
I don’t know much about the case, what I do know is that the people who’ve tried to persuade me (despite neither knowing nor really caring) about why Clancy is guilty have exclusively made arguments that go against basic civil rights and burden of proof ideas. If everyone seems to think we have to throw out the idea of culpable mental states to get a conviction, then that makes me very wary of the idea there should be a conviction.
I’ve yet to see anyone defend her who isn’t just some extremely online individual. She’s been brought up ONCE by an irl friend and it was more talking about very copious amounts of astroturfed accounts pushing literal misogyny by making it seem like there is some concerted effort by “women” to defend her on the grounds of “postpartum”.
My pov is she killed her 3 kids in a mental health episode and ppl raised a million dollars for her on gofundme. I really dont get it like i get it was a mental health thing but murdering your own children is just… gross imo. I work with children and am passionate about it so maybe i have a bias
100% agree with on the latter part! The whole “the husband did it” or even just blaming the husband as though he should have seen it coming is disgusting, I’ve had to tell one person in my life to quit that bullshit around me. What I’ve personally seen is a lot of people basically saying the insanity defense shouldn’t exist and that her mental illness is something she should be blamed and punished for in itself, which is also appalling.
No I totally get you! It’s completely normal to have icky feelings about criminal defense in general, especially in really horrific situations like this one. I think there’s a lot of dimensions to this and which one each person focuses on is going to make it really disconcerting when people prioritize a different facet.