The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Lindsay Clancy case is so polarizing bc both sides require u to totally ignore t
Poast new message in this thread
Date: September 4th, 2026 7:59 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) he opposing argument. The Matt Walsh steel man is that she killed the kids end of story burn the witch, ignore 100% of the defense case. Conversely NGRI means she was 1000% nuts beyond a reasonable doubt, had absolutely no idea what was going on, and was basically abducted by aliens. Now under Mass law obviously the tie goes to the defendant, hence 11-1. But we don't get any middle ground here. Hence why so many people see it as just one way or the other. There was absolutely nothing she could have done to stop herself from killing the kids? It's a reach. But also Matt Walsh is ignoring the mitigating factors to a point where his views lose credibility, even if you think she's not completely innocent. You'll never get 12 people to convict on Murder 1. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116614) |
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:01 PM Author: MISO HORNY Both sides of the political spectrum are comprised of sort of brain dead people who are eager to fill their emptiness with ideology and go with whatever talking points the thought leaders are pushing (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116618) |
 |
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:37 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116845) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 5:54 AM Author: chilmata (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117088) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:14 PM Author: Kenneth Play (emotional girth) cr nobody wants to hear about common sense being in the middle these days (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121694) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:03 PM Author: Jalapeno cheddar Yeah she killed 3 little kids she should be euthanized or locked up for the rest of her life it's not hard (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116620) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:10 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) But you realize if you're an impaneled juror who passed voir dire and not an internet tough guy and you've sworn an oath to impartially look at the evidence you're not going to 100% throw out the defense argument. In a case where most jurors listen to the defense attorney even a little bit you're going to have substantial reasonable doubt. The jury isn't 12 handpicked men from the jury school of internet tough guys. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116633) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:12 PM Author: Jalapeno cheddar I don't give a shit about any of that bullshit you dork. She killed her own little kids it doesn't fucking matter if she thought the tooth fairy told her to do it she should be removed from society (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116637) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:17 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Administer the King's Justice! In the name of internet tough guys we must burn the witch without due process! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116651) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 12:23 AM Author: Ass Sunstein This but unironically (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116966) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 5:55 AM Author: chilmata (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117089) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 2:39 PM Author: Debunked antisemitic trope (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117716) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:14 PM Author: Kenneth Play (emotional girth) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121695) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:24 PM Author: STEPHEN MILLER (FAGGOTCHIPPER / Hegemon) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121710) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 12:54 PM Author: Richard Ames Not even sure how this could be viewed as controversial. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117515) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:24 PM Author: STEPHEN MILLER (FAGGOTCHIPPER / Hegemon) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121711) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:35 PM Author: The Penis (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116672) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:39 PM Author: Jalapeno cheddar She strangled her own kids to death one by one but these freaks want her to get off (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116678) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:42 PM Author: The Penis I really don't give a fuck if she could "appreciate wrongfulness". That's not an observable piece of evidence like cause of death or dna. You can't fully reconstruct what someones mindset was in an objective way, and she googled tons of incriminating shit. The burden for an insanity defense needs to be exceedingly high or else everyone will pull this shit "oh well you can't prove I wasn't psychotic". (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116683) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:52 PM Author: $BILLIONS OF DOLLARS (gunneratttt) Everything is this case showing insanity could be applied to your average buckwild teen. Hormones going crazy, erratic behavior. And on top of that they have the added behavioral issues/trauma from bad environment and lack of adequate care
A dindu goes berserk in a crowded public place and starts shooting over scuffed shoes. His medical record will surely show a history of psychiatric problems and inadequate care from an overburded system. Is he not criminally responsible?
If Clancy isn't criminally responsible then 90% of the incarcerated people in Mass aren't responsible either. |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:11 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) The dindu was nuts from birth and has a wrap sheet the length of a phone book.
To cite Reddington's closing argument, how did we go from this to this? Wherein holds up a photo of the happy family and then holds up a photo of the crime scene.
What makes Lindsay sympathetic as a defendant is that by all accounts and through a mountain of testimony, she was a nice normal person beloved by everyone around her. The dindu with mental illness has been bashing people's heads in since elementary school. Lindsay wasn't. She was a totally normal person and loving mother who went through a massive personality change having to do with the realignment of neurochemicals in the postpartum period and their interaction with the prescriptions such as giving a bipolar person SSRIs that specifically exacerbated her condition.
If Judge Judy snapped at her advanced age and went on a killing spree no one would think she was herself. No one would think well this model citizen with a lifetime of public service would just turn on a dime and become somebody else. Turns out that's what happened with Lindsay. It wasn't necessarily a decision process that was all thought out and she knew what she was doing. The argument is that she had a delusional, psychotic break with reality from the person she was before, there were no warning signs, she was commendable her whole life up to a point where the chemical balance went off the rails. That's the difference.
Believe whatever you want to believe but the defense argument resonates with 50-75% of people who learn about the trial. She still might be guilty but I don't think the next jury, or any jury, will throw out the defense argument completely. It's strong because it's strong.
Every defendant who can invoke the insanity plea, does. Most do not get 11/12 jurors to buy it. I encourage you to look into the evidence. |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:22 PM Author: The Penis This is internally contradictory with the actual record. There were lots of warning signs that she was mentally ill. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116728) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:25 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Not before the period in which she lost it. She gave birth in the Spring. Then they summered on Cape Cod. Happy family. No issue. Comes back in the Fall and starts to implode. We're talking 30+ years of kindheartedness and sanity, third baby born, happy summer with the family, then the 4 month decline into madness. So nothing before that point. Yes warning signs between October and January or so. No one could have foreseen her major mental breakdown before October 2022. Hth (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116736) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:32 PM Author: Gay Grandpa We are not punishing the sane Lindsay, we are punishing the insane one. Or is she back to being sane? |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:35 PM Author: The Penis She was sane when it makes it sound good for her to have been sane, but not so sane it makes it seems suspicious she suddenly became so insane (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116751) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:39 PM Author: Gay Grandpa 11/12 individuals selected for having a high enough degree of mental incapacity agree with this (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116758) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:01 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) She was sane for her whole life and beloved by everyone around her until she went nuts. Then she was insane. That's the argument the majority of jurors bought.
The only example during trial that came out that she may have been crazy before is that after she gave birth the second time she got depressed for a while too but she exercised a lot and that seemed to cure it. |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:41 PM Author: The Penis No they were also trying to argue that during the "good period" she was hypomanic and the doctors missed it (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116851) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:54 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) They did argue that she was downplaying her symptoms at times. It's obvious that she didn't tell her shrinks everything. She told only two people she had thoughts of filicide, her husband and mother, and told all the shrinks she had thoughts of suicide but never had a concrete plan. The shrinks never took her seriously. She probably didn't show them much but her caregivers were all paint by numbers. She had crisis after crisis and even checked herself into McLean but it was New Years and all the docs were on vacation. She tried to go to some postpartum program in Rhode Island and they said she was too far outside of the postpartum period. Did you not see the text to her mother in closing where she said she was losing her marbles and begging for help?
The problem for convictionmos is that once you actually sit through the entire defense case, which I'm sure you haven't, you realize just how much she was reaching out for help over things going awry and just how little anyone was out there to help her. But yeah go all internet tough guy. Reddington shredded the prosecution experts on mental health. There's a reason he is beating his chest because there is no jury in Plymouth County who is going to unanimously convict her. The DA is a huge pussy if he doesn't retry her for murder 1 again. He is going to get his bussy blown out all over again. No shot. |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 11:10 AM Author: $BILLIONS OF DOLLARS (gunneratttt) "The dindu was nuts from birth and has a wrap sheet the length of a phone book."
Exactly. So why is he criminally responsible why Clancy isn't? The three paragraphs you wrote about the Clancy case have nothing to so with it. |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 12:22 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Jurors are allowed to consider character. Lindsay is much more sympathetic. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117441) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 12:52 PM Author: $BILLIONS OF DOLLARS (gunneratttt) Dude, I'm not asking about this case or what the jurors are allowed to consider. I'm saying that if this standard was applied across the board equally and fairly and it would excuse almost all crime.
Little crime is committed is cold blood deliberately. In most cases someone flips out and acts erratically, with far less forethought than Clancy. Austin Metcalf for example. If that occurred in Mass and he had the same psychiatrist experts as Clancy testify he could not control his impulses, he should go free if Clancy goes free. |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 2:34 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) But it's a completely different case with a different set of facts that isn't remotely the same. You can claim it's the same application but it's not. If Karmelo could have pleaded insanity he would. But he didn't. We've already been over this. You're wrong or you think he had ineffective counsel. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117711) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 2:50 PM Author: $BILLIONS OF DOLLARS (gunneratttt) If the standard applied to Clancy was applied fairly and equally, that would render a 90% of criminals not guilty. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117739) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 2:52 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) But they aren't applied in the way in which you describe and no one thinks they ought to be. It's just a nonsensical fantasy argument not based in reality that you're asserting as fact. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117744) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 3:11 PM Author: $BILLIONS OF DOLLARS (gunneratttt) "But I did have breakfast this morning"
The law is meant to be applied equally and fairly, although it's impossible to do it perfectly, that is the goal. If law we adopt in this case was applied that way, as all laws should be, it would render 90% of criminals not guilty. |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 3:56 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) There isn't one member of the judiciary anywhere who would agree with your piping hot take. Under your logic we can apply Foucault's theory that no laws are legal and every crime is just. Just because you use the words adopt fairly doesn't mean your argument is correct. Yes technically the law is 100% made up but no one in real life can assert that in court and get away with it. You're deep in love territory of absurdity claiming to have the upper hand. It's laughable. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117848) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 3:59 PM Author: $BILLIONS OF DOLLARS (gunneratttt) You don't understand what I'm saying or you're deflecting with a strawman. It's pretty simple, you could put this into an LLM if you're truly having trouble comprehending, but the truth is you're resorting to deflections because you can't reconcile and defend my point in good faith. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117855) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 5:44 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) U: what if the moon were made of cheese? Me: but it's not U: durrrrr dunning krueger! |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 6:23 PM Author: The Penis Nah he's right that what Mass does for insanity is unusually defendant friendly. Once there is some evidence supporting lack of criminal responsibility, the state must prove criminal responsibility beyond a reasonable doubt. the defendant doesn't bear the ultimate burden of persuasion. That's wild, because of how easy it is to produce evidence of some insanity, but how often people who can produce such evidence commit these crimes and still knew exactly what they were doing. Gunnerattt might be exaggerating with the 90% figure, but he is right about the principle. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118099) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 6:49 PM Author: $BILLIONS OF DOLLARS (gunneratttt) I'm not even referring to Mass law specifically as I think she is guilty if that was applied properly. I'm saying that whatever standard is being applied where Clancy is not guilty would make a majority of convicted criminals not criminals, and a majority of crime not crime.
HAtp keeps quibbling with whether that may happen (of course not), or procedural burdens, which is beside the point. The point is whether this *should* be the standard. And if one thinks so, they'd also have to be OK with the majority of erratic, violent crime committed by people with diagnosable psychiatric problems not considered crimes. |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 8:33 PM Author: The Penis Oh yeah I agree with that then. And hatp's argument about whether it would actually happen misunderstands how a reductio argument works. you're making a reductio about the normative principle someone would have to embrace in order to think Clancy should be excused. Doesn't matter if it actually may happen. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118305) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 8:37 PM Author: $BILLIONS OF DOLLARS (gunneratttt) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118309) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 8:00 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) He literally wasn't even saying this remotely. Reading comp? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118250) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 8:09 PM Author: $BILLIONS OF DOLLARS (gunneratttt) Wtf? No he's got the thrust of it, I just clarified a small tidbit above. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118275) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 8:36 PM Author: The Penis I read it quickly. I missed one part, that he wasn't saying mass law as applied properly results in 90%, just that if everyone were to apply the same principle that you would need to for this bitch to get off, 90% would get off. His poitn is basically to ask what feature of her mental state makes her conduct non-culpable, and are you prepared to apply that principle to unsympathetic defendants displaying the same feature (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118308) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 9:50 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) No one is prepared to do this which is why attorneys don't raise it (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118375) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 10:00 PM Author: The Penis That doesn’t really answer the normative challenge. It answers whether lawyers would actually make this argument broadly in practice. But the question is whether they should, if the underlying principle is valid. “Attorneys don’t raise it” is beside the point because litigation strategy and doctrinal eligibility are downstream questions. None of that tells you whether the moral principle used to excuse her generalizes. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118392) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 10:23 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) The opposite of this is actually true. No amount of philosophy is relevant to practical reality. If what you were saying is true then virtually every attorney would be guilty of IAC. There's no point in hypothesizing a world that we don't live in and trying a case in that alternate universe. This is why what gunneratttt is saying is so pointless. He wants a minitrial in a parallel universe where he can't declare himself a winner. But he's wrong in this one. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118419) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 10:55 PM Author: The Penis Your “parallel universe” criticism is really odd because testing a rule by asking how it generalizes is utterly ordinary legal reasoning. You don't need an imaginary universe. If ten thousand unsympathetic violent offenders possessed the same legally relevant kind and degree of impairment that you think excuses Clancy, should those ten thousand also be acquitted? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118455) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2026 12:08 AM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Where's the evidence? Clancy had a mountain of evidence. Go watch the trial which I know you didn't. The exculpatory evidence was astounding. You can defend your dindu client however you see fit. But only in extremely rare cases does the evidence point to NGRI. Really sick of debating this with people who don't understand the Evidence and want to generalize. You can do whatever you want but without Evidence none of this matters. Real cases with real evidence matter and you should look into it before mouthing off in a way that makes you look dumb. Hth (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118531) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2026 12:19 AM Author: The Penis You’re still answering a question nobody asked. The hypothetical stipulates that the other defendants possess the same legally relevant kind and degree of impairment you believe the evidence established for Clancy. Anyway it is clear at this point you are obviously trolling. You have to be. Either you are trolling or you completely did not understand anything from the entire argument in this subthread, starting from gunnerattts first response to you. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118554) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2026 1:29 AM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Hypothetically my aunt has a penis and is actually my uncle, but actually, she's not! That's what's so crazy about this. Yeah hypothetically if literally all of the evidence in every case were different then different laws would apply and there would be different outcomes. The only thing that matters are the facts and evidence in real cases that we do have. In France they argue hypothetical cases to the Supreme Court over there. Here, we don't. Every test has a real case behind it. Simple as. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118609) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2026 1:45 AM Author: The Penis The conversation is still going over your head or you are being deliberately obtuse. Noone said anything about different evidence, different cases, different laws, different worlds or any of that. The point is whether you are willing to apply whatever idiotic principle you think lets this bitch off to other cases, or whether your only real reason is that she just "feels" like a sympathetic character to you, and you want to simp to her for being a woman. But fine let's put that aside.
Let's talk about the actual evidence. The question is about whether, because of a mental disease or defect that she lacked substantial capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of what she was doing or to conform her conduct to law. The doctors actually treating her closest in time repeatedly observed depression and anxiety but no psychosis. McLean discharged her as a low safety risk without psychotic features. Her treating psychiatrist saw her the day before the killings. She denied suicidal and homicidal ideation and the psychiatrist observed no psychosis or mania.
Then look at the conduct immediately surrounding the killings. She searched the restaurant, checked the drive time on Apple Maps, called the pharmacy, arranged the takeout, and sent her husband on two errands, creating a period when she would be alone with the children. She then killed three children sequentially.
She had also previously concealed thoughts of harming the children from medical providers because she was afraid they would be taken away. Her own defense expert acknowledged that. That is evidence that she understood the significance and wrongfulness of those thoughts and rationally anticipated their consequences.
And the alleged command hallucination, which was the central and most important evidence for NGRI, appeared after the fact. She never reported an external voice to her treating providers before the killings. Her later accounts differed about when it began, and the prosecution expert testified that the claimed pattern of one continuous voice appearing during this episode and then disappearing was atypical.
She obviously made up the psychosis shit, but even if she were psychotic it still wouldn't matter. The only thing that matters is that she appreciated the wrongfulness and that she wasn't forced by her symptoms and the evidence shows both of those. You claim there was a ton of exculpatory evidence, but I didn't see shit. The only evidence there was is pointing toward the fact that she understood what she was doing and could have resisted and done otherwise, even if she did have psychosis (she most definitely is making it up). |
|
Date: September 6th, 2026 10:18 AM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) These are good points overall. I think the worst witness for the defense was the chaplain. You could tell this woman was a mindless do-gooder who was going to say anything she could to support Lindsay. Dr. Zeizel was also very questionable. I don't dispute the holes in the defense theory. It requires the jury to rely heavily on Dr. Resnick who is the leader in the field. But it's obviously all conjecture.
I think she was nuts, I think she had totally lost the plot mentally. I think she was given horrible psychiatric care. She was definitely hiding the severity of her symptoms from the shrinks but not from her husband and mother. They definitely should have had her committed. We all know Patrick is a complete pussy.
I definitely could have been convinced of manslaughter or murder 2. I don't believe she entirely knew what she was doing was wrong. You poked someone good holes in the defense case but it you applied yourself in equal measure at poking holes in the prosecution case it falls apart too. About 2/3rds of what the state said in opening was completely disproven, hence reasonable doubt. I think retrial is fair at this point. The state should get one more bite at the apple. As many have pointed out they need to start the next trial with their closing from this one. They started weak and finished strong. They need to start over from the end and build that case. They had a really bad opening. So it would be interesting to see if the points you're making come out earlier in the trial and not at the very end. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2026 2:07 PM Author: The Penis You seem to be making a really airy philosophical type argument where you just are weighing both sides equally and then withholding judgment as some epistemic exercise because "well we can't really know which is right and both sides make good cases and we need to give the benefit here to the defense since it says reasonable doubt", rather than weighing the actual evidence and making a determinate judgement based on applying the principles properly. Your argument is entirely philosophical, basically about "what reasonable doubt should mean" once you really give consideration to both cases. The problem is that even if you grant every single point that the prosecution makes, it still makes her guilty under the Massachusetts standard.
Massachusetts actually sets a demanding causal test. A mental disease or defect must cause the person to lack substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality or wrongfulness of the act, or to conform her conduct to the law. The two capacities are alternatives, so she does not have to lack both. And “appreciate” means a meaningful understanding of the legal or moral significance, rather than merely being able to state abstractly that murder is illegal.
If you are trying to argue that the command hallucination made her unable to resist (again we are granting here she actually had a command hallucination) that is a much weaker argument than “a psychotic delusion made her unable to appreciate wrongfulness.” If someone hears “kill them” from a voice and proceeds to kill them, the hallucination explains the presence of a motive or pressure, but does not by itself establish incapacity. Ordinary people also experience extraordinarily strong motives, emotions, threats, addictions, compulsions, and impulses while remaining legally responsible. And that was part of gunnernattt's earlier point about "who else would you have to let off if you apply this same principle", without having to have gone that deep into it. The point is that people are really strongly compelled to commit murder for various reasons that are arguably much stronger and more difficult to resist than what a "command hallucination" might be, and we never let them off. If “unable to resist” means literally that no psychologically possible exercise of agency could have produced resistance, then I am not sure forensic psychiatry can establish that proposition with anything approaching ordinary evidentiary standards. We cannot rerun the person under identical internal conditions while changing only the decision. So that prong is off the table. It's a losing argument if you look at it objectively.
I'll be short with the wrongfulness prong, even though I know I said that was the stronger possibility, I just am sick of writing. It basically goes like this: the defense has evidence that her reasons were psychotically distorted, but that is different from evidence that she could not appreciate wrongfulness. Hearing a command or believing the children were “better off” dead can explain why she killed them while still being fully compatible with knowing that killing them was morally and legally wrong. There is a missing bridge from the idea that she had delusional reasons for doing it, and that she couldn't meaningfully understand that doing it was wrong. |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 1:36 AM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) I've been mulling this word salad seemingly for weeks trying to grasp and the kernel. It sounds like you don't believe she had a command hallucination and even if she did that alone doesn't justify killing her kids. Ok great.
You still don't seem like you've gone through the entirety of the defense case which really began during the prosecution when defense counsel began poking holes in it. Your zeroing in on one aspect of the psychiatric expert testimony. Yes it's important but it's within a much larger context.
You can downplay the defense case all you want or accuse me of being overly impartial or whatever you were getting at. But there's a reason 11/12 voted NGRI. The defense case was compelling and for more reasons than Dr. Zeizel and Dr. Resnick. You're entitled to believe she knew the wrongfulness of her actions. Whatever. A juror may consider whatever testimony they want. Defendants plead insanity all the time. You're not on to some super secret reasoning no one's thought of what if all defendants are crazy. Any that can, do we've been over this.
At any rate lots of people think Lindsay is guilty. Even more people don't. You're in the minority opinion of every poll that's ever been done on this. And that's fine. You're just a guy on the internet, I'm just a guy on the internet. But I'm telling you a lot of legal analysts and pundits who followed the trial believed that NGRI acquittal was the most likely outcome if not hung. And they came to that conclude based on the facts and evidence in the trial.
I hate to say it but you don't sound like someone who actually watched the trial. You sound like you read a blog with some talking points. I've admitted you do make some good points about holes in the defense case but you haven't looked into the holes in the prosecution case at all. You accuse me of being overly impartial. Ok let's all just take the view that she's a bad evil woman and we'll fill in the facts from there. You're not starting at the starting point you're just either looking at one aspect of a 7 week trial under a microscope or you're making bold claims about a trial you only seem to know half of. Tun Sie was sie wollen. I'll be happy to address any plot holes in the defense case but you really should be more prepared to address the holes in the state's case but you'd have to actually start from the beginning with an open mind to both sides before you get so ultra specific. It's totally OK if you think the whole trial boils down to the command hallucination testimony. But different jurors have different experiences. Everyone brings a different point of view to that jury room. |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 1:40 AM Author: $BILLIONS OF DOLLARS (gunneratttt) Pearls before swine (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50120135) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 1:42 AM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) You're not as smart as you think you are (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50120136) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 3:43 AM Author: The Penis It isn't that nothing else in the trial matters. It's that all the other evidence has to connect eventually to one of those two propositions. The bottom line is that two psychiatrists who actually treated her before the murders testified that they saw no psychosis. Even granting psychosis, where is the evidence connecting the psychosis to loss of appreciation of wrongfulness? If she understood the killings were wrong while acting because of psychotic, suicidal, or compulsive reasons then she is still responsible for them. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50120275) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 9:47 AM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) I think if you watch the testimony it seems to me like she was way worse off than the shrinks thought. Now whether she was downplaying her symptoms because she was afraid of losing her kids or not, I think her medical care was really bad. She told a lot of doctors she was suicidal. She was rejected from a number of programs either because she was outside the typical postpartum window or because she never admitted to having a plan to kill herself. There's a lot of complexity to what went on during her medical care. She definitely 100% told her mom and her husband about the thoughts of filicide. They tried to help her. Her mental state was clearly deteriorating. She was put on SSRIs after receiving a bipolar diagnosis which is a big no no. Her shrinks weren't really communicating and none of them bothered to request her medical records. The care she received was really low effort and paint by numbers. Defense counsel made a mockery of all of the prosecution witnesses, even goading them into giving contradictory testimony. When Lindsay checked into McLean it was New Years and all the docs were on vacation. It took her 5 days to even see a shrink and by the end of it she was sick of being there and wanted to leave. A lot of the medication timeline is really insane too. Her condition kept getting worse and no one ever really stopped to think what is going on here, do we need to take further action. Instead they just changed her dosages over and over as if that's all psychiatry is. Her main shrink was fresh out of training and had virtually no experience.
But yeah if you want to boil that all down to her docs never thought she had psychosis and you think she knew what she was doing was wrong then fine write it all off. I will leave you with a quote from the Commonwealth's final witness when defense counsel read off a quote from the state's opening argument in a similar vein to your summary of Lindsay's mental condition. "That statement downplays what Lindsay went through." No further questions. |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 12:23 PM Author: The Penis ok, but everything you just listed only goes toward the idea that she was mentally ill, deteriorating, suicidal etc. but criminal responsibility doesn't turn on whether her care was negligent or whether her illness was severe. It turns on what that illness did to the particular capacities at issue when she killed the children. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50120601) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 12:49 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) The fact that the defense had to concede the suicide attempt was real, Lindsay wasn't known to be a shitty person, and that even the state's experts conceded she had a mental disease or defect, the CW already conceded 85% of the defense case. And all you need is reasonable doubt. They didn't prove whatever you're saying beyond a reasonable doubt. There's plenty of doubt. And that's why only one juror wanted to convict her. And they have no chance on retrial either. You're never going to get 12 to convict in this case. Reality, sorry fag. But yes approximately 10% of people see things like you do. Congrats, I guess? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50120630) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 1:43 PM Author: The Penis I agree that all the Commonwealth needs to lose is reasonable doubt. But reasonable doubt about what? Nobody disputes that she had a mental disease, was suicidal, or that the suicide attempt was genuine. Those aren't "85% of the defense case." The remaining issue is the whole ballgame. So saying there's "plenty of doubt" just restates your conclusion unless you identify the evidence creating reasonable doubt about one of those capacities.
There can be enormous doubt about how sick she was, whether her doctors failed her, whether she was psychotic, etc., while still being no reasonable doubt that she understood killing the children was wrong and retained substantial capacity not to do it.
And I don't know why you keep citing the jury count as though it resolves the underlying question. To me whats important is whether she is actually responsible, not whether some other people think she is. |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 3:40 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Just do completely bungle your opening statement, the evidence points towards something entirely different, in closing you focus on the 15% of the case that was in your favor, hooray you convinced 1 out of 12 people she was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. They can mistrial this as much as they want. In the jury room of real life there is 1 guy who thinks like you do and 11 who think like me. That's a landslide even if they couldn't finish the job.
But I agree that retrial is appropriate here. We will see what unfolds. If the prosecution start the next case with the closing from this one it may be different. We will just have to see what the trial will look like with a more competent prosecution. Maybe they can hammer home some of your points better than they did. But obviously 11 people did not weight your arguments as heavily as the other evidence, which they're 100% allowed to do. |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:15 PM Author: Kenneth Play (emotional girth) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121696) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:40 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) in other words, the burden should shift to her to prove beyond a reasonable doubt she was criminally insane and not just insane insane. I don't buy it. In a just society, there'd be a crane outside the courthouse and she'd be hanging from it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116850) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:43 PM Author: .,.,...,..,.,.,:,,:,.,.,:::,...,:,...:..:.,:.::,. I just looked this up today. The burden shift in most states is exactly like that but in MA isn't like that so the prosecution was on the hook to prove that she was sufficiently sane (which, pardon the pun, is insane). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116855) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:45 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) JFC.
Crazy part is my dad died at Spaulding Hospital Cambridge and we are coming for them *big time*. |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:48 PM Author: The Penis Yeah it's wild. I read that earlier today too that's what prompted me to make the thread about getting rid of the insanity defense. I had never heard that before about mass. Thought it was pretty much every state where the burden was extremely high and you had to prove basically that the psychosis was the direct cause not just an aggravating factor. In mass all they have to do is produce “some supporting evidence” in order to meet what they call "burden of production"and then at that point the burden shifts to the state essentially to prove she wasn't insane. stupidest shit I have heard in my life. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116864) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:06 PM Author: .,.,...,..,.,.,:,,:,.,.,:::,...,:,...:..:.,:.::,. So I was arguing with my wife and she was saying "but what about reasonable doubt???" I didn't want to say something wrong but I knew that insanity defense was a classic affirmative defense with burden shifting, but asking Claude I was immediately corrected that MA is an exception. I don't think they should get rid of it but it definitely should have a very high burden.
In any event, when I found out the MA legal position I realized why the prosecution was fucked from day 1. |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:07 PM Author: The Penis I think even with the MA standard she still is guilty. But the instructions probably confused people into giving her defense way more leeway than it deserved. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116899) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:15 PM Author: .,.,...,..,.,.,:,,:,.,.,:::,...,:,...:..:.,:.::,. Based on what I saw the prosecution seemed to argue like there was burden shifting instead of deliberately and methodically demonstrating that she a) understood her actions and b) was not compelled to perform them.
This is also likely what the defense attorney was arguing during deliberations on the 1 holdout juror not "following the jury instructions." |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:38 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) 100% agree, even as a defense attorney.
I personally would not have taken this case for any amount of money. |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:15 PM Author: The Penis I would absolutely discount every second of whatever bullshit the defense put on (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116647) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:17 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) (Juror 1/12) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116653) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:09 PM Author: $BILLIONS OF DOLLARS (gunneratttt) This could be a Gell-mann amnesia moment for you if you consider that perhaps these people do it with everything and this is just one you have a lot of knowledge on. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116629) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:15 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Oh definitely. It's brought down my view of political pundits substantially. As someone who sided with NGRI I still thought some of the conduct from the pink shirt wearers was bad like cheering on her van or the woman who got arrested for felony juror intimidation. So there's bad actors on both sides. It was tough for me calling out Nick Fuentes for being wrong about something. But he still has command over his top domain knowledge which is the influence of global jewry on our government and society.
We all have a little Gell-Mann when it comes to topics outside of our wheelhouse. Remember all the times I got pwnd on tort law and M&A shit? We all have blind spots. I have no idea why I grasp criminal law easily but don't have a clue about C Corps inter alia. |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:16 PM Author: the laziest nigger alive How are you a real person (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116650) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:17 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Taking qs (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116652) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:25 PM Author: STEPHEN MILLER (FAGGOTCHIPPER / Hegemon) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121712) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:33 PM Author: average/ordinary/typical citizen/person If she walks after all said and done I assume someone will kill her (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116669) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:45 PM Author: .,.,...,..,.,.,:,,:,.,.,:::,...,:,...:..:.,:.::,. If this was Texas or Florida? Sure.
In Massachusetts? Wouldn't bet on it. |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:50 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) NH is right next to MA. Someone will drive 40 minutes. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116867) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:59 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) (Claudio Neves Valente) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116885) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:14 PM Author: Bronus Swagner If she walks it would be a medical miracle (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116918) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:16 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116925) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:25 PM Author: STEPHEN MILLER (FAGGOTCHIPPER / Hegemon) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121716) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 8:46 PM Author: lsd There’s a sizable feminist contingent that believes that Patrick is actually who killed the kids and masterminded the whole setup to make Lindsey to look guilty, 100% not flame (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116686) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:15 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) I talk to a lot of women and virtually all of them believe Patrick did it. One woman told me that Lindsay's family had 'raised millions of dollars in order to prosecute him.' Ljl at women. Bird brains undefeated against logic and reasoning. You can't make this stuff up. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116716) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:17 PM Author: the laziest nigger alive I talk to a lot of women tp (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116722) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:18 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) All my friends wives are Patrick Clancy did it truthers (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116723) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:42 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) that's funny, because I'm with a woman who's 100% convinced this woman needs to hang. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116853) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:56 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) You have the mental capacity of an almond, fren. And you always have. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116880) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:10 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) if you really think she's not guilty, you're the one that's dumb (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116905) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:11 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) No one respects you lol (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116908) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:13 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) okay?
how about arguing against the point I just made |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:13 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) It Pays to Discover™ (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116917) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:08 PM Author: ........,,,,,,......,.,.,.,,,,,,,,,, What is the point of the trial?
Just lock her up in a mental health jail for life. Who cares about the semantics this is hte obvious outcome. |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:16 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Because the DA is a hardo who gets off on putting people away for life. He's been in the job for most of the 21st century. Prosecutors be like that. They like the thrill of the conviction. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116719) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:48 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) that's not entirely true. I would have been an outstanding elected prosecutor because I actually get it. I, personally, would not like convicting people, but I understand it's necessary to have the society our forefathers gave to us. It's the only way to continue the American dream. I don't care about (most) petty stuff, but when it comes to the serious crimes, I would make it my life's mission to crucify scum. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116865) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:00 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) You have possibly the least trustworthy and one of the the worst reputations as a lawyer of any poaster ever fren. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116886) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 12:28 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) not even close to being true (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117460) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:08 PM Author: r|cky it would not have been fair or decent to the people in your jdx if you had been elected. not only were you fraud inexperienced total shitlawyer, but you're an incredibly dishonest and troubled person. your personal financial history and endless river of nuisance lawsuits displays serious mental unwellness. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121686) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:25 PM Author: Bronus Swagner The defense argument is such obvious bullshit that the only reasonable thing to do is completely disregard it (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116735) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:30 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) I think elements of it are bullshit but elements are true. For instance I don't believe she had any command hallucinations and I don't believe anything she told the chaplain or Dr. Zeizel. But I do believe she believed she needed to bring the kids to protect them in Heaven with her before she killed herself. At any rate it's enough reasonable doubt.
The state on the other hand made a half dozen claims they failed to prove such as that she was a horrible, manipulative person, or that she faked her suicide, or that her motive was not wanting to go back to work as a delivery nurse. The state way overshot what they were trying to prove. And I think the defense got in plenty of doubt. |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:36 PM Author: Bronus Swagner The irresistible command hallucination is her entire defense. Without that even the birdbrain prosecutors couldn't have fucked this up (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116841) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:55 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) I think something similar happened but not as clean and conveniently as they said it did. It's still reasonable doubt even if I don't buy everything Dr Resnick said verbatim. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116878) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:57 PM Author: The Penis If you don't buy the evidence that she actually lacked the capacity to understand wrongfulness or resist what she was doing, you can't manufacture reasonable doubt by saying “well, something vaguely similar probably happened.” (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116883) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:01 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) That's not what I said. I said I don't believe the testimony about command hallucinations. I think it's at least partially made up. But yes I am convinced she was nuts. She's obviously crazy imo. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116887) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:03 PM Author: The Penis Right, but that’s the implication I’m pointing out. If you think the command hallucinations were at least partly fabricated, what evidence is left that her illness actually deprived her of the capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of killing her kids or to resist doing it? You can believe she was nuts and still conclude she was criminally responsible. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116890) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:05 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) I think she was at least 25% criminally responsible fren. I probably could have been persuaded to convict her of manslaughter if the other jurors were pushing it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116893) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:43 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) what? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116854) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:34 PM Author: faggot account *strokes clitdick* (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116747) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 12:52 PM Author: race baiter ginsburg (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117506) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:35 PM Author: 6.5 Screed Moar I hate lawyers (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116750) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:45 PM Author: peeface the problem is, we know women.
hopped up on meds? unable to cope with day to day life?
that is all of them. |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 9:46 PM Author: Consuela (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116780) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:54 PM Author: .,.,...,..,.,.,:,,:,.,.,:::,...,:,...:..:.,:.::,. The real problem is that this shit absolutely impacts cultural beliefs. There's already a copycat (Corie Walsh in Frankfort, KY) who murdered her 2 year old. There will be others. If burning shitbag mothers who think murdering their kids is cool in public with their screams streamed in 4k prevents this shit then I'm good with it. That remains true if they claim a voice in their heads tell them to do it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116876) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:50 PM Author: .,.,...,..,.,.,:,,:,.,.,:::,...,:,...:..:.,:.::,. She was crazy but she absolutely knew that a) she was killing her own kids and b) that doing so was wrong. While a voice "told her to do it" I don't see any argument that she was unable to resist the voice, nor was there any prior history of her doing other shit "just because the voice told me I had to."
Honestly, if she were in a normal red state without the dumbfuck lack of burden shifting for insanity defenses that MA has I think she would 100% fry. |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:53 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) I just honestly do not think she should be called a murderer because obviously she was not even acting like herself when it happened and she said she heard a man's voice telling her to do it, and since her husband is the main man in her life then I feel like that has to mean something even if people say it does not make sense, because why would her brain choose a male voice unless some man had put all that fear and pressure into her in the first place, and everyone keeps acting like she just woke up one day and decided to kill her own children for no reason when clearly there was a voice and voices do not just come from nowhere, they come from things people have said to you and ways people have treated you and probably from being controlled for years without anyone noticing, so really her husband should have known what was happening and stopped it because that is literally what husbands are supposed to do, they are supposed to protect their family and pay attention when their wife is falling apart, and if he left her alone or ignored warning signs or made her feel trapped then how is it fair that she gets blamed for everything while he gets to stand there acting shocked, because maybe she technically used her own hands but mentally it was like someone else was using them, and if the voice sounded like a man then I just feel like the responsibility has to go back to the man who had the most influence over her, which was obviously her husband, and people can say that is not how evidence works but sometimes feelings are evidence too because you can tell when something deeper was going on, and no normal mother would ever do that unless she was being pushed by some outside force, so calling her evil is just lazy when the real question is what her husband did or did not do that made her hear that voice, and honestly if he had been a better husband then none of it probably would have happened, so it seems completely wrong to say she is guilty of murder when she was basically another victim of the same man's voice. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116869) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:54 PM Author: The Penis (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116875) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:55 PM Author: .,.,...,..,.,.,:,,:,.,.,:::,...,:,...:..:.,:.::,. ... but omg they burned her alive and she screamed and it was scary so I guess I won't kill my kids like omg
^ the correct ending. |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:53 PM Author: The Penis yeah this is the strongest argument imo. her doctor testified she had a so-called “delusion of influence”, her reported feeling that an external force had taken over her body, almost as though she were a puppet. but what could posssibly independently establish that she couldn't resist, rather than that she didn't resist? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116870) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 10:55 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) if you claim that you were criminally insane at the time of the alleged crime and are competent to stand trial, you should be required to testify. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116879) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:04 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) She was recorded on video for 10 hours explaining the events to the prosecution experts and the jury had access to this evidence. She essentially did testify, fren. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116892) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:08 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) a video isn't able to be cross examined. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116900) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:12 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) You must have been incredible at law school (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116910) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:13 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) okay?
how about arguing against the point I just made |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:14 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) You didn't make one and you don't have a valid license to practice law lmao (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116920) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:16 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) I actually do (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116924) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:04 PM Author: .,.,...,..,.,.,:,,:,.,.,:::,...,:,...:..:.,:.::,. Well, if you've ever known serious schizophrenics and other nutjobs there is a simple answer to that. They have long histories of doing dangerous, scary shit that they legit have no control over and that often make no sense. They attack the principal at a local school because he molested her when she was a kid except she never went to the school and never met him. They attack random grocery store clerks because they're really hitmen hired to assassinate them.
They don't just go from "I'm on some pills because I'm depressed" to "I'm killing my kids." |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:07 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Post partum psychosis is not in the DSM. It's very rare and almost no one has any clinical experience treating it. We must expand the scope of are mental health system my guy. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116898) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:08 PM Author: The Penis yfwgi (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116901) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:10 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116906) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:12 PM Author: .,.,...,..,.,.,:,,:,.,.,:::,...,:,...:..:.,:.::,. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116912) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:09 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) so why not just remove them from the gene pool? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116903) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:17 PM Author: .,.,...,..,.,.,:,,:,.,.,:::,...,:,...:..:.,:.::,. As a policy matter this makes the most sense.
As a legal matter, the fact that it isn't in the DSM makes it hard to argue as a legit mental illness in the first place. |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:17 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) And yet the Commonwealth never argued that it wasn't real... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116930) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:19 PM Author: .,.,...,..,.,.,:,,:,.,.,:::,...,:,...:..:.,:.::,. They should have. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116935) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:32 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) They backed off most of the claims in their opening statement. They definitely can try a better case than they did. I think at best it would be hung again. They're never getting a conviction. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116948) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:18 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116932) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:03 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) I think knowing it was wrong is too far. I think she thought it was naughty and a little bit cheeky at most like she was hiding in a big wheelbarrow. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116888) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:06 PM Author: The Penis flame jumped shark (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116896) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:11 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Ok I was kidding there. But let me ask you to steel man the case for premeditated murder. Do you believe she did not fully intend to kill herself? What explains why her mental state deteriorated so quickly and how there were few signs she was going to go nuts before October 2022? What was her motive? No one thought she was a malicious person. The state never proved any motive and in fact the prosecution expert said he agreed with Dr. Resnick that she wanted to protect her kids in Heaven from a life on Earth without her as this amazing mom? Fill in the gaps for me. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116907) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:12 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) you're too dumb to engage substantively on this topic. fix that first. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116911) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:13 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Counterpoint: I have a functioning Discover card (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116914) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:14 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) why? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116919) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:15 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Good point, should I cancel it and exit the relationship in good standing? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116921) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:17 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) no, you should respond substantively or take the gaping you've received ITT and scurry away like a RAT KIKE (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116929) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2026 11:11 PM Author: Taylor Swift is not a hobby she is a lifestyle (πΊπΈ π΅π±) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50116909) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 12:06 PM Author: UhOh anyone who murders someone is somewhat insane. their exact mental health condition should be irrelevant, or if anything considered an aggravating factor. execute them all, and the shrinks too. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117415) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 12:10 PM Author: The Penis idk about anyone who kills being insane but agree with the second part (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117421) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 12:29 PM Author: UhOh psychiatry is all normative, it has no biological basis or objective measurement. murdering someone is so far out of the norm that it is per se insane. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117462) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 12:40 PM Author: The Penis normative is not the same thing as arbitrary, and abnormal conduct is not the same thing as mental disorder. an act can be immoral or socially deviant without being produced by a psychiatric dysfunction. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117487) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 12:53 PM Author: Richard Ames This is why my POV is "If she wasn't insane, she's gotta go...if she was insane, she's still gotta go. Permanently in either case." Looking into the details simply plays into the (((frame))) laid out for the culture war bullshit. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117511) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 3:06 PM Author: cosmic penis (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117779) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 2:39 PM Author: Chimp Fatigue Three defenseless children were deliberately killed, one after another, by the person uniquely responsible for protecting them. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117714) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 2:47 PM Author: UhOh yeah but her husband was mean (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117731) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 8:05 PM Author: Here's why Her husband is a narcissist!!!!!!! Look at his eyes and the fact that he remarried!!!! He tricked her!!! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118265) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 2:43 PM Author: Debunked antisemitic trope OP dated the box. He's either preemptively defending her or has some plans of his own (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117724) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 2:54 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) She's nuts but not in that way. She gets really emotional in the moment but has never plotted to hurt somebody. Not her type of crazy. Also not psychotic. Just her emotions get too strong temporarily. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117749) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 3:02 PM Author: Debunked antisemitic trope And when the moment comes that her emotions just get so really strong temporarily and she kills three babies, we all know you'll be here, explaining why (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117766) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 3:05 PM Author: '"'""'"'"' Uhhh she literally killed her kid (who the fuck knows who the dad was, lol) and bragged about it here the day it happened (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117776) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 5:45 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) I know who the dad was. It was a poaster lol. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118019) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 6:32 PM Author: industrial revolutions have consequences Straighttt got the ultimate NOWAGing (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118117) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 9:52 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Straighttt jr nuked from orbit in a Jewish psyop (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118378) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 8:42 PM Author: The Penis I totally forgot about that thread and event until you just brought it up now (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118315) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 3:04 PM Author: '"'""'"'"' TRVTHNVKE (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117772) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 4:47 PM Author: .,.,...,.,.,.,:,,:,...,:::,.,...,:,.,.:.:.,:.::.,. lol (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117934) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 8:46 PM Author: the laziest nigger alive (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118318) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:26 PM Author: STEPHEN MILLER (FAGGOTCHIPPER / Hegemon) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121722) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 4:00 PM Author: .,.,...,.,.,.,:,,:,...,:::,.,...,:,.,.:.:.,:.::.,. Why do I even need to pick sides on some random criminal case im not a juror on. America is so gay (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50117856) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 6:40 PM Author: thinkin' about asians (π€) it's polarizing because some people think women should be in charge of everything but men are always to blame for everything and other people aren't sure that's right (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118127) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 8:09 PM Author: I was Robbed I would bet that if a good chunk of American men and their familial lines were holocausted women would stop complaining about men so much and this sort of noise would all retreat into the background (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118277) |
|
Date: September 5th, 2026 11:43 PM Author: The Penis (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50118489) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 6:18 PM Author: The Penis (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121274) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:22 PM Author: Kenneth Play (emotional girth) The biggest problem I have with NGMI in a case like this is that she'll get counseling, go before a Massachusetts judge or panel, and then be back in the general population - if they're convinced she's no longer mentally ill. And I don't think that's justice. But, in the LC case specifically, she attempted suicide and she's paralyzed from waist down - I don't know what to do with that information. It's not like it changes culpability. But, it's just such a sad situation (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121704) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:26 PM Author: STEPHEN MILLER (FAGGOTCHIPPER / Hegemon) insanity doesn't change moral culpability at all, and in fact should be considered an aggravating factor rather than a mitigating one
htfh |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:36 PM Author: The Penis Whats funny is she isn't insane anymore. She was sane leading up to the killings as witnessed by multiple doctors, then suddenly became extremely insane right before the killings to the point of it not making sense to hold her criminally responsible because the impairment was so strong, but now she is healthy again. So she will likely get a short eval in a forensic hospital, maybe the commonwealth will file to get her a 60 day commitment then she will auto be released when they can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she is mentally ill enough to create a likelihood of her causing serious harm to herself and others (that's the standard in mass for holding someone who is criminally insane in a forensic hospital). Crazy how these things work out. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121737) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:45 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Nothing escapes you fren. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121750) |
|
Date: September 8th, 2026 8:32 AM Author: Kenneth Play (emotional girth) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50122056) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:24 PM Author: STEPHEN MILLER (FAGGOTCHIPPER / Hegemon) hilarious that there are retards here who believe insanity plea is legitimate
"this person experienced such severe psychosis that she lost all capacity for reason and killed her three children"
yeah that's actually the ideal candidate for death
"she didn't understand what she was doing"
will that bring her kids back?
"that's not fair to her"
i couldn't give less of a fuck about fairness to child murderers, but that aside: it's more than fair! fairness would actually be strangling her to death three times
retardnigger OP doesn't understand that justice is retributive, above all else |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:43 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) That all may be true, but do you acknowledge that every jurisdiction in the United States has a more lenient, more favorable view of the insanity plea and the defendant than you do? I'm not asking you to change your views. I'm asking you to admit that most people, virtually all people, including other far right people, are to the left of you on this issue? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121745) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:41 PM Author: hank_scorpio normal people are basically ok with the traditional insanity plea, that the person truly did not know what they were doing essentially, MA has some horseshit law that would literally allow Dahmer to go free (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121742) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:44 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) If it's so easy why didn't Aaron Hernandez plead it? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121748) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:45 PM Author: hank_scorpio he probably should have tried given this absurd standard, but having a clear history of being crazy obviously helps a lot, my point remains, all serial killers should go free in MA, you think they aren't suffering from severe mental illness and a compulsion to kill? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121751) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:50 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) It's two prong fren. You have to have the serious mental disease order defect and you have to be unable to appreciate the law OR conform your actions to it.
OK champ? |
|
Date: September 8th, 2026 12:01 AM Author: hank_scorpio I don't currently understand why it would be wrong to kill you (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121773) |
|
Date: September 8th, 2026 12:02 AM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Turn that frown upside down, Hank (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121774) |
|
Date: September 8th, 2026 12:04 AM Author: hank_scorpio my mental defect prevents it, now prepare to die (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121777) |
|
Date: September 8th, 2026 12:12 AM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) π₯Ί (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121795) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:55 PM Author: The Penis Raising insanity is partly endogenous to what the defendant is willing to claim after the offense. If he came out after and said "oh acktually voices made me do it" then maybe he could have convinced a jury considering how insane the standard is. But he didn't do that. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121764) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:55 PM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) He was literally on Angel Dust (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121766) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2026 11:56 PM Author: The Penis Yeah and mass law doesn't count that as a reason to get off criminal responsibility. Even if the intoxication caused someone to lose the substantial capacity to appreciate wrongfulness or conform conduct to law they still consider you guilty. Another good illustration of how arbitrary this all is. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121767) |
|
Date: September 8th, 2026 12:00 AM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) I think your points are very astute ITT. I just wish you applied equal scrutiny to the Commonwealth. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121772) |
|
Date: September 8th, 2026 12:09 AM Author: The Penis The Commonwealth didn't do a very good job of presenting their case. They were all over the place. One thing I will say, and this actually is not scrutiny about the Commonwealth but I haven't brought it up yet, is that the doctor the Commonwealth put on, the theory of what actually happened that that doctor presented I think is almost certainly what actually happened irl. Not saying I can prove it, but it is just much more plausible and fits multiple aspects of the case better than the delusion + command hallucination story. Basically the idea that she was really suicidal and had made the decision to killself, and so she killed the kids, because she did not want them to have to grow up with a killed-self mom.
The Commonwealth's theory here has the advantage of requiring fewer additional assumptions. There was independent evidence of prolonged depression and suicidality before the killings happened. Its theory doesn't need a previously unreported male command voice suddenly appearing right at the crucial moment.
Anyway, I think the biggest mistake the Commonwealth actually made is that they presented a much more aggressive portrait of clancy than what was needed to make their case. They painted this picture of her that went far beyond the evidence and what they could prove and opened themselves up to look bad. |
|
Date: September 8th, 2026 12:17 AM Author: hank_scorpio the point being made by normal people is that simply hearing a voice that commands you to kill does not excuse the killing, you need to be so absolutey batshit insane that you don't know you are killing people, she absolutely knew that even by the account of the defense (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121799) |
|
Date: September 8th, 2026 12:19 AM Author: The Penis Yeah I agree with that. I don't think she was guilty even granting the prosecution's best case. I'm not saying the command hallucination and delusion of being taken over would have absolved her, just that I don't think they happened. For me the issue is that there are other reasons people kill that I think are even more forceful and compelling than command hallucinations, and we don't use this to let them off. There isn't really a way to tell that she couldn't have resisted, vs. didn't resist. The only real case for murder that I think excuses it is if you kill because your life was in danger. There could be some really serious cases of psychosis especially if paired with certain forms of intoxication that make people unable to appreciate the wrongfulness or unable to resist because they were blacked out and didn't even know wtf they were doing. Not saying this ought to excuse it, just saying I think it exists. But I don't think she was at that level of impairment. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50121801) |
|
Date: September 8th, 2026 12:27 AM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) Cr.
The first four weeks of the trial were spent trying to prove that she didn't really try to kill herself and that she was a bad person prior to the killings. The CW wiped out on that. The problem with the state's doctor is that he testified right after Resnick who also said Lindsay killed the kids because she thought no one else could be as good a mother to them. At that point legal analysts were saying it felt like the two sides' theories fused, which is really bad for the CW.
It's like a basketball game where a team shoots, is blocked, there's an outlet pass going the other way, the ball handler is behind the defense unguarded and just has to make a layup shot to win the game. Yes he might miss. Sometimes basketball players do miss wide open layups. But the critical 15% of the case where maybe the CW proves she knew the wrongfulness of her actions, maybe she didn't. The Overton window of the case was already so far in the defense's side.
So yes I think you have raised a number of really important points but the balance of the game would have to be a lot closer to 50/50 for it to matter. Jurors don't ignore 85% of the testimony just to autistically battle over a few key points. Many crimdef master men say when they speak to jurors after a case they find a lot of them don't consider the facts or evidence at all. They say jurors often go on gut instinct and all sorts of random shit like hey my Uncle Steve he had a similar experience with XYZ and I learned such and such. Jury trials are notoriously unpredictable for that reason. But I do think it will be interesting on retrial if the CW doesn't fuck up so hard if it's a lot closer than will it come down to a real battle of expert testimony. And they need way better psychiatric experts too. Even if there was one good one the other two got skewered. Mack really looked like a retard and the other dude looked up at the ceiling the entire time like some weirdo.
So yeah all this shit factors in but I do still find your points interesting and valuable and maybe we see them come into play next time. |
|
Date: September 8th, 2026 12:43 AM Author: The Penis Yeah they really destroyed their credibility by trying to defend the idea that the suicide was faked. And they spent too much time trying to character assassinate her when they really did not need to do that, and that opened them up to further looking bad when other witnesses got up and said they thought she was a good person and not manipulative and controlling.
I would have opened the case something like: Lindsay Clancy was sick. She was depressed. She was suicidal. Her medical treatment may have failed her badly. None of that is what the Commonwealth needs you to dispute. The question in this case is whether despite that illness, did she still substantially understand that killing her children was wrong, and did she retain substantial capacity not to kill them?
That's it. That's the minimal and important version of the case. |
|
Date: September 8th, 2026 12:52 AM Author: "4 Phones" Paxton (Prestige Feuds) 100% cr. A lot of LawTubers said that their closing argument should have been their opener. This is also why Kevin Reddington was so desperate to remove the juror, and to raise all of the 6th Amendment issues and the issue of how the CW twice invoked the Catholic concept of mortal sin. He couldn't end it there because of the holdout. Now his partner is appellate law is going to argue the CW goaded the witnesses into a mistrial on purpose because they were losing so LC cannot be retried under double jeopardy. But now you have an issue where there are virtually no people left in the venire who are totally unbiased to the case. So we have no idea where this is going. Maybe Tim Cruz offers a plea deal.
I just have one remaining question about this trial. Do you think Attorneys Sprague and Buckingham have a private booth at the 99 where they crush apps and entrees after a tough day in court? |
|
Date: September 8th, 2026 8:34 AM Author: Judas Jones Every time I see this thread title I click on it expecting a SUP BRADY email reverse (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5900727&forum_id=2E#50122059) |