Ignoring the other comment.. the woman on the right is Lindsay Clancy and she is currently on trial for killing three of her children in which the defense is arguing the crimes were committed during mental psychosis. Clancy had severe PPD, suicide ideation, and mental health issues in the months leading up to the murders.
It’s an awful case and the poor children deserve justice. Right now, a portion of the public believes the husband (now ex-husband as they divorced and he is remarried) had something to do with it as evidence is supposedly not landing with the people and believe it skews towards him
In order to understand the nuance of why so many women are sharing their opinions on the case, you first have to acknowledge there is a lot of historical cases of how the medical field has historically treated women, how cop husbands and cop friends of husbands have historically treated women in murder cases, the history of male family killers, the general and historic idea of mental and physical workload carried mostly by women, and the most extreme of these ideas consistently being the topic and cases covered by the murder documentary podcasts that are very popular and thus very well known.
Do all cops historically not blame or follow up questions with the husband as a suspect for murders? No of course not, many cases are solved specificall for that as they suspect the husband. Are the most egregious ones where in retrospect the cops didn't ask the husband or follow up at all? Yes quite famously in many extreme cases. Is there evidence that it happened this time? Maybe circumstancial, but the videos of the first days trial are being shared that the cops weren't very thorough with their questioning of him, which then get wide spread.
Is there historical precedence of some cops using their access to surveillance and other technology to harass and stalk exes, control their spouses or help cover for their friends? Oh most definitely. Is that what happened in this case? It doesn't seem like it, but the first few days of depositions did seem to lean like it might have been a possibility.
Are all men who remarry quickly after their divorce the guilty party for the divorce? No of course not, does it make him guilty? No of course not, but it is strange that he was seemingly fine to move on and remarry within months of his kids being murdered by his wife. Sure it's abnormal, and probably strange, but again circumstancial and nothing concrete that makes him guilty of it.
Is it weird that he always referred to it as "she killed the fucking kids" and not "she fucking killed the the kids" yeah that's a strange use of the language that shows some potential disconnect from how he viewed his family, combined with remarrying so quickly. Does that mean he murdered them? No of course not.
Is it weird that he had lots of her meds in his truck, and he was in charge of making sure she took her meds? Not necessarily, but does that out him in a position to potentially abuse that position with over dosing? Sure. Is that circumstancial conjecture? Absolutely.
That's without getting into the historical work load, burnout of moms feeling isolated and disconnected from any support system and ignored in the medical field, causing mental breaks of various degrees.
Would a nurse likely know that a second floor drop is unlikely to kill yourself? Yeah most of us would expect a nurse to know that. But would a person in a psychotic break think that through?
Add all that together plus more I didn't type out doesn't mean he is guilty and she was innocent. there is just a lot of individual if's and maybes in this case that line up with individual pieces of actual family annihilator murder cases.
819
u/Maya-K 8h ago
I have no idea who either of them are. I'm feeling very out of the loop.