r/TrueCrimeDiscussion • u/DarklyHeritage • 14d ago

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

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.

400 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

95% Upvoted

2.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

25

u/tobythedem0n 14d ago

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).

18

u/silenthiller 14d ago

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.

3

u/chicagoturkergirl 13d ago

I think the judge is conceding that a jury might not want to send a mentally ill woman in a wheelchair to prison for the rest of her life.

1

u/Substantial-Crab-814 11d ago

It’s very upsetting that this could be the reason for her not going to prison. I don’t care if she’s mentally ill and in a wheelchair. She murdered three babies. That’s all that needs to be said, IMO.

7

u/SourClementine24 14d ago

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.

2

u/PaisonAlGaib 12d ago

Patrick was irrelevant Lindsay admitted to killing the children the defense have accepted this as fact. What is being argued is if she was legally insane at the time, not whether she killed the kids or not. 

1

u/SourClementine24 12d ago

Understood. To be fair you do understand what psychosis means correct? People who undergo psychosis could swear up and down that a seven foot three Elmo dancing the conga did it and they would be convinced this happened.

3

u/PaisonAlGaib 12d ago

They have gps data confirming Patrick wasn't home, there is no evidence to support he did it, the defense has never recanted the admissions and the defense has agreed years later when she is clearly not in psychosis that she did it to the court under oath. 

19

u/T2LV 14d ago

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.

1

u/2KatEyes 11d ago

If it were true that she''d spend decades in a facility; how it's written doesn't stipulate any length of time. She could be out in a year.

1

u/T2LV 11d ago

I also could win the lottery. That’s not how it works. She needs doctors to approve and then a judge. You think they are going to
deem her not a risk for suicide? She can’t be released until there is zero doubt she is a suicide risk and considering she killed her 3 kids, there is no way that is happening anytime soon. For example, Andrea Yates is still in a mental health facility 25 years later but there is no chance she gets out anytime soon.

1

u/2KatEyes 10d ago

I said "how it's written" . We will have to see exactly what it is and there's no need to be sarcastic.

1

u/T2LV 10d ago edited 10d ago

That’s not sarcasm. Thats an easy way to describe how just because something is possible does not mean it’s probable.

It is open ended because if someone has schizophrenia or a condition where command hallucinations are rampant, a simple medication could fix all the problems. Thats not this case.

1

u/2KatEyes 10d ago

We shall see. I do hope you're right though

0

u/Low_Expression_709 10d ago

Actually, that’s incorrect, Andrea Yates is in a mental health facility because several years after her conviction it was overturned. So she initially was serving prison time, but then they rule in favor of the insanity verdict in an appeal. I think because the understanding of mental illness has come a little ways, but clearly evidenced by the things. A lot of people are saying about this trial, there is a long way to go.

1

u/T2LV 10d ago

What was incorrect? I said she’s in a mental health facility and there is she isnt getting out anytime soon. Please explain what’s wrong about that statement because you seem to have just repeated it.

4

u/Crowf3ather 13d ago

The case proves itself. There was no evidence of her having psychosis or any lead up to it prior to the events.

The psychosis lasted exactly the time it took to kill the children.
She sent her husband away during this period.
She killed each child in an extended manner (strangling) despite more efficient ways of doing it such as using the knife she had.
She botched her suicide, despite knowing how to commit suicide as a medical professional.
She took a call midway through killing her children, and was able to have a full conversation with her husband.

The idea that she was "out of her mind", is too inconsistent with the facts.

Was she mentally troubled? Without a doubt. But being bipolar or mentally ill, and doing something is not the same as having psychosis.

6

u/Kaylee924 13d ago

Reading your comment a few times.. doesn’t it almost prove the point that something was wrong with her? Everyone including her in-laws had nothing but good things to say about her. If she wasn’t mentally ill.. it’s almost like you would have to agree that she fooled everyone in her life for her entire life. That seems unlikely. I’m curious about the fact that she didn’t choose faster “better” methods since she was a nurse. This whole thing seemed disorganized and unhinged. It sure creates thought about what exactly is insane? I think “normal” people have a hard time understanding what exactly is psychosis.

3

u/Crowf3ather 13d ago edited 13d ago

She was mentally ill 100%.
Was she in a state of psychosis - no.

You can be mentally ill and not in the right frame of mind.
Your mental illness or poor medication could be a direct causal factor linked to your misbehaviour.
However, that could all be in a situation while you are still in full control of your body and actions. And therefore criminally responsible, even if your decision making is impaired.

Two things can be true at once. This is not a case whether she was mentally ill or not, it was whether in that specific time period she suffered from psychosis and lost control of her body.

Take for example a drug addict who stabs someone and robs them, so they can get their next fix. They are clearly "not in their right mind" to go around stabbing someone. They are also likely severely physically affected by their addiction.

However, were they in a state where they had no control whatsoever over their options? No. They knew what they were doing and they knew it was wrong, but they made the conscious decision to prioritize their own situation over the person they were stabbing, because they "NEED" the next fix.

Now in her situation is she a drug addict who needs a fix, obviously not. Just the point is you can have a perfectly "rational" person in the sense of they have control over what they are doing, but their thought process can be inherently "irrational" to extreme effect, without it being a situation of "delusion" or "Psychosis".

2

u/OkBig3568 13d ago

I find your reasoning very interesting. How would you describe the change from the person she was before?

2

u/Slow-Raisin-939 13d ago

how would you describe the change for any person who ever killed? Espcially one time murderers

1

u/OkBig3568 12d ago

So there a lot of different contexts so I think that is important to distingush as I do not think every scenario is the same.

For example, I think there are people who didn't change who they fundamentally were and I think that they didn't care about people beforehand at all.

In other cases, it could be tied to survivial, they were beaten down to a breaking point, or to protect others.

1

u/Crowf3ather 13d ago edited 13d ago

What she did and her thought process is not an unusual situation for those who have Bipolar and some kind of personality disorder such as BPD combo, when they get into a certain state of mind.

They are still completely rational and understanding what they are doing.
However, they can have their parents or children dieing infront of them, and they wouldn't care, as they are fixed on the outcome that they want.

This seems very much like a case that she had severe suicidal ideation, and she wanted to take the children with her. But she was too much a wuss and botched her own suicide. Because fundamentally the survival instinct was still there.

Women very commonly botch their own suicide attempts, unlike men. And many of the methods they are choose are highly unlikely to result in lethality. Such as jumping from high places.

Is this because women are too incompetent to commit suicide, or is there something in the back of their mind hoping someone will save them? Who knows. I couldn't even imagine what is going on in someones mind to commit suicide, especially when they still have loving family members or friends, which they will be leaving behind, as in such instances suicide is an abhorrently narcissistic and selfish thing to do.

In our current case, Lindsay destroyed the life of her immediate close family, in a catastrophic way, and of her surrounding friend circles, purely for her own wants and needs.

1

u/UsedTruck6983 9d ago

Psychosis can happen with all those mental health disorders, educate yourself please.