True so just pretend you were not aware of your actions at the time
sending her husband on errands makes it hard to conclude she had a psychotic break
Her history shows she was having a break.
As I said I haven’t met her, read her file, etc. i am going off the news and I can see a valid defense. So did the jury.
If you look at the grok output from the other cases. Often they were found not to be mentally ill
1 Like
Except one.
And, a million internet incels.
Where the killer is from Duxbury[ AKA Deluxbury} , I used to live 20 miles from there. Duxbury is where all the beautiful people live.
The reason there was a Mistrial was probably because of her weasel attorney{Kevin Reddington]. He is a very high profile lawyer. Some useless information…he is based out of the town I lived in Brockton, Ma.
Thankfully there was 1 juror who was able to see thru all the smoke and mirrors that was thrown at them from Reddington.
Massschusetts law is in her favor
I am not saying she was or was not insane. What I take issue with is people not looking at the facts of the case to see there are valid concerns here. When people say she needs to be held accountable, that often means they don’t believe in mental illness or the sky god controls our actions.
If you look at the cases sister posted, most were either not mentally ill, using illegal drugs or they knew right from wrong.
I have no issue giving people treatment rather than prison, but that doesn’t mean I think they should be allowed back into society without restrictions. If you have been shown to be a danger, we need to make sure the danger is mitigated.
2 Likes
2 Likes
1 Like
Texas and North Texas (AKA Oklahoma) know how to kill the murdering psycopaths. I have no issues with this. At the end of the day, kids were brutally murdered. Insane or not the killer should get old sparky!
1 Like
Agreed. Is this a mockery on 12 Angry Men ?
There were valid concerns. That’s why there were 11 votes for acquittal but a lot of that was I am with her rather then did the prosecution prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Linda Clancy had the capacity to murder her kids. I’m actually with the one juror because I think she premeditated killed her kids
I have no problem with that. The problem is her stay in a psych hospital needs to be at least the same amount of time as if she was convicted of manslaughter
Nobody disputes she killed her children. She had the capacity to do and did do it. Everyone is in agreement on that.
1 Like
Should she be guilty but mentally ill or sent to a psych ward until they say she can be released?
In other words should it be viewed as legal insanity where she’s not held responsible or should she be held responsible despite being mentally ill
That’s up to the jury
1 Like
What it’s worth, A finding of not guilty is not a finding of innocence.
The jury may believe that she is probably guilty but the fact has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.