Yall are conflating 2 different things. One is referring to the concept of I've accepted Jesus as my Lord and Savior, so I get out of jail free card. The other is everyone is open to forgiveness and salvation following true and genuine remorse.

ErnestEndeavor said:

---

One way to view that as a positive is a bunch of women are actually talking about the negative effects of these psych medicines that doctors are over-prescribing.

For example, when someone is prescribed Prozac it can take years to effectively wean them off of it without significant side effects.

IMO this is one of those rare cases where there's a reasonable belief that she was legally insane at the time of the murders.

---

You and I both know that isn't the reason they are defending her. You can be against SSRIs and the abuse of psychiatric drugs and also say this woman deserved to fry.

Spergin said:

---

ErnestEndeavor said:

---

One way to view that as a positive is a bunch of women are actually talking about the negative effects of these psych medicines that doctors are over-prescribing.

For example, when someone is prescribed Prozac it can take years to effectively wean them off of it without significant side effects.

IMO this is one of those rare cases where there's a reasonable belief that she was legally insane at the time of the murders.

---

You and I both know that isn't the reason they are defending her. You can be against SSRIs and the abuse of psychiatric drugs and also say this woman deserved to fry.

---

If anything, they're saying she should have been on more drugs.

No, what these women are claiming is that Lindsay Clancy was trapped in a life she didn't want to be in and was therefore justified in the murders. Or they are accusing the husband of framing her. And their evidence for this is the time of year he was born. I'm not kidding.

Women should be given their own corner of the internet where we don't have to see their opinions and their votes should be set in a different pile that is uncounted as they get a pat on the head.

Vessel said:

---

Spergin said:

---

ErnestEndeavor said:

---

One way to view that as a positive is a bunch of women are actually talking about the negative effects of these psych medicines that doctors are over-prescribing.

For example, when someone is prescribed Prozac it can take years to effectively wean them off of it without significant side effects.

IMO this is one of those rare cases where there's a reasonable belief that she was legally insane at the time of the murders.

---

You and I both know that isn't the reason they are defending her. You can be against SSRIs and the abuse of psychiatric drugs and also say this woman deserved to fry.

---

If anything, they're saying she should have been on more drugs.

No, what these women are claiming is that Lindsay Clancy was trapped in a life she didn't want to be in and was therefore justified in the murders. Or they are accusing the husband of framing her. And their evidence for this is the time of year he was born. I'm not kidding.

Women should be given their own corner of the internet where we don't have to see their opinions and their votes should be set in a different pile that is uncounted as they get a pat on the head.

---

They are proving they are basically children and should never be given any responsibility at all, ever. I was already almost there but I am never voting for a woman again. I'll unironically vote for a communist man (assuming he is not a foreigner) over a conservative woman. That's where we are at this point.

Spergin said:

---

Vessel said:

---

Spergin said:

---

ErnestEndeavor said:

---

One way to view that as a positive is a bunch of women are actually talking about the negative effects of these psych medicines that doctors are over-prescribing.

For example, when someone is prescribed Prozac it can take years to effectively wean them off of it without significant side effects.

IMO this is one of those rare cases where there's a reasonable belief that she was legally insane at the time of the murders.

---

You and I both know that isn't the reason they are defending her. You can be against SSRIs and the abuse of psychiatric drugs and also say this woman deserved to fry.

---

If anything, they're saying she should have been on more drugs.

No, what these women are claiming is that Lindsay Clancy was trapped in a life she didn't want to be in and was therefore justified in the murders. Or they are accusing the husband of framing her. And their evidence for this is the time of year he was born. I'm not kidding.

Women should be given their own corner of the internet where we don't have to see their opinions and their votes should be set in a different pile that is uncounted as they get a pat on the head.

---

They are proving they are basically children and should never be given any responsibility at all, ever. I was already almost there but I am never voting for a woman again. I'll unironically vote for a communist man (assuming he is not a foreigner) over a conservative woman. That's where we are at this point.

---

LOL, I am not even close to that point yet, but I do share your general sentiment.

It's obviously not ALL women...I know well grounded, logical, conservative women who don't think like this. My wife, for instance, thinks this lady needs to fry, even though she was insane at the time. She is disgusted by so many females latching onto her as if she is a poor victim of oppression or something.

But it is ENOUGH women that I think your approach of abstaining from voting for females is probably a smart one. I think social media has driven most women even closer to the brink. They seemed much more stable in the 90's and early 2000's.

Vessel said:

---

Doesn't matter if she's insane or not, this type of person is incompatible with polite society.

---

This has always been my thought, with regards to the insanity plea.

The fact that they're deemed clinically 'insane' should be a strike against them...not something that helps their defense and gets them excused/reduced charges.

If they are insane, and proven to be capable of harm, they should not be part of society. It should ramp up the punishment, not reduce it.

Personally I think she needs to be removed from the earth permanently.

Why do we give a **** about this person? What purpose does it serve to keep incredibly broken vessels alive?

If she is possessed, we are doing her and society a favor. If her brain is broken, we are doing her and society a favor.

What possible good could come from keeping someone this broken alive?

AgGrad99 said:

---

Vessel said:

---

Doesn't matter if she's insane or not, this type of person is incompatible with polite society.

---

This has always been my thought, with regards to the insanity plea.

The fact that they're deemed clinically 'insane' should be a strike against them...not something that helps their defense and gets them excused/reduced charges.

If they are insane, and proven to be capable of harm, they should not be part of society. It should ramp up the punishment, not reduce it.

---

Exactly.

"This person has such a ****ty grip on reality they murdered their own children" is pretty good reason to permanently remove them from society.

AgGrad99 said:

---

Vessel said:

---

Doesn't matter if she's insane or not, this type of person is incompatible with polite society.

---

This has always been my thought, with regards to the insanity plea.

The fact that they're deemed clinically 'insane' should be a strike against them...not something that helps their defense and gets them excused/reduced charges.

If they are insane, and proven to be capable of harm, they should not be part of society. It should ramp up the punishment, not reduce it.

---

I bet you could argue that a solid % of all murderers over time who have been treated as murderers were on some sort of insanity spectrum.

Hardcore Greg said:

---

AgGrad99 said:

---

Vessel said:

---

Doesn't matter if she's insane or not, this type of person is incompatible with polite society.

---

This has always been my thought, with regards to the insanity plea.

The fact that they're deemed clinically 'insane' should be a strike against them...not something that helps their defense and gets them excused/reduced charges.

If they are insane, and proven to be capable of harm, they should not be part of society. It should ramp up the punishment, not reduce it.

---

I bet you could argue that a solid % of all murderers over time who have been treated as murderers were on some sort of insanity spectrum.

---

Well murder is insane to a well-adjusted person. That's how you get these juries with women or these woman DAs who can't picture themselves killing anybody so the defendant must be insane and be released to torment society.

Hardcore Greg said:

---

Spergin said:

---

Vessel said:

---

Spergin said:

---

ErnestEndeavor said:

---

One way to view that as a positive is a bunch of women are actually talking about the negative effects of these psych medicines that doctors are over-prescribing.

For example, when someone is prescribed Prozac it can take years to effectively wean them off of it without significant side effects.

IMO this is one of those rare cases where there's a reasonable belief that she was legally insane at the time of the murders.

---

You and I both know that isn't the reason they are defending her. You can be against SSRIs and the abuse of psychiatric drugs and also say this woman deserved to fry.

---

If anything, they're saying she should have been on more drugs.

No, what these women are claiming is that Lindsay Clancy was trapped in a life she didn't want to be in and was therefore justified in the murders. Or they are accusing the husband of framing her. And their evidence for this is the time of year he was born. I'm not kidding.

Women should be given their own corner of the internet where we don't have to see their opinions and their votes should be set in a different pile that is uncounted as they get a pat on the head.

---

They are proving they are basically children and should never be given any responsibility at all, ever. I was already almost there but I am never voting for a woman again. I'll unironically vote for a communist man (assuming he is not a foreigner) over a conservative woman. That's where we are at this point.

---

LOL, I am not even close to that point yet, but I do share your general sentiment.

It's obviously not ALL women...I know well grounded, logical, conservative women who don't think like this. My wife, for instance, thinks this lady needs to fry, even though she was insane at the time. She is disgusted by so many females latching onto her as if she is a poor victim of oppression or something.

But it is ENOUGH women that I think your approach of abstaining from voting for females is probably a smart one. I think social media has driven most women even closer to the brink. They seemed much more stable in the 90's and early 2000's.

---

I don't actually believe a woman when she says she is conservative anymore. It's trivial to find issues where they immediately go with the social media hivemind.

I see good conservative women do this constantly. Hell I've seen my wife do it. They are conservative out of opportunity not because of conviction.

Quote:

---

I'll unironically vote for a communist man (assuming he is not a foreigner) over a conservative woman

---

One of the dumber things I've seen here. Are you a woman by chance?


Bernie Sanders over say, Sarah Huckebee? Great idea!

Quote:

---

They are conservative out of opportunity not because of conviction

---

Sounds like you hang around the wrong women. Perhaps some inner reflection?

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

I'll unironically vote for a communist man (assuming he is not a foreigner) over a conservative woman

---

One of the dumber things I've seen here. Are you a woman by chance?


Bernie Sanders over say, Sarah Huckebee? Great idea!

Quote:

---

They are conservative out of opportunity not because of conviction

---

Sounds like you hang around the wrong women. Perhaps some inner reflection?

---

Imagine being this out of touch with modern women and society in general.

Imagine admitting you'd vote for a communist. Feel the Bern!!!


Most women are nuts. But not as nuts as communist! Incels gonna incel.

Spergin said:

---

They don't even understand how much they are participating in a restructuring of cultural authority in this country.

The dark side of women has been revealed. With this will be the end of their preferential treatment, & ability to manipulate their way into avoiding consequences. https://t.co/QAbGA4korD

— Pat Stedman | Dating & Relationship Coach for Men (@Pat_Stedman) August 14, 2026

If you haven't been following X or Tik Tok, then you're not seeing the insane response from tons of women. They are blaming everyone except the woman. It's not just feminists, I have seen tons of supposed conservative women doing the same thing. The amount of women not doing this has been like 5% of women.

The dark impact “true crime” content has had on women needs to be studied. It is so pervasive and results in such evil that I wonder if anyone has ever looked into the idea that this sort of thing is funded and pushed algorithmically to women on purpose. https://t.co/ZTqK01QQfM

— Mack (@kenzietuff) August 14, 2026

Mental illness is not an excuse to murder. Many men are mentally ill and they get life in prison or execution. That is what this woman deserves.

Also, it's clear more than ever that we need to repeal the 19th and that women should not be allowed to be judged.

---

Amendments 16-19 are a disaster. 1 down, 3 to go.

What's the difference from a culpability standpoint between this murderer and someone like Thomas Johnson?

Where are all the women wanting to give him a hug?

aggietony2010 said:

---

What's the difference from a culpability standpoint between this murderer and someone like Thomas Johnson?

Where are all the women wanting to give him a hug?

---

Nothing at all. These same judges would have released Johnson too though. Female judges and DAs were a mistake.

aggietony2010 said:

---

Spergin said:

---

They don't even understand how much they are participating in a restructuring of cultural authority in this country.

The dark side of women has been revealed. With this will be the end of their preferential treatment, & ability to manipulate their way into avoiding consequences. https://t.co/QAbGA4korD

— Pat Stedman | Dating & Relationship Coach for Men (@Pat_Stedman) August 14, 2026

If you haven't been following X or Tik Tok, then you're not seeing the insane response from tons of women. They are blaming everyone except the woman. It's not just feminists, I have seen tons of supposed conservative women doing the same thing. The amount of women not doing this has been like 5% of women.

The dark impact “true crime” content has had on women needs to be studied. It is so pervasive and results in such evil that I wonder if anyone has ever looked into the idea that this sort of thing is funded and pushed algorithmically to women on purpose. https://t.co/ZTqK01QQfM

— Mack (@kenzietuff) August 14, 2026

Mental illness is not an excuse to murder. Many men are mentally ill and they get life in prison or execution. That is what this woman deserves.

Also, it's clear more than ever that we need to repeal the 19th and that women should not be allowed to be judged.

---

Amendments 16-19 are a disaster. 1 down, 3 to go.

---

Let's add the 24th & 26th and make it a package deal.

Woman:“I’m not a feminist,I’m conservative”

Same woman:“Women killing their babies are victims of the system,I want a manly man that doesn’t tell me what to do,my body count doesnt matter but men watching porn is evil, incels need to be locked up but Lindsay Clancy needs a hug”

— Adriana Flowers 🌸 (@Adriana19Flower) August 14, 2026

Conservative women.txt

It's hard for me to get around the fact that she texted her husband to ask if he could get takeout food for her, which gave her the time window to do this. That, and her search history, show that this was somewhat planned.

I'd like to think if I had voices in my head telling me to kill my children, I would want my husband to come home ASAP, but again if she truly experienced psychosis, who knows.

I haven't watched much, but her ex husband seemed like a pretty considerate person and all around at least decent to good father. Much different than Andrea Yates case.

Also, she seemed to want more kids and wasn't being forced into it, which is different from the Yates case.

I don't really understand the women who are supporting her in such large numbers. She's essentially a family annihilator. I know there are some weirdos on the internet that still think Chris Watts either didnt do it or was forced to do it because of his controlling and financially irresponsible spouse, but I kind of chalk them up as the same types who support Luigi M because he's attractive. Very small % of super weird people.

I dont see any reason she shouldn't spend the rest of her life in jail. She did what she did and actions have consequences. Murdering your own 3 children should put you behind bars forever. PERIOD. I dont care what your excuse was, or anything else. You strangled a 8 month old, a 3 year old, and a 5 year old. One by one, while your husband was getting you a Mediterranean bowl that you asked him to pick up.

Are there any streaming news stories on this case (dateline, 48 hours, etc?) that would be good to watch and catch up? The only one I see is one on FoxNation streaming, but that sounds like a low-rent and potentially biased show.

Like I said, I haven't looked into it much, so that's why Im seeking further info. I suppose if I looked at the whole picture I could change my mind.

BadMoonRisin said:

---

It's hard for me to get around the fact that she texted her husband to ask if he could get takeout food for her, which gave her the time window to do this. That, and her search history, show that this was somewhat planned.

I'd like to think if I had voices in my head telling me to kill my children, I would want my husband to come home ASAP, but again if she truly experienced psychosis, who knows.

I haven't watched much, but her ex husband seemed like a pretty considerate person and all around at least decent to good father. Much different than Andrea Yates case.

Also, she seemed to want more kids and wasn't being forced into it, which is different from the Yates case.

I don't really understand the women who are supporting her in such large numbers. She's essentially a family annihilator. I know there are some weirdos on the internet that still think Chris Watts either didnt do it or was forced to do it because of his controlling and financially irresponsible spouse, but I kind of chalk them up as the same types who support Luigi M because he's attractive. Very small % of super weird people.

I dont see any reason she shouldn't spend the rest of her life in jail. She did what she did and actions have consequences. Murdering your own 3 children should put you behind bars forever.

Are there any streaming news stories on this case (dateline, 48 hours, etc?) that would be good to watch and catch up? The only one I see is one on FoxNation streaming, but that sounds like a low-rent and potentially biased show.

Like I said, I haven't looked into it much, so that's why Im seeking further info. I suppose if I looked at the whole picture I could change my mind.

---

I found out about this from the OP. MSM will not touch this.

GuitarSoup and MsDoubleD are usually all over stories like this and are able to discern what is true, so I'll be following the thread looking for their input.

I was really just pro Karen Read more than anything!!! And Aaron Spencer!

So will I. Really demonic when you think about it.

I've only heard a little bit of the details, but from what I've read and heard, based on timeline and other little things here and there, I'm gonna go ahead and say I don't think she did it

Mucho austin said:

---

I've only heard a little bit of the details, but from what I've read and heard, based on timeline and other little things here and there, I'm gonna go ahead and say I don't think she did it

---

But she did it, so now you know whoever you've read or heard on this is an imbecile.

ETA: She isn't even arguing she didn't do it. She's admitted guilt. It's a just matter of if she was "insane," by the court's standard or not.

Pacifico said:

---

BadMoonRisin said:

---

It's hard for me to get around the fact that she texted her husband to ask if he could get takeout food for her, which gave her the time window to do this. That, and her search history, show that this was somewhat planned.

I'd like to think if I had voices in my head telling me to kill my children, I would want my husband to come home ASAP, but again if she truly experienced psychosis, who knows.

I haven't watched much, but her ex husband seemed like a pretty considerate person and all around at least decent to good father. Much different than Andrea Yates case.

Also, she seemed to want more kids and wasn't being forced into it, which is different from the Yates case.

I don't really understand the women who are supporting her in such large numbers. She's essentially a family annihilator. I know there are some weirdos on the internet that still think Chris Watts either didnt do it or was forced to do it because of his controlling and financially irresponsible spouse, but I kind of chalk them up as the same types who support Luigi M because he's attractive. Very small % of super weird people.

I dont see any reason she shouldn't spend the rest of her life in jail. She did what she did and actions have consequences. Murdering your own 3 children should put you behind bars forever.

Are there any streaming news stories on this case (dateline, 48 hours, etc?) that would be good to watch and catch up? The only one I see is one on FoxNation streaming, but that sounds like a low-rent and potentially biased show.

Like I said, I haven't looked into it much, so that's why Im seeking further info. I suppose if I looked at the whole picture I could change my mind.

---

I found out about this from the OP. MSM will not touch this.

---

No, because it's an open and shut case. It's women of all political leanings on TikTok and X that have decided she's either completely innocent (framed by the husband, they say) or that she's not guilty by reason of insanity (a plea you can make when you don't like your family or your husband drove you crazy or PPD is the worst thing to ever happen to anybody).

This is truly an IQ filter case, and so many women are proving why they shouldn't be permitted to partake in the national discourse.

She killed her kids. She should face the consequences. I also think she was battling something.

This is a tragic situation.

over $700,000 now raised for a woman who strangled her 3 children to death with exercise ropes. every single donation is from a woman. hundreds of thousands of women in a tiktok true crime psychosis where they believe the husband did it because he looks mean https://t.co/7jfUu9UbKc pic.twitter.com/hVAK6JlcAH

— shoe (@shoe0nhead) August 17, 2026

aggietony2010 said:

---

What's the difference from a culpability standpoint between this murderer and someone like Thomas Johnson?

Where are all the women wanting to give him a hug?

---

Johnson did not put on an insanity defense. I don't recall whether he was barred by the judge from doing so in a pre-trial motion or if they changed strategy midstream.

There are several lawyers providing commentary on their YouTube channels. For objective daily summaries I suggest following the channel "Lawyer You Know." For this trial on weekends he's also publishing weekly analysis with his dad who is a longtime defense attorney.



The consensus among most of the lawyers who are covering this trial is the defense has a good chance to win on insanity. Most are also criticizing the prosecution strategy of going overboard with evidence designed to elicit an emotional response.

Commonwealth rests with Ian Wiffin as final witness. Anyone remember him from Karen Read trial?!?!

MsDoubleD81 said:

---

Commonwealth rests with Ian Wiffin as final witness. Anyone remember him from Karen Read trial?!?!

---

He's not the one that talked about Reed's leaky balloon knot is he?

Nono, that was Officah Proctah