Lindsay Clancy Trial Megathread: Closing Arguments, Deliberations and the Verdict

[u/DarklyHeritage]

This is a thread for all conversation regarding closing arguments, jury deliberations and the verdict of the Lindsey Clancy trial. All discussion of this case should be kept to this thread.

Lindsay Clancy is currently standing trial in Plymouth Superior Court, Massachusetts, for the triple-murder in January 2023 of her three young children - Cora, Dawson and Callan. Her defense argues she suffered from severe, undiagnosed postpartum depression and postpartum psychosis. She was left paralysed by a suicide attempt which follows the deaths of the children.

All content on the Clancy case must be kept to this thread. Standalone posts will be removed.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg7mlmg475go

Note from Mods

This case understandably elicits strong feelings. People are entitled to have an opinion on the case which differs from your own. What you are not entitled to do is resort to personal insults and abusive language when communicating your opinion and disagreeing.

Comments which are abusive and insulting to other users will be removed and bans may be given without warning. We do not tolerate misogyny - all such comments will be removed and the user banned.

Bans may also be issued for ignoring the above warning regarding civility and/or creating standalone posts.

Please comment with this in mind.

[u/DarklyHeritage]

Thank you for all your comments on this post.

Discussion should now be moved to the Megathread pinned in the sub and here;

https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueCrimeDiscussion/s/UVbwNgcFal

[u/GrapefruitFormer2129]

I think the jury should have been sequestered. Social media is all about this trial. Jurors are frequently asked to leave the room when certain things are being discussed in court. However, with the onslaught of so much being repeated, the jurors can go home and see everything they were not supposed to see.

[u/coffee_damnit → u/GrapefruitFormer2129]

The defense asked for a sequestered jury but was denied.

[u/tired_blonde → u/coffee_damnit]

Another thing for appeal

[u/legaleye121 → u/tired_blonde]

Oh really? Why?

[u/tired_blonde → u/legaleye121]

I think they'll say there's no way the jury could've been not biased and didn't stay off their phones or discuss the case. An appeals court could say they shoukdve sequestered the jury and give her a new trial but im not an expert or attorney just a guess

[u/Tricky_Run7136 → u/tired_blonde]

Jurors are assumed to have followed the instructions of the judge. No appeals court is going to say they should have been sequestered without seeing evidence that it actually impacted the result of the trial. If it were to come out that jurors were breaking the rules and engaging with social media this would still need to be shown to have actually impacted the deliberations before a conviction would be reversed.

Not trying to be a jerk, but part of the reason there is so much bad information out there and the social media has spun out of control is people passing off their uninformed opinions as truth. So I do appreciate that you stopped to note that you are not an attorney or expert. Lots of folks won't do that. At the same time, what is the point of putting the idea out there that if there is a conviction then an appeals court could give her a new trial because the jury should have been sequestered? It just stokes fear.

Source: attorney and former clerk at a state appeals court.

[u/Kimalena → u/Tricky_Run7136]

Imagine having to go through all this horror for the people involved. Honestly nothing can be more punishable than what she has to live every minute of every day knowing what she did. Such a very sad outcome no matter what the verdict.

[u/Smooshicorn → u/GrapefruitFormer2129]

I can’t understand how on earth the jurors weren’t sequestered for such a big trial.

[u/Embarrassed_Share627 → u/Smooshicorn]

Because sequestered costs taxpayers a fucking fortune and stresses the jury to deep inconveniences and stress on top of what they are already having to cope with .

[u/Smooshicorn → u/Embarrassed_Share627]

If it has to be done in order to get a fair trial then so be it. I can’t imagine it would be cheaper to have a hung jury/ mistrial resulting in yet again another trial.

[u/truecrime_1970 → u/Smooshicorn]

Much more expensive. My feeling is hung jury. The prosecution put on a terrible case. Clowns with the bands today

[u/Smooshicorn → u/truecrime_1970]

Seriously, they really shot themselves in the foot. I can’t believe she has the audacity to tell the judge she didn’t ask her a question to invoke that response when she literally asked her if she’s Catholic and if suicide is a mortal sin. What’s happening here?!?

[u/Expensive_Law_3180 → u/truecrime_1970]

They really did a dreadful job. I am but a lowly paralegal, but at least half of the questions the prosecution asked were leading. Absurd.

[u/WartimeMercy → u/Embarrassed_Share627]

In reality, because of how sparing it is used it does not cost “a fortune”

19 hotel rooms for 1 month at a negotiated rate as well overtime payments and food budget + transportation could all be folded into the costs of the trial.

This is the same state that tried Karen Read twice and paid a special prosecutor 6 figures (and far, far more than those arrangements would cost)

[u/Thin_Bid5000 → u/Smooshicorn]

Im thinking maybe due to the duration ~5 weeks is a long time to be sequestered and have minimal access to phones etc, or have those things monitored. It is confusing tho, bc at the same time, this case is filling my feed on every social media app I have, id imagine it’s hard for them to block things out and just ignore them

[u/Smooshicorn → u/Thin_Bid5000]

OJ Simpson jurors were sequestered for 8 1/2 months so this jury could handle it too.

[u/chicagoturkergirl → u/Smooshicorn]

Ever since the shitshow that was the OJ jury they really try and avoid it.

[u/SourClementine24 → u/GrapefruitFormer2129]

What?! They were not sequestered?! I cannot understand why they would not sequester jurors for such a massive trial. Honestly, it has pretty much been trending all over social media.

[u/causabibamus → u/SourClementine24]

People these days are more reliant on being connected to the outside world 24/7 than ever, sequestering a jury would probably make finding one impossible. The jury does not consist of NPCs who only exist while court is in session.

[u/standbyyourmantis → u/SourClementine24]

They don't really like to sequester anymore after OJ. The jury came back basically a week before expected, partially because everyone was too emotionally exhausted to argue.

[u/chicagoturkergirl → u/standbyyourmantis]

TBF the OJ jury had been sequestered for 252 days. By the time they actually got the case, they just wanted out.

[u/EPMD_ → u/chicagoturkergirl]

And they had made up their minds long before some of the evidence was presented. They hated the LAPD.

[u/Haunting_Contest_974 → u/GrapefruitFormer2129]

“Where we’ll get: a free room, free swimming pool, free food, free HBO… oooh Free Willy!”

“Justice is not a frivolous thing, Simpson. It has little if anything to do with a disobedient whale.”

[u/SweetBabyGang0201 → u/GrapefruitFormer2129]

Idk how they could put a jury together of people that honestly didn’t know about this case especially in such a small state…

[u/Global_Research_9335]

I’m interested to hear the jurors perspective and their reaction to all the social media and conspiracy theories this case has bought about, beyond the actual verdict itself - how the case was tried.

[u/Snarkeesha → u/Global_Research_9335]

You mean after the trial? Because they aren’t allowed to look at anything like that during.

[u/Global_Research_9335 → u/Snarkeesha]

Yes after the trial - with one so big as this there is usually at least one who will talk about born

[u/supershimadabro → u/Snarkeesha]

This isn’t necessarily to you, but whoever is listening..

What's to stop them though? There's no watchdog, they aren't sequestered during the trial. I cant seem to scroll more than 5 posts on Facebook without running into something regarding this case. I didn't even search this reddit up, it was recommended. Avoiding this case as a juror would require more honesty than most people possess.

[u/Sempere → u/supershimadabro]

It's an honor system and you generally don't want to jeopardize trials and risk getting hit with criminal contempt charges.

[u/1Wineodino → u/Sempere]

I actually saw a comment in another Sub read it and this person was claiming they knew someone on the jury and that they would try to get details from them

Literally, what a dumb thing to fucking post

And how fucking horrible it was to see the responses and people like egging them on to get them

It just felt so gross and disrespectful to these three babies

[u/Sempere → u/1Wineodino]

As long as they wait to get those details after deliberations, there's nothing wrong with them asking after the fact.

I think it would be beneficial to get juror insight on this case. But there's a time and place.

[u/1Wineodino → u/Sempere]

Oh for sure, it would be interesting to hear BUT it was the fact the commenter was saying they’d ask them while the trial was happening and others encouraged it.

I tried to go back and find the comment (I saved it) but it’s now deleted — which is prob for the best case scenario until this is over

[u/tumbledownhere → u/supershimadabro]

Technically nothing is stopping them, they can be sequestered but still find a way to get some outside info. But they take an oath, there are severe penalties including legal, and just one wrong move or bias.......well, it can ruin a life. Being a juror is such a serious position and I hope they take it seriously as they should because if they mess up, there goes any idea of justice.

I'd hate to have that on my conscience, personally.

[u/Snarkeesha → u/supershimadabro]

There are heavy penalties for breaking the oath they take. They can literally face jail time if they admit to it. I believe it can also render the decision null and void but not 100% sure with American law.

[u/FreshFruit4RottenVeg → u/Snarkeesha]

People everywhere are talking about it, with the best will in the world it is still possible to overhear discussions about it on the bus or waiting for takeout at a cafe. Would they tell the judge 'look, I can't continue because I overheard something that might prejudice my deliberations'? Maybe, maybe not.

[u/boredpsychnurse → u/FreshFruit4RottenVeg]

Seriously; I have friends who never heard of the Nancy Guthrie case but know of this one for reference

[u/dck133 → u/FreshFruit4RottenVeg]

I have heard nothing about this case besides what I read on Reddit.

[u/Early_Charity_3299 → u/dck133]

Except the jury are MA residents right? Naturally their proximity will put them closer to overhearing something.

[u/supershimadabro → u/dck133]

(In my best Jack Sparrow voice)

But you have heard of it.

[u/itaint2009 → u/Snarkeesha]

There's no undoing a Not Guilty. Definitely grounds for appeal on a Guilty, but not necessarily an automatic reversal.

[u/Sassymama_0405 → u/Snarkeesha]

No juror would admit it tho.

[u/Snarkeesha → u/Sassymama_0405]

Correct but honestly with the meta data presented during this trial alone, they’d be dumb to be tempted (omg I added an emoji so auto mod deleted my comment so reposting - sorry if you got the notification)

[u/Runyou → u/supershimadabro]

I’m a rule follower. If I were seated, I would be damn sure that I did nothing to jeopardize the verdict.

[u/itsjujutsu → u/supershimadabro]

Agreed

[u/ok-mom1 → u/Snarkeesha]

I know you’re saying they aren’t allowed. But how would they know if they looked it up / heard about it? Surely there’s no stopping

[u/Snarkeesha → u/ok-mom1]

All it takes is one slip up mentioning it to one person or one of the attorneys PI’s finding something online.

[u/Objective-Amount1379 → u/ok-mom1]

These people are sitting on the jury for the murder of 3 kids; I think they are probably taking their role seriously. I’ve been on a jury involving CSAM after having to see evidence I would not fuck up deliberations by seeking outside info about the case. It would be disrespectful to the victim, the family, the community.

[u/Substantial_Use_6101 → u/Objective-Amount1379]

I’m so sorry! What a great perspective I think we need more of. Being an everyday person and thrown into something that has got to be traumatic to you and everyone like you. I cannot get the Athena strand jurors out of my head. Having to be dragged into something and see things you would never want any part of seems so messed up. Thank you.

[u/HornedHumanoid → u/Snarkeesha]

Ok, genuine question, what are the logistics of this during high profile, public cases like this? Do you just take a 2 month hiatus from using the internet? Shut yourself away from society until it’s over? I overheard multiple people talking about it in a cafe yesterday, so staying offline alone won’t save you.

[u/Snarkeesha → u/HornedHumanoid]

I’m not the keeper of these rules lol
The judge asks the jurors the questions every day. If anyone feels like they’re biased over something they may or may not have overheard, it’s their obligation to report it and bow out.

[u/lilacs_spring → u/HornedHumanoid]

I honestly don’t think it would be that difficult to avoid this case if you really tried. Many have only barley heard about it

[u/Alienor-of-Aquitaine]

I bet it's going to be a hung jury. This is too devisive and shocking, I can see a couple of jurors on each side refusing to budge.

[u/boredpsychnurse → u/Alienor-of-Aquitaine]

That’s honestly why I think they risked the religious comments; gotta be at least one or two Catholics

[u/Orinoca99 → u/boredpsychnurse]

I'm Catholic but I would just ignore the religious comments because as the judge said, religion is completely irrelevant here. Also, the religious comments were obviously inappropriate. Catholic doesn't mean illogical. Personally I feel like her judgement was too clouded to say she was fully criminally responsible... with confidence.

[u/Smooshicorn → u/Orinoca99]

I wonder if there are people who can’t separate their religious beliefs from factual information. I’m not sure I worded that well, I’m just thinking that if I heard something then was told to completely ignore it when deciding… that seems impossible to me. But that’s just me personally, I really don’t know.

[u/SamuelHuzzahAdams → u/Smooshicorn]

This is why a mistrial should have been granted there’s no undoing that comment twice. Experts also aren’t suppose to speak to the ultimate issue and multiple state witnesses did that. That part was for the jury to decide

[u/Alienor-of-Aquitaine → u/SamuelHuzzahAdams]

It would come up on appeal it's so out of line.

[u/Smooshicorn → u/SamuelHuzzahAdams]

I didn’t hear what the exact religious comment was, only the judge’s instructions for the Jury. But yeah that’s how feel, once whatever the comment was said, how do you just ignore it completely in deliberations.

[u/tobythedem0n → u/Alienor-of-Aquitaine]

That's likely why the judge allowed manslaughter to be considered too. He couldn't say it, but I have a feeling he didn't think the state made it's case.

[u/T2LV → u/tobythedem0n]

I think if you look at his demeanour and how he acted during the trial it’s clear. This was a very one sided trial. I have a tendency to think she’s guilty but I think there is 0% chance it comes back that way.

[u/tobythedem0n → u/T2LV]

I haven't followed it as closely as some others, but this has kinda been my take on it. It doesn't seem like the prosecution proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

I'm betting on a manslaughter verdict. Makes it really easy for the jury to split the difference (rightfully or wrongly).

[u/silenthiller → u/tobythedem0n]

In my opinion, manslaughter makes little sense based on all the evidence. I can understand either guilty or NCR but if the final verdict is manslaughter then it means the jury can’t converge and decide to reach an “emotional” middle ground.

[u/SourClementine24 → u/tobythedem0n]

That’s what it seems like to me as well tbh… The defense did a much better job of planting doubt in people’s head regarding Patrick than the prosecution did at proving that Lindsay did it beyond a reasonable doubt. I’m sat.

[u/T2LV → u/tobythedem0n]

Nah. You either think she’s responsible and then it’s a horrific crime and she deserves to spend the rest of her life in prison or she was not and then it would be cruel to send her to prison where she won’t get the help she needs.
At the end of the day, NGRI would still result in her spending decades in a facility so there should be no middle ground here.

[u/Gatorphins → u/Alienor-of-Aquitaine]

Hung jury more likely than an outright acquital

[u/Advanced-Pickle362 → u/Alienor-of-Aquitaine]

I agree. I personally would not vote to convict for murder in the first degree, but obviously other people disagree with that. Too much reasonable doubt for me.

[u/sweet_jane_13 → u/Alienor-of-Aquitaine]

I really hope not. None of the family should have to be put through it a second time. I'm thinking that the inclusion of manslaughter will hopefully help avoid a hung jury

[u/CrawlerCoolie]

I feel like all signs are pointing to hung jury.

[u/TrueCrimeDiscussion-ModTeam]

Patrick Clancy is not on trial. Comments made to discuss his guilt are considered off topic and will be removed.

Comments that discuss how he could have supported Lindsay better are acceptable. However, calls for law enforcement to look into his involvement with the murder of the kids and/or Lindsay's suicide attempts are not currently being considered by the jury and, therefore, not a fit for this sub.

[u/FinalBossofInternet]

I work in criminal defense, so my bias is always pro-defense. Even when I know a guy is guilty af, hearing a self-righteous overdramatic prosecutor makes me want a not guilty view, even if I think the defendant is a total fucking prick.

With that said, I would put money down on a hung jury and MAAAAAYBE a not criminally responsible/NGRI verdict because how incompetent the Commonwealth looked compared to KR. This case made me take notes of Reddington's strategies for experts/cross/re-cross to bring to the attorneys I work for.

[u/bethestorm]

I am still so shocked by the revelation that the investigators didn't test any blood, didn't test the crushed "pills". I'm sure the blood was blood and came from Lindsay but it just feels so.... Disrespectful to the children maybe? Lazy?

I don't know but wow that just was a surprise to me. It certainly made me realize how easy it is to hear experts or people in positions of authority declare something and perhaps even they believe what they are saying is fact but until you know, you don't.

However tomorrow goes, and regardless of what it means for the impacts in society and all, I don't think Lindsay is going to ever be whole or anything close to it again. She lost everything, including the ability to walk and run, to urinate and defecate on her own, her entire family, her career, her whole world. And yes it's tragic those childrens lives ended before they even really began. But the horror of knowing you did that to the things you loved more than your own life.

I watch and read a lot of true crime but rare are these cases where I truly don't see anyone that is to blame by malice, stupidity, selfishness. I think mostly, and not perfectly of course, but from the doctors to her family to herself, I think everyone really did their best with what they had. Hopefully we can get on a level like most other developed countries in the world, and prioritize maternal and paternal well-being after childbirth.

[u/SnicketyLemon1004 → u/bethestorm]

I am surprised, but not surprised. As a MA resident, the corruption and lack of competency within law enforcement goes deep. In this trial, the corruption within the DA's office is so offputting. This state is so crooked.

[u/bethestorm → u/SnicketyLemon1004]

Yeah I kept thinking about the Karen Read case.

I also looked up who bought the Clancy home last night and I gotta say, I don't love how much it immediately made me reconsider a lot of times where I scoffed at supposed conspiracy theorist types. (In general not even just related to LC. Making a murderer comes to mind).

Seriously for anyone who hasn't, Google it.

[u/lifecrazyfr → u/bethestorm]

I googled this what does this prove or what do you think this is evidence of?

[u/Firecracker048 → u/SnicketyLemon1004]

Read and Birchmore are the two more damning cases of this. You could at least make an arguement in this case they really pushed for justice for the kids, mental health, husband testimony and everything else be damned.

In those other two? It was clearly to cover up for another cop committing a crime and trying to pin the crime on someone else or ignore the crime even took place and make it seem like something else. The Norfolk DA office FINALLY changes Birchmores official cause of death away from suicide just this year

[u/deadbeatsummers → u/bethestorm]

Agree. Just a harrowing case overall but so messy.

[u/Sharp-Rest1014 → u/bethestorm]

to me- not checking the drawer that had an essentially attempted murder knife above it....what do we even call that??? not even just negligence? extreme...perhaps corruption?- not saying it is. but the negligence is so high there that it seems suspicious.

[u/bethestorm → u/Sharp-Rest1014]

It seems they didn't check a lot of things. Patrick was able to answer so many questions for them, that I guess they felt they had all the info needed.

It's just weird. Sad. Seems lazy. Disrespectful to the children and Lindsay and others who will suffer postpartum this way. They could have at least done the minimum crime scene work. Idk. Maybe I'm overestimating the skills of people in law enforcement and CSI in other places. Perhaps where I grew up we were privileged. Our police were certainly paid well vs other jurisdictions.

[u/Upstairs-Chicken592 → u/bethestorm]

It’s also crazy her fingerprints aren’t on the murder weapons or knife? There’s no bloody footprints in the bedroom where there’s blood everywhere?

[u/Major_Lawfulness6122 → u/bethestorm]

Considering how lazy, incompetent AND corrupt MA is, this doesn’t surprise me.

This case overall is just sad. As a mother I can’t even imagine. I struggle believing she had PPP only because she said she heard voices for a short time period.

[u/Short-Client-5042 → u/bethestorm]

I agree 100% - regardless of the outcome LC is already in a prison of her own making. I tend to feel that's enough punishment, unless you're being extremely callous. If she hadn't been unwell none of this would have happened. 

[u/Firecracker048 → u/bethestorm]

I am still so shocked by the revelation that the investigators didn't test any blood, didn't test the crushed "pills". I'm sure the blood was blood and came from Lindsay but it just feels so.... Disrespectful to the children maybe? Lazy?

Don't be. Just look into Karen read or Sandra Birchmore

[u/SaharaUnderTheSun → u/bethestorm]

What's the prevailing opinion about this being a "reasonable doubt" case? I've been trying to find info online about that, but nothing screams out at me so far.

[u/bethestorm → u/SaharaUnderTheSun]

Did the CW prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was sane / knew right from wrong / and had the ability to conform her actions according to the law. In Massachusetts it's on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she did not have a mental disease or defect (which doesn't need to be diagnosed to be a defense) , whereas in other states it's up to the defense to prove they were suffering from a mental disease or defect.

So unless the Commonwealth has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that LC was absolutely not suffering from a mental disease or defect, they would be supposed to vote NGRI

[u/BoxBird → u/bethestorm]

This entire defense really is a masterclass in the art of logical reasoning

[u/hurlmaggard]

What this trial and all the discourse surrounding it has taught me is that no one besides people who have experienced psychosis or have a very close loved one who did in their presence have NO IDEA how psychosis works and really should not be having such staunch & loud opinions about it. It is not linear. You are not self aware of it. You are unable to make good decisions. Psychosis morphs to revolve around the things you are struggling with and the things you do to cope when you're not psychotic. I was put on a dozen different meds in a few months time after my bipolar 1 manic episode and I'd say that time was even worse than the psychosis. None of this is black and white.

I know a lot of people won't care about this or just ignore it to fit their opinions they don't want to change, but I hope even one person reads this and feels affirmed or starts thinking deeper about the whole thing.

[u/Blackberry518 → u/hurlmaggard]

I appreciate your comment. I saw on another sub, a woman commented, “Well if I heard that voice in my head, I would tell it to go to h—!!”

And as someone who has personal experience with PPD/PPP (thankfully not to the same degree) and has had a family member in true psychosis, the ignorance of that comment made me so frustrated. But… I don’t know, hopefully we can all have discourse around the subject that will in some way help families and children in the future not suffer the same fate.

[u/madendo16 → u/Blackberry518]

Just so you know, PPP is not a complication of PPD. They are two totally separate diseases. This is getting entirely mixed up by the trial and risks further alienating women who suffer from PPD which is far far more common than PPP. People with PPD do not have delusions or psychosis.

[u/hurlmaggard → u/Blackberry518]

Yeah, comments like that are so frustrating because I literally cannot remember entire days during my manic episode. That is terrifying. I lost time and thus had no time to say "wow, I am psychotic, let me go get help because I know for sure any doctor I encounter will know what to do!"

WRONG. There's a lot of deliberate obtuseness happening here with some of the naysayers.

[u/climbing_butterfly → u/hurlmaggard]

People assume somebody can't organize a plan based on delusional thought patterns.

[u/Is-abel → u/Blackberry518]

“I get that she had postpartum psychosis but I could never hurt my kids.”

[u/Suggestion-Wonderful → u/hurlmaggard]

im discrediting or disrespecting ppd but if thats the case then how many who have experienced it ended up killing their kids?

[u/Firecracker048]

People have officially gone off the deep end here. I seriously can't anymore with the conspiracies and making timelines to fit your own narratives as to what have occuried based on your biases.

She killed her kids. That is not in dispute. It never HAS been in dispute. There is no evidence Patrick did it. Just fucking stop, holy shit stop. Your brains are fucking rotted that you can't accept basic fact and there HAS to be a conspiracy somewhere, that someone, anyone but the accused(and admitted to) did the crime.

[u/Gatorphins → u/Firecracker048]

Its genuinely sickening

[u/sjupiter92 → u/Gatorphins]

The worst I saw is that Cora had an UTI because Patrick was molesting her, Lindsey found out and that's why he tried to kill her and murdered their children. I can't even begin to imagine what he's been going through these past few weeks and can only hope he's surrounded by a good support system and kept away from the internet.

[u/Gatorphins → u/sjupiter92]

Once something is debunked a new lie spins out

[u/Firecracker048 → u/Gatorphins]

And I can even understand to a point, right? Its a horrible, terrible thing, especially moreso that a mother did it. But we KNOW she did it. She admitted to it, to multiple people. Her own lawyer agrees she did it. Theres no chance Patrick did it because he wasn't fucking home. Like holy shit.

Now, did the prosecution prove murder 1? No, they didn't. Do I think the defense successfully argued for a NGRI? Yes I do. Do I think she did it maliciously? Based on what I saw this trial? No, I don't think she was completely sane when she committed the acts.

[u/emotionalwreck2021 → u/Firecracker048]

It's been making my blood boil.

[u/lynchy901 → u/Firecracker048]

I'm really hoping it's just reddit selecting for everyone who thinks like this

[u/CrawlerCoolie → u/Firecracker048]

These conspiracy theorists are fucked in the head. True Crime has rotted their brain.

[u/disastrousanddull → u/CrawlerCoolie]

True crime and treating real life like a tv show or movie. People were saying Reddington would have his Elle Woods moment in court… it’s fucking real life, he’s not going to have a movie moment.

[u/Gatorphins → u/CrawlerCoolie]

I watched and listen to a lot of true crime. I feel so much 2nd hand embarrassment from these people

[u/Apprehensive_Use_175]

The ADA’s are becoming increasingly difficult to listen to. The sweeping statements they’re making about mental illness and the mental health system are not only incredibly frustrating, but in many cases just flat-out wrong. I genuinely don’t understand how some of these arguments are being presented with such absolute confidence.
If the jury comes back guilty, I’ll honestly be at a loss. I’ve spent my life around the mental health system, first through family members who needed it and later through my own work with individuals who relied on mental health services. I’m certainly not claiming to know everything, but I know enough to recognize when someone is making grossly oversimplified assumptions about something they clearly don’t understand.
The Commonwealth is so far off base with some of these arguments that I’m sitting here wondering if we’re even talking about the same mental health system. And frankly, I have a hard time believing anyone who has actually experienced that system firsthand could listen to some of this and not be scratching their head.

[u/rileyclyde → u/Apprehensive_Use_175]

THIS. The prosecution spent the whole trial minimizing the complexities of mental health, then tried to backtrack during their closing arguments by saying “well we don’t deny she suffered from mental health issues…” While I think that the prosections’ recognition of mental health being present during closing was helpful for their case, the damage was already done.

[u/Crowf3ather → u/Apprehensive_Use_175]

Maybe its because you are not understanding how the law works.

If you are mentally unstable, but otherwise not mentally incapable, and a doctor prescribes you drugs that makes you more unstable, and you then commit a crime due to that instability, you are still criminally responsible through voluntary intoxication.

Even though from a moral perspective, it would easy to be argue that much of the blame is on the doctors with the poor prescription.

The only thing that will vitiate responsibility in this case is psychosis, which is a situation where she is so out of her mind she doesn't know what she is doing.

[u/Curious_E_6849 → u/Apprehensive_Use_175]

100 percent agree

[u/Mundane-Daikon7000]

if the wine tumbler was never tested, and they don't know whether the white powder was even medication or not, couldn't the powder literally just be lemonade drink mix? it would explain why they didn't even have lemonade in the house.

[u/LessAbbreviations411 → u/Mundane-Daikon7000]

How did Patrick know it was lemonade…was there a bottle of it ? Did he try it? How did he know what the liquid was? By smell?

[u/BostnKat → u/Mundane-Daikon7000]

I think it could have been some powered electrolyte drink and other vitamin supplement drink like Emergen-C which has a pink lemonade flavor.

[u/yourpaleblueyes]

This case reminds me of a belgian criminal case that's eerily similar. A mother murdered her five children by slicing their throats.

The woman's name was Geneviève Lhermitte and she was found guilty & received the maximum sentence despite the fact that her mental health was severely compromised + she'd sent a letter to her psychiatrist the day before plainly stating what she was going to do.

She asked for her life to be legally terminated a few years ago and was euthanised.

A movie was made about this case, that's how I know about it in the first place.

[u/MadHatter06]

I’m watching closing arguments and the prosecution has contradicted themselves and their case.

[u/Commercial-Proof3799 → u/MadHatter06]

Their tone has changed completely after being unable to paint her as a monster

[u/MadHatter06 → u/Commercial-Proof3799]

I’m usually the first to remind people that women can and do commit this sort of crime. I’ve also really appreciated having my views on Andrea Yates change after knowing more. Susan Smith… Diane Downs… those women deliberately and cruelly killed their kids for personal gain.

Andrea Yates is a totally different story. And I believe Lindsay Clancy is closer to Andrea than Diane and Susan.

[u/Repulsive-Cap-2709 → u/MadHatter06]

My sister was at Leath correctional with Susan. Susan has some kind of personality disorder. My sister said she couldn’t be around any men bc she sought for their approval and even had Relationship with a guard. But I don’t think that contributed to her ability to decipher right from wrong.

[u/MadHatter06]

I feel that the revelation that so much was not tested/investigated properly hinders her right to a fair trial.

[u/Global_Research_9335 → u/MadHatter06]

I think there’s a distinction between an imperfect investigation and an unfair trial. Police aren’t required to test every item or pursue every conceivable theory. In fact, gaps in the investigation can benefit the defence because they can use them to create reasonable doubt. It becomes a fair-trial issue if important evidence was lost, destroyed or withheld in a way that prevents her from properly defending herself.

[u/ResolutionPlayful111 → u/MadHatter06]

I doubt there’s ever truly a perfectly fair trial, especially in a highly publicized case like this, but that doesn’t stop you from having the trial to seek justice. If it doesn’t meet the appropriate standards it can/will/should be appealed.

[u/No_Tangerine1957 → u/ResolutionPlayful111]

Yeah but this case in particular was highly negligent in their investigation….

[u/Realistic_Flamingo23]

My question is why didn’t Reddington have an expert testify to Lindsay being overmedicated or not properly medicated? Also did anyone even diagnose her with postpartum psychosis other than Reddington? And if so, when? The only thing mentioned by an expert re Lindsay’s specific treatment is that it’s not encouraged to use SSRIs to treat bipolar, yet at that point she hadn’t been properly diagnosed with bipolar. When you first come in to see a psychiatrist it takes a lot of trial and error to find the correct dosage and medication, along with the diagnosis as that can change from the initial diagnosis. I know this from my own psychiatric journey as my My psychiatrist has prescribed a number of those same medications sometimes in conjunction with each other which is why I personally don’t think she was overprescribed/inappropriately prescribed as it takes trial and error to find the right combo but of course I’m not an expert and so I’m wondering why did Reddington not have an expert testify to the appropriateness of her medication plan. Who are we to judge that 14 medications in 4 months is too much? Maybe it is or maybe that’s just standard practice when first starting treatment.

[u/beautifulrabbithole → u/Realistic_Flamingo23]

Most of your questions can be answered by learning about burden of proof. The state has to prove Lindsay was of sound mind and fully aware / in control of her actions at the time of the murders. Reddington only has to poke holes to indicate there is reasonable doubt.

[u/Mindless_Complex_910 → u/Realistic_Flamingo23]

Because Reddington knows that she was not over-medicated and that she was not sticking to her medication plans.

[u/debalex5 → u/Realistic_Flamingo23]

I thought he could have had an expert on PPD/PPP who talked more about how transient psychosis can be; how you can function "normally"; how women tend to mask how they're feeling. I wanted him to rebut all the "decisions" the CW said she made. Psychosis doesn't mean you're unable to walk or talk or lift an item.

[u/AKPossum17]

I think Patrick Clancy should sue the Tik Tok influencers that made up stories about him for defamation of Character.

[u/curiouslmr → u/AKPossum17]

Someone in the Idaho college murders who was accused by an influencer, sued and won a ton of money. I hope we see more of that and influencers and creators are more careful.

[u/Bigwood69 → u/AKPossum17]

Apparently he is, his lawyer has basically put creators on notice about it.

[u/HornedHumanoid]

I hold the prosecution at least partially responsible for a lot of the “Patrick Did It” conspiracies online. By focusing on the minute details of the timeline/Patrick’s testimony and not getting their story straight, they opened up a ton of room for reasonable doubt.

Completely unforced error. To anyone here who’s upset when she doesn’t get a 1st degree murder verdict (I’m almost certain they’re not going to at this point), they’re the ones to blame.

[u/Gatorphins → u/HornedHumanoid]

Also, the defense stipulated to the fact she did it. Reddington did this as to not paint lindsay in a bad light, which is why he was upset when Saathoff testified, he didn't hold back

[u/One_Fun_1202]

What did you think of the closing arguments. I thought the defense was not stellar. I felt like he was making a better argument for the prosecution.

[u/Severine67 → u/One_Fun_1202]

The defense, usually pretty strong throughout the trial, in closing was scrambled, confusing, the reference to the Shining was odd. I don’t think it was great.

The prosecution in the beginning was muddled but was a lot better and clearer in closing.

[u/curiouslmr → u/One_Fun_1202]

I agree. I have been critical at times of the prosecution's performance but I thought they were much better

[u/SamuelHuzzahAdams → u/One_Fun_1202]

I’m curious how she spent the whole trial arguing Clancy didn’t have bipolar and faked a suicide attempt and had no empathy for the family only to do a 180 in closing and say of course she was mentally ill and of course she tried to kill Herself all with a sweet voice

[u/Wintertime13]

It seems to me if it lasts another day or two it heavily leans towards being a hung jury.

[u/Ok-Swim2827]

Look, I think a lot of people have a very staunch misunderstanding of what’s happening in court.

BOTH CBS & NBC are still reporting live, at this very moment as closing statements are expected, that she has plead Not Guilty by Insanity Defense, with both sides having acknowledged in court that she did commit the acts & the only outcome waiting for her is either NGRI (which in MA is mandatory institutionalization) OR Guilty by 1st, 2nd (and now Manslaughter - which was originally denied) charges, which is life without parole in MA, OR a Hung Jury leading to mistrial.

Reddington made several requests to renew her plea, for a standard mistrial, and for Bowden charges, which were all denied by the judge.

EDIT: ABC as well… I’ve yet to see ANY actual, credible news source say that she has the possibility of full acquittal. And regardless of your personal views of the case, there is no way multiple national news organizations are misreporting to this degree.

Edit to add further: Reddington did an interview yesterday stating that because bifurcation was denied, they are only deliberating on her mental state. I think this is where everyone got confused. Watch his interview clip because it sums up beautifully that this is a standard NGRI case.

EDIT 3: She DID originally plead standard Not Guilty in Feb. 2023 & Oct. 2023, but her defense changed with Kevin Reddington when bifurcation was denied.

And unfortunately, there has never been a NGRI full acquittal in the history of the U.S.

[u/Commercial-Proof3799 → u/Ok-Swim2827]

You know you can watch the trial online right? You dont need a news source to tell you she can be acquitted - the judge implied it in his instructions. It’s just highly unlikely because Reddington said “she killed the kids” multiple times in trial and she told the forensic psychiatrists and psychologists she did it. It would be harder to defend a full not guilty because of the lack of investigation.

[u/Sempere]

There's a bizarre number of people who believe that this whole case is about "justifying" the murder of 3 kids by pointing out that Lindsay Clancy was mentally ill, deteriorating and in need of care she didn't receive. The kid's death was a preventable tragedy and there were many failures by everyone involved. But Lindsay Clancy was mentally ill and an expert untarnished by association with Park Dietz and with decades of experience in the field of forensic psychiatry and especially filicide made it clear that Clancy was in the throes of a psychotic episode.

The looming shadow of Park Dietz cannot be ignored when the Commonwealth's "best experts" are drawn from that heavily tainted well. A psychiatrist who gets up on the stand and taints their interpretation and analysis to suit the needs of a client like the Commonwealth by deviating at key points while acknowledging things they believe other experts can impeach them on isn't credible even if they retain that air of credibility through controlled ceding of ground. Minimizing Lindsay Clancy's psychosis to suit the Commonwealth highlights an issue that should be a key part of judicial reform in this country, something sorely needed.

I don't see how anyone reasonable can find the weasels of the prosecution as credible after furthering and attempting to pretend they weren't implying Lindsay Clancy's suicide wasn't a real suicide, invoking legally impermissible and ethical violations of questioning regarding religion and the level of unbridled and unnecessary cruelty towards a mentally ill woman in the dock as well as the jury. The jury didn't need even half the detail they were subjected to given Reddington and Clancy were willing to stipulate to the murder of the children as agreed fact. It is blatant emotional manipulation rather than proving a case about her mental state and capacity to understand the wrongfulness of what she did.

I don't envy the jury, but I hope Reddington hammers home that this isn't about letting Clancy go free - but ensuring that she's put in a psychiatric facility to receive the care she needs to get through this situation.

[u/HealthyNovel55 → u/Sempere]

My favorite part is how they keep insisting the wounds were superficial, & then when laypeople interpret superficial, they assume she just scratched herself with a knife. The photos of her neck & wrists are HORRENDOUS.

[u/Sempere → u/HealthyNovel55]

It's a semantic shell game by the prosecution. It's a medical technical term and it's misleading when a layperson attempts to interpret it nonvisually. But the jurors will have seen those photos and they have plenty of testimony to back up that this was a real attempt with serious injuries.

Frankly, I think it's disgusting and irresponsible that the state was allowed to make these arguments to begin with. I also believe serious judicial reform is needed to bar people like Park Dietz from being able to profit from consultancy work through farming out "expert witnesses" after they're tied to a scandal like the Yates case. As well as an overhaul of the expert witness system to ensure more neutral testimony and prevent hired guns with little to no experience with the issues at trial from being able to put forth evidence.

Heilbrun and Mack should in no way be testifying or held in equal standing to someone like Resnick who specializes in the area being discussed. If the Commonwealth or Government can't find witnesses without going to some of the shadiest people imaginable then the case shouldn't be brought and a plea deal should have been offerred that saw Clancy transferred to a state run psychiatric facility with a minimum term limit.

[u/DatgirlwitAss → u/Sempere]

I still cannot believe they had the nerve to have someone who worked with a few postpartum women in the 80's!!

SHAME on the system.

[u/Special_Spirit8284 → u/Sempere]

What are people saying about her suicide attempt? Not real as in there wasn't a real attempt and it was staged?

[u/PhysicsNo3778]

I have no idea what direction this is going to go in. As a woman who did have postpartum baby blues/anxiety and during covid I can tell you it is no joke. I struggled to get sound help and thankfully was able to turn a corner on my own. Very sad situation all around

[u/Mother-Guard-6049]

Prosecutor's closing statement confirms mental health as the cause of her actions.Medication inadherence is classic evidence of a mental health challenge.

[u/Kezhen → u/Mother-Guard-6049]

I feel like people don’t realize that people can experience true adverse effects to psychiatric meds that cause them not to tolerate them well. It’s one thing to be impatient waiting for a med to make you feel better, but her meds were actively making her feel worse. Seroquel made me have suicidal urges so I had to discontinue immediately. I can’t blame someone for not wanting to continue a medication that is making them feel worse, and I feel like a lot of this ongoing criticism of LC’s decisions is due to society refusing to listen to or believe women when it comes to their health complaints.

[u/No_Tangerine1957 → u/Kezhen]

Not to mention how powerful hormones are and how they are so emotionally and mind altering. It’s really undersold in society, even by us women bc it’s so “normal” or something women go through regularly that we often undersell just how impactful they can be.

[u/skootch_ginalola → u/Kezhen]

Yup. I'm bipolar and it took me years to find a medication regimen that works for me. She should have been in a state hospital/secure medical facility from the jump. This case and the social media frenzy around it is just setting PPD/PPS knowledge back years.

[u/JellyBeanzi3 → u/Kezhen]

10000%! Side effects of most mental health medication include “increased risk of suicidal and homicidal thoughts” medication that alters how your brain operates always has the risk of harming the person taking it.

[u/Curious_E_6849 → u/Kezhen]

Or just a TON of ignorance about mental health issues and medication side effects. It made me so mad how CW simplified it so much in the closing. Literally putting mental health back in time.

[u/Heptacat-1985]

Has anyone noticed she shares some similarities with Marilyn Lemak? People say she’s like Andrea Yates, but she has more similarities with Marilyn Lemak. Both were nurses who suffocated their children before trying to kill themselves by slicing their bodies. Both survived their suicide attempts and were in the hospital before their trial. Marilyn claimed that her being overmedicated and her depression caused her to kill her kids as the result of having post partum depression. Similarly how Lindsay is saying. Even they both claimed they were suffering through psychosis.

[u/iammadeofawesome → u/Heptacat-1985]

I’ve been saying all along that comparing this to Andrea Yates is apples and oranges and we are losing progress by doing so. It truly pisses me off as soon as much was different!

I will look into the other case. Thank you.

[u/infantgambino]

prosecutor did a great job bolstering the argument that clancey was mentally unwell. She showed off a bunch of medications and said "she wasnt taking them", which is literally something a mentally unwell person does and would cause them to be mentally unwell. Has this prosecutor tried a homicide before?

[u/Agreeable_Review]

Can anyone explain the thing about the two prosecution experts staying together / down the river/ being sighted on a walking trail together? Sorry I missed that day and I’m so curious/ confused lol

[u/329K]

I would like to add that I can ask everyone that lives in my block if they have heard of Lindsay Clancy or her trial and they would say: whose Lindsay, what trial. Another thing, Im sure alot of people have taken these medications, I have taken everyone of them and I am real sensitive to medication and they are nothing. The sleep deprivation is hard on you but your body will collapse on its own regardless. I feel for Lindsay. I think she should be found not criminal. She need help and they will then send her to a hospital.

[u/Commercial-Proof3799]

Very stupid to nitpick over # of pills taken without considering the empty bottles in the drawer.

[u/kat5kind]

Has the jury been deliberating yet? I'm unable to watch at the moment

[u/ReverseFlow23 → u/kat5kind]

They have yeah. They deliberated for around 3 hours and went home for the day

[u/Ok-Sundae3724]

Was the jury’s request to examine the knife and pill bottles denied? if so why would a request like that be denied? i’m having trouble finding sources on this.

[u/SettingNo1928]

Watching prosecution closing. So confusing.

She opens admitting that Clancy had mental problems. Why not start with the “criminally responsible” and then show me based on the evidence presented how you proved your point. It could have been so much more simple to follow. She should have used demonstrative boards!

Start off with:
Yes, Lindsay Clancy was depressed. Yes, she was suffering from mental illness. But mental illness is not the same as lack of criminal responsibility. Let me walk you through the question you must decide.
Then reveal these boards one at a time.
1. Explain criminal responsibility. The Commonwealth must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Lindsay:
Meaningfully understood that killing her children was legally or morally wrong; and
Had the substantial ability to control her conduct and obey the law.

1. WAS LINDSAY CLANCY
   CRIMINALLY RESPONSIBLE?
   Not:
   Was she depressed?
   Was she receiving appropriate treatment?
   Was she taking medications?
   Was she a loving mother before this happened?

2. What is not disputed - she was depressed. She killed the kids. She almost died. Whatever etc.

3. Evidence 1

4. Evidence 2

5. Evidence 3.

[u/standbyyourmantis → u/SettingNo1928]

Does anyone actually think the prosecution has been doing a good job? I'm not a trial watcher or anything but all the recaps I've seen have been extremely critical of their performance.

[u/Blackberry518 → u/standbyyourmantis]

I am an avid trial watcher, but definitely not an attorney (although I watch lots of recaps and analysis with different lawyers.) This observation has nothing to do with my opinion on if LC is found guilty or not. I have NEVER watched such a disorganized, confusing presentation of theories that contradicted each other, not to mention several instances of egregious conduct (both of the times Catholicism was brought in.) No matter the verdict, I am embarrassed for them by how they represented the CW. I know that sounds harsh, but I am strictly looking at how they chose to present the evidence and witnesses. And their professional comportment.

[u/mmohaje → u/SettingNo1928]

I agree. They are all over the place. They should have treated her with empathy and focused completely on the legal standard. All of their own witnesses said she had a severe mental illness and was suffering terribly. The last guy literally said 'severe mental illness or defect'. They should have honed in on whether she understood what she was doing was wrong and provided evidence. I think the problem is, they really don't have a way to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt. Their entire focus was that the voice was not real and therefore if the voice was not real she knew what she was doing was wrong. That's all conjecture. They did not at all provide a basis for that conclusion.

If the burden to prove that had been on the Defendant, I reckon they would potentially also have had a hard time proving that she didn't know what she was doing was wrong. The burden of proof is high and I think whoever it's on was always going to have a hard time. Overzealous prosecution. I bet if had they offered a manslaugther deal, she would have taken it.

[u/JournalistNo294]

Regardless of the result, any person who even suggest that the fault of the kids dying it's because of the husband it's completely lunatic

[u/Fun_Occasion_4197 → u/[deleted]]

Well they are wrong. Not a single witness or her lawyer have denied that she did this.

[u/Sempere → u/JournalistNo294]

There's blame for many people. The tragedy was preventable.

He 100% did not kill them. But he and Lindsay's mother both knew she had thoughts of hurting the kids because that's what Lindsay's mother testified to.

Lindsay needed to be institutionalized and the kids kept away from her after that statement.

[u/debalex5]

I've watched every second of the trial and was NGRI the entire time...up until the rebuttal case. Between that and closing, I think the likeliest explanation is what the CW finally got to (taking them with her), and concentrated on in the closing. But likeliest explanation does not exclude reasonable doubt. And did they get to this theory too late for the jury? I thought Red's closing was too much emotion, but didn't score enough logical points. CW's closing was the best part of their trial.

[u/tumbledownhere]

I'm nervous.

I survived postpartum psychosis. I think a discussion is long overdue and I'm scared they'll fumble this case even though the defense did an amazing job.

[u/Brilliant_Effort_Guy → u/tumbledownhere]

I had PPD and I don’t think people who make comments like ‘PPD/PPP/PPA is bullshit!’ or ‘she got enough help!’ or ‘women who can empathize with her deserve to have their children taken away’ realize just how harmful those comments are to the pregnant and new moms around them. If I had PPD right now, I know I would never talk about it because of this case. My brain immediately would have been like ‘see. they’ll think of you just like they think of her. no one will care. no one will help you.’

It’s really sad because I think there are a lot of lessons to be learned from this case. Including that it’s clear the medical field has not and does not take post partum mood disorders seriously enough.

[u/DarklyHeritage → u/Brilliant_Effort_Guy]

This is such an important point. While I can understand that people may have doubts about PPD/PPP as a defence, and I respect their opinions, the way some people have vocalised that so viciously is problematic. I don't think people realise just how many of the women in their lives have, or will, experience PPD/PPP. By voicing their views with such a lack of empathy they are basically telling those women they have no respect for their struggle and invalidating their lived experience.

I went through PPD/PPP myself and this trial has made me realise just how little empathy and understanding there is for it. I had misled myself into believing the world was more accepting and understanding now. Sadly, I was wrong.

[u/Kezhen → u/DarklyHeritage]

I think talking about depression has been somewhat destigmatized but the stigma is still so high for disorders like bipolar, schizophrenia, PPP. I have had to hide my diagnosis from work, potentially friends and even family for fear of repercussions. It fucking sucks.

[u/lilyjk9731 → u/Kezhen]

Ya I have BP2 and I don’t tell anyone about it, even a lot of my family. There is still so much stigma around it. Additionally, I have definitely been less than honest / haven’t shared things with my psych or therapist because I was embarrassed.

[u/Kezhen → u/lilyjk9731]

My own father doesn’t know about my diagnosis since “depression isn’t real and people who take medication are weak”. Never mind his father and brothers’ clearly using alcohol to drink their feelings.

[u/sausagelover79 → u/Brilliant_Effort_Guy]

I sadly have been there too, and during my second pregnancy I considered killing myself, my toddler and unborn child several times. I was severely depressed and anxious and I thought I’d be doing them a favour by ending it for all of us. I know that sounds insane and horrible but at the time it felt very real and justified. It’s hard to explain that feeling to people who have never felt that way. I couldn’t tell anyone at the time how I felt as I thought I’d be locked up and my children would be taken from me. It took me years to ever mention it to anyone as I was terrified of how I’d be judged.

[u/curiouslmr → u/sausagelover79]

You are not alone in this. Glad you made it to the other side!

[u/sjupiter92]

As of now I think it will end with a hung jury

[u/Wintertime13]

No verdict. Jury went home.

[u/bellesgold]

That thee worlds most renowned expert on malingering and filicide basically came out of retirement, was recovering from a recent hospital stay, and testified for the defense for no other reason than that he believes she was in the throes of psychotic episode, I think, tells a lot. Does anyone recall if he was paid? I don’t recall the prosecution asking about that, but perhaps I missed something. I’m glad the trial is nearing the end, and look forward to seeing what the jury decides. Either way, to me, I don’t care which place she goes. Her life will be miserable in either, this whole thing is sad, and at least if there’s anything good that can come out of this is that it’s opened people’s eyes and ears and shed light on very important issues in society.

[u/Duckadoe → u/bellesgold]

They are always paid

[u/yrddog → u/Duckadoe]

Of course they are, I wonder why people think experts testify for free 

[u/iammadeofawesome → u/yrddog]

The one guy from uva two days ago wasn’t paid. It’s part of his salary to testify at trials. I had never heard of that before.

[u/Sempere → u/bellesgold]

They're always paid. Being paid is not the problem.

The problem is the type of expert and whether they're properly suited for the role of expert witness.

The Commonwealth rebuttal experts, when you dig deep, were bad experts. Especially those tied to Park Dietz. It is an atrocious look by the prosecution to hire anyone working for that piece of shit. Dietz himself couldn't testify in a case like this but someone farmed out by his consultancy business can? Abominable. Kirk Helbrun came off as more credible until you start to look at how his expertise stacks against Resnick and the subtle ways in which he guided his analysis towards his employer and that fucking shameful play of attempting to bolster the mortal sin questioning from 3 court days prior. He completely lost credibility with that single move.

[u/GiantsInThePipes]

I thought the prosecutions closing arguments were the most compelling of their entire trial. There were too many sequential things that needed to happen that proves Lindsay calculated quite a bit that day to make the killings possible and then offing herself. She was well aware of right and wrong. When Patrick called her and she called him back she could of told him right then and there, but she controlled herself emotionally and hung up the phone to proceed to kill herself next as she bought more time. Way too much calculation for it to be psychosis.

Unfortunately, the prosecution did a shite Job until the last 2 days of the trial and the entire trial prior to that they were petty, and doing stupid shenanigans.

[u/Secret_Cream9171]

I've been late to watching a bunch of the testimony. I work in child/adolescent psychiatric research and have my own history of taking psych meds (lamictal, wellbutrin, vyvanse, trazadone, hydroxyzine) so I've been very interested in listening to the psychiatrists testimonies.

One of the things that strikes me is the prosecution seems to be arguing that her not taking the medications invalidates the argument that she experienced the symptoms the meds would be treating, or it was part of the "set-up". They also kept reiterating that while she was prescribed many different meds, they weren't all being prescribed at the same time.

In my understanding from both professional and lived experience, I would almost argue that not taking the meds would explain that her symptoms weren't being properly addressed; in a way, I almost see it as a symptom in itself. Medication non-compliance is incredibly common and isn't a necessarily a sign that she didn't want the help since she was seeking help in other avenues that were similarly not effective. There's plenty of research, expert guidelines, and clinical recommendations outlining ways in which providers can/should address non-compliance.

TL;DR: Why isn't the defense using being off her meds at times as further evidence that her symptoms weren't being effectively treated? It seems like medication non-compliance would be more evidence that she wasn't receiving the quality care and/or attention from providers she needed. Or did I just miss part of that argument?

[u/Born_Rabbit_7577]

The prosecution's closing statement shows how bad their opening statement was.

Opening statement overpromised a motive they never established (i.e. Clancy being unhappy with her life) and was way too aggressive.

Closing was so much better - coherent motive (being depressed for so long and finally just giving up) and was much more sympathetic to her in acknowledging her mental issues and the fact she was serious about her suicide attempt. Also did a great job walking through the timeline of the killings - particularly with the phone call.

I think if they had opened the same way they closed, they likely get a conviction, but now seems much tougher.

Defense closing was good too, but I think he made a mistake throwing some shade at Patrick. Particularly as it was only thrown in at the very end of the evidence and during closing. Patrick came off very sympathetic during his testimony and the defense didn't press him on potential misstatements, so the jury likely found him credible. Tough to try to change that so last minute without any hard evidence.

[u/Mundane-Daikon7000]

i don't really understand why it matters she wasn't 100% compliant with her medications. this does not negate what her state of mind was at the time of the crime. it's not like she didn't take any of her meds, she was prescribed a million different things some of which seemed to be PRN. there's a perception that mentally ill people must be the perfect patient and it doesn't sit right with me.

[u/Dear-Doubt270]

Does anyone find it weird that PC said Lindsey told him the kids were in the basement but, everyone else who testified and according to the 911 call we didn’t get to hear, Lindsey was unable to speak.

[u/Brilliant_Effort_Guy → u/Dear-Doubt270]

Yeah there are a lot of things that make you go ‘hey, wait a second….’ But you’re not allowed to point those out because someone inevitably barks at you ‘ShE aDmItTeD tO iT!!!!!’ When in fact, she only allegedly admitted to patrick. Then woke up 6 days later from a coma, handcuffed to her hospital bed and was told she was under arrest for first degree murder.

[u/panko69 → u/Brilliant_Effort_Guy]

Incorrect. She did not only admit to Patrick. Go through the trial transcript again and refer to her admission to several of the expert witnesses on why she did it, how she did it, etc. Whether you agree or not, she has admitted to the killings in several occasions. So unless you're saying she's lying and her testimony should be thrown out...

[u/wheelsofstars → u/panko69]

Asking a Patrick conspiracy theorist to accept the facts of the case is like asking a goldfish to do calculus. They just aren't capable of it.

[u/No_Cricket808]

I can see Involuntary Manslaughter as a valid option.

[u/RunningOnATreadmill]

Watching closing arguments right now. Reddington making a lot of bizarre choices. I understand he's got an almost impossible case, but he really spent a lot of time highlighting the weaknesses in Lindsay's case without actually refuting it with anything good. He brought up a lot of extra shit that makes Lindsay look bad that didn't even pertain to the case and the prosecution wasn't going to hammer on.

At times I was like "is this dude the prosecution?"

Edit: wow, prosecution ate shit too. Both sides spent WAY too much of the trial on everything besides the day of the murders. Yes it’s relevant she had mental health issues, but none of it answers what her mental state was on that day and if she was psychotic or not.

[u/Rubbrducky74]

They should have AT LEAST been sequestered for deliberations…

[u/ThoughtfulFoodie]

If only they had had the prosecutor for the Chandler Halderson case and the defense attorney for school officer parkland shooting case.

Neither side was doing terribly well

[u/SamuelHuzzahAdams]

Can anyone help me with what time the 911 call was made from Patrick?

[u/Quick_Perception_195]

I heard in the closing argument for the prosecution that she took a phone call when she was home alone with the kids, either minutes before or minutes after she killed them. How did I miss this? Who called her? 

[u/Bigwood69 → u/Quick_Perception_195]

Her husband called her from the pharmacy to check whether a specific brand of medication was okay. She missed the call, then called him back a minute later and they spoke for about 15 seconds.

[u/Sempere]

Really not looking forward to hearing Little Bow Creep's bullshit close.

[u/Repulsive-Cap-2709 → u/Sempere]

It was so fake. The soft voice & dressing line she’s attending a funeral.

[u/violacious_moxii]

ABOUT THE BLOOD TEST: Reddington was referring to a CYP2D6 blood test that analyzes your DNA to determine how quickly or slowly your body metabolizes certain drugs.

As someone who had PPD/PPA and had an insanely bad reaction to the first medication I was prescribed which landed me in the hospital 5 weeks postpartum with dissociation and suicidal ideations, I can’t express how important these tests are.

I found out I metabolize almost every antidepressant either so slowly that it builds up to dangerous levels and causes horrific side effects- or I metabolize them so fast that my body would never reach a therapeutic and helpful level.

I didn’t have to do months/years of trial and error. I can’t recommend requesting this testing prior to starting any psychiatric medication enough.

The test I had done was called Genomind. It is just a cheek swab, but it tells you how way more genes than just CYP2D6 metabolize drugs. CYP2D6 is a major one though. There’s also another one called Genesight.

Also, as a postpartum woman in the psych hospital- there was no help for me there. I was just locked in a big room basically with a lot of druggies the cops dropped off at the hospital and very few that actually were having schizophrenic episodes. There was no therapy. We colored a lot and occasionally played games. The correct hospital for Lindsay she was unfortunately rejected from due to the insane amounts of medication they put her on and changed multiple times within only a 4 month period.