Lindsay clancy trial

[Widowwith2]

Has anyone else been following the lindsay clancy trial? What is everyone thinkin? I dont think she done it

I understand the purpose of this trial in regards to wether LC is criminally responsible for killing her children or not in relation to mental illness.
I certainly do not think i've had an aha i've figured it moment....
I've no clue what the truth of what has happened in this harrowing case is right now. Why is it "not up for discussion" what the evidence is that she killed her children? its not part of this trial but i dont see why it cant be discussed.

This thread is called LC trial. There isn’t the same expectation to prove her guilty of murder. That’s pretty much a given.

You can absolutely start a thread regarding the investigation. That’s the police, detectives right up to the point her lawyer said yes you did this but my job is to not have them send you to jail.

You do risk the chance of a load of armchair, TikTok, projecting conspiracy theorist types commenting and saying the same crap you read on Facebook. But sometimes there’s someone who knows their stuff.

I understand you think "not up for discussion" is directed at this thread as its titled LC Trial rather than generally.I somewhat disagree because the trial does look at what actually happened the day, those poor children were killed and its understandable people have questions ,thoughts and opinions on that.I don't have Tiktok or Facebook so i'm not sure whats being said there, but i have seen on instagram varying opinions ,some seem outlandish. i honestly don't know what to think at this stage of the trial ,although its not complete yet and things may become clearer as the trial progresses. I would hate to a juror on this harrowing case.

The Trial isn’t to determine whether she killed her children. She did. The prosecution and the defence have both stated very specifically that it is a fact she killed her children.

There will clearly be evidence to show that but that may not even need to be presented due to the fact the trial is to determine whether she is criminally guilty or whether the killing was due to insanity.

People can speculate on TikTok and fb and on here what evidence there was, but the likelihood is that won’t ever be fully known because it doesn’t need to be as it’s not part of the trial.

Yes people can discuss, can speculate, can claim they know x or why, but that’s all it is.

No I agree. I think that’s why I’ve taken such an interest. I should absolutely despise her and what she’s done but I don’t. I feel sad for her and I want her to go somewhere she needs to be. There is a tiny bit of me which thinks maybe some meds were crushed/kept back. But I’m waiting on the man who worked so hard on this case to take the stand.

It’s been handled so well and now it’s turned into a circus where there are best friends involved, speculations about scenarios and money. No one talks about how scared and awful a death those 3 little ones had.

I think you may have hit on the crux of this (speculation theories etc) in that the heinous nature of the killing of 3 little children in such a truly barbaric way is so unfathomable and distressing for the human mind to contemplate that we look to find explanations ...... My heart goes out to those poor children,then to everyone involved.

The opening post on this thread is
Has anyone else been following the lindsay clancy trial? What is everyone thinkin? I dont think she done it

There's another thread in the News. The Lindsay Clancy trial. Which you can find in similar threads. Just below.

Perhaps post there?

You seem determined to get in on every discussion. Maybe have an opinion and voice it. But you don’t have to get involved in every debate.

You’ve still to reply to the last comment when I replied to you because you got caught up in yet another disagreement.

It's an open thread. What exactly is your problem about people posting here?

Yes it’s an open thread. I can’t remove anyone. They are welcome to tell me to get lost or counter my point. You have chosen anger and it wasn’t even aimed at you.

Exactly the same with the video clip. You can’t just apply one rule for one person and not the other. So to be clear, you can’t suggest I go and find another thread and then criticise me for doing the same. (Mine was a suggestion to start a new thread to be fair)

Okay. Suit yourself.

Defence starts next week. It'll be interesting to see how that works in court, especially the cross questioning.

I think that it is frustrating to see her case derailed by people on the internet.

People assume they know more than the law enforcement professionals who have all the evidence because ‘his shoes look different in one video’ and ‘PC arrived slightly later into the restaurant than he should have’.

There seems to be a bizarre lack of critical thinking. Yes his shoes were viewed from a different angle and of course they look different. Has nobody ever sat in their car and text a mate or sent an email before getting out? I do it all the bloody time especially when I’m having a break from my child.

It is totally nuts and appalling to me that this poor man, who has had his 3 children murdered, is coming under this kind of scrutiny by people who think they can make these judgements based on very little.

We don’t need to question if she did it. We know she did it. She said she did it. The timeline supports that she did it.

Any other chat is distracting from the core issue which is what would drive a woman to do this? At the start of the trial I felt great sympathy for LC and assumed she had lost her mind but since watching all of the trial I’ve changed my mind a bit. I’m not sure she was psychotic and I’m not sure there aren’t other mental illnesses involved that are undiagnosed. Yes maybe PC could have done more. Maybe he wasn’t expecting her to do what she did.

Let’s leave PC alone.

I understand your sentiments but i dont think speculation online will derail the case.
I agree regarding the speculation on things we maybe don't know everything about eg: the shoes.
Not so much about the sending an email from the car ,yes we have all done that ,but meta data would surely show where and what device sent a particular email.
The trial isn't about wether LC did kill her children (although i dont think it wrong to have questions about that and be interested in why that is accepted as fact) its about wether she was of sound mind or not/criminal responsibility for the killing.
I don't think that a clearly severely mentally ill woman said she did it ,necessarily means she did and could be relied upon, beyond all reasonable doubt.i would be interested in specific evidence that proves she did it, although i appreciate that isn't what this trial is about.
I do feel sympathy for LC because its clear she was severely mentally ill ,overmedicated and poorly medically supervised and that could possibly have led to this tragedy. Im honestly unsure as to reasons and motives in this at the moment. Perhaps more light will be shed as the case progresses. As i said, id hate to be a Juror in this case.
As for PC, im not sure he can be " left alone" because hes a witness and as such will be cross examined and that will attract speculation .
But,PC isn't on trial LC is.

But they have specifically agreed to leave bits of evidence out if the case that proves LC did it. They have that evidence. They have just decided that it is too harrowing for everyone involved and pointless because she did the crime and there is no question legally whether she did or not.

They’ve also discussed with PC in the trial that he probably sent the email from his phone. They have all the messages from LC telling PC to go and get XY and Z from the store/restaurant. She planned this in detail. Directed PC to pick up medics and food from a specific restaurant that would give her enough time to commit the crimes.

I disagree that PC shouldn’t be left alone. He is a victim too.

I think wether she did the crime or not is crucial to be proved beyond all reasonable doubt and open justice is important. Saying she did it but you cant know why really isnt good enough. Although i appreciate that isnt' what this trial is about.
As for the email PC sent, it isn't good enough to say "probably" from his phone.
Meta data can establish the device the email was sent from categorically and its important to know the truth of the matter.
i don't think that LC told PC to go to get XY AND Z proves anything.
Witnesses cant be left alone ,they have to be cross examined .

By saying the fact she specifically sent him on errands during the timeframe the children were murdered doesn’t matter, you are ignoring important evidence that is absolutely crucial to the case. It shows premeditation.

Do you think law enforcement have not looked into the meta data? Really?

They aren’t ignoring evidence, they just aren’t putting it out there for all and sundry to tear apart, which, given the conspiracies already floating about, has proven to be quite right. Because she has admitted she did it! Everybody involved knows she did it, except some people on the internet apparently, who know better.

Bizarre.

i dont think "sending him out" on errands means beyond all reasonable doubt that a severely mentally unwell woman premeditated the murder of her children.
Did the meta data show PC sent the email from his phone or laptop is all i am asking? If it showed his phone say so.
Perhaps showing the evidence rather than keeping it secret would prevent conspiracies?
That a severely mentally unwell woman "admitted she did it" wouldnt be enough for me to establish beyond all reasonable doubt.
I don't think that "bizzare"

But the prosecution don’t have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that she killed them. She did.

They don’t have to produce the evidence that she killed them, they have to prove that it was murder rather than insanity. Hence why all the prosecution evidence that there was no question of psychosis.

I appreciate this trial isn't about wether she killed the children or not.
Im saying its reasonable to want to know why its accepted "she did" with no evidence other than a severely mentally ill woman saying she did.
This trial is about LC having criminal responsibility or not for killing her children.
The prosecution (in this state) have to prove LC was not criminally insane beyond all reasonable doubt when she killed her children ,i don't think given the obvious well documented mental illness ,the proven over medication and poor medical supervision that has been achieved. Im glad im not a juror in this harrowing trial.

What I can gather from when the forensic Psychiatrist was up her replies were very much disjointed from the children. She was horrified at what she had done and then went on to ask questions regarding her own well being. She was at this point deemed to be in a state where she was aware enough to change her proxy care.

I think there is every reason to assume her confession was accepted because she had been checked over by professionals throughout her recovery.

The prosecution has to prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the murder was committed whilst of sane mind. Otherwise what's the point of the trial?

I think there is every reason to assume her confession was accepted because she had been checked over by professionals throughout her recovery.

You are thinking and presuming. Which is not what courts do when finding culpability, which in the prosecution is of sane mind.

And you need to be more specific when you say recovery. Recovery of psychosis or recovery from the injuries that resulted in paraplegia?

If you actually think through what happened it is beyond any doubt that LC did it.

The poor baby Callan was bit deceased upon arrival of the ambulance. We know what time the ambulance arrived. We have cctv footage of PC out of the home. In order for baby Callan to have been alive at the time of the ambulance arriving the crime had to have been committed during the time frame that everyone involved in the case said it did. Are you saying that PC could have strangled 3 children and forced LC out to commit suicide during the 5-10 unaccounted minutes? It took 6-8 minutes per child at least according to medics.

Sorry but it’s absolutely ridiculous to suggest otherwise and makes no logical sense at all.

He changed his clothes its conceivable he attacked her first came back and did the kids and called 911

The very long quotations regarding some posters on this thread is astonishing. Wonder why that is? And basically those posters are trying to engineer the trajectory that the thread should go.