Posted on 09/03/2026 6:00:49 AM PDT by Ciaphas Cain
A few days ago I shared some cursory thoughts about Lindsay Clancy and her murder trial. What immediately shocked me was the sheer number of medications that she was on. As a former mental health professional, as someone with a mental health condition myself who has experienced issues with meds, I was absolutely floored by all the drugs that Clancy was taking. What I was thinking most was about the very significant probability of drug interactions that would have possibly clouded her senses, including her moral judgement.
Intrigued, I looked into the case further. One friend alluded that he couldn't believe I had been unaware of this trial going on. What can I say? I've been very busy lately: everything from starting a new job to getting a new car, to the past few days when I've been working on a horror story (that will absolutely outrage some people if it ever gets published). And I'm not really all that much a fan of sensationalism, something the Lindsay Clancy murder trial seems rife with.
But I took a harder look at the case. And now, what do I think?
Lindsay Clancy needs to be found guilty and sent to prison for the rest of her life.
There are three possibilities that I see going on with her. There is the notion that she suffered from post-partum psychosis, on which her defense is hanging their chances on. There is the possibility of a condition like bipolar disorder. And then there is the possibility that she is a full-blown psychopath: something that there is no cure for and it could perhaps be said there is no hope either.
Folks, mental illness can distort thought. It certainly has to me, too many times since the onset of manic depression in the winter of 2000. It suppress inhibitions. I've written about it in my book, how being manic led to me doing some horrible things because of an outraged libido that could not be satisfied. I did other things too, that I am not proud of.
But there was always a choice. Unfortunately I chose wrong, more times than I can count.
There remained moral choice though. And that is where Lindsay Clancy went horribly wrong and deviated straight into pure evil.
Clancy, apparently, researched ways on how to kill her children. She planned this. Clancy spent an inordinate amount of time looking at methods of ending her children's lives. That is something that mental illness can never bring about. Can mental illness lead to murder? Yes, when passions go out of control. But to premeditate the harming of others? That takes free will. She had every opportunity to pull away. If she was going through psychiatric issues she could have addressed those. But she didn't. If she truly has a mental illness she spent far more time indulging her dark fantasies than she did in doing her damndest to stave off the dark thoughts bedeviling her.
I don't believe that mental illness, including post-partum psychosis, can be used as a viable excuse of what Lindsay Clancy did. She maintained enough reason to spend time studying how to kill her own children. That alone invalidates her defense.
Which leaves us with psychopathy. Something almost entirely removed from the concept of transitional mental illness. A complete disregard for others. A detachment from moral restraint that makes anything justifiable in the eyes of the psychopath.
There is no real treatment for such a person. There is no "getting better" for a psychopath. Thankfully true psychopathy is a rare condition. And not all psychopaths are necessarily evil. It's been suggested that psychopathy is a trait that can be found in many among the executive business community. It might make them exceedingly cutthroat in their dealings but there seems to be at least some realization that bad things will happen if they go too far.
That isn't common among psychopaths however. But I'm digressing.
What Lindsay Clancy did in murdering her children involved either a chosen course of action in researching how to kill her offspring and she's trying to hang that on a temporary mental condition. Or she is a psychopath who did what she did without feeling moral compunction.
However it is, she does not need to be given the opportunity to ever again be a free woman. She chose her actions. Or she has no restraining morality at all. One or the other.
The jury needs to find her guilty. Send her to prison for the rest of her life. Not just to hold her accountable for her temporal sins, but as a service to society as a whole. She is too dangerous to treat with overbearing kindness that does not adequately address the severity of her crimes.
If there is no justice in this case, then there will not be true justice in a lot of other situations that will come about.
I originally expressed the belief that Clancy might not have possessed enough sense to keep from murdering her children. I see now that I was wrong in that assessment. She did what she did of her own volition.
And I hope that the jury in her trial will do the right thing and make damned sure that she never sees an iota of freedom again. Ever.
Her defenders have absolutely no grasp of what they are doing in claiming she is innocent.
The outrage would have been complete.
But baby humans? What's a few "very late-term" abortions in the scheme of things?
Let's just move along....
>Could you imagine if Lindsay Clancy had strangled her puppies?
She would have already been imprisoned for animal cruelty.
I totally agree with your assessment. She is guilty of premeditated murder, and has fooled enough people already. She’s not unlike Ted Bundy in this regard. She needs to be on Death Row.
She would have been bombarded with death threats.
Written by a man. That’s all many women will see.
What can I say? I'm home from working all night long, and I'm feeling a bit loopy from the antihistamines helping me fight a nasty allergy. My editing skills ain't so sharp at the moment :-P
Lindsay Clancy should’ve killed herself before she killed her children... Or even after she killed them... But she does not and never will deserve one breath of fresh air in the presence of freedom for the rest of her natural life.
As for her supporters... They should all be rounded up and put under surveillance for the rest of their lives. Not one of them should ever be trusted again.
That too.
She was too busy researching how to kill her kids to find the time to kill herself.
Now and then, clarity comes along and truly exposes the rotten underbelly of something. The Lindsay Clancy case has exposed the utter failure of radical feminism. Life was devalued, women were taught to believe a baby isn’t a baby, and that all men are bad. What you’re seeing with the Clancy supporters is the fruition of the evil that was planted many years ago. They like to believe they’re supporting a woman who may or may not have been in psychosis, but the truth is they’re supporting her (and their) right to simply be happy, no matter the cost. If that means getting rid of three little kids, so be it.
Not this woman. However, you make a good point for most women.
And to further exploit your meme, consider that fact that
Clancy’s jury is 9 women and 3 men.
Yep another media soap opera right or wrong not an issue.
Radical demonism is not exposed any more than it's ever been. Conservatives have known, since Gloria Steinem opened her evil mouth, that feminism in all its forms was demonic.
Liberals, on the other hand, do not now, nor have they ever, had the mental acuity or common sense to see radical feminism as the evil it is.
Ergo, nothing has changed. All the above are still firmly ensconced in their respective camps.
I was wondering what that term meant.
I was going to look it up after I finished the article.
But I forgot by then and went on to the comments.
I am glad you found your error.
I decided that I would look it up anyway and discovered that there is what they call "transitional-age mental illness".
This is a child with mental illness passing through puberty which causes complications due to the usual emotional turmoil associated with puberty.
I don't see much chance of that transitional-age mental illness could be a get out of jail card for Lindsay.
Here is my problem with the above description:
1. Author claims that ‘She’ researched how to kill her kids. However, someone did research that, but we don’t know if it was her or her Husband, or his lover.
2. Author acknowledges, as a health care professional, that she was on many medications that can have profound effects. Those profound effects can be temporary insanity.
3. Post Partum depression and psychosis is real, the medical treatment of which using multiple conflicting medications, and refusal to hospitalize the patient when she is clearly in trouble, looks like a medical failure. The system clearly failed here, IMHO. She should have never been alone with the kids if the aforementioned is true.
4. Evidence put in has a completely medically incapacitated person killing her children with ‘exercise bands’ but removing ONLY her traces of DNA from the weapons OR wearing gloves..... THIS IS COMPLETELY ILLOGICAL.
5. The husband, in my opinion, gave clear testimony that is impossible. The woman at 82 degrees had NO conversations.
6. The defendant could have admitted to the murders, but have been so mentally incapacitated that her recollection is in error. Her admission of guilt means nothing to me. I need hard evidence that she killed the kids with her DNA on the weapons, witnesses that saw it, camera evidence, or something that proves she actually committed the crime and isn’t just saying she did it.
Is the person innocent or guilty. I don’t know. If I were I were on the jury I would not be able to convict her, because I wouldn’t be sure beyond reasonable doubt. That isn’t the same as saying she was ‘innocent’, it just means I couldn’t convict.
I have a feeling that the actual murder may not have even been arrested or on trial, and that is part of my ‘reasonable doubt’. We shouldn’t bash the jury here, this one is hard.
HAD NOT REALIZED SHE HAD DONE SO MUCH RESEARCH.
IF SO-—SHE DID NOT JUST HAVE A “BREAK—DOWN”.
THIS WAS METICULOUSLY PLANNED.
THE EXTENSIVE RESEARCH WOULD TELL ME SHE CANNOT POSSIBLY BE INNOCENT
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.