Anonymous #2 9w

I love this point. Liberals are too scared to realize the number is 0.

-4

Anonymous #3 9w

the larger difference is that in this case the person was clinically out of her mind when the crime occurred, AND she’d taken every precaution she possibly could to get help

9

Anonymous OP 9w

vs in the mens cases they usually just wanna leave their wife

9

Anonymous #2 9w

none of them have documentation proving psychosis

12

Anonymous OP 9w

That’s false, she was very much of sound of mind. It is documented that she was not suffering with psychosis, which her therapist has stated. She planned it out by sending her husband out for errands, he even called her she went back to killing her kids.

0

Anonymous OP 9w

But they do have evidence proving other disorders that cause psychosis or delusions AND which observably change the brain- PTSD, CTE, and schizophrenia (more common in men than women). And still, nobody defends the men who commit atrocities with these disorders. How much $ did Benoit’s GoFundMe get?

0

Anonymous OP 9w

Men have been in the same situation because of PTSD, CTE, schizophrenia, etc, and have been sentenced and convicted. No men defended them. No men raised millions.

3

Anonymous #2 9w

men defended johnny depp, andrew tate, chris brown etc. i dont think u wanna have this conversation

0

Anonymous OP 9w

None of those people committed triple homicide. “I don’t think u wanna have this conversation” you say as you entirely change the topic lmao. Gotta love when people immediately resort to beating a straw man at the slightest resistance.

1

Anonymous OP 9w

I’ll say it again. Point me to ONE instance where men defended and raised abused amounts if money for a man who annihilated his family. There’s plenty of murderous men who had been diagnosed with PTSD, CTE, or Schizophrenia. All you have to do is name ONE.

2

Anonymous #2 9w

name one time when a woman shoved a beet bottle up a mans ass and women rallied behind her?? name one time a purple elephant walked into a jersey mikes???? if we wanna get real specific

1

Anonymous OP 9w

Exactly. You can’t. You’ll change the topic to something that this conversation is not about.

4

Anonymous OP 9w

“If we wanna get real specific” yet you can’t answer this persons question.

1

Anonymous #3 9w

well im driving rn

-1

Anonymous #2 9w

heres your list Daniel Penny Johnathan Ross Jacob Lang Bernhard Goetz Kyle Rittenhouse

4

Anonymous #3 9w

That’s your opinion, not a fact

-1

Anonymous #2 9w

It is so laughable to try to make it seem like women have some kind of issue because there are women supporting her. You clearly haven’t looked into why they are and you are just spreading moral panic

-1

Anonymous OP 9w

Denial Penny was in self defense, Johnathan Ross killed a child sex offender, Jacob Lang there was not a large amount of men coming out to support him, Bernard Goetz is claimed self defense, Kyle Rittenhouse was in self defense he has a crowd chasing him one guy had a handgun and the other was using his skateboard as a weapon. Also, the person said “Point me to ONE instance where men defended and raised abused amounts if money for a man who annihilated his family”. Didn’t provide what was asked.

10

Anonymous #7 9w

I saw a video of a woman saying she innocent because Patrick’s aura was orange and that means he did it. It’s laughable that anyone would show an ounce of support towards a woman who chased down her kids and strangled them one by one. No one needs to look into these women who clearly need psychiatric help.

1

Anonymous #7 9w

Let me reword what I said, the key difference is you don’t see men in mass wearing the same shirts supporting a child murder. There has been zero instance of men supporting a man who killed his family. That is a fact

7

Anonymous #3 9w

No, i meant that your opinion is that she was of sound mind. And this always happens. People thought the mom did it when that kid went missing and was found dead on family vacation in Japan, people thought the parents did it when those kids went missing from their backyard. It’s not that crazy

1

Anonymous #7 9w

If her therapist said she didn’t have psychosis and could answer a phone normally, how would she not be? Yeah people assume it’s always the parents and in this case it was the mother. What is the poly of bringing that up?

1

Anonymous #3 9w

there is a lot of evidence she was in psychosis bc of what she told her mom and husband & her search history. My point is that it isn’t crazy that there are people thinking the dad did it cause people always become true crime nerds about these cases and come up with all kinds of possibilities

1

Anonymous #7 9w

The way Clancy’s psychosis presented would be extremely abnormal, if it was actually psychosis. She described it as constant (rather than episodic) and for the duration of the murders. Coincidentally, never before and never since has she had an episode. It doesn’t really add up for me in light of what we know about psychosis.

1

Anonymous #2 9w

There is evidence that she was in psychosis either way though. It’s not like that claim is totally baseless. idk, I just would rather assume she was in psychosis and have her sent to a mental institution than make a mistake and send her to prison if she rly was in psychosis. Idk tho, i haven’t gone over all evidence. I just don’t like the polarization/moral panic over this case

5

Anonymous #3 9w

here are the issues with your question. 1. men dont typically rally for apparent social issues like women do. 2. the main reason women rallied behind this case is because of the way it became a larger political conversation on tiktok, in part due to the manosphere men who caught wind of it, and the subsequent feminists who engaged in the conversation to combat those men. 3. some of these supporters are not actually following the case, theyre following that conversation. and from the

6

Anonymous OP 9w

cherry picked parts they see, they think the husband did it and that an innocent womans on trial. that’s why most of the people are donating money, not because they want to give money to someone who killed people under psychosis this last point is important and its why i listed the names that i did. you can cling to the specifics of your question all you want, a point i addressed with the “a giraffe walks into a jersey mikes”, and by addressing other intensely specific times men have rallied

5

Anonymous OP 9w

behind horrible men. but the underlying issue in this clancy trial is the same in most of the cases i named. the public often inappropriately politicalizes horrible crimes. that is not a situation unique to this case, its just the first time its happened to women. but jt has happened many times with a more left vs right proxy war, and a lot of the time its the right that rally behind someone who killed in appropriately out of fear or “self defense”

4

Anonymous #3 9w

okay? ive seen videos of people who think trump is christ returned and the US is secretly ancient Jerusalem. people are crazy, u dont gotta form a whole world view off one random person online

7

Anonymous OP 9w

First it’s not my question it was the other persons question that you could not respond back to, but instead listed names that had nothing to do with this kind of case nor the question. The point is you can’t provide a single instance where a mass group of men will defend a father who killed his family.

1

Anonymous OP 9w

My point is it’s a mass group of delusional women defending this killed killer.

1

Anonymous #3 9w

ur spreading moral panic

1

Anonymous #7 9w

What is the evidence? Her own recitation of a command hallucination that isn’t entirely consistent with the medical literature? There’s also the fact that PPP onsets almost always within just weeks of birth. It’s just too many .1%’s stacking up for me to believe it. Maybe the drugs? But she wasn’t consistent with her dosing on that either? What induced the psychosis? Genuinely asking because the evidence just doesn’t do it for me.

1

Anonymous #7 9w

You have the IQ of room temperature

0

Anonymous #3 9w

you should try looking up what moral panic is

5

Anonymous #3 9w

and look up examples

1

Anonymous #7 9w

Cool, it’s still a fact that women in mass are defending a child killer.

0

Anonymous #3 9w

Because they believe her when she says she was in psychosis and didn’t want to do it & sympathize with the horror she must be experiencing after that. It’s obviously not because they think it’s okay to murder kids

4

Anonymous #3 9w

for all different reasons, some informed, some not. and mass is a stretch. also you know the go fund me isnt for lindsey clancy right? she cant access any of that money nor can it legally be used for her defense the money goes to her parents, who lost thejr grandchildren and their child all at once. the had to move/relocate to be closer to the trial, which they could barely afford, so the money goes to that

2

Anonymous #2 9w

we dont know what triggered it but we know it was related to her latest child because a lot of her early spirals (things she wrote abt in her diary as she started to lose touch with reality) were about her relationship with him. she felt like she couldnt chemically connect with him and she described feeling overstretched i think the girl getting sick was a catalyst as well. i think she wasnt supported properly and that made her mental state worse and worse. then dealing with a sick kid and

1

Anonymous OP 9w

feeling like a horrible incompetent mother, all alone in the house watchjg three kids while her husband cant even get the right medicine at the store without calling her for help. i think that stress triggered the episode that made her do what she did

5

Anonymous OP 9w

That’s highly speculative and not evidence, though. I asked for evidence. None of that changes my mind whatsoever. Stress induced psychosis is a variation of psychosis that is periodic, and pretty much never constant.

1

Anonymous #2 9w

You can find the evidence if you look it up. She told her mom and husband about her thoughts, checked herself into psych ward like a month before it happened, was being switched on and off all kinds of meds, her search history showed her searching terms like “psychosis”, “postpartum”, “intrusive thoughts”, etc

0

Anonymous #2 9w

youre asking for evidence for something phenomenological that occurred inside someones brain… do you want me to crawl in there and solve the mystery?? like if i say i have depression how would you prove (with evidence) that i do or do not?

-1

Anonymous OP 9w

You make a pretty good argument for barring the insanity defense lmao.

1

Anonymous #2 9w

you know there needs to be actual evidence

1

Anonymous #2 9w

my point is that things of the mind are not fully understandable. but neither is gravity and we accept that just fine. same truth goes for witness testimony, there’s no way of knowing if someones memory serves them right, but that still holds up in a court of law. like how the stuff lindsey said to her therapist does

1

Anonymous OP 9w

If they are not fully understandable, they should not be used to justify and excuse murder.

1

Anonymous OP 9w

Eyewitness testimony, for the record, gets torn up on cross legitimately anytime it is brought up.

1

Anonymous #2 9w

you ignored all the evidence i listed

0

Anonymous #7 9w

You are ignoring what her therapist said

0

Anonymous #2 9w

earlier you asked me what the evidence was for what induced her psychosis. which is an unanswerable question (as i pointed out) because we cannot know what caused the psychosis as we are not in her brain. We also dont quite understand what causes these things or how they work what is understandable however is that yes, she was in psychosis

1

Anonymous #3 9w

okay that’s your perspective, but my point is that there are real reasons that people believe her. Like it’s not just people believing her for no reason. and also i feel like it makes sense that if she didn’t tell her therapist. i probably wouldn’t tell my therapist about being suicidal and a lot of people wouldn’t

0

Anonymous #7 9w

It’s not my perspective it’s an actual fact. Just because people believe her doesn’t mean it’s true. You are applying how you feel personally which is irrelevant.

1

Anonymous #3 9w

The only thing I have been arguing this whole time is that the moral panic over this whole situation is ridiculous. There are a bunch of people making generalized statements about women, implying that women are condoning murder because there are people who support her. All I am saying is that there are real reasons that people believe that she was in psychosis.

2

Anonymous #3 9w

I acknowledge that you could be right and i understand that you also have real reasons to believe that she did it consciously/premeditated it, I am just tired of seeing stuff like “women would support hitler” in response to the support lindsay clancy has gotten

5

Anonymous #3 9w

ok i caught up now her therapist BEFORE the crime said there isnt enough evidence for a psychosis diagnosis but the therapist the court called for an expert testimony said there was evidence after. so its one opinion vs another. is that your main basis for why u think shes guilty?

1

Anonymous #7 9w

It’s not generalized when there are women creating groups and organizing in support of her. Just people believe it doesn’t mean it’s true.

1

Anonymous #7 9w

It’s not what I believe, what I believe is irrelevant to the facts that are presented. She sent her husband out for errands and calculated the time. It was premeditated. I wouldn’t go that far but there are groups of women on her side. There shouldn’t be anyone on her side since she killed her kids and attempted to it. This trial shouldn’t have lasted this long and she should be in jail by now.

1

Anonymous #3 9w

So you agree with stuff like this top comment?? You don’t think it’s overboard?You can’t see my point that people are having some kind of moral panic about women being evil or something?

1

Anonymous OP 9w

She’s guilty because she strangled her kids to death.

1

Anonymous #7 9w

No I do not agree with the top comment. There are people who are causing moral panic, I can agree with you on that. But I’m not. There are literal groups of women who support her and have a uniform which is pink shirts.

1

Anonymous #3 9w

unless you believe over 50% of all women i. the US are actively and knowingly supporting lindsey clancy, then yes it is generalizing lmao

3

Anonymous #3 9w

“sent her husband out for errands” and it was getting their sick daughter medicine right after she got back from the dr

4

Anonymous OP 9w

No I don’t believe 50% of women. All I said a mass of women, which isn’t an actual percentage but rather saying there’s a lot of women who do support her. Enough women to create groups and have a uniform.

1

Anonymous OP 9w

That is an errand.

5

Anonymous #3 9w

an errand that needed to be done that night. its not like she sent him out for eggs or something random. its not enough to imply its premeditated

1

Anonymous #3 9w

Well I am glad we can agree on that & i get not everyone is spreading those extreme views. I personally don’t find the groups of women supporting her concerning, especially after watching videos of women sharing their stories with postpartum, but it’s fine if you don’t see it that way

1

Anonymous OP 9w

If she told him to go do it instead of her. She sent him out, and she planned it. An errand doesn’t mean just grocery shopping.

1

Anonymous #3 9w

that still doesnt prove premeditation. we also dont know if hes the one that offered to go, if hes was usually the one to grab the family dinner anyway, if she was busy at the time, if she wasnt feeling well etc. im just saying u cant use that to suggest its for sure premeditated

1

Anonymous #3 9w

if shes found to have been in psychosis her official verdict will be “not guilty by reason of lack of criminal responsibility”

1

Anonymous #7 9w

The concerning piece is creating conspiracies that fly in the face of all evidence, like that Patrick killed the case. That stuff creates real harm to real people.

1

Anonymous OP 7w

Mass isn’t a stretch when there is a group made up of hundreds of women who support her. Even the women jurors have been shown to be compromised

6

Anonymous #7 7w

What they believe is irrelevant to reality. She clearly wanted to after going back to killing her other kids after ending the phone call. She planned it, she made her husband go out for errands then executed her plan. It’s going to be funny when the husband starts suing people for all the misinformation.

1

Anonymous #3 7w

Omg that is literally your opinion. I have not stated my opinion on whether I think it was premeditated or not. All I am saying is that there are real and valid reasons that people believe what they believe about this & all the moral panic implying that “women are condoning murder” is ridiculous

-1

Anonymous #7 7w

The sequence of events presented via evidence indicates the behavioral pattern of a person coming up with a plan, carrying the plan out, and continuing to carry that plan out despite interruption. That’s not an opinion, that’s an observation of a pattern showing a plan.

1

Anonymous #6 7w

So you think people have 0 reasons to believe it wasn’t premeditated? Ok whatever

0

Anonymous #6 7w

You can easily look up the reasons that some people believe it wasn’t premeditated. There are real reasons & they aren’t basing that opinion off of thin air. Your argument is flawed because you can’t even acknowledge that

1

Anonymous #7 7w

It’s not my opinion, it’s factual. There is evidence to support my what I have stated. No, there opinions are not valid. Apparently you have a reading comprehension problem. I said in mass there are women who support her. There is a group made up of over 100+ women. It’s not moral panic it’s the truth.

2

Anonymous #7 7w

… do you realize how a plan functions through time relative to “premeditation”… the premeditation is part of the planning process… it’s a near completely interchangeable word/concept for “coming up with a plan in your head” The action part of it is how we deduce premeditation. So things like looking up how to do something on the Internet, preparing tools, exploring options to achieve a goal, etc etc etc, illustrate the process of planning and continuing to act on said plan.

0

Anonymous #3 7w

Apparently you don’t understand reasonable doubt

0

Anonymous #3 7w

I am willing to bet that you have a lot of conflict with people in your life that goes unresolved lol

-1

Anonymous #7 7w

Apparently you are closing your eyes to the evidence.

4

Anonymous #3 7w

It’s bizarre man if an observation of reality contradicts what someone (mostly women but I see guys do it too occasionally) feels guilty about they for some reason will ignore reality and try to continue pushing a fabrication that has already been disproven. Ladies… whatever yall feel guilty about surrounding this situation. Please let it go. There are no men coming to hold you responsible for having evil thoughts. Everyone has evil thoughts.

2

Anonymous #7 7w

Cool assumption, I don’t start conflicts with people around me. I bet you’re the type of person that makes assumptions and has zero social skills.

1

Anonymous #3 7w

You don’t have to add insult to injury #3 they are already in denial (stages of grief). It will just be a slow burn until they feel okay to let the guilt go. If we twist this metaphorical knife in during every interaction they are going to dig into their delusion deeper and take longer to come out of it/heal.

1

Anonymous #6 7w

The problem is people like to build this false reality in their heads and let their imagination run wild. Some people believe that it’s easier to face imagination than face reality. Majority of people have intrusive thoughts, but no one just acts on it.

3

Anonymous #3 7w

So since you are continuing to argue with me, that must mean you disagree with me, which means you think that women are crazy and condone murder & anyone who thinks there is any semblance of reasonable doubt condones murder. Again, I never shared my personal opinion on whether it was premeditated.

1

Anonymous #3 7w

Well it is easier to face their imagination. That’s why they do it. They don’t think they have an out in reality, which is probably where the core of the issue lays. For some reason they bought off on the “if men get their way it will be like the handmaids tale or worse” vibe and it’s like, gents, please reassure the women in your lives that’s not gonna happen no matter what they are guilty of doing. I don’t have the time or the patience to build a system like that with the other men.

1

Anonymous #6 7w

Are you listening to anything i am saying

1

Anonymous #7 7w

Yes.

1

Anonymous #6 7w

What do you disagree with?

4

Anonymous #7 7w

I didn’t say any of those things. You’re the first person on this thread I’ve seen to say “women are crazy and condone murder etc” And since that’s not my thought and potentially yours I’ll do my best to put your mind at ease and say I don’t think that yall are crazy. I think yall got tricked into some sort of defensive social hive mind scheme where you need to defend everyone who’s a woman just because they are a woman and that’s relatable because I got tricked into doing something similar.

6

Anonymous #6 7w

What if I told you that I agree with you that it was probably premeditated? (me saying that still wouldn’t contradict my point). Would you still disagree with me?

3

Anonymous #6 7w

I totally see what you are saying but both sides are falling into this dynamic which is the point I am trying to make. It is like a psy op

5

Anonymous #7 7w

In this instance: You. But that doesn’t make you guilty of murder, or crazy. It could be argued you’re condoning murder but that doesn’t seem to be the case either. Yall don’t seem to feel like you’re being heard that the circumstances created a mental state that’s relatable among yall, which I get. We as men have evil thoughts too. But we cannot allow our thoughts, or anyone else’s thoughts, rule our actions. Especially for extended periods of time that create plans to be carried out over time.

1

Anonymous #6 7w

Oh forgive me I thought you asked “who do I disagree with” I’m just glancing down at my phone while I pack so it’s a multitasking thing.

6

Anonymous #7 7w

I mean that’s a fair observation as well. People are literally digging up the criminal records of jurors on both sides. Making personal attacks. This case has waves of whatever this vibe is just oozing off of it. I’m not sure if that makes it a good or bad case to examine but I’m grateful this is one of the first conversations I’ve had about it where we tried to understand where one another was coming from.

1

Anonymous #6 7w

Yeah I appreciate being able to come to some kind of an understanding too. My main problem with it is that some people seem to be assuming all women are supporting lindsay clancy or are generalizing lindsay clancy support to all women. I just wish people could disagree without it becoming this gender wars thing & it sounds like you feel the same. And exactlyy, the vibes of the whole situation are just weird.

4

Anonymous #7 7w

You might not not like this answer, but it’s a “No I don’t disagree with you then, BUT” Because people do seem to be spreading moral panic. It is quite eye opening to see what people are willing to spend their time doing relative to this case. And it is, genuinely, a moral crisis of sorts, so I expect people to panic. (Before Auburn my industry was centered around people in crisis, so this has all the criteria for “people in a state of perceived crisis”) But like most crisis I’ve dealt 2/2

5

Anonymous #6 7w

2/3 with, 90% of what’s going on around the real problem, is people’s reaction to it. So in this case we have people empathizing too much with what is said, rather than looking at what was done or not done. It’s very easy to emotionally manipulate people who are aiming to be “empathetic” which is why I prefer the strategy of compassion… I don’t have to completely know how you feel to help you if I’m compassionate. I just need to know enough about the problem to help you heal.

5

Anonymous #7 7w

I should also point out that’s what I believe I’m observing as far as, and tell me if I’m wrong here, do many women feel guilty for feeling and thinking things that society or other people don’t approve of? I realize I sound like a psychopath asking that, but I’m genuinely trying to understand the whole situation better.

1

Anonymous #7 7w

what if i tolf you im drunk as fuck and scrolling thru this conversarion with yalls profile pics is giving lesbian flag??? what then???

5

Anonymous OP 7w

We have profile pics on this app??

1

Anonymous #6 7w

ur coloration

1

Anonymous #3 5w

so this happened

1

Anonymous #2 5w

how about defending 7 of them and photoshoping their heads onto heros?

0

Anonymous OP 5w

What about the text message that was released and her admitting to doing ketamine voluntarily. That’s the seven they aren’t heroes. Did you not watch the boys?

1

Anonymous #3 5w

she has said the first sex act and first ketamine use was consentual but after that they used that intoxication to pressure her into doing more and more, at one point having 5 guys surround her and coerce her into doing far too much ketamine, to which she shortly after lost her memory the initial act of the night was consented but not what happened after

1

Anonymous OP 5w

she went to the frat house intending to hook up with one person, once she arrived super drunk, she agreed to let one more person join. this was all consensual still she then did ketamine with them, also consensual. but then one of the guys sent that message in the gc, and more and more men kept coming in and thats when it became no longer consensual. she was clearly heavily intoxicated and resisted them several times, many of the men were sober and continued anyway. they slapped her so hard

1

Anonymous OP 5w

she got bruises. they surrounded her and blocked the door. she said she felt physically unable to leave. she told them several times she felt dizzy and needed to rest but they pushed further. she has no memory of that end of the night. we do not know if any of those men had sex with her or if they just kissed and touched her, so i am not sure it holds up in court as rape but there is no doubt that every one of those 7 men did something horrible that night

1

Anonymous OP 5w

That’s false since she has text messages saying she was going there for a threesome, and then changed her mind when she realized her reputation will be ruined. She also said that nothing they did was illegal.

1

Anonymous OP 5w

She also changed what she said from the time after it happened to recently

1