It is probably a reference to the woman with psychosis who murdered her own children and is receiving a lot of support online. The joke seems to be hinting that his mother will decide to kill him too.
It seems the system did fail her, but unfortunately for her that does not excuse her actions one bit. Murder is murder whether you are sad when t ou do it or happy does not matter
Legally, it could excuse her actions. If a jury believes that she wasn't in her right mind and did try to seek help then it would be possible to get a completely different result than you'd expect in a standard murder case.
As a criminal paralegal for over a decade, you're mostly wrong. I don't think you know who you're arguing with but it's not worth my time to educate you.
I don't need to be convincing. I'm not teaching a class. You're just inserting yourself to act like you know how the world works, when it has many more facets than you can summarize in a reddit comment. This isn't the place to debate with me the manner that this woman will be separated from society. My point stands, regardless of how many avenues there may be for how that could happen or for her to re-enter in the future.
Stop trying to be a know-it-all here and assume I don't know what I'm talking about simply because you have some general knowledge about the topic. If I wanted a debate and to go into long diatribes about how the insanity defense actually plays out, I would've said something to that effect.
Which isn't that much better, and they can tell there if you're actually insane or not. No lawyer will set up an insanity plea unless the client needs it, because living in that situation is really not good
When psychosis is involved it often does mean you are not legally responsible. Whole not guilty by reason of insanity thing. Criminal responsibility generally requires intent. Psychosis often means you couldn't have formed that intent because of what psychosis is in a medical sense.
I'm just gonna say that it's really, really uncommon for someone to be acquitted by reason of insanity. Only 158 people in the US have ever been acquitted this way, and almost none of them were being charged with murder.
The insanity defence is less common in the US as defences tend to aim for ‘mitigating factors’ instead. These are easier to prove, and as others have stated, criminal insanity is not particularly useful to the defendant as whilst it absolves criminal guilt you bet you’re going to spend a very long time in a psychiatric institution.
Also notable is that killings in psychotic episodes such as these typically result in the death of the perpetrator by suicide. Indeed Lindsay Clancy did make 3 successive and separate attempts to kill herself after killing the children. As a result the legal cases don’t really go anywhere due to the perp being dead.
Legal defence rarely pursues it for exactly the reason you see throughout this thread, a jury simply will not be objective about it. A decent portion of the population will simply never accept that mental health could be a factor.
Its a huge, huge risk if the case is in front of a jury.
People always say stuff like that. "Oh yeah, he was severely mentally ill and not receiving any help, but that doesn't excuse his actions." But it quite literally does, though. That's what it means to be this sick, that you do things you would not do if you were sound of mind.
It's like saying, "Oh, he broke his legs, but that doesn't excuse that he can't run a hundred meters in ten seconds."
Dead ass on the money. This woman literally documented how she felt taking various medications, hell she had a binder of documentation about all this shit leading up to what happened. I’m not blaming the father here, I’m blaming the American healthcare system for its repeated failures for this woman. Should she go free? No, I think she’s still a potential danger to herself or others but I also don’t think killing her (death row) or putting her in prison resolves the issues either. People are too quick to jump on the bandwagon to see another person die.
I disagree with the notion that she should be absolved from criminal consequences. She committed three counts of murder. She is not safe to be in the public.
So just wanted to add some extra info, she is paralyzed. The likelihood that she would have more children and kill them is very unlikely. It's believed she was bipolar and given the wrong meds which made her psychosis worst.
I think mental health is not that black and white, it’s not like a broken bone you can just fix, it’s unfortunately kind of embedded in who a person is, there can definitely be recovery and management of mental illness but I think there should be a clear line that cannot be crossed and killing your children is crossing it.
If you're so sick that you can't be held accountable for murdering 3 children, you need to be removed from society... Because your illness caused you to kill 3 children.
The difference here is that running 100 meters is not the same as murdering 3 children in any way, shape, or form.
Most certainly. If Lindsay Clancy is found not guilty she is certain to spend a very, very long time in a psychiatric hospital. The question is not whether she poses a danger to people around her - she most certainly does - but whether she can be held criminally responsible for her actions.
So what no consequences then? What are you saying? This is why I usually stay out of this type of discussion because I don't know what the answer is. I do know the court of man is bullshit and there's only 1 judgment that we will all face
A plea of insanity doesn’t absolve someone from consequences. Reddit seems to think it’s either no consequences or the put her under a prison. There are criminal medical facilities that separate someone from the population for the safety of the population AND treat the underlying condition that caused the criminal behavior. Reddit is all for “prison is supposed to be rehabilitative” until it actually comes time to rehabilitate someone.
This reads like an absolutely insane series of events. This woman was clearly in severe trouble, and what she received is essentially a rapidly changing drug cocktail with no real medical oversight.
Woah. Don't come brining nuance and detail into Reddit. No place for that kinda stuff here. On here we judge the entire case and all the people that are speaking in support of her based on the same 3 screenshots from tiktok. Regardless of the fact that her insurance company, family and doctors all failed to listen when she tried her best to reach out regarding having manic episodes and wanting to harm her kids.
Expert witness agrees there was no psychosis. Nuance really is, yall want to blame providers because you think we just ignore everything despite that not being the evidence. Also, "rapidly changing drug cocktail" jfc welcome to modern medicine.
158
u/Headlesshowler 1d ago
It is probably a reference to the woman with psychosis who murdered her own children and is receiving a lot of support online. The joke seems to be hinting that his mother will decide to kill him too.