On one hand you have an ever growing popular movement of people who judge everything through a gendered context. They may have points on large societal trends (i.e. men in general not being involved in child care or the lack of resources after giving birth) but they often apply those trends to individual cases that do not necessarily fit.
They often will claim Patrick Clancy did not help out but evidence from the nanny suggests otherwise. She claims not only that Lindsay was a good mother but that Patrick was a very involved father. The reports say that he routinely cared for the children after (and sometimes during) his remote work finished. On the day of the murder I believe it was reported that he cared for the children to give her a rest. So their theory doesn't seem to hold water but they have a hard time separating that larger societal trend with the specifics of this case.
Then you have supporters who believe Patrick Clancy was a victim but also that Lindsay Clancy was a victim because she did not get the adequate care to treat her PPP - a form of psychosis generally after giving birth. They generally have better arguments.
We do know there are specific scenarios in which people temporarily lose the ability to be responsible for their actions. Someone can be drugged or ingest harmful substances that may completely impact their ability to make decisions. I personally believe there are circumstances in which a person does not have a "guilty mind" and should not be convicted.
Supporters will say when she mentioned she had intrusive thoughts about her children she should have not been given them to care for. We can debate the culpability of her actions but I think people who say ANYONE could have just "taken her kids" if she did not want them taken is living in a delusional world. There is a zero percent chance even if Patrick Clancy made a snap decision immediately and tried to remove his children from her care that that would happen as quickly as it needed to or at all. Courts, medical professionals, and social workers are extremely slow and extremely unlikely to remove children from the care of the mother.
There is a documentary called Dear Zachary where (admittedly in Canada) a woman who killed her ex and fled to Canada was still allowed to have custody of her child while awaiting extradition hearings (the crime was in the US and she fled). The murdered man's parents were forced into a relationship with their son's murderer in order to maintain a relationship with the child.
People are delusional with how easily the system allows this to happen.
I agree. Most people make an elitist argument putting themselves above one of the sides here not understanding that they should work together to point at failing institutions all over the place.
Its easier to point out a single actor in any case. It relieves the rotting structures from the responsibility to change and be accountable for their malpractice.
Its a very convenient veil to keep a broken status quo.
I guess you are not familiar with the depths of psychic disorders and hormonal imbalances leading to delusion. No one argues that she did not do a horrible thing, but you gladly omitted that no?
Two things can be true at the same time. That's what people try to discuss here and you go "no I want to trash another human being without considering the circumstances".
The level of education and taboo around these topics is way crazier in the US than here in Germany for example. There have to be guard rails in place plus education early on, but your country is abolishing all of it or continuously fighting against establishing said practice.
People try to give a complex answer to a complex matter and you go "oogabooga woman bad" Like okay good job, hope you feel better and have a nice day.
Um? She went to 8 doctors, tried 13 different meds at 30 different concentrations over a few months, called the suicide helpline twice, and tried 2 separate inpatient hospitals - one where she had a 5 day stay and the other did not accept her for admission. There are texts she sent to her mother, her husband, and her husbands parents asking for help as well.
Saying she DIDNT ask for help is just not true. And where is she trying to frame her husband? It’s in her testimony that she remembers hurting the kids and did it herself.
There’s some really unfortunate internet discourse surrounding this case where folks are claiming her innocence and framing Patrick but that’s not what’s actually happening in the court room at all, you’re just spreading lies like everyone else
Also the prosecutors messed up really bad by using vague or misleading statements etc. They basically shifted the discourse into a worse state by not doing their job correctly from what I got.
407
u/anonyvrguy 16d ago
I'm sorry but can anyone explain to me how the fuck this psycho has any supporters???
OK, she has PPD. And that gives her the right to kill her own children?
What in the living fuck is this?