- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Lindsay Clancy Question
Posted on 8/27/26 at 7:32 am
Posted on 8/27/26 at 7:32 am
I have followed this case the last few weeks and the reaction of many women is absolutely disgusting. So I wanted to pose a question to the board to see what your thoughts are.
What if Clancy had murdered someone else's children and not just her own? What if a friend's children were there during her "alleged" psychotic break and they were strangled as well? Would women still be defending her? I don't believe they would be, at least to the extent they are now.
If this is the case, is this trial simply American women consciously or subconsciously asserting that women should be able to murder their own living children without any criminal consequences? If she was in a psychotic state, the identity of her victims should be irrelevant, but I don't think the reactions would be the same.
What if Clancy had murdered someone else's children and not just her own? What if a friend's children were there during her "alleged" psychotic break and they were strangled as well? Would women still be defending her? I don't believe they would be, at least to the extent they are now.
If this is the case, is this trial simply American women consciously or subconsciously asserting that women should be able to murder their own living children without any criminal consequences? If she was in a psychotic state, the identity of her victims should be irrelevant, but I don't think the reactions would be the same.
20
Posted on 8/27/26 at 7:34 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
What if Clancy had murdered someone else's children and not just her own? What if a friend's children were there during her "alleged" psychotic break and they were strangled as well? Would women still be defending her?
Yes
Posted on 8/27/26 at 7:36 am to SCLibertarian
The prosecution bungled this case and the laws in Massachusetts set up favorably for an NGRI defense. It puts the burden of proof on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she knew right from wrong and was in full control of her actions, if the defense shows prima facia evidence that she didn't or wasn't.
The people supporting her all need mental health evaluations. They are sick individuals.
And she should be remitted to a secured mental institution for the rest of her life without the possibility of parole/release.
The people supporting her all need mental health evaluations. They are sick individuals.
And she should be remitted to a secured mental institution for the rest of her life without the possibility of parole/release.
This post was edited on 8/27/26 at 7:38 am
Posted on 8/27/26 at 7:40 am to SCLibertarian
Yeah they'd probably do some mental gymnastics to somehow blame the husband.
I've been seeing women screeching that men shouldn't have an opinion because they aren't mothers. They are simultaneously claiming that men can't understand post partum depression and demonizing Patrick Clancy because he didn't understand what was going on when his wife had post partum depression. Seems like the dude was doing his best in a situation he didn't understand, he was trusting what his wife and her doctors were telling him.
I've been seeing women screeching that men shouldn't have an opinion because they aren't mothers. They are simultaneously claiming that men can't understand post partum depression and demonizing Patrick Clancy because he didn't understand what was going on when his wife had post partum depression. Seems like the dude was doing his best in a situation he didn't understand, he was trusting what his wife and her doctors were telling him.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 7:43 am to SCLibertarian
When abortion has been so normalized with these women and some don’t bat an eye at full term abortion, killing a couple kids is just the next small logical jump.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 7:46 am to SuperSaint
I agree 100%. Not sure how old you are, but I think we're about the same age. I remember as a teen in the 1990's when we first started to learn about abortion. The overwhelming sentiment from the pro-choice crowd was that abortion was evil, but a necessary evil. Nowadays, the pro-choice crowd paints it as some sort of virtuous life decision. It's an absolute turn off for anyone with a moral compass.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 7:48 am to SCLibertarian
Posted on 8/27/26 at 7:49 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
I have followed this case the last few weeks and the reaction of many women is absolutely disgusting.
Moreso than just that, it's completely asinine.
I've seen women on social media that I know personally, and whom I know are normal, rational women, and I've seen them say they don't even think she killed the kids and that the husband did it.
That is just insanity to me. Even her defense says "Yeah, she did it, she was just crazy when she did." But there are idiots out there who go beyond the post partem shite and believe she is actually innocent from the killings themselves. It's wild.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 7:51 am to KosmoCramer
That's what's driving me up the wall about this case. The absolute most charitable interpretation is that she had a psychotic break and killed her 3 children, and can never be trusted again. This woman went doctor shopping, ignored medical advice, had every resource you could ask for, and still committed a heinous act. Even if you totally believe the PPP excuse, she needs to be under 24/7 care. People want women like her to have agency but also treat them like invalids when it comes to facing consequences
Posted on 8/27/26 at 7:52 am to Ingeniero
The problem with this case is that women are trying to bring up legitimate issues but using the absolute worst case in the world to do it.
Like I told my wife, if would be like a libertarian arguing the points of smaller government using a trial of a pedophile as his springboard. Just not a good choice.
Like I told my wife, if would be like a libertarian arguing the points of smaller government using a trial of a pedophile as his springboard. Just not a good choice.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 7:54 am to SlowFlowPro
So true.
I'm a little disappointed to see Mike Tracey taking the contrarian role on this one. He is getting roasted in comments sections.
LINK
I'm a little disappointed to see Mike Tracey taking the contrarian role on this one. He is getting roasted in comments sections.
LINK
This post was edited on 8/27/26 at 7:56 am
Posted on 8/27/26 at 7:58 am to Bunk Moreland
Lots of men do look like emotionally stunted morons responding to women looking like rationally stunted political board posters.
This is your classic case of internet factions taking sides and sprinting towards the poles to ensure ideological purity within the in-group.
Just watch. Trying to use any nuance to stop the polar shift will be met with labeling that person as an out-group apostate
This is your classic case of internet factions taking sides and sprinting towards the poles to ensure ideological purity within the in-group.
Just watch. Trying to use any nuance to stop the polar shift will be met with labeling that person as an out-group apostate
Posted on 8/27/26 at 8:00 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The problem with this case is that women are trying to bring up legitimate issues but using the absolute worst case in the world to do it. Like I told my wife, if would be like a libertarian arguing the points of smaller government using a trial of a pedophile as his springboard. Just not a good choice.
It’s kinda like Rittenhouse. Like it’s pretty reasonable to ask why that kid was running around a protest with a gun
But the three people he shot were all deplorable and he was well within his rights to defend himself.
It wasn’t the case to champion for the anti-Rittenhouse crowd
Posted on 8/27/26 at 8:00 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
What if Clancy had murdered someone else's children and not just her own? What if a friend's children were there during her "alleged" psychotic break and they were strangled as well? Would women still be defending her?
No
I think the point is to bring up the postpartum psychosis issue + failure of the medical system to get her proper treatment instead of just throwing a library of medicines at her.
A lot of other people have gone sideways on this case. I can't speak to any of that.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 8:01 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The problem with this case is that women are trying to bring up legitimate issues but using the absolute worst case in the world to do it. Like I told my wife, if would be like a libertarian arguing the points of smaller government using a trial of a pedophile as his springboard. Just not a good choice.
This is white womens Michael Brown
This post was edited on 8/27/26 at 8:02 am
Posted on 8/27/26 at 8:03 am to SCLibertarian
Men. If you have a wife that supports clancy, dont be a bitch. Stand your ground. Be strong.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 8:03 am to Dire Wolf
The crazy thing about Rittenhouse is that a SUBSTANTIAL portion of the the anti-KR crowd thinks he kills minorities to this day. I saw it posted over and over again after Karmelo's retrial was denied.
Which leads me to another point. My FB is filled with lots of MAGA gals who have HAD ENOUGH of the fake hate crimes like Karmelo and Nolan Wells who have posted at length how they think Patrick killed the kids and gaslit Lindsay into thinking she did it.
Which leads me to another point. My FB is filled with lots of MAGA gals who have HAD ENOUGH of the fake hate crimes like Karmelo and Nolan Wells who have posted at length how they think Patrick killed the kids and gaslit Lindsay into thinking she did it.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 8:03 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
What if Clancy had murdered someone else's children and not just her own? What if a friend's children were there during her "alleged" psychotic break and they were strangled as well? Would women still be defending her? I don't believe they would be, at least to the extent they are now.
Yes because they truly believe that Patrick either did it or it was his fault anyway for only being 99% helpful around the house and in caring for Lindsay's issues.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 8:05 am to CocomoLSU
quote:
I've seen women on social media that I know personally, and whom I know are normal, rational women, and I've seen them say they don't even think she killed the kids and that the husband did it.
I've got a good friend I've known since high school. We went to college together. She's now a CRNP. Highly educated and intelligent.
Seeing her believe this Clancy shite is disappointing to say the least. And the worst part is she's the only one vocal. I've got other female college friends, with kids, who have been silent on the whole thing when they tend to be very vocal about this type of thing.
These are intelligent, college educated (and in most cases post-graduate) women with kids.
Just shows you the power social media group think and appeals to emotion have on your average woman.
Posted on 8/27/26 at 8:07 am to SCLibertarian
Prosecution has unfortunately fumbled this case, IMO. They can’t decide if they’re arguing that she didn’t have PPP, or maybe she did but she still knew what she did was wrong and should be held criminally responsible.
Thankfully juries usually don’t get enough credit in cases like this. They hate her just as much as the majority of everyone else.
Thankfully juries usually don’t get enough credit in cases like this. They hate her just as much as the majority of everyone else.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News