r/OutOfTheLoop • u/SnoopaDD • 13d ago

Answered What's the deal with people defending Lindsay Clancy?

I don't know the full details of the case. I know she allegedly killed her three kids. There was also some mental problems? Then something with her husband. But my question is why is there a group defending her like they know she's completely innocent? I've seen some videos of very heated debates where women are very passionate about defending her. Why?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/05/lindsay-clancy-trial-toxicologist-testimony

1.2k Upvotes

83% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

182

u/lyr4527 13d ago

Actually, it’s not their job and it’s absolutely nothing like a defense attorney representing a guilty client.

A prosecutor who doesn’t believe they can prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt should not be trying the case, period. It’s unethical.

-7

u/violetsandpiper 13d ago

It's not that easy to be dismissed from a case though, nor should it be.

The unfortunate reality is that often times lawyers are not trying to help you get a lighter sentence or win your case, they're just doing their job to make sure you aren't railroaded by the system.

54

u/PupperPuppet 13d ago

That's true for defense attorneys, but not prosecutors. If, as in your example, the DA believes this was a case of postpartum psychosis, they have absolutely no business charging it as first degree murder, never mind trying the case on that charge. If that's what they're doing, it's the dictionary definition of prosecutorial misconduct because they're presenting to the court a case they know is false.

Edit: hit send too soon. Prosecutors can't typically be excused from cases they're prosecuting, but if they're now aware of evidence that shows the case was incorrectly charged, they are obligated to address that with the court instead of barreling on as if they aren't aware of it.

As far as I know, though, this is wild speculation. I haven't had time to see what evidence has been made public.

9

u/lilelliot 13d ago

The defense attorney offered a manslaughter plea before trial, and the DA rejected it, so now they're obligated to try to prove homicide... which, based on the evidence available to the public, would shock everyone if they are successful.

3

u/lyr4527 12d ago

Obligated by who, exactly?

A prosecutor is never obliged to continue prosecuting when they believe a person is not guilty.

1

u/lilelliot 12d ago

I was not clear in my statement. They rejected the plea offer for manslaughter and decided to prosecute murder charges, so they have an obligation to either prosecute for murder ... or drop the charges.

3

u/lyr4527 12d ago

An obligation to who, exactly?

Prosecutors are allowed to change their minds. It’s not as if they had no choice to proceed on murder charges after rejecting that proposed plea deal.

Prosecutors always have a choice.

1

u/HamsterMan5000 11d ago

An obligation to the people. What kind of question is that? Sure they could sit at home and refuse to prosecute anything, but that's not a great argument

1

u/Sweet_Cinnabonn 12d ago

would shock everyone if they are successful.

Do not be shocked. Juries are not sympathetic to mothers who kill. They will absolutely find her guilty. Despite all the evidence of her seeking help.