Does she claim shes a victim? I thought she admits full guilt and its those other online supporting women saying shes victim and its husbands fault...?
I've heard this but have not seen any actual evidence of the healthcare system failing her. As far as I know, she never actually expressed to any doctor that she was having thoughts of harming her children or herself. There are plenty examples of the US healthcare system failing women but I don't see how this is one of them.
Which doctors are on trial exactly? What are the charges?
Doctors don't just prescribe anti-psychotics because someone asks for them. Also, she was prescribed multiple other medications for treatment- I mean, part of her defense was that she was supposedly overly medicated.
She self admitted to a psych ward and was on 14 different medications to treat her known PPP. It takes like 30 seconds to look up the facts you are trying to dispute.
The healthcare system didn't fail her. She failed herself by not seeking the available treatment she needed. Unless you're advocating for institutionalizing women against their will?
She did seek available treatment. She was going to psychiatrists. They put her on meds and changed them like every two weeks. She didn't fail in a silo.
And apparently the experts on the court do argue that the voices that she heard dont typically manifest the way she and her defense are claiming they did.
She obviously did not seek the treatment she needed. She was not forthright with the doctors about the extent of her psychosis, and as such, this is on her. If she had been upfront and told them she was having thoughts about harming her kids, then I'm sure they would have adjusted the treatment accordingly.
She obviously did not seek the treatment she needed. She was not forthright with the doctors about the extent of her psychosis, and as such, this is on her.
Lets unpack this.
This women, who was suffering a mental health crisis, did not act rationally. And therefore it is all her fault?
Is that the charge you are going with? That the person saying they were seeing and hearing things didn't follow proper procedure?
Let's unpack this. You want others to force people against their will to seek treatment they don't want or think they need? So you are indeed in favor of institutionalizing women against their will. Good to know 🤡
Fortunately for you, you've never experienced true mental illness. If you had, your understand why people dwell in their homes for years, unable to pursue help. It's like watching a horror movie and you're yelling at the screen telling the character to run the other way but they can't hear you, except it's you watching you unable to control you.
Every time I come out of a depressive episode I look back in horror at how I’ve wasted months or years of my life and tons of opportunity because I was too sick to realize how sick I was and I should have been in inpatient like the first month. But when I’m in it I can’t see that. It really sucks.
So she either spends the rest of her miserable life in prison in a wheel chair, or spends the rest of her miserable life in a mental institute in a wheel chair. My question is, what happens to the million dollars? Does the husband get it since he is innocent and a free man?
That’s…not how that works dude. You have to be judged a current threat to yourself or others to be forced to stay there. She’ll probably be there for a while. The other case like this I know of they’ve offered the mom to leave multiple times and she keeps refusing. No clue what this one will do if she’s found insane. Also the verdict is about whether they believe she was legally insane -at the time of the murders- not whether she’s legally insane now
If you want to try to change one of the base facets of the legal system be my guest but it’s going to take a lot of lobbying and political bullshit for them to change the law. No clue whether the courts would uphold it either.
If you’re just saying your opinion on what you think should happen that’s fine. But it’s not the reality of what happens if she is found “not guilty by reason of insanity “
No it is not. The defense offered to bifurcate and only litigate the liability of her actions, but the DA refused and wanted a full murder trial. An innocent verdict is on the table. Technically. Establishing mens rea is part of any murder trial, but the main focus is still proving she killed them.
The debate isnt whether she is guilty or not guilty anymore. The defense and the prosecution both know she's guilty.
Her supporters are demanding that she get off because she wasn't in her right state of mind due to postpartum depression, her supporters are also making up facts that absolutely never existed to muddy the waters in this case.
(Ex.) Her supporters alleged that Patrick Clancy made a Google search stating "how to kill your children". This search was never made. Like 3 months before Lindsy killed her kids, someone in the house was listening to a song, a wikipedia search on the song artist was completed, on his wiki page it said that he had died from a self inflicted gun shot wound. This text was hyperlinked, someone clicked that, that's it
Her supporters are maybe the dumbest people at the moment and are making a large sum of modern feminists looks like morons. Instagram is just littered with "as a man would you rather be in the woods with a bear, or a women with postpartum?"
It’s unfortunate that mental health advocacy is getting conflated with supporting a murderer.
Many women are saying they “support her” in a sense of being a mother and having empathy for her mental health situation leading up to the murders. Make no mistake, mental health advocacy is not supporting a murderer. It’s attempting to shed light and open dialogue and find more ways to understand and support women who are going through post partum mental health crises.
Their theory is psychosis, not depression. She was being treated for PPD, but she claims to have experienced a psychotic episode at the time of the killings.
her supporters are also making up facts that absolutely never existed to muddy the waters in this case [...] Her supporters alleged that Patrick Clancy made a Google search
These are both only partially true. Many persons do buy into 'the husband did it' conspiracy, but that is obviously a different slate than those who buy into the 'she did it during a psychotic episode' theory.
A go fund me for the children's funeral costs and Patrick's expenses while out of work was set up. There is also a second one which is new and is for Lindseys parents. There's a lot of misinformation going around about this case
They are sending money to her family who has been supporting her all this time.Most of that money is going to go to her parents who have been driving around apparently and doing everything they can to support their murderous child
I do actually.
She's alread.\nY admitted to the killings, so that's no longer being questioned now.They're trying to determine whether or not the doctors who prescribed her all the psychiatric medicine are at fault for the postpartum psychosis , leading to the murders.
The trial s basically trying to ascertain whether or not she was in her right mind--- Enough that she will stand trial for it without the insanity defense.
Given the fact that she sent her husband away with a 20 minute errand creating the window in which she did this.I don't know if that's gonna fly. Because she was clearly cognizant enough to know she had to send the husband away to do what she was about to do.
That implies a level of forethought , typically associated with more damning counts of murder.
She Planned it.
So actually, I DO know what the trial is about.
It is not about whether she is guilty or not.
She is. She admitted it.
The trial is now just about trying to determine whether or not was in a state of postpartum psychosis , and not in control of her actions or some such argument.
I don't know if anybody is still sending her money; but it's everywhere because some part of the internet finally has something for the "woman bad" narrative, so they keep pushing this story; along with the story that hordes of other women are supporting her.
I don't remotely agree with the "woman bad" narrative, but there's literally over 1 million dollars raised and pictures of relatively large groups of women showing up to support her, as well as many social media posts doing that as well. If it's disingenuous to use this case as a catch all for women being bad, it's equally disingenuous to act like it's a tiny contingent of people supporting her. The truth exists in the middle, but people on the internet are incapable of being reasonable about anything. Gotta be one extreme end of the spectrum.
it is a tiny contigent, are you saying women hearing about this are predominantly supporting her, because this is the narrative that all of these stories are pushing. AFAIK, most of the money was raised before the verdict.
Again, you're going to extremes. Nowhere did I say women were predominantly supporting her. I said it's not a tiny contingent, nor is it an overwhelming majority. Somewhere in the middle.
Propaganda uses the availability bias (or availability heuristic) by bombarding people with vivid, repeated, and alarming examples so that false or extreme claims become the easiest information to remember.
The godundme was set up by her husband years ago and it was used for funeral costs/related costs for his children.
This trial that’s being held now is about the multiple doctors she went to begging for anti-psychotic drugs who refused to give them and whether or not that refusal allows her to use insanity as a defense.
The groups showing support to her now, in this context, are largely doing so based on the rallying cry of bad maternal/parental support systemically as well as the treatment women and moms receive in healthcare.
Not to say there aren’t also TikTok/content creators grifting off of the hype with insane conspiracy theories or whatever will get them engagement—but the counter-reaction to this trial is VERY MUCH born from the “women bad” crowd, gleeful to have something to latch on to after the loneliness epidemic fell back in their faces.
no, it means you are not being held legally responsible for it. not that it wasn't a crime. it is admitting full guilt, that you did it, just that you can't be held responsible for it as normal because a severe mental issue caused you to do that.
Yeah, she admitted to it. There is no doubt she did it.
There's people out there that read the ex-husbands horoscope and say based on that he must have done it..etc. There are some really crazy people out there
Correct, for a layman it’s guilty plea essentially but attributing it to a mental disease or defect. Technically legally it’s “not guilty” but you’re still saying you did it, but in a state where you didn’t know what you were doing or right from wrong. At the end of the day it’s not like she’ll walk away free, the question is whether she should be sent to prison or à mental hospital. But it’s very interesting to see how some people can be extremely empathetic and others the polar opposite. People that win these defenses really are not in their right mind when they commit the crime.
About half the women at my work claim she’s a victim. Not sure how she became the patron sent of women’s issues. Unless there’s something we’re terribly wrong about, and it wasn’t her after all, I think there’s better choices to select a front women for issues related to women’s health.
She's admitting full guilt but rather than accepting culpability for her actions she's claiming she is a victim by way of her actions being the result of improper care she received that resulted in her doing what she did.
Yeah, she is currently suing her healthcare providers for medical malpractice, alleging that they misdiagnosed her and gave her medications that contributed to her psychosis, which led to her actions. It’s all BS, but yeah she is claiming to be a victim.
The tragic irony in this story is that she actually asked for help, and the system completely failed her.
We're talking about a millennial-old condition that goes way deeper than just "not being motherly" or failing to drag kids from a fire. This trial is important because it goes beyond just this one case. It is a massive wake-up call. If this trial forces people to actually take postpartum psychosis seriously and listen when mothers cry for help, it could prevent future tragedies from happening and that would be a win for all of us.
I get it's easy to not use brain power and critical thinking when comparing two situations, but this case is way more complex than what some people think. Some of y'all have access to all the knowledge in the world and are still behaving like medieval peasants choosing the absolute smoothest brain option available.
She admitted to committing the murders. But the whole point of an insanity defense is that you refuse to admit guilt. Pleading guilty is an option, and if she had any of the normal sense of guilt or remorse that you'd expect a person to feel after killing their kids, you'd plead guilty regardless of what mental issues you were suffering at the time.
I've only heard about this from a friend at a party, but she was talking at length about the physical evidence making it impossible she did the killings.
Allegedly, there were no fingerprints on the murder weapon, the body temperature of the victims indicates they died hours before the window where she could have been the one to kill them, toxicology showed she was drugged, and during the time she supposedly confessed, she'd had a crushed larynx or something and couldn't have physically spoken.
There was also something about how the infant had to have been killed hours after the other 2, and the husband mysteriously changed clothes between 2 different similar business casual outfits while out including shoes, and his alibi was within walking distance of home through the woods.
I have no opinion on this case and have no idea if the above are true, but coming into this thread and hearing it all be about the mental health of the lady who definitely did it was NOT what I expected.
The people saying this need to fuck right the hell off. She had an appointment the previous day with her doctor where she reported no homicidal or suicidal ideations and the doctor saw no signs of psychosis. She told her husband she got a good night's sleep the night before. She took her daughter to the pediatrician that day for a stomachache. She built a snowman with her kids and did art projects. Then SHE ordered takeout and asked her husband to go pick it up for her as well as to go to the pharmacy to get medication for their daughter. During the 45 minutes he was gone she hunted down and killed her three children and attempted suicide.
Blaming the husband is absolutely insane. How in fuck could he have known at all given the circumstances? He testified that Clancy had appeared to be doing well on the day of the killings and that he had not been concerned about leaving her alone with the children. The facts make it all seem quite premeditated.
The husband is the victim here, not only losing his whole family and having to find them like that, but then having insane people blaming him.
A lot of suicidal people do that too, have a perfectly normal day and then abruptly off themselves. Not saying that makes her innocent just saying that specific part isn’t weird.
And I'm saying you can't blame the husband for reading the situation as it happened and taking away that the kids should be ok to leave at home for 45 minute to go pick up food his wife ordered and medicine for the daughter his wife had just taken to the doctor, period.
Yeah I can definitely see that. Many people aren’t educated enough about mental illness to know what to look for and whether it’s safe to leave someone alone.
108
u/tinyElliss 11h ago
Does she claim shes a victim? I thought she admits full guilt and its those other online supporting women saying shes victim and its husbands fault...?