenterBHSFan wrote:

I just saw those clips. They were mad at the one holdout because he didn't have compassion for Clancy (not the job of a juror) and he wouldn't listen to what the nurses in the jury had to say. And to that second point the judge instructed them to only take into account the evidence presented in the courtroom. The nurses on the jury did not testify as part of the prosecution or defense, so why would they lean on them so heavily? 

Meanwhile, they completely disregarded the cunning in Clancy's setup for the act. 

And since there has been a copycat baby killer.  Corie Walsh. A mother from Illinois killed her baby the same day she had a group chat about the Clancy case. They are saying she now has Grief Psychotic Disorder. 

Jesus Christ. 

White liberal women in America are some of the dumbest subset of the population (though they won’t hesitate to tell you about their higher education in worthless degrees). Thank goodness they don’t want to have children. Remove insanity pleas and hate crimes. Just execute people or sentence them to life. No reason to play these stupid games. 

iclfan2 wrote:

White liberal women in America are some of the dumbest subset of the population (though they won’t hesitate to tell you about their higher education in worthless degrees). Thank goodness they don’t want to have children. Remove insanity pleas and hate crimes. Just execute people or sentence them to life. No reason to play these stupid games. 

I don't mind the insanity plea, but get rid of the "temporary insanity" get off scott free thing. 

If you want to plead insanity for murder you get life in a mental hospital/insane asylum. So you choose, jail/death row or insane asylum if you can prove you were insane.

The temporary insanity plea drives me insane "well I wasn't responsible for my actions in that moment but I'm fine now so I should get to go home".

Fun fact!

Recently I watched a vid by a guy named The Fat Electrician about the first use of the temporary insanity plea. Dan Sickles was the man who used it. 

I just looked it up. 

https://youtu.be/mMs8gPatfEo?is=yKh8V4zxsTGu8ynh

Not sure what news to believe at this point, but I've rarely heard so much about a dysfunctional jury.

Sounds like a little bit of bullying going on.  And the "lone" holdout was apparently not the only one who felt she was guilty, but others caved.  What really blew my mind was one woman seemed to claim she had reasonable doubt Clancy even committed the murders.  And she's not talking about the wild conspiracy theory that the husband did it (LOL, we have a lot of really stupid people in this country), but apparently the prosecution didn't prove she committed murder.

Anyway, seems unlikely they'll ever convince 12 jurors to convict her.

CenterBHSFan wrote:

Fun fact!

Recently I watched a vid by a guy named The Fat Electrician about the first use of the temporary insanity plea. Dan Sickles was the man who used it. 

I will have to watch that one later. I love Fat Electrician, he's hilarious.

I am just realizing that the hold out was pushing for guilty.  I assumed that everyone wanted guilty and the hold out was for not guilty.  That is crazy.

geeblock wrote:

I am just realizing that the hold out was pushing for guilty.  I assumed that everyone wanted guilty and the hold out was for not guilty.  That is crazy.

Not guilty by reason of temporary insanity.  What the prosecution failed to convince the jury of was that she still was aware of and able to control her actions.  I didn't follow it really, but one thing that stood out to me was sending her husband out and waiting until he was gone, which to me suggests premeditation and planning that doesn't seem consistent with an insanity plea.

Definitely not a jury I would have wanted to be on.  Can you imagine the hate coming that guy's way when his name inevitably leaks?

iclfan2 wrote:

Remove insanity pleas and hate crimes. Just execute people or sentence them to life. No reason to play these stupid games. 

The more I think about this point you made the more I tend to agree. I'm not a fan of the hate crime classification already. 

As far as temporary insanity - what's the big difference in how that plea was utilized in the Clancy case and a "crime of passion"? Both rely on an instantaneous and irresistible intrusive thought/s.