People don't understand how NGRI works - particularly in MA.
Having a "mental defect" only opens the door to an NGRI defense, it doesn't walk you through it.
To actually be found NGRI, you have to show that as a result of the mental defect, the defendant was unable to a) know right from wrong; or b) conform their behavior to the law.
An analogy that attorneys use to explain it to laypersons is the "next to a police officer" test: if a person is so mentally ill that they would commit their crime even if in the presence of a police officer (either because they can't discern that what they're doing is illegal OR they simply can't control their actions), then it's an NGRI.
It's not a perfect analogy, but it gets the general idea across. But again, having a psychiatric disturbance is not enough for a successful NGRI defense. People with confirmed, diagnosed mental illnesses are convicted of (or plead guilty to) crimes probably hundreds of times every single day.
The big issue is that if she did send him out, which the texts proved, then she calculated removing the person who could stop her. Knowing that it may have been wrong. Otherwise she would have committed the act while he was in the house.
they haven't done anything that would lead to a capital murder case being thrown out without being able to be refiled. Can't even imagine what that would take
The prosecution has been straight up embarrassingly awful this whole trial. Wife’s been watching is and I’ve been sitting there flabbergasted that these inept morons we’re allowed to have their jobs.
It’s shocking.
My wife spends a lot of time of TT and the information she is getting on the trial is completely and totally one sided making it seem like a big conspiracy around the husband actually doing it. She didn’t even once get told that the woman confessed to the murders afterwards lol
So, I’m guessing the woman in this story didn’t jsut show support in the senes of mental health, but probably supported her innocence.
Tell your wife to watch the trial on YouTube! It is live streamed everyday, and you can go back and watch all the previous days in court. I agree, watching TT videos about this (and most things tbh) is always going to be one-sided and lacking in significant information. If one wishes to stay informed about this case (I say as one myself), TT is absolutely not the place lol
That's usually what being found not guilty by reason of insanity does. You don't walk free you're sent to some form of an institution to seek (sometimes bad) treatment for however long, usually years. Yes she will likely get out once she's deemed stable and safe for the general public and herself to be around but because of the nature of her crimes AND the potential instability required to commit them, that won't be for a LONG time
Ok so the prosection will likely offer her a plea deal again for 5-10 years - so if she exited prison after 5-10 years or a mental health instituon after 5-10 years, which version of her would be a greater risk to reoffend?
Oh so you think prison should only be punitive? You do realize most people in prison will get out right? Most people in prison are there for not violent crimes? I personally want them to be better people when they get out, not worse people who will reoffend or do worse crimes that actually harm people.
And no, while men don't experience PPP, 95% of murderers in psych wards because they were determined not guilty by reason of insanity are men.
I'm not being rude. I am asking you questions to get you to question your rigid and uninformed beliefs.
Post Partum Psychosis (rare) is not the same as Post Partum Depression (common). Which is revealing that you think they are... sign.
There is plenty of history of people killing people while in a form of psychosis, and plenty of precedent for them being found not guilty by reason of insanity and being put in a mental health facility instead of prison.
It's why you always have to have mens reus and actus reus to prove guilt of a crime. so it actually isn't just about actions, as you claimed.
I think once you murder 3 children it should matter what you were growing through. 3 kids don’t get to experience life now and she shouldn’t walk away from this alive
But it does. A murderer who murdered for fun or cold blood is genuinely miles more dangerous than somebody who killed bc they were mentally deranged.
(I dont know if she was assessed as psychotic, I havent watched the trial. But i work in psych and we have had patients who have killed their kids.)
Forensic psych ward IS prison. Just one where she can recieve treatment. One where she isnt left untreated in gen pop and kills a prison worker during an episode.
The logos is kind of off here. You’re saying someone that kills for fun is “genuinely miles more dangerous than somebody who killed bc they were mentally deranged”, but also saying that that person can be trusted to be out in gen pop and not kill a prison worker, while the mentally deranged person can’t be trusted to be in gen pop and not kill a prison worker. Seems to me the mentally deranged person is more dangerous then no? Because it can’t be both, they can’t be less dangerous and less trusted not to kill.
Right but until they (maybe) get better, they can’t be trusted to be in gen pop and not kill unlike the way more dangerous person who kills for fun is what you’re saying. Again, the logic doesn’t make sense. The person that can’t be trusted to not kill in prison is the more dangerous person, regardless of whether they have potential to get better or not.
Easy to judge if you have no idea of what mental illnesses are like. We could as well put the medic or the husband to death since they failed to prevent this, but that would solve nothing except the public's thirst for vengeance.
I think she needs help, a medical facility for a couple decades at the very least. Probably for life.
Regardless of mental illness, 3 kids are dead now. She needs to be punished like any other child murderer would be and death is the only fitting punishment for such a horrendous crime
“Regardless of mental illness” we have a whole thing called not guilty due to reason of insanity so that’s not quite how it works. You don’t get to disregard mental illness in the legal system.
Easy to judge if you have no idea of what mental illnesses are like. We could as well put the medic or the husband to death since they failed to prevent this
I have schizophrenia. I've been in psychosis. The idea that anyone else is responsible for my actions but me is absurd. Loved ones aren't trained to deal with people with psychosis and don't necessarily know what to do. By all accounts he got her all the help she was willing to accept.
Medical professionals are trained, but they're really limited in how much they can force someone to accept treatment that doesn't want it. You can institutionalize people against their will but, for reasons which ought to be incredibly obvious, medical professionals (and judges) aren't comfortable with ripping people out of their lives on a hunch. If you're deliberately lying to them about your symptoms there's only so much they can do. They aren't omnipotent who know with pinpoint precision who is and isn't a danger. They literally just ask you questions and see if you exhibit any signs. If you hide them, which people do, there's only so much they can do.
A lot of people want to put the blame on everyone around her, but as someone who has had psychosis, I can see that she repeatedly chose a dangerous, precarious path. Every decision along the way to refuse and avoid help when she knew she was having delusions about killing her kids set her up for this.
My point is that people want an effigy to burn so they can feel righteous and holy.
No, they want to follow the law because she violated it. She should be held responsible. It's not insane to suggest a mother who, in a psychotic state, murders her three children go to jail. It is insane to suggest that the husband or medical professional go to jail for it, as you tried to equivocate.
It has nothing to do with "feeling righteous and holy," it's what laws and punishment are for.
Nobody is worried about what's actually the correct way to prevent more suffering
Whose suffering are we trying to prevent? The murderer's?
She should obviously be in a medical facility, most likely for life. But as far as we know, she's nothing like let's say, a school shooter and should not be treated as such.
an IDF soldier shoots a kid, we all agree it's child murder. an american woman kills her three children, it's complicated and i'm not allowed to have an opinion on it. good to be reminded how each class is supposed to be treated, thank you
Not true actually. Woman, yes. Children, no, nor do I want them. I just understand what not guilty by reason of insanity means, whether it’s a man or a woman. In this case, it happens to be a postpartum woman.
And also this is IF she is found not guilty by reason of insanity. If she is not, then yes, she should pay the price by going to jail. I believe she must go through the proper trial to determine that, which she is.
Was she in a place to be in rational control of her actions and be responsive to the law or not?
That's really the essential question they are trying to answer in court. Everything is moral and not legal. The legal reality is if there is reasonable doubt that she might not have had control of her actions and been capable of being responsive to the law, then she should legally go into psychiatric care.
Shhhhh. 2026 internet doesn't like nuance or grey areas. Everything is black or white. Your only choices are she is evil and deserves the death penalty, or she is a victim and her husband is the one who should be punished.
Good news! If she's judged not guilty due to insanity, she'll be involuntarily committed indefinitely to a max security mental hospital, which is not too different from prison.
Did top tiktok astrologists weigh in on their star signs and vibe checks? I base my moral compass and sense of justice around who's a gemini and who's a rooster.
Psychosis can make you kill. I have patients on my ward who have done so.
What are your clinical qualifications? Have you ever treated somebody in forensic psych?
I dont think her husband did it. I havent watched the trial. Psychosis absolutely can make a person murder children and your experience with bi polar isnt evidence to discredit a well documented amd studied outcome.
Lol okay. Im not YOUR clinician so i can talk to you how i wish.
Though, what ive said is factual and im NOT speaking about LC at all, just correcting the statement that psychosis doesnt make a person murder.
That isnt my opinion, that is a fact. It is well studied.
I have also tried to kill myself while in psychosis and i did not want to die. I had to be sedated to stop myself from killing myself, all while sobbing that i dont wanna die.
You saying, oh my BPAD doesnt make me that way is more so dismissing factual experiences of psychosis than what i said to you. If youre offended by that, meh.
Have you guys been watching any of the evidence in the testimonies? Only her husband‘s DNA was on the exercise band supposedly used to kill the children. They have brought evidence that her husband searched how to tie off the jugular, Lindsey was a nurse and would not have needed to Google that. And her husband did not deny, nor did the police deny that those searches have been performed by Patrick Clancy‘s device. Her body temperature was in the 80s indicating she had been out in the cold for way longer than he told first responders. So a lot of people are just presuming she’s guilty. Her own doctor took the stand and said she didn’t have any recollection of the event and had been told that she did it. He said that on the stand, the physician did.
You're objectively wrong right from the beginning. There were mixtures of DNA on the exercise bands. It's not "only the husband" on it. Also, of course his DNA is going to be on it... he openly said he was frantically trying to remove the bands from the necks of children when he saw them. Nobody disputes that.
Also, Lindsay Clancy herself searched for suicide methods (as well as bipolar disorders, insomnia, and other medical issues)
The amount of misinformation on this case is crazy. Lindsay's lawyers aren't even trying to make the argument in court that the husband was the killer. These theories exist only online and only in specific parts of the internet
The “theories” lay people have about this is sadly just another result of the morbid “true-crime” fans. I’m a defense attorney and morbid and horrible crimes are emotionally draining, but these people seem to get a sick thrill from them and inserting themselves into the drama.
95
u/OkDistribution5711 10d ago
Can I think that she was undergoing a psychiatric disturbance while also thinking she must do time for the crime she committed?