LegalEagle did a pretty good video about this the other day. I agree that our health system failed her. It's a bad situation all around
this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2026
40 points (93.5% liked)
News
39093 readers
1658 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Lady murdered her own children because she was fucking nuts and no other reason. Nobody disputes this. If she doesn't qualify for the 'insanity' defense, who does?
Pregnancy is a scary thing. Everyone knows it can kill it's parent, but not everyone appreciates that it regularly changes the mom's body permanently. That is to say it damages mom's body permanently. Turns out it can wreck the brain just as badly as the pelvic floor.
It's so shocking and disturbing to think about a mother murdering her own kids. So I feel like I have to point out that family annihilation is the most common form of mass murder in the US and it happens about every 5 days. Clancy's actions do not fit the pattern of that crime because the children were wanted, the marriage was stable, there was no abuse, and it's unusual for a woman to do this.
You could probably say that about any mass murderer. However, being insane does not necessarily mean you don't know the difference between right and wrong. That is basically what she is on trial for.
I don't know enough about the history of her medical treatment et al, but she wasn't being tried on being insane or not.
The question isn't really if she was crazy it's more about how much we want to punish her
the legal system is heavily tilted in favor of ''let's never let anyone go free'' than anything else.
Apparently you're not aware of the laws in MA concerning this specific example. MA laws significantly differ from most states in that if there is a possibility of mental issues the burden is placed on the state to prove the person is competent. In short the exact thing you think the legal system is tilted towards is what is NOT happening to her because of the potential for mental issues.
tiktotk warped the juries mind.
Case reminds me a little bit of the guy who decapitated the random person on a bus in winnipeg.
That guy was set free due to the insanity defence.
Is he evil? No, probably not, but he's capable of doing evil things. What happens when they arbitrarily decide to stop taking their meds again?
Also, aren't almost all evil acts a result of mental illness? Why does lindsay get a pass? Wouldn't you say that every single person that kills their kids are mentally ill?
I feel bad for those with mental illness, but I also don't want to live in a society with these people at all. If a person killed a child they should be locked away so there is no chance of it happening again.
My biggest bafflement though comes from how she has fans and supporters. It is a very scary thing on full display right now.
No, probably not, but he's capable of doing evil things.
Just a side-note: show me the human that isn't capable of doing evil things? Some just needs a bit more vigorous pushing than others. But it's never an infinite amount.
I know. She didn’t wake up one day with serious MH issues, she'd been repeatedly told what she needed to do. She didn't do it. She's also shown intent eg killing the kids in the basement where she's less likely to be caught. What happens next time she doesn't take her medication? And how is her MH likely to IMPROVE now she's responsible for killing her kids, paralysed and gone through the court case?
Whichever way you look at it, 3 beautiful children are dead. And it's just fucking awful
Also people don't seem to be thinking about the bigger picture here. What do you think will happen with a not guilty verdict? Maga is going to have a field day with this. It wouldn't even surprise me that this is a psyop designed to kill decades of feminism progress.
It's a good thing our justice system is not built on how different political factions will react to certain verdicts. We'd never have integrated schools if that was the case.
I don't know how you come to the conclusion that this is somehow a psyop. Unfortunately, people, including women, sometimes kill their children. Treating this as though it's designed to kill the progress of feminism is not really supported by the facts.
Rather than reply to this comment and your above comment, I just want to add here that just because people are rallying around her in this moment does not mean they support her actions. I don't think people are attempting to suggest what she did was ok, just to raise awareness about how severely childbirth and motherhood can affect women psychologically and how we need to do more as a society to support people in these positions. Especially when you take into account the seemingly negligent way in which many mental health issues are treated on their own without the addition of motherhood. It seems like she was struggling mentally before all of this and I wonder what kind of plans her, her husband, and her doctors had discussed regarding childrearing. If it was never broached that is likely an issue in itself.
I think it could be a psyop in that tiktok/others is pushing a certain algorithm to gullible people on what is an obviously very dividing and engaging topic and it will be used against said people who are incriminating themselves online to strip their rights citing they are not fit for society, and in this case, almost unanimously women. Snowden spoke on what a permanent record online means almost 15 years ago and this is about to come to fruition. And the US is spiraling into christian nationalism
For the average walmart american this case is cut and dry: she killed her children and there is an alarmingly large portion of people defending her. There has never been a case in history where a large portion of people have rallied behind someone who have killed their kids. Not one single example.
Why did this case blow up on social media suddenly anyway? This is so obviously politically motivated in my opinion.
Cases like this often make the news. It's sensational because it goes against one of the things we think is foundational to society. We see similar things with cases where kids kill their parents, but less since we expect parents to care for their kids more. People still talk about Casey Anthony and the even the dingo case. This case may be getting more publicity than others because of a variety of factors, including her prolonged struggle with mental health, but I really don't think it's so substantial I'd call it a psyop. I'm not on TikTok though so I don't know what they're saying there.
I don't think it's as cut and dry as you assume, seeing that a jury of those same Americans don't seem to think it's as cut and dry. I think a lot of people don't actually understand what you refer to as "Walmart Americans" actually believe. I understand the fear that America is backsliding, but suggesting that we give up on justice does not help us. I'd also like to point out that people don't think she should walk free. Even in your original comment you note that you don't want to live in a society with people like her. She will likely be in a mental health facility for a long time if not her life. I don't think most people think prison is the right place for someone with such severe mental illnesses and the jury seems to reflect that.
This is a showing my ignorance but can she be locked away in a mental health facility? In Canada this hasn't been a thing for many years. It's prison or back into society with medication after they decide you are fit for society. Maybe a short hospital visit if lucky. Usually whichever is cheapest
If she is found not guilty due to lack of criminal responsibility, the court would begin the process of committing Clancy to a state psychiatric facility. Her commitment order would be subject to regular review by the court, though she could be committed to the facility indefinitely. If she is deemed no longer mentally ill and not a danger to the community, she could be released following a hearing.
Literally the first article that came up about it: https://abcnews.com/news/story/lindsay-clancy-trial-guilty-lack-responsibility/?id=136187449
It's perfectly reasonable to say a temporary mental condition caused diminished capacity but that should not fully negate the crime. Massachusetts laws are very different from Federal laws and the majority of states, and MA laws would not give her a free pass if she were found to be affected by a temporary mental health issue. The problem is the mental health defense would normally result in confinement to a mental health facility, but if this was only an issue during/after pregnancy is she still a danger? Should she still serve time? Those are the questions the trial is trying to answer in real time.
People need to understand that civil commitments are pretty fucking wild. They're effectively life imprisonment.
No, this trial is trying to answer one very specific question, which is whether the killings were done with a criminal mind. Pretty much everything else is already known or outside the scope of a criminal case.
Yes but that's the defense, mental disorder in lieu of criminal intent.
a temporary mental condition
There lies the argument of the defense (the mom). This wasn't a temporary mental case, it was the conclusion of a very long period of mental illness. Having listened to their defense, the system failed her and her family.
Yes but that's a specific issue with the defense. Postpartum depression IS by definition a temporary condition, even shorter if treatment is sought, which she didn't, which leads to culpability.
Yep and a bunch of laypeople are doing it. Not MH experts, not doctors, random people.
She has experts, the prosecution has experts. That's the ideal example of the current system in play. The goal of neither side is to tell the truth, unfortunately, it's to tell the best story which matches their side of events. Which is fucked up but is the reality of the system.