Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
She is a victim, of stress, pressure, and mental health problems
She is a cold criminal for killing her 3 little children no matter what stress or mental health problems she might have had
Select gender and age to cast your vote:
Please select your age
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
7Opinion
Obviously it’s all horrific, but I think she was incorrectly treated and medicated. I don’t think prison is the appropriate punishment. What I would need proven beyond a reasonable doubt to recommend imprisonment would be for a solid motive to be established for why she would have done this if not for mental illness.
The most important thing here is to not get your judgement clouded by shock value. Three small children dead is obviously upsetting, but that can’t be what drives the story, with all respect to the kids. Whether the children were 1 or 100 years old is kind of irrelevant to me, in the vacuum of looking at the case.
You can’t let emotion dictate legal decisions, yours, or those of the surviving people affected. One thing I hate about criminal proceedings is this aspect of “getting justice for the family”, and all that…. frankly, satisfying the vengeance of the directly affected parties shouldn’t really be on the radar. That’s not what this should all be about; it’s about making a determination if someone can safely live amongst us in society. THAT’S IT. OF COURSE the people most affected are going to want the book thrown at them, usually. So it shouldn’t be their call. I think that’s a very broken part of the system. Whether the family wants her forgiven or for her to get the electric chair shouldn’t even be a consideration. “Victim impact statements” shouldn’t alter a sentence. That’s the wrong focus.
I think think Lindsey Clancy’s chance of recidivism is next to nothing. She’s now crippled, and she’s going to be under intensive psychiatric care no matter what. If the charges are dropped, she’s not just going to go back to her normal life. She’ll be in the Tewksbury State Mental Hospital, or whatever it’s called now, where I’ve had family members stay; and trust me, it might as well be prison.
there's no societal message sent by convicting her. This was clearly a mental episode that caused this, and all the laws in the world and all the precedent set by this case if they convicted her still will do absolutely ZERO to prevent something like this happening again. It’s not like women everywhere are going to just start murdering their babies and claiming post-partum as a defense as a result of the case being dropped, if it is. I’ve never seen this happen in my nearly half-century worth of life, and I probably never will again. So I don’t think this is some societally defining decision we’re making here.
Not for nothing, some guy in Erie, Pennsylvania just wiped out his whole family and himself, but the energy on that is way different. Reading comments on that one, there was the whole “They aren’t releasing the victim’s identity…. YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS”, insinuating some kind of racial protection for non-white people. Now we know it was a white guy, and the story is all but blown away in the wind already.
And I think that’s part of it: I hate to tie politics into it, but we’re in a SUPER weird political climate right now, and I feel like a lot of people are really trying to highlight blaming certain demographics while making every excuse in the world for more favored demos. One is “non-white/non-citizen people are more dangerous than White Americans”…. they're really trying to establish and hammer that narrative.
But the secondary one I notice is this air of “We’ve been going too easy on women, and we want to see them endure harsh conditions and/or punishments.” That one’s really weird, and seems driven be this corny ass incel culture of men who just seem to hate women. We’re even hearing people talking about repealing women’s rights to vote for fuck sake, and proposing the “man of the house” gets one vote for the household. So we’re dealing with crazy people, basically, lmao.
So, I think that’s driving a lot of the response in the Clancy case: right-wing-coded misogyny. I just haven’t seen anything in the case, regardless of “premeditation” to sway me towards her being some ruthless killer. You can plan it for five years, it doesn’t mean it wasn’t mental illness; and you just can’t rightly criminalize mental illness, as a bottom line. If she had some history of abuse with the kids, that’s something else. But she seems like she was just a normal mom, and something beyond her control drove her haywire.
I hate to say it, but the obvious end to all of this is that she’ll probably kill herself over the insurmountable guilt, no matter where they put her, so it’s kind of a moot point. But don’t convicted her just because you think it’ll “send a message to women” or whatever.
Of course her chance of recitivism is 0. She has no more kids to murder.
@moddy_the_mod hahaha Yeah this guy is a bit to confident about with he says it sounds to me.
I strongly disagree with you saying that ALL we need to look at is whether she is safe to live among us or not. And that's it. I can't disagree more. I don't know what the law says regarding punishment, more specifically why put someone in prison. But I can offer my view. After all what we call law is a view of someone or some people. NOTHING MORE.
Punishment has more than one function. As you said to keep safe from criminals. That is true and very good reason to put someone behind bars. But also punishment has a deterrent effect. If there was no prison for sure people would dare do things which they otherwise would not do. I myself would kill a bunch of people who wronged me in the past or who I simply hate. So that is a second reason regarding punishment. Thirdly, punishment serves to give criminals what they deserve not just to protect the public. But to throw them in jail or hang them for what they have done. Depending on the case of course.
Now this is my general view. Regarding this bitch I did not go into a lot of detail surrounding her case. But in any case there is no way she is free from guilt after murdering her 3 little children no matter what her state of mind was. She should have stabbed herself in the heart if she really was made at that moment. And yes by the way, the age of the victims matters. It takes more of a cold blooded murderer to kill a 5 year old for example than to kill a 30 year old. These things all factor in the justice equation if you ask me. Justice is not as narrow as you portrayed it to be. Is society in danger or not with a particular person living among them?
So even if for arguments sake we can see the future and we see that the Lidsay would never commit another crime, still I think she should go to prison for what she DID. You understand?
* if she really was that mad at that moment... I wanted to write. MAD not MADE.
Sure, man, fair objections; I think you and I just have some different feelings on human behavior. Happy to address it, but I think we’re ultimately just gonna boil down to telling each other “nuh-uh”, lmao.
So…. I don't really think there’s as much deterrent factor as we give credit for. My conscience is what keeps me from committing crimes. And if a criminal situation presents itself to me and I do it, it’s likely going to be done in the heat of the moment, if we’re talking about something violent. Actually, maybe I’d clean that up to “I don’t think punishment is a strong deterrent for violent crime.” People committing violent crime are either crazy, in a highly emotional situation, or in a state of extreme stress or desperation. The premeditated murderers who get caught I believe are often narcissists who can’t even fathom that they aren’t clever enough to get away with it until they’re convicted. But in very few of those cases do I think someone is going to pause and say “But wait…. I could go to prison if I do that.” And someone like Clancy who’s like hearing voices and shit, nothing is going to outweigh mental illness.
I mean, case in point: we’ve HAD a system of laws and prisons and all that, for almost as long as we’ve been a nation. And yet crime and imprisonment have persisted throughout. So it’s not really THAT effective of a concept. I think there are very, very few people who are just bad apples, and almost every criminal is a victim of their life circumstances and experiences. We’re much better off attacking root causes of crime instead of leaving things as is and then just hitting people over the head with a mallet and throwing them in a cell AFTER those cumulative circumstances and experiences result in criminal actions. So I just don’t think harsh punishment has the effect we think it does.
As for punishment…. I honestly don’t need that, just as a member of society. I don’t need to see anyone “pay”, or anything like that. There’s no revenge factor involved. I think that attitude is very unhealthy for us to hold. I always cringe when I see the comments about people being convicted or sentenced. All the “have fun with Bubba in the showers!” or the goof that shows up on every one of these things saying “He’s not sorry…. he’s just sorry he got caught!”, as if that’s some clever or astute contribution to the conversation. I saw someone mad that they couldn’t see the look on the defendant’s face as the guilty verdict came down. Why would you need that? Just a random person wanting to see someone life be rendered effectively over, over an offense that didn’t affect anyone you personally knew? That’s so fucking weird. You don’t earn any “good citizen points” for pointing and condemning a bad one.
I don’t know, just people feeing glee or celebrating or taunting a convicted criminal…. i don’t think much better of them than the criminal themselves. I think they’re impure of heart, while desperately trying to appear the opposite, probably to self-soothe about their own character shortcomings. “Well at least I didn’t murder someone! Look at how bad that guy is!”
Or the “the victim didn’t get to live their life, so the killer shouldn’t get to either!” That’s vengeance-based. Everybody loves to say “two wrongs don’t make a right”, until they want vengeance. I think that’s just wildly unhealthy, as I said before; so I don’t think that should be leaned into, just as a matter of our societal character. Seeing somebody sentenced doesn’t make me feel happy or satisfied or anything positive. I always feel bad for the convict, to at least some degree, regardless of the offense. There’s an aspect of taking away a human’s freedom as a means of punishment for misbehavior that will just never, ever sit right with me. It’s always sad when someone is incarcerated, even if they deserve it to some degree. And in many cases, I just don’t think it helps anything beyond the rest of us just feeling like someone paid a stiff price, and I guess I just honestly don’t care to that extreme in a very large majority of crimes.
But I guess the thing I really dispute is that punishing her would do anything to deter anyone else, and no matter where she goes after this, I don’t think a day of her life won’t be punishment enough. And her alternative is basically incarceration, just not a formal prison. She’s not gonna leave court and just head off to go shopping or something.
I watch humans arbitrarily decide how much human life is worth based on the dumbest shit all the time. Some people who are bent out of shape about the Clancy kids think it’s “just part of war” to wipe out like 150 little Iranian girls at a school, or that the kids with half of their heads blown off from a hollow-point exit wound in a school shooting were expendable enough that we can’t even make a single move on gun regulations without a huge uproar…. so I just don’t really take it all that seriously when we’re having a selective “bUt WhAt AbOuT tHe cHiLdReN?” moment. Keep the same energy in all situations.
I think you ultimately need to see this woman punished, and I just simply don’t. She punished herself with the killings and by crippling herself in the suicide attempt. I don’t think anything is accomplished by piling more on her. I think she’s dead by her own hand as soon as she can get herself alone anyway.
I’ve committed felonies in my day, technically, and I did them either knowing full well that I was risking time and I did it anyway, or I was reacting in anger in a split-second and probably blacked out. You can say whatever you like about my actions, but I can tell you I was completely undeterred by punishment; I either just took an abundance of caution, or I was beyond a point of control and just would’ve had to eat whatever consequences came my way as a result. I’m not going to stop mid-blackout and be like “Wait! I’d better stop! That’s 3-5 years mandatory!”, lmao. I wish I had that capability, but I don’t, so there’s no research of prior legal cases I’m going to be conducting ahead of time.
So…. I get what you’re arguing for, but I think we’re not going to find common ground on either the effectiveness of deterrence or the value of sheer punishment for the sake of punishment🤷♂️
All serials killers are mentally ill. I'm not saying she is not a victim but if she is then so are all others. ㅤ
So you mean to say that you excuse serial killers because you think that they are mentally ill? I don't exactly think that they are mentally ill. If someone is stressed or frustrated there are plenty of things you can do to vent out the negative energy you have in your mind. And you can visit a professional councilor too.
It’s possible to be mentally ill but still understand the difference between morally wrong and right.
I heard it was reported she used Apple Maps to check the driving distance and travel time to the restaurant and CVS where she sent her husband, Patrick Clancy, on the evening of the murders.
If that is true that sounds like premeditation to me.
She planned murdering of her kids, she is guilty
Good point. If it can be proved or shown that she planned the killings than it is also shown that she did not have a fit of madness.
Criminal beyond doubt , you DONT kill your children.
The whole thing is confusing to me. She admitted that she murdered her children. What more could you read into the story? Oops? Sorry? I promise not to do it again?
So what if a slick lawyer says she was crazy at the time? She's a cold blooded murderer. She lost her privilege to be part of society. Who would want her around them? Who would want her around their children?
She needs to be either killed or banished from society in one form or another.
Both. But she should have been punished for murdering her kids
Both. She's unfortunately a victim of her own mental health. But that still doesn't change the fact that she murdered her kids.
Victim, but I haven’t reviewed the case nearly as closely as a juror would
If she's a victim, what does that make her dead kids?
This is an idiotic comment.
Are you kidding us? Do you mean to say that you will not hold her accountable for those 3 little kids she executed in cold blood, and for no reason (As in the kids did not do anything to her)?
Cold, calculating. And a unfit to be around kids Shame on that jury for mostly wanting to believe the mental disease stuff
.
Anyone who votes “victim” is a moron.
I quite agree!
The poor kids..
Criminal