A woman who was juror No. 5 spoke to WBZ-TV's Kristina Rex Tuesday, though she asked to remain anonymous.

"At the end of the day, there was so much doubt," the woman said. "The prosecution didn't have a figurative smoking gun. There was not a single moment throughout the presentation of that case where you could say 'Yup, 100% I'm certain she did it' or that she didn't do it. There was too much gray area."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Lindsay Clancy said she thought she was going to hurt herself and/or her children.

But she didn't want to hurt herself or her children. She was losing control of herself. She reached out for help to everyone in her circles. She told everyone she was losing grasp on reality.

So the question for the trial - Was Lyndsey Clancy in her right mind when she killed her children?

That's clearly a divisive question that even a jury made up of her peers couldn't completely agree on, though 11 of the 12 believe that there was enough reasonable doubt of that.

You might want to read up on psychosis to better understand that someone suffering from psychosis is not in control of themselves.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    This specific hearing is about whether she was in her right mind during the fifteen or so minutes she was strangling her toddlers to death one by one, cutting herself and jumping out a window.

    It's likely she'll be found insane for that. MY POINT IS she wasn't psychotic for eight solid months. There's plenty of criminal negligence here to do around.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment