also this guy is spreading lies. the evidence is clear she did it, and she confessed. there was no despute as to her guilt in murdering her children.
the issue is whether she can be held criminally liable for first degree murder. if the charges had been manslaughter or something else, it would have been a slam dunk conviction. but due to her mental state at the time, it’s questionable if she was capable/committed first degree, or premeditated, murder.
but people don’t want to talk about the legal issues in the case… they just want to push the emotional bullshit that she was absolutely innocent, or absolutely guilty, and there can’t be anything in-between. and lots and lots of people like the db0 user commenting here are spreading lies about the case to push their political agenda.
to the point that many of the TikTok moms who support her innocence are working entirely outside of the factual evidence of the case. which is also more evidence of how social media itself is causing psychosis in many folks, as it’s well-documented already how social media amplifies delusional and paranoid thinking.
I was pretty explicit, I think she did it and the state lacks evidence to convict beyond the shadow of doubt.
Sorry if the db0 in my username added some political leaning to my above post. I was trying to be pretty by the numbers as best as I knew.
I didn’t even mention the fact that there’s been a giant push for people to claim that the father committed the murders. It’s pretty far out there for claims.
I know another comment some issues with the way her specific state handles insanity pleas. Of that, I am not too in the know about. So I didn’t mention it.
What the state lacks evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that she was sufficiently sane to be held criminally liable at the time of the murders in the state of Massachusetts. That last bit is important because it’s the only state where the prosecution has to prove sanity rather than the defense having to prove insanity.
Personally I suspect she’s not guilty by reason of insanity, but I’m not certain I’d feel that way beyond a reasonable doubt were I on the trial. And it seems a large portion of people are of the opinion neither side managed to clear the bar of reasonable doubt
Lindsay Clancy
She admitted to the murders, but is pleading insanity.
also this guy is spreading lies. the evidence is clear she did it, and she confessed. there was no despute as to her guilt in murdering her children.
the issue is whether she can be held criminally liable for first degree murder. if the charges had been manslaughter or something else, it would have been a slam dunk conviction. but due to her mental state at the time, it’s questionable if she was capable/committed first degree, or premeditated, murder.
but people don’t want to talk about the legal issues in the case… they just want to push the emotional bullshit that she was absolutely innocent, or absolutely guilty, and there can’t be anything in-between. and lots and lots of people like the db0 user commenting here are spreading lies about the case to push their political agenda.
to the point that many of the TikTok moms who support her innocence are working entirely outside of the factual evidence of the case. which is also more evidence of how social media itself is causing psychosis in many folks, as it’s well-documented already how social media amplifies delusional and paranoid thinking.
I was pretty explicit, I think she did it and the state lacks evidence to convict beyond the shadow of doubt.
Sorry if the db0 in my username added some political leaning to my above post. I was trying to be pretty by the numbers as best as I knew.
I didn’t even mention the fact that there’s been a giant push for people to claim that the father committed the murders. It’s pretty far out there for claims.
I know another comment some issues with the way her specific state handles insanity pleas. Of that, I am not too in the know about. So I didn’t mention it.
What the state lacks evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that she was sufficiently sane to be held criminally liable at the time of the murders in the state of Massachusetts. That last bit is important because it’s the only state where the prosecution has to prove sanity rather than the defense having to prove insanity.
Personally I suspect she’s not guilty by reason of insanity, but I’m not certain I’d feel that way beyond a reasonable doubt were I on the trial. And it seems a large portion of people are of the opinion neither side managed to clear the bar of reasonable doubt
I can switch to my Lemmy.World account if you prefer 😅
Fixed. Thanks! Problem with going off the cuff is I am terrible with names.