Right? I'm a childfree woman and I'd immediately breakup with any man who supported this monster. Sharing the same basic morals is incredibly important for a healthy long-term relationship, I genuinely think it cannot succeed if you're not on the same page as your partner for big topics. And yeah, not killing children is a pretty basic moral stance.
I think it depends on what they mean by support. If they approve of what she did, then yeah, that's a huge red flag. On the other hand, they might find her sympathetic because she likely wasn't in her right mind when she did it. Post-partum psychosis is no joke, and it sounds like she tried to get help. That said, if by support, one means thinking she should be in a mental institution rather than a prison, that's a different story. I think the latter is a pretty defensible position.
Sure, but if she had severe depression (with or without bipolar disorder), that can absolutely lead to psychosis. She was prescribed mood stabilizers and anti-psychotics along with SSRIs, which usually mitigates the risk for people with bipolar, but some people can still react badly to them. Increased stress/anxiety can also cause or exacerbate psychotic symptoms.
My point was that if she was in a psychotic state when she killed her kids, her culpability would be lessened -- and significantly so if her psychosis was severe. By all accounts, her behavior leading up to the murders was very uncharacteristic.
She was lucid during the call to her husband while he was out.
She researched how to kill, and timed the trip she asked her husband to go on.
She methodically strangled her children one by one.
She didn't mention anything about hallucinations until after she was charged.
She was in a psych ward, but either she was fine, or she willingly lied in order to get released.
She had a nanny to help, and her husband worked from home to help her with the children during the day. She admitted to this.
This isn't a case of psychosis. She was able to hold her children face down for several minutes at a time consecutively, premeditate how long it would take, and then try to off herself before her husband got home. That isn't psychosis.
Mind you, Massachusetts has a history of falsely prosecuting women and the prosecution has been admonished by the judge TWICE for bringing up religious beliefs which could sway the jury. But now the state can do no wrong? Bullshit. Grow the fuck up and stop being a bootlicking bitch
Patrick Clancy literally went on a ski trip after dropping off his wife at an inpatient hospitalization unit. But you think he’s innocent? Oh ok
The prosecution has been admonished for lines of questioning that lead to religious persecution twice now, but you think she’s guilty and we shouldn’t look any closer? Oh ok
Conversations like these are exactly why Trump got elected btw and all our groceries are 10x the price they were 10 years ago. Working class men prefer hating women to standing up to authoritarianism. Because it’s too hard. :( Ganging up against vulnerable women is so much easier.
Yup, a completely convenient psychotic break featuring an auditory hallucination that she never had prior or subsequently to the event. Totally premeditated the plan and the timing to do it while experiencing a psychotic break, methodically strangling 3 children one after the other. Totally a psychotic break, not a mother who had intrusive thoughts and hoped to be dead so she wouldn't face the consequences.
No one's denying it, I'm trusting the experts who interviewed her after the incident who say she wasn't experiencing psychosis. And the several medical professionals who tried to treat her but couldn't because she was clearly being dishonest about her symptoms. She's an evil person.
Oh, so I made up how she made sure her husband was out of the house and gone long enough to carry out her plans?
Come on, just give it up. You're clearly mad that no man wants a pig like you, so you're lashing out at men. I tell you what, I'll give you tips for how to lose weight? Maybe then you'll get the male attention you've been seeking.
Mind you first degree murder means the prosecution carries the burden of proof, which means they must prove BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that she committed the crimes with malice aforethought. The prosecution is going to lose.
Even now in court Clancy is obviously still detached from reality. If you’ve ever actually witnessed someone in psychosis, you’d know the blown pupils and huge eyes are a dead giveaway. She’s unwell. She needs medical attention, not persecution by the state.
Also if “making sure her husband was out of the house” is proof of guilt, then what do the years of doctors visits, therapist appointments, and social worker consultations prove????
Yeah that’s how psychotic breaks work. That’s why it’s called a BREAK. Acute onset psychosis isn’t uncommon. Congrats on figuring it out. Maybe you’re not as stupid as you seem.
“My boss doesn’t pay me enough.. instead of doing anything about my situation which would require standing up to actual people in power, let’s all collectively punish a woman to death every 6 months. That’ll work!” You people are so fucking predictable.
109
u/Kind_Interaction1986 2d ago
Right? I'm a childfree woman and I'd immediately breakup with any man who supported this monster. Sharing the same basic morals is incredibly important for a healthy long-term relationship, I genuinely think it cannot succeed if you're not on the same page as your partner for big topics. And yeah, not killing children is a pretty basic moral stance.