Jurors return in Lindsay Clancy trial after judge asks them to break deadlock

Quilty?

  • yes

    Votes: 71 94.7%

  • no

    Votes: 4 5.3%
  • Total voters
    75
DreamKing

DreamKing

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
17,974
Reaction score
6,389
Location
Kingdom of Dream, King's Castle
The jury in the US trial of Lindsay Clancy returned to court on Wednesday to try again to reach a verdict in the deaths of her three children.

The panel had told the judge a day earlier they had been unable to agree after days of deliberations and were instructed to keep trying. Clancy, who has pleaded not guilty, faces three counts of first-degree murder.

Prosecutors have alleged that she made a calculated, intentional decision to kill the children in their Massachusetts home in 2023.
Click to expand...
www.bbc.com

Jurors return in Lindsay Clancy trial after judge asks them to break deadlock

They resumed efforts on Wednesday to reach a verdict in the case of a mother charged with murder over her children's deaths.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
 

Lindsay Clancy’s ‘pink lady’ supporters rally outside court as heartbreaking triple murder trial captivates nation: ‘Women are being dismissed’​


nypost.com

Lindsay Clancy’s ‘pink lady’ supporters rally outside court as heartbreaking triple murder trial captivates nation: ‘Women are being dismissed’

A large group of Lindsay Clancy supporters gathered outside a Massachusetts courthouse Thursday as the killer mom’s murder trial was winding down.
nypost.com nypost.com

sick and stupid ...........
 
Kung Fu Porkchop said:
Ridiculous. How they can't just find her guilty blows my mind
Click to expand...
That's because this isn't what the trial is about, she's already confessed to the murder, the jury now needs to decide on one of these three verdicts
If she is found guilty of first-degree murder, the intentional and premeditated killing of another person, Clancy will face a mandatory life sentence in prison without the possibility of parole.


She could also be found guilty of a lesser charge, including second-degree murder - committed with malice or extreme recklessness, but without prior planning - or manslaughter - unintentionally killing "by wanton and reckless conduct". In either of those instances, she would face time behind bars.

If Clancy is found not guilty by reason of insanity, she will not be set free - she would instead be sent to a psychiatric hospital where her status would be periodically reviewed. She could stay in hospital for the rest of her life.
 
Nom Chompsky said:
The jury is clearly corrupt and some are infested with whacko leftist ideology.

It's an open and shut case. She literally admitted to killing her kids!!!
Click to expand...
Yes and now the jury needs to decide on which of the three verdicts, guilty, not guilty due to insanity or guilty but second degree murder, there is no getting off verdict, only life behind bars, life in an insane asylum or one where she's still behind bars for a long time but not life.
 
Lupus said:
That's because this isn't what the trial is about, she's already confessed to the murder, the jury now needs to decide on one of these three verdicts
If she is found guilty of first-degree murder, the intentional and premeditated killing of another person, Clancy will face a mandatory life sentence in prison without the possibility of parole.


She could also be found guilty of a lesser charge, including second-degree murder - committed with malice or extreme recklessness, but without prior planning - or manslaughter - unintentionally killing "by wanton and reckless conduct". In either of those instances, she would face time behind bars.

If Clancy is found not guilty by reason of insanity, she will not be set free - she would instead be sent to a psychiatric hospital where her status would be periodically reviewed. She could stay in hospital for the rest of her life.
Click to expand...
Apologies, I should have cleared up my statement.

Here goes: How they can't just find her guilty of first-degree murder, blows my mind.
 
ShaunSA said:
The lunacy of the ladies from the left never ceases to amaze

They would have been the first to bay for blood if she killed a kitten

Or if the husband had killed the kids
Click to expand...
Some think he did kill the kids and then tried to kill her and cover it all up, while driving to get the kid medicine and takeaway she ordered.
Apparently he wasn't a good husband, you know quitting his job to work from home with a new job, getting in a nanny, allowing her to quit her job to be a sahm, getting her all the medical help she needed, getting family in to help out, taking the kids when she needed a break and and... Apparently a terrible father he was cause he's a Gemini. Also women don't strangle apparently.
 
Lupus said:
That's because this isn't what the trial is about, she's already confessed to the murder, the jury now needs to decide on one of these three verdicts
If she is found guilty of first-degree murder, the intentional and premeditated killing of another person, Clancy will face a mandatory life sentence in prison without the possibility of parole.


She could also be found guilty of a lesser charge, including second-degree murder - committed with malice or extreme recklessness, but without prior planning - or manslaughter - unintentionally killing "by wanton and reckless conduct". In either of those instances, she would face time behind bars.

If Clancy is found not guilty by reason of insanity, she will not be set free - she would instead be sent to a psychiatric hospital where her status would be periodically reviewed. She could stay in hospital for the rest of her life.
Click to expand...

It's pretty obvious first-degree murder. The "insanity" defence has long been used by criminals to get a lesser sentence. It's a well-known tactic. Anyone believing her obviously made up hallucinations ordering to kill her children can be regarded as suspect. Remember she was apparently so "insane" at the time that she sent her husband off on an errand...
 
Nom Chompsky said:
It's pretty obvious first-degree murder. The "insanity" defence has long been used by criminals to get a lesser sentence. It's a well-known tactic. Anyone believing her obviously made up hallucinations ordering to kill her children can be regarded as suspect.
Click to expand...
Still needs to happen though sadly, though you're correct it should've been uhmm nope not insane life in prison do not pass go. But women always get off with lighter sentences. Always
 
Lupus said:
Some think he did kill the kids and then tried to kill her and cover it all up, while driving to get the kid medicine and takeaway she ordered.
Apparently he wasn't a good husband, you know quitting his job to work from home with a new job, getting in a nanny, allowing her to quit her job to be a sahm, getting her all the medical help she needed, getting family in to help out, taking the kids when she needed a break and and... Apparently a terrible father he was cause he's a Gemini. Also women don't strangle apparently.
Click to expand...

Their blatant ignorance of reality is nothing short of astounding

One of the loons was caught filming the jurors as they left court. If this doesn't go their way they are going to make the jurors lives hell
 
I think Jurors are being fair. They are just waiting crowdfunding campaign for her to reach 5 million dollars.
 
by the way, it's Guilty not Quilty, not sure if she's making quilts for people?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X