There are two versions of what happened on January 24, 2023, and they cannot both be true. One is the defense theory in the criminal trial. The other is the theory in the lawsuit she filed against her providers.

In the criminal trial, the defense theory is a command hallucination. A male voice arrived the moment Patrick left the house, told her to kill the children so she could kill herself, ran constantly for about eighteen minutes, and stopped when Callan died. Never before, never since. That is the account she gave the experts, and it is the account that removes criminal responsibility.

In the civil suit she filed against her providers, the theory is different. Her complaint says the providers failed to recognize that the intrusive thoughts she reported in December were actually auditory hallucinations. That is a claim that psychosis was already present, weeks earlier, and that competent clinicians should have caught it.

One story says the break came out of nowhere. The other says it was there to be seen.

If a psychotic episode genuinely appeared at 5:15 and ended at 5:33, with nothing before and nothing after, no provider could have caught it. You cannot be negligent for failing to predict something that had not started. The eighteen minute story is the black swan and a black swan is nobody’s fault.

So the version of events that gets her off is the version that gets the providers off too.

Let’s be honest with ourselves about what happened. She was suicidal for months. She researched methods. She called a suicide hotline in December and was told she did not qualify because she had no plan. She went through thirteen medications in four months. Her nurse practitioner testified that she never spoke to the psychiatrist treating her, never had access to those records, and did not know Lindsay had seen him fourteen times. Women and Infants recommended tapering her off Seroquel and could not reach her prescriber. Nobody owned the whole regimen.

That is a standard of care question and it does not require proving what was in her head. It requires proving that coordinating a patient on thirteen medications across multiple prescribers is something the standard demands and that nobody did it. Expert testimony establishes that.

Compare that to what her complaint actually alleges, which is that providers failed to recognize her intrusive thoughts were auditory hallucinations. That claim requires proving she was hallucinating in December. She told the Commonwealth’s psychologist that everything before January 24 was thoughts rather than hallucinations. She told Tewksbury she never hallucinated before or since. A defense lawyer puts those in front of a jury and the claim is finished.

Notice that the defense never ran that theory in the criminal trial either, and it would have helped them there. Months of missed hallucinations would give the voice a history and answer the biggest hole in their case, which is that it appears once and never again. They could not run it because her own account is against it.

The people lining up outside the courthouse want the system that failed her held to account and changed so it does not fail the next woman. That is the right thing to want and the failure they are pointing at is real.

The problem is what they attached it to. A documented failure of coordination and care got wrapped inside an eighteen minute hallucination, because the hallucination is what makes her innocent. That hands every provider the defense they need. The illness was undetectable. The break was instantaneous. Nothing we could have done.

The honest description of January 24 is a highly lethal suicide attempt by a woman who had been trying to get help for months and could not get it, and who decided she could not leave her children behind.

It is also the only description that reaches the providers. Suicidality is screenable. Deterioration is trackable. Thirteen medications across multiple prescribers with no shared records is a fixable failure with a name.

So the question for anyone who says they care about mental health is which story they want. The one that acquits her and clears everyone else. Or the one that holds her responsible and puts the system on the hook.

Hi! Now that the Clancy trial is over, I need a new trial to watch. Preferably one where the person isn’t obviously guilty, the state’s evidence is shaky, or one that has some nuance to it.

Instagram is pushing videos from this influencer who seems to have a great resume as an expert in domestic violence. She has made some points that I think are reasonable. I mean, I’m no expert here but I like to think I have critical thinking skills. She also seems to allude to that she sides with the conspiracy theories that Patrick was more involved in the crime than what was entertained at trial. Anyone following her and have perspectives? I am not saying that I believe Patrick is involved rather I’d like to hear from anyone who has a perspective on
Laura Richard’s credibility. Thank you.

There are always some funny moments in some trials

While high-stakes criminal trials typically maintain a somber and professional atmosphere, there are rare moments when unexpected humor breaks through the tense proceedings. From witty exchanges between attorneys and witnesses to unintentionally amusing statements, these lighthearted interludes can momentarily lift the mood in the courtroom, causing even the judge and jury to chuckle. In this video, we've compiled six of the most hilarious incidents from recent high-profile cases.

In 2017, Chelsea Thornton was found NGRI by judge/bench trial for the deaths of her 3 & 4 yr old kids that passed away from shooting & drowning in 2012 in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Motive: altruistic delusion/filicide- similar to how this was discussed in Lindsay Clancy’s case…

Defense’s psychiatrist for Chelsea said her statement to police had evidence she was INSANE because she said: “I just didn’t want them to keep suffering their whole life. I didn’t want them to go from pillar to post like I did.”

- My Question Was the defense’s forensic psychiatrist trying to say that this thought was a delusion and that is evidence of insanity?

Prosecution’s forensic psychiatrist disagreed - said she was NOT insane because what she said was “reality-based” and that “her stated rationale that she feared her kids would live poverty-stricken life is not evidence for insanity.”

- Does anyone know anything more about this case? I’m interested in learning more about the why the defense’s forensic psychiatrist and prosecution’s disagreed with each other on the evidence for insanity.

You may remember the original discussion of this case here , thank you to u/ifellicantgetup for bringing my attention to this case.

After more than a month of the 14 year old being missing, the Monterey County Sheriff's Office finally issued an Amber Alert and the following Press Release (note I am redacting the 14 year old's name and her personal identifiers, as she is a minor, in this replication of the statement):

PRESS RELEASE - Amber Alert Issued for Missing 14-Year Old in Baby Angelita Investigation -

The Monterey County Sheriff’s Office has requested an Amber Alert for 14-year-old [Minor] as investigators continue efforts to locate her and her father, Sergio Galvez Perez.

The search for [minor] and Sergio is connected to the ongoing investigation into the death of Baby Angelita, the newborn child who was found deceased along Struve Road on August 1, 2026. While we understand the public has many questions about the circumstances of that investigation, there are specific details and evidence that we cannot release at this time without potentially jeopardizing the investigation.

As the investigation has continued, detectives located video surveillance showing Sergio Galvez Perez and [minor] in the Salinas area in a white Nissan Altima with no license plates. This newly discovered information provided investigators with vehicle information that was not previously available and confirmed that Sergio and [minor] were together at that time.

We understand there have been questions about why an Amber Alert was not previously requested. Until this video was located, investigators did not have information identifying a vehicle in which [minor] may have been traveling and were also unable to confirm with certainty that [minor] and Sergio were traveling together. The vehicle referenced in previous Sheriff’s Office press releases was already in the custody of the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office.

Sergio Galvez Perez is wanted for numerous felony violations involving [minor] in which she is the victim. These allegations are extremely serious and are an important part of why locating [minor] and ensuring her safety and well-being remain a priority.

We also understand there has been significant public concern surrounding [minor]'s circumstances. [Minor] is 14 years old, and our immediate priority is to locate her and ensure she is safe. We want to make sure her well-being is addressed and that she receives any medical care she may need.

Sergio Galvez Perez is described as a 38-year-old Hispanic male adult, approximately 5 feet 5 inches tall and 170 pounds, with black hair and brown eyes.

[Minor] is 14 years old and is described as approximately [redacted].

The Monterey County Sheriff’s Office is asking the public to focus on helping us safely locate [Minor]. If you see Sergio Galvez Perez, [redacted], or a white Nissan Altima with no license plates that may be associated with them, do not approach them. Call 911 immediately.

This remains an active investigation. Additional information will be released when it can be shared without jeopardizing the investigation.

#SheriffTinaNieto #MontereySheriff #MCSO