Lindsay Clancy was let down

It is undisputed that she was very unwell - the prosection agree as much. What is in dispute is whether she remained sufficiently lucid to remain criminally culpable.

I.e. - was she:

(1) experiencing severe anxiety, depression and suicidal ideation, but remained in control of her actions; or

(2) was she suffering from psychosis and lacked control/capacity.

Like you (seemingly), I think it's likely the former and that there should be a conviction.

But I don't think comparing it to the archetypal male anger/malice cases is very helpful, where mental capacity isn't even in question - its usually just an extension of a pattern of abuse and violence.

I can think she's probably guilty and yet not equivalent to someone who killed their kids out of sheer vindictive rage - i.e., most men who commit similar acts.

'but she was clearly very unwell and not motivated by malice'

She wasn't clearly anything, I presume that's why there still isn't a verdict.

It doesn't matter if you think mentioning men killing their kids isn't helpful . The fact is that they do and we never see fleeting psychotic episodes as reasons for the horrific killing.

People can be depressed/anxious/suicidal whatever but still do not kill their children in such a cold calculated manner.

Also, in many cases a male perpetrator has also been a perpetrator of domestic abuse/violence, while a female perpetrator has often been a victim of domestic abuse. That doesn't apply to every case, including the LC case, but I would say explains why many people would generally give a female perpetrator the benefit of the doubt in a way they would not to a male perpetrator.

I really don't think the "if she were a man" comments, comparing it to instances of family annihilation by a man, are helpful.

Those cases are almost always marked by coercive control and narcissim, and often with vindictive motivation.

It's obvious - inclusing to the prosecution - that it is not the case, here.

LC was clearly in a mental health crisis, it's just a question of whether she remained of sufficiently sound mind that she is criminally culpable.

FWIW, I believe that she was culpable, and I do not believe the "sudden, auditory command hallucination" story, but she was clearly very unwell and not motivated by malice.

Pp is terrifying.

Ive posted about it a few times over the years. I had it after the birth of my son.
I thought he'd died during birth and been replaced by a demon.

You have no idea how it feels if you've not gone through it.

If she actually had it then she was in no way responsible for her actions.

Oh dear. This thread has gone pretty off the rails. Nevertheless I want to say something.

It just so happens that I've come across psychosis a few times in my life - among other things, my mother's much younger half brother developed it in late adolescence and we spent a lot of time at the grandparents' house, and the son of a very good friend of mine killed himself after 12 years of living with schizophrenia.

I feel for those of you who are struggling to care for someone with psychosis. It's so hard to know what to do (remembering my grandparents here).

So I want to extend a hand to the posters on here who try to explain how difficult it can be to assess what is going on with a person with a history of psychosis. It's not like a switch is flicked and a previously-normal person turns obviously, ravingly mad.

Certainly when the delusions and/or hallucinations are developing, the sufferers may be very well aware that what they are experiencing is considered 'not normal' and they'll be trying to hide their thoughts and experiences. They avoid showing their stressed side and get lost in a garish fantasy world while making every effort to 'function normally'.

My poor friend had to argue with her son's father and several other relatives and to write a report on him (she was a doctor herself) for the police in order to get him committed. And the psychiatrist who first assessed him told her later that he had been extremely good at pretending to be normal (''); that it was only about 45 minutes into their conversation that his facade began to break down. How many mental health professionals these days even have that amount of time to assess someone?

I don't know the ins and outs of the case under discussion. But please, people, don't judge too quickly. Psychosis doesn't have to look like picture-book madness to be very, very destructive.

You dont know what is in someones head on a forum and you made deliberately unpleasant, provocative and inflammatory comments. Unnecessary.

I wish you well with your mother but you dont have the right to take out your frustrations about that situation on others.

It is the killing of 3 children that is shocking as is your attempts to excuse the mother. She is apparently disorganised and chaotic when allegedly trying to take her own life yet thorough and very organised when killing children.

My 'emotional awareness education' is fine thanks I'm just not an apologist for killers.

...

You know this is batshit, right? And honestly, a pretty evil thing to say.

5:10pm - Lindsay places food order, by telephone, at a local restaurant.
5:15pm - Patrick leaves the house.
5:32pm - He is seen on CCTV at a pharmacy.
5:33pm - He tries to call Lindsay from the pharmacy, she does not answer.
5:34pm - She calls him back and he answers
5:38pm - The last of Lindsay's movements that were tracked by her phone (climbing stairs).
5:54pm - He is seen on CCTV at restaurant.
6:09pm - He arrives home.
6:11pm - He makes his call to emergency services.
6:18-6:21pm - First responders arrived.

What do you get out of spreading malicious lies about a (3x) grieving parent?

'It’s a disorganised and erratic attempt at suicide because it happened in the throws of psychosis'

Yet whilst allegedly 'in the throws of pychosis' she managed a very organised and not erratic <more deliberate> killing spree. Big selective, no? I mean if even one had been spared it would give some credence to your 'disorganised' theory.

Gosh you seem to know a lot about what other people, some randomer on a forum thinks inside their head?

I find it sad that you cant seem to discuss this without resorting to comments like that.

I dont need to go over my career but as I said Ive worked in MH, on psychiatric wards and with MH professionals now and am very experienced in this.

She didnt have zero motive, the motive could be as simple as, Im not going to be here, I dont want my children to be here without me.

I bet it's harder to kill 3 children tbh but she managed that ok?

'If i have doubt, i imagine at least 1 person on the Jury will have doubt too,that will result in a hung jury and a mistrial..'

Yep there will be doubts. Look at how obsessed a minority are on here that mental health issues equals no responsiblity for killing as psychosis just comes and goes and can be a one off never to be repeated or witnessed fleeting event 🙄.

Aren't there 9 women on the jury and how may days are we waiting so yes perhaps hormones will have been thoroughly analysed, discussed and be given as the reason for her family annihilation.

Well I would hope the burden of proof is always on the prosecution? Hopefully not just in Massachusetts.

Oh I know a lot about peri and the menopause. If someone killed their 3 kids and tried to blame it on it 'plummeting oestrogen' I'd think that was bollocks too.

Couldn't care less what you think about my use of 'annihilator', it was been widely used to describe this woman so no idea why you're acting like it's the first time you've heard it.

Conspiracy theories - making stupid people feel clever since 1963.

Do you think the prosecution proved beyond a reasonable doubt that LC did not have PPP/a psychotic episode at the time of the killings ? I don think they did,i have doubt...
If i have doubt, i imagine at least 1 person on the Jury will have doubt too,that will result in a hung jury and a mistrial..
In Massachusetts the burden of proof is on the prosecution not the defense and the verdict must be unanimous.
The defense dont have to prove there was evidence LC was insane at the time of the killings,the prosecution have to prove beyond a doubt hat she wasn't insane.
The experts disagreed ,that in itself introduces reasonable doubt.
It's possible to be devastated for the loss of 3 beautiful children and to understand there is doubt in this case.

If she'd wanted to kill herself she'd have been as thorough as she was with the poor victims, her innocent kids.

Superficial lacerations to wrists and jumping from a second floor window does indeed sound half arsed to me.