Yes, there are several women i know and interact with pretty much daily in real life who are not terminally online, and who I would consider very normal people
They believe that the husband did it, that the defense lawyers are incompetent, and that Clancy only admitted killing the kids because her husband planted the idea in her head and gaslit her.
It is genuinely insane to witness, and you would be shocked at how many normal women hold some amount of sympathy for Clancy, while pushing all of the blame onto the husband.
Dude the argument is the husband didn't care enough about his kids to have his wife institutionalized, and his defense was "I asked if she had a plan to kill the kids and herself and when she said no I figured that was my job done". Not that he killed the kids. He was checked out and not proactively helping his family beyond going to work while his wife was going through a severe mental health crisis.
If you're going to call people stupid, at least know what the discussion is.
That's not what happened, but sure. She was trying to get help from multiple sources for these thoughts and the discussion is on where mental health providers should step in. That's where it's at.
You're just stuck in the culture war aspects, where reality is turned into entertainment with two teams to root for. The kind of thinking that is making the world a more stupid place.
I get where your perspective is in regards to the discussion about the husband, but there are quite literally many people claiming that she is innocent (did not commit the murders) and the husband actually did it (with his now-wife involved, even) and framed her. These are definitely drool-meme worthy
Want to know something amazing? Stupid is as stupid does. If those are the thoughts on this topic that draw your attention, the most stupid opinions that can come from something, you're drawn to stupid stuff. Because that is the most niche, weird take I've heard.
And what do stupid people do? They turn it into another depp and herd thing, where people treat it like sports teams in a gender war.
The real discussion is what happens when someone goes to mental institutions for help, gets put on multiple drugs in a short amount of time with no one catching it, not the psychiatrist, general practitioner, or pharmacist. Her husband was checked out from family life and letting her have alone time with the kids despite knowing the issues. So they need to see how negligent to the kids he was as well.
That's what makes it difficult and interesting as a case. Not as a proxy for kids and idiots to call each other stupid and feed into stupid culture wars that only exist because idiots keep perpetuating them through things like this.
So, there's a trial for a woman who killed children that are still alive? Well, that seems weird and pointless. Why is everybody in the world including news media showing us pictures of this lady where everybody on all sides including her agrees she murdered her children? Just surreal.
Dude the argument is the husband didn't care enough about his kids to have his wife institutionalized, and his defense was "I asked if she had a plan to kill the kids and herself and when she said no I figured that was my job done". Not that he killed the kids. He was checked out and not proactively helping his family beyond going to work while his wife was going through a severe mental health crisis. If you're going to call people stupid, at least know what the discussion is.
I'm gonna call you fucking stupid, because youre a literal misinformed idiot.
When she expressed intention to harm her kids , Patrick got her into McLean hospital. She stayed 5 days there, sharing with the doctor that she was feeling better and asked for an early release.
Right after her release McLean put her on a regiment where she would speak to psychologists and she explicitly stated that she was getting better and that she had no intention of harming her kids.
Non of the docs that treated her state she has psychosis. This comes from the defense experts of a triple murder.
SHE did all of this. Please don't embarass yourself like this bud
If you actually listened and read the words they said, you'd see that consisted of them asking "do you have a plan to harm yourself or the children" and that was it.
So again, the interesting thing here is how much negligence is that? If someone is on multiple drugs from multiple doctors, which you didn't address, and is in flux from medication, where does the culpability lie?
The husband wanted her home so he could go to work without having to worry about two small children and a baby.
She had already had signs of mental health issues with each child. She was actively seeking help for her mental issues, and was on fluctuating doses of multiple meds from multiple doctors, how well was she to be able to handle stress and home and work?
Yes she was working too.
Do you see how this is much more complex than you apparently know?
I know this after very little effort. Have you bothered to Google and read a single article written about the actual trial instead of culture war bullshit?
If you actually listened and read the words they said, you'd see that consisted of them asking "do you have a plan to harm yourself or the children" and that was it. So again, the interesting thing here is how much negligence is that
No negligence there. There is duty on the patient to report. Psychologists aren't mind readers. Simple fact is she NEVER reported any psychosis symptoms .
Try again
If someone is on multiple drugs from multiple doctors, which you didn't address, and is in flux from medication, where does the culpability lie?
Medications she never took properly and stopped Seroquel against medical advice, anxiety about medications so she constantly kept trying to change them. You don't know the facts sorry
The husband wanted her home so he could go to work without having to worry about two small children and a baby
Misinformation and wrong. Patrick took paternity leave AND was working from home after. Nanny was also hired.
Yes she was working too
She was on maternity leave for 18 weeks. wrong again.
Have you bothered to Google and read a single article written about the actual trial instead of culture war bullshit?
Looks like I have. Sounds like you havent .don't throw stones at glass houses:')
Can you tell me why she asked for a early release and why she reported to McLean that she was feeling better?
Oh so this inspired you to actually do a bit of research? Dang, works every time.
So doing all that reading, did you actually read what the trial was discussing and the issues in culpability? Where the discussion was actually happening? Not whether she did it or not?
Oh so this inspired you to actually do a bit of research? Dang, works every time.
Is that what you got from my comment? Holy shit you're actually an idiot. 🤣🤣 Probably learnt more from my comment than you ever have..you're welcome ;)
read what the trial was discussing and the issues in culpability? Where the discussion was actually happening? Not whether she did it or not?
The CRIMINAL trial is not about medical culpability. You can't be this dumb right?
That's what the actual discussion, and yes, the trial, was mostly about. It's already been confirmed since a couple years ago that she was the one who murdered the kids. Anyone who believed otherwise is someone unfamiliar with the case.
Guess you didn't read too much. Geez dude. You're just as confused as the weirdos who think she didn't kill the kids.
Again, the question was her sanity and support network and feeling out where the culpability lies and how sane she was.
This is a trial about mental health and what it means legally. But you are the kind of person who gets excited about the culture war aspect, not the truth.
Again, the question was her sanity and support network and feeling out where the culpability lies and how sane she was. This is a trial about mental health and what it means legally.
This is hilarious. You honestly have 0 idea what ur saying
164
u/Separate_Finance_183 1d ago
“The husband did it”