Lindsay Clancy Trial

159,789 Views | 1690 Replies | Last: 7 hrs ago by torrid
Tramp96
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Vessel • 8:33a, 9/9/26
Vessel said:
Also pay attention to anybody who was saying the jurors wearing pink did not mean anything. Those people have no read on modern society.

The smart people continue to be vindicated after the interviews today.

I believe myself and others on this thread were ridiculed over this by a couple of leftist posters who were adamant we were out of our minds for pointing out that three of the jurors showed up in pink after closing arguments were done.

It wasn't a coincidence. Everyone here with a brain knew it at the time...and it's proven to be true. Will those that mocked the majority of us admit they were wrong? Hell no.

But they know.
Reply Quote
25
bmks270
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to stetson • 8:39a, 9/9/26
AG
stetson said:
doubledog said:


Wow, the stand out juror could not get over the fact that Lindsay viscously killed her own childern.

To some the deaths of the childern are just a post-post birth abortion.

Another comment she made struck me, "He had no heart." This jury was made up of 11 feelers and 1 thinker. Their job as jurors was to weigh the evidence presented to them objectively, not impart their feelings.


The hold out guilty verdict was the only juror with empathy for the kids and a sane mind.

These female jurors are soulless brain dead NPCs.
Reply Quote
27
1 edit
Hardcore Greg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AggieKatie2 • 8:39a, 9/9/26
AggieKatie2 said:

I apparently missed that Massachusetts is one of the few states that when the defense utilizes an insanity defense, the state is required to prove the defendant WAS SANE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

This is what I hate. As a reasonable juror, it seems to force you between a rock and a hard place. A juror should be able to say "yeah I think this person was crazy as all get out, but they are GUILTY full stop of heinous atrocities". That's personally where I sit...i believe she was very likely way out of her mind, but I don't care and think it's ******ed to give people a pass because they are crazy.

I don't have a legal bone in my body...is there something I am missing?

Is this going to start applying to school shooters and mass murderers? When an 18 yr old kid shoots up an elementary school or a movie theater, are people going to have this same energy?
Reply Quote
4
Fenrir
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:41a, 9/9/26
Quote:
He would not interact with us... He had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children.

The fact that this quote was stated by someone voting for an acquittal in all seriousness and with the intent of justifying her position, and not a satirical quote from the Babylon Bee is one of the most absurd things I've seen in a long time. How this ***** sleeps at night amazes me.
Reply Quote
20
1 edit
El Chupacabra
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Backyard Gator • 8:43a, 9/9/26
Backyard Gator said:

Those three *****es literally tried to replace the law with their feelings, and wanted to rule that way. They're incapable of being jurors.

There's Supreme Court justices that do that. Country is cooked.
Reply Quote
16
El Chupacabra
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bmks270 • 8:44a, 9/9/26
bmks270 said:
stetson said:
doubledog said:


Wow, the stand out juror could not get over the fact that Lindsay viscously killed her own childern.

To some the deaths of the childern are just a post-post birth abortion.

Another comment she made struck me, "He had no heart." This jury was made up of 11 feelers and 1 thinker. Their job as jurors was to weigh the evidence presented to them objectively, not impart their feelings.


The hold out guilty verdict was the only juror with empathy for the kids and a sane mind.

These female jurors are soulless brain dead NPCs.

You could have saved some typing and just typed 'democrats'.
Reply Quote
3
Hardcore Greg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BadMoonRisin • 8:44a, 9/9/26
BadMoonRisin said:


It was 8-4 at the beginning, so 8 out of the 9 women were in favor of NGRI initially; 3 were persuaded to change and 1 was the lone holdout.

I cant imagine the load of bull**** this guy had to endure for those two weeks.

I am sorry, I already have a wife, and she can get spicy everyonce in a while. I do not have the bandwidth to sit there and listen to godless liberal women with toxoplasmosis hurling insults at me because they're to stupifd and hyper-emotional to process a cut and dried triple-homicide case. Proud of this man.
Reply Quote
23
Pinochet
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:46a, 9/9/26
We just need counter conspiracy theories to explain all the things the TikTok dip****s are saying. She didn't jump out, she lowered herself. There was blood on the window sill indicating she tried to hang out first. There was a previous coworker who LC called to ask how failed suicide attempts look. She locked the door and took her husband's key to make it take longer for him to find the kids. I can make up the same off the wall bull**** to confuse those idiots.
Reply Quote
4
Hardcore Greg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Tramp96 • 8:49a, 9/9/26
Tramp96 said:
Vessel said:
Also pay attention to anybody who was saying the jurors wearing pink did not mean anything. Those people have no read on modern society.

The smart people continue to be vindicated after the interviews today.

I believe myself and others on this thread were ridiculed over this by a couple of leftist posters who were adamant we were out of our minds for pointing out that three of the jurors showed up in pink after closing arguments were done.

It wasn't a coincidence. Everyone here with a brain knew it at the time...and it's proven to be true. Will those that mocked the majority of us admit they were wrong? Hell no.

But they know.

Ducks4Breakfast is good people, but I personally did not agree with his "Come on everyone, yall are crazy, females wear pink" take. One day people are going to learn to quit giving white liberal females the benefit of the doubt. Especially coastal ones.

We cannot apply our rational and reasonable ways of thinking to them. I hope he learns from this and doesn't hitch his wagon to white liberal northeastern females going fwd.
Reply Quote
7
2 edits
Phatbob
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Fenrir • 8:57a, 9/9/26
AG
Fenrir said:
Quote:
He would not interact with us... He had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children.

The fact that this quote was stated by someone voting for an acquittal in all seriousness and with the intent of justifying her position, and not a satirical quote from the Babylon Bee is one of the most absurd things I've seen in a long time. How this ***** sleeps at night amazes me.

It reminds me of a documentary of the One Child policy in China made by a female victim of the policy who was adopted in the US. When she talked to the people who were all part of the process that lead to so many dead girl babies, they all shrugged and said "That was the government policy" and had nothing to say further than that with no judgement on the consequences of what they participated in.

We've seen it throughout history. People will offload their morality to the "laws" and feel justified in excusing atrocities because it absolves them of the consequences of their own belief system.
Reply Quote
5
Tramp96
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Hardcore Greg • 9:00a, 9/9/26
Hardcore Greg said:
. I do not have the bandwidth to sit there and listen to godless liberal women with toxoplasmosis


I'm 53 years old and I learned a new word today.
Reply Quote
4
BrazosDog02
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Hardcore Greg • 9:03a, 9/9/26
AG
Hardcore Greg said:
AggieKatie2 said:

I apparently missed that Massachusetts is one of the few states that when the defense utilizes an insanity defense, the state is required to prove the defendant WAS SANE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

This is what I hate. As a reasonable juror, it seems to force you between a rock and a hard place. A juror should be able to say "yeah I think this person was crazy as all get out, but they are GUILTY full stop of heinous atrocities". That's personally where I sit...i believe she was very likely way out of her mind, but I don't care and think it's ******ed to give people a pass because they are crazy.

I don't have a legal bone in my body...is there something I am missing?

Is this going to start applying to school shooters and mass murderers? When an 18 yr old kid shoots up an elementary school or a movie theater, are people going to have this same energy?


You're not missing anything. It's a nuance of the charge and sane people have a tough time with it. I believe you can be insane and do terrible things because of it and not realize what you did because you are insane. But I also have no way to proving any of it and as such this defense makes it very hard to work in my head. I think it's being abused here and I think she's absolutely aware of her actions.

Also, I think jury instructions are hard for some people when you dump all of the above into the mix. It requires more than an "average" person to process it. I've said it before, but I've met my "peers". 98% of them are dumber than me and there is no way in hell that I want my fate depending on their ability to critically think or have complex thoughts. No way at all.
Reply Quote
2
bmks270
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:03a, 9/9/26
AG
I don't understand why the insanity defense even exists.

Insane or not, murderers should be locked up.

Reply Quote
22
MouthBQ98
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:07a, 9/9/26
AG
I seem to recall this from a certain movie:
"How do you write women so well?"
"I think of a man. Then I take away reason and accountability."
Reply Quote
19
Benny the Jet Rodriguez
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bmks270 • 9:08a, 9/9/26
AG
Yep. Anyone who commits murder is insane. They have to be. Outside of self-defense situations, a sane person can't be capable of murdering someone.
Reply Quote
5
Tramp96
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bmks270 • 9:17a, 9/9/26
bmks270 said:
I don't understand why the insanity defense even exists.

Insane or not, murderers should be locked up.


I think it should only be used for death penalty eligibility.

If guilty because insane, ok we lock you up and don't keel you.
Reply Quote
5
Spotted Ag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:18a, 9/9/26
AG
And those harpy jurists look EXACTLY as I thought they would look. Now, lets talk about where they fall on the political spectrum...oh wait, we already know with certainty. Lunatics, the whole lot of them. Liberals literally want criminally insane and mentally insane people running our streets and interacting with us.
Covidians, Communists, CNN, FOX, and all other MSM are enemies of the state and should be treated as such.
Reply Quote
11
Hardcore Greg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BrazosDog02 • 9:22a, 9/9/26
BrazosDog02 said:
Hardcore Greg said:
AggieKatie2 said:

I apparently missed that Massachusetts is one of the few states that when the defense utilizes an insanity defense, the state is required to prove the defendant WAS SANE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

This is what I hate. As a reasonable juror, it seems to force you between a rock and a hard place. A juror should be able to say "yeah I think this person was crazy as all get out, but they are GUILTY full stop of heinous atrocities". That's personally where I sit...i believe she was very likely way out of her mind, but I don't care and think it's ******ed to give people a pass because they are crazy.

I don't have a legal bone in my body...is there something I am missing?

Is this going to start applying to school shooters and mass murderers? When an 18 yr old kid shoots up an elementary school or a movie theater, are people going to have this same energy?


You're not missing anything. It's a nuance of the charge and sane people have a tough time with it. I believe you can be insane and do terrible things because of it and not realize what you did because you are insane. But I also have no way to proving any of it and as such this defense makes it very hard to work in my head. I think it's being abused here and I think she's absolutely aware of her actions.

Also, I think jury instructions are hard for some people when you dump all of the above into the mix. It requires more than an "average" person to process it. I've said it before, but I've met my "peers". 98% of them are dumber than me and there is no way in hell that I want my fate depending on their ability to critically think or have complex thoughts. No way at all.

Same. And it's sad, but as a society we have to be pragmatic and realize that overall it is a very rare thing statistically, and that the real victims are the ones that were injured or killed (and their families). Not guilty by reason of insanity is absurd imo, and not fair to the victims or society at large.

You could literally make the case that the brain chemistry for just about every mass murderer, school shooter, and serial killer in American history was completely "off". Too bad, so sad, we demand that they be held accountable.

I keep going back to Thomas Johnson...that dude was clinically insane and many people, including doctors, knew this for a long time. Fast forward a few years and he's homeless and looks completely different and decides to hack up a couple of innocent joggers in Dallas one morning with a machete.

We going to give people like this a slap on the wrist? Or are only females with children special?

Not directing my rant at you, just ranting.
Reply Quote
4
4 edits
No Spin Ag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Tramp96 • 9:23a, 9/9/26
Tramp96 said:
bmks270 said:
I don't understand why the insanity defense even exists.

Insane or not, murderers should be locked up.


I think it should only be used for death penalty eligibility.

If guilty because insane, ok we lock you up and don't keel you.


Agreed.

The jurists said they all agreed she killed her kids. Right there, at best, she needs to live the rest of her life in an asylum. She should never be amongst non murderers ever again.
There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the later ignorance. Hippocrates
Reply Quote
7
Cromagnum
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:24a, 9/9/26
AG
If you show up to jury summons with unnatural hair color, or just have the air of smug liberal arrogance and entitlement, you should be struck from the jury immediately. These creatures will NEVER convict someone of a crime they see no problem with.
Reply Quote
9
1 edit
BadMoonRisin
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Spotted Ag • 9:30a, 9/9/26
AG
And they couldn't wait a single business day after the end mistrial was declared to go in front of a TV camera as a group.

These are activists looking for book deals and attention, not impartial jury of peers.
Reply Quote
19
2 edits
fc2112
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:30a, 9/9/26
You just know these harpy women gave the man's name to these news agencies too but none of them have run with it (yet).
Reply Quote
4
rwpag71
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:35a, 9/9/26
AG
Those women interviewed are just not very bright, and seem to be quite comfortable in exposing that fact to the world. But then again, they are not very bright.
Reply Quote
6
Hardcore Greg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to No Spin Ag • 9:39a, 9/9/26
No Spin Ag said:
Tramp96 said:
bmks270 said:
I don't understand why the insanity defense even exists.

Insane or not, murderers should be locked up.


I think it should only be used for death penalty eligibility.

If guilty because insane, ok we lock you up and don't keel you.


Agreed.

The jurists said they all agreed she killed her kids. Right there, at best, she needs to live the rest of her life in an asylum. She should never be amongst non murderers ever again.

I respectfully disagree with this. A man or a woman who kills others because their brain chemistry was off (virtually every serial killer and school shooter ever) needs to go to prison. Even though it may not be entirely fair that they went schizzo or psychotic or whatever.
Reply Quote
1
fc2112
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:44a, 9/9/26
I have said repeatedly on here - the prime motivation for most women above all else is to fit in.

If you watch the Whatever podcast, you'll see women asked something like "how many continents are there". The first woman says "20" and next 5 all say 19 or 21.

These women saw that most of the other women all wanted NGBI and all fell in line. The idea that anyone would hold out on their principles versus wanting to fit in is absolutely foreign to them.,
Reply Quote
13
Hardcore Greg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fc2112 • 9:57a, 9/9/26
fc2112 said:
I have said repeatedly on here - the prime motivation for most women above all else is to fit in.

If you watch the Whatever podcast, you'll see women asked something like "how many continents are there". The first woman says "20" and next 5 all say 19 or 21.

These women saw that most of the other women all wanted NGBI and all fell in line. The idea that anyone would hold out on their principles versus wanting to fit in is absolutely foreign to them.,

This whole thing is crazy...in just a matter of weeks, the curtain has been pulled back, and I now see why the Bible forbade women from preaching or holding positions of authority within the church. And why almost every society throughout history and the world kept them out of real positions of power and influence. Why they were generally tasked with maintaining the home and caring for the children and directing their empathy in healthy ways.

A lot of women are great, and know how to think for themselves, but an awful lot don't, and it is simply to risky to let them steer institutions, nations, etc. Our forefathers were much wiser than we give them credit for.
Reply Quote
18
2 edits
fc2112
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:05a, 9/9/26
Ben Bankas has a great take. "If you don't know where you want to go eat, you shouldn't vote". AMEN. (Language NSFW)

Reply Quote
11
2 edits
No Spin Ag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Hardcore Greg • 10:17a, 9/9/26
Hardcore Greg said:
No Spin Ag said:
Tramp96 said:
bmks270 said:
I don't understand why the insanity defense even exists.

Insane or not, murderers should be locked up.


I think it should only be used for death penalty eligibility.

If guilty because insane, ok we lock you up and don't keel you.


Agreed.

The jurists said they all agreed she killed her kids. Right there, at best, she needs to live the rest of her life in an asylum. She should never be amongst non murderers ever again.

I respectfully disagree with this. A man or a woman who kills others because their brain chemistry was off (virtually every serial killer and school shooter ever) needs to go to prison. Even though it may not be entirely fair that they went schizzo or psychotic or whatever.


Good point.

And seeing as how there's prisons for all types, I'm sure there's one for people like her that they could put her in.

To me, as long as she's not in the general public, I couldn't care less where she spends the rest of her life.
There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the later ignorance. Hippocrates
Reply Quote
4stringAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:19a, 9/9/26
AG
Massachusetts is ****ed. There's no way to win a trial like this with their screwball "prosecution has to prove sanity" practice. There will always be women (and beta men) that will sympathize with this murdering wretch and go for not guilty by reason of insanity.

Think about those words: not guilty. After murdering your three kids in heinous fashion. I think that's what the lone juror was not able to get past. He couldn't find an acceptable out. There was no "guilty but insane" option so he held out for guilty of murder because it was the right thing to do and the facts showed that.

Now these 3 crazy jurors are coming out lambasting him and trying to justify their completely toxic empathy that they were willing to let a triple murderer loose on society.
Reply Quote
24
1 edit
No Spin Ag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 4stringAg • 10:36a, 9/9/26
4stringAg said:
Massachusetts is ****ed. There's no way to win a trial like this with their screwball "prosecution has to prove sanity" practice. There will always be women (and beta men) that will sympathize with this murdering wretch and go for not guilty by reason of insanity.

Think about those words: not guilty. After murdering your three kids in heinous fashion. I think that's what the lone juror was not able to get past. He couldn't find an acceptable out. There was no "guilty but insane" option so he held out for guilty of murder because it was the right thing to do and the facts showed that.

Now these 3 crazy jurors are coming out lambasting him and trying to justify their completely toxic empathy that they were willing to let a triple murderer loose on society.
There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the later ignorance. Hippocrates
Reply Quote
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 4stringAg • 10:37a, 9/9/26
AG
4stringAg said:
Massachusetts is ****ed. There's no way to win a trial like this with their screwball "prosecution has to prove sanity" practice. There will always be women (and beta men) that will sympathize with this murdering wretch and go for not guilty by reason of insanity.

Think about those words: not guilty. After murdering your three kids in heinous fashion. I think that's what the lone juror was not able to get past. He couldn't find an acceptable out. There was no "guilty but insane" option so he held out for guilty of murder because it was the right thing to do and the facts showed that.

Now these 3 crazy jurors are coming out lambasting him and trying to justify their completely toxic empathy that they were willing to let a triple murderer loose on society.

Agree that MA law is all effed up with such a screwy and unusual insanity standard and burden shifting.

I always expected a hung jury but TBH expected it to go the other way. But a holdout is a holdout in our jury system in criminal trials so in the end the system worked as designed.

Interestingly, back when I was in school, psychologists tried ro study the dynamics of jury deliberations and convinced a judge to allow them to secretly record several jury deliberations from different trials. When they published their research, without identifying which trials but with enough specificity to narrow down which court, they were forced to further identify which jury deliberations they recorded and those convictions were tossed out. Eventhough the juries involved never knew they were being recorded, the mere possibility was considered too big of a threat to jury deliberations to taint those convictions.
Reply Quote
2
ThunderCougarFalconBird
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 10:40a, 9/9/26
AG
People would be stunned by the amount of money that gets spent empaneling mock juries for big civil trials. Some former colleagues had one where the damages model was (legitimately) 10 figures. I think they spent north of $ 1 million just on focus groups and mock juries.
Reply Quote
3
Squadron7
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:42a, 9/9/26
AG
Reply Quote
14
Squadron7
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:43a, 9/9/26
AG
So would the proper phrase be toxoplasmatic women?
Reply Quote
1
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ThunderCougarFalconBird • 10:52a, 9/9/26
AG
ThunderCougarFalconBird said:
People would be stunned by the amount of money that gets spent empaneling mock juries for big civil trials. Some former colleagues had one where the damages model was (legitimately) 10 figures. I think they spent north of $ 1 million just on focus groups and mock juries.

Yes but difference being that those jury consultants have based their research and resulting knowledge for their predictive models on post deliberation interviews not recording deliberations as they occur. It is that knowledge that drives today's jury consultants from voir dire and jury selection to the conduct of the defense.
Reply Quote
1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.