3rd Coast said:

---

While everything is still fresh, and the other perspective jurors see the consequences of not ruling how they should. The defense attorney should be disbarred.

---

3rd Coast said:

---

While everything is still fresh, and the other perspective jurors see the consequences of not ruling how they should. The defense attorney should be disbarred.

---

ErnestEndeavor said:

---

The attorney commentary channel I'm watching now thinks defense wants to go quickly so prosecutors don't have time to get their act together. He thinks the not guilty (insanity) verdict was justified but only because the prosecutors bungled the case and couldn't meet their burden. The more time the prosecutors have to prepare and get organized with a coherent argument the better chances they have at retrial.

---

ErnestEndeavor said:

---

The attorney commentary channel I'm watching now thinks defense wants to go quickly so prosecutors don't have time to get their act together. He thinks the not guilty (insanity) verdict was justified but only because the prosecutors bungled the case and couldn't meet their burden. The more time the prosecutors have to prepare and get organized with a coherent argument the better chances they have at retrial.

---

ErnestEndeavor said:

---

It will probably be a few months. Almost every attorney I've seen who has watched this case and
commenting on it have said the prosecutors looked disorganized and their witnesses were unprepared.

More time will be good for them if they utilize it. I think there's a possibility you could have a different prosecutor taking the lead, but it's likely the office wanted a female leading the prosecution team.

---

ErnestEndeavor said:

---

Defense wants to panel a new jury next monday.

---

Quote:

---

Well, it's a lot easier now.

How do you feel about the Lindsey Clancy?

---

FireAg said:

---

And Yates was originally found guilty, correct?

Do you believe that insanity is a defense? Should Yates's conviction have stood, or do you agree with the reversal on appeal?

Yes, I agree with the mental history being far better established with Yates than it has been with Clancy, but the day of the murders, they both appeared to operate in fairly similar ways…

With that said, it appears that at least some on the jury did not think that well-documented psychoses diagnoses were required for a NGRI under the MA law…

I may not like it, but that's what they determined, it appears…

How much blame should we lay at the feet of the prosecution for not making a better case to prove sanity? A lot of folks on here are blaming XX-chromosome jurors, but shouldn't some of the ire be focused on the prosecution for not overcoming that in their case?

---

The jury foreperson is beside herself. She told the holdout to:

-read the room
-be normal for once
-just be a decent human being

She then called him an incel and said he would never get laid again in this town.

And nevertheless, he persisted.

— Douglass Mackey (@douglassmackey) September 4, 2026

torrid said:

---

I read a day or two ago that the judge was thinking of removing the juror causing the deadlock and replacing them with an alternate.

How would that work once the case had gone to the jury? They just re-start deliberations from the beginning?

edit - Was a defense request.

---

Lindsay Clancy locking eyes with the one man standing between her and a co-hosting gig on The View. pic.twitter.com/rGcgzz8WNS

— Alec Lace (@AlecLace) September 4, 2026

samurai_science said:

---

ErnestEndeavor said:

---

It will probably be a few months. Almost every attorney I've seen who has watched this case and
commenting on it have said the prosecutors looked disorganized and their witnesses were unprepared.

More time will be good for them if they utilize it. I think there's a possibility you could have a different prosecutor taking the lead, but it's likely the office wanted a female leading the prosecution team.

---

Can the prosecutors even be trusted, I have my doubts after what I have seen the last few weeks, if you know what I mean.

---

hunter2012 said:

---

The jury foreperson is beside herself. She told the holdout to:

-read the room
-be normal for once
-just be a decent human being

She then called him an incel and said he would never get laid again in this town.

And nevertheless, he persisted.

— Douglass Mackey (@douglassmackey) September 4, 2026

---

hunter2012 said:

---

The jury foreperson is beside herself. She told the holdout to:

-read the room
-be normal for once
-just be a decent human being

She then called him an incel and said he would never get laid again in this town.

And nevertheless, he persisted.

— Douglass Mackey (@douglassmackey) September 4, 2026

---

hunter2012 said:

---

The jury foreperson is beside herself. She told the holdout to:

-read the room
-be normal for once
-just be a decent human being

She then called him an incel and said he would never get laid again in this town.

And nevertheless, he persisted.

— Douglass Mackey (@douglassmackey) September 4, 2026

---

Slicer97 said:

---

hunter2012 said:

---

The jury foreperson is beside herself. She told the holdout to:

-read the room
-be normal for once
-just be a decent human being

She then called him an incel and said he would never get laid again in this town.

And nevertheless, he persisted.

— Douglass Mackey (@douglassmackey) September 4, 2026

---

The "foreperson" has no business being on a jury, let alone being it's foreman.

---

Aggie95 said:

---

Hardcore Greg said:

---

For those not on social media…there are countless posts like this. But even more disturbing, they are littered with THOUSANDS of psychotic women who fully agree in the comments sections…

https://instagr.am/p/DcBWbVrOSxB

---

terrifying

---

hunter2012 said:

---

The jury foreperson is beside herself. She told the holdout to:

-read the room
-be normal for once
-just be a decent human being

She then called him an incel and said he would never get laid again in this town.

And nevertheless, he persisted.

— Douglass Mackey (@douglassmackey) September 4, 2026

---

Cromagnum said:

---

Lindsay Clancy locking eyes with the one man standing between her and a co-hosting gig on The View. pic.twitter.com/rGcgzz8WNS

— Alec Lace (@AlecLace) September 4, 2026

---

deddog said:

---

FireAg said:

---

And Yates was originally found guilty, correct?

Do you believe that insanity is a defense? Should Yates's conviction have stood, or do you agree with the reversal on appeal?

Yes, I agree with the mental history being far better established with Yates than it has been with Clancy, but the day of the murders, they both appeared to operate in fairly similar ways…

With that said, it appears that at least some on the jury did not think that well-documented psychoses diagnoses were required for a NGRI under the MA law…

I may not like it, but that's what they determined, it appears…

How much blame should we lay at the feet of the prosecution for not making a better case to prove sanity? A lot of folks on here are blaming XX-chromosome jurors, but shouldn't some of the ire be focused on the prosecution for not overcoming that in their case?

---

This is not a prosecution problem. This is a toxic empathy problem.

You illustrated it multiple times by trying to claim this was similar to Andrea Yates. That is absolutely not factual. That is either ignorance of the case facts, or emotion.

If jurors dont consider premeditation, and zero lack of previous history and the actual evidence, then that is not a prosecution problem.

That is toxic empathy.

---

ErnestEndeavor said:

---

Prosecutors holding a press conference, just got shouted a question wondering why they only care about the three dead kids and not the mother. Someone shouted "amen."

---

FireAg said:

---

deddog said:

---

FireAg said:

---

And Yates was originally found guilty, correct?

Do you believe that insanity is a defense? Should Yates's conviction have stood, or do you agree with the reversal on appeal?

Yes, I agree with the mental history being far better established with Yates than it has been with Clancy, but the day of the murders, they both appeared to operate in fairly similar ways…

With that said, it appears that at least some on the jury did not think that well-documented psychoses diagnoses were required for a NGRI under the MA law…

I may not like it, but that's what they determined, it appears…

How much blame should we lay at the feet of the prosecution for not making a better case to prove sanity? A lot of folks on here are blaming XX-chromosome jurors, but shouldn't some of the ire be focused on the prosecution for not overcoming that in their case?

---

This is not a prosecution problem. This is a toxic empathy problem.

You illustrated it multiple times by trying to claim this was similar to Andrea Yates. That is absolutely not factual. That is either ignorance of the case facts, or emotion.

If jurors dont consider premeditation, and zero lack of previous history and the actual evidence, then that is not a prosecution problem.

That is toxic empathy.

---

You're out of your mind if you think I have "toxic empathy"…

I think Yates should've been sent to death row for what she did…I just think that Rusty, based on personal interactions, shared some of the blame and should've faced some form of punishment as well…

I'm trying to understand the psyche of a panel that was 11-1 NGRI…on the surface, this case feels black and white guilty of murder…but 92% of the panel charged with rendering a judgement saw the exact opposite of what most here believe was an obvious verdict…

Why?

I suspect this case will be dissected in every way possible trying to find the answers…

But don't think for one second I'm arguing this was the outcome I would have voted for…you'd be dead wrong…

---

FireAg said:

---

deddog said:

---

FireAg said:

---

And Yates was originally found guilty, correct?

Do you believe that insanity is a defense? Should Yates's conviction have stood, or do you agree with the reversal on appeal?

Yes, I agree with the mental history being far better established with Yates than it has been with Clancy, but the day of the murders, they both appeared to operate in fairly similar ways…

With that said, it appears that at least some on the jury did not think that well-documented psychoses diagnoses were required for a NGRI under the MA law…

I may not like it, but that's what they determined, it appears…

How much blame should we lay at the feet of the prosecution for not making a better case to prove sanity? A lot of folks on here are blaming XX-chromosome jurors, but shouldn't some of the ire be focused on the prosecution for not overcoming that in their case?

---

This is not a prosecution problem. This is a toxic empathy problem.

You illustrated it multiple times by trying to claim this was similar to Andrea Yates. That is absolutely not factual. That is either ignorance of the case facts, or emotion.

If jurors dont consider premeditation, and zero lack of previous history and the actual evidence, then that is not a prosecution problem.

That is toxic empathy.

---

You're out of your mind if you think I have "toxic empathy"…

I think Yates should've been sent to death row for what she did…I just think that Rusty, based on personal interactions, shared some of the blame and should've faced some form of punishment as well…

I'm trying to understand the psyche of a panel that was 11-1 NGRI…on the surface, this case feels black and white guilty of murder…but 92% of the panel charged with rendering a judgement saw the exact opposite of what most here believe was an obvious verdict…

Why?

I suspect this case will be dissected in every way possible trying to find the answers…

But don't think for one second I'm arguing this was the outcome I would have voted for…you'd be dead wrong…

---