Lindsay clancy trial

[Widowwith2]

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

I've googled and yes that was her and it was on her phone.

Turning airbags off isn't an unusual search for someone with a baby to make IMHO - relevant to car seats.

Declaration for a stay granted. Must be applied for within an hour. Court adjourned.

Mistrial declared. Ideally the prosecution will drop the murder one charge for the next round. My understanding of the state law is that the trial can be decided by a judge, if it’s murder two or ‘below’. It really does need to be decided by a judge who is better placed to weigh up the evidence and inconsistencies without emotion or pre-conceived ideas.

Just saw a stay is granted. Will be interesting to see the outcome

It was a murder suicide gone wrong IMO. Her profile isn’t actually that different to other family annihilators in terms of need for control and a carefully presented public image. Just a different gender. I think the ‘hormones’ defence is quite dangerous as a precedent

Stay granted for the defense team. Reddington says has the stay pre- prepared.

It has officially been declared yet.

Strangely the news websites said it had been quite definitively! I’ve edited my post anyway as they have updated it

Hasn't officially been declared. Jury are not in the court room.

Declaration of stay made under the Americans with Disabilities Act with reference specifically to the one juror who refused to comply with the judge's explicit directions.

And don't let her have been on benefits! 😳 The judgement and entire narrative would be harsh. I guess it's easier for members of the public to judge when they don't see themselves or one of their family members in someone and when they see someone as beneath themselves.

The inference seems to be that the juror is unable to comprehend the judge's directions to come to a decision.

Do you think that’s what it meant? I thought he was referring to Lindsay being disabled?

I’ve read that if the stay is granted (and the bar is very high) they will decide on whether the judge managed the jurors appropriately under the state law. They can deny the petition or they can say yes he did handle it wrong and ask the jurors to continue deliberating or declare a mistrial.

The judge did declare it. I heard him. Then KR shouted up and he was allowed an hour.

The mistrial isn’t official as yet due to the petition. But if the petition isn’t upheld it will revert to the judges decision.

Yes watched him say it. Disability in the Commonwealth can refer to people with low mental abilities, including comprehension difficulties. Being either unable to comprehend the direction of the judge or expressing doubt but saying categorically guilty would indicate a low comprehension.

Why would a stay be for LC? She's currently in a mental health facility.

It's unlikely the stay will be successful, so a mistrial is the likely outcome.

So the options are
Retrial and new jury - probably
Plea bargain - maybe
Dismissal - unlikely

It's astounding that someone as mentally fragile as LC has been able to endure this trial without falling to pieces. She's not looked remotely close to that though.

id imagine she’s heavily medicated?

She's on medication and has broken down several times.

No, because if that was the case the juror could be removed and there would be no need for a mistral.

That's not the case. The jury foreperson has said that one person is not applying the judge's direction regarding the law relating to what constitutes reasonable doubt. That juror has made a decision - guilty. But the rest of the jury have interpreted what they have said as being at odds with that direction at law.

So for example - if that juror has said in deliberations "I don't know for sure that she knew what she was doing or had capacity - but I don't care because 3 innocent kids are dead and so I can not find her not guilty by reason of insanity" - then that would be an incorrect application of their duty as a juror.

Rather than that person saying I have no (reasonable) doubt at all that she knew exactly what she was doing. In which case - if they are adamanent they won't change their mind then it has to be a mistrial.

The jury is the judge of the facts. The judge applies the law.

It is the case though. I didn't reference mistrial in the post you quoted.

If, and it's a big unlikely if, the stay succeeds, then the jurors can return on Monday and deliver the verdict.

I heard him say it too, but watching the commentary even they were confused about the disabled comment and felt it might’ve been about Lindsay.

I meant if the petition is granted, not a stay.

It won't be monday. Bank holiday for Labor day. Tuesday

You've just made all that up on supposition.

Yes - thus the words "for example" ....