@donovan88026808@theEagl30155907@EdPaltzik Your retarded talking points won't change the facts. She is innocent of strangling her kids until proven beyond reasonable doubt. Prosecution failed. Just because your criminal of a "hero" didn't get it, does not change laws.
The core facts have always been in dispute
It's called innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution failed and your zero of a hero has no idea what the law required of him because he is a violent criminal himself who assaulted his illegal immigrant wife and a minor, never mind failed to pay his rent.
She has not been convicted first of all.
Secondly she never confessed to killing her kids. A d the evidence that she did it is slim to none.
Just prosecution's fiction based on what others said.
Zero forensic evidence.
No video
No audio
No witnesses.
Get out of here, pea brain
You parrots ๐ฆ๐ฆ๐ฆ๐ฆ๐ฆ๐ฆ talking points are nauseatingly repetitively false and stale.
The burden was always on prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that she killed the kids. It's called innocent until proven guilty. They never did.
The only legal way for her to admit she killed her kids was by giving a confession under oath.
Post it!
Or post a police report documenting she strangled her kids like this on your despicable violent zero whose own mother called EVIL
No. The prosecution was under burden of first privilege g she killed the kids before moving on to criminal responsibility because the rule *innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt* was not banned just for the Lindsey Clancy Trial. Your troll gaslighting is repetitive and nauseatingly boring. Muted
This was a poor misunderstood Michael show.
He married an illegal Haitian immigrant and never denied physically abusing her.
Or assaulting his nephew, who he characterized as being 6'2", as an excuse even though he was a 13 yr old minor
History of Domestic violence should have disqualified him from being a juror on this domestic violence trial.
Michael got notoriety by serving on the Clancy trial, and the most pertinent question is ;
What evidence was strong enough to erase reasonable doubt... that ...
1. She killed her kids
and following prosecution proving that beyond reasonable doubt
2. That the 13 mind altering drugs she had been yo yo'd on for four months, left her lucid enough to know what she was doing.
None of this " Michael-the-black Republican victim of Democrat activists" podcast answered the most important question.
What evidence ๐งพ was persuasive enough beyond reasonable doubt, to return a guilty verdict
Reposting for @beachvetlbc who seemed determined to condemn a juror as a Haitian illegal immigrant, who was actually a citizen reaching a conclusion based on the evidence in the Clancy trial.
There are a million trolls/bots/ second repeating the same
lies about Lindsey Clancy case. Pretty sure someone who wants Lindsey Clancy convicted ( psych industry insurance companies/ psych pharma) are printin and deploying thousands a minute using AI.
@beachvetlbc You accuse others of being evading facts but exactly when was he found guilty of beating his wife, assaulting his nephew? He wasnโt. You say he didnโt deny it. Well you know who didnโt deny MURDERING her children? Yeah, Lindsay Clancy.
There is a restraining order on record his nephew filed
And there is a police report documenting your "hEro" abusing his Haitian illegal immigrant wife.
@LieutenantRusty@bronzebarbarian@redsteeze If she admitted to killing them, there would be a confession.
A stipulation in a legal strategy is not and has never been a Confession.
Post it.
@JP61926104@EdPaltzik His actions speak for themselves.
1. Married an illegal immigrant
2. Choked her as she was comforting his baby
3. Assaulted a minor
4. Deadbeat who can't pay his rent.
5. Opportunist who hired an attorney to bully and intimidate journalists and censor them
@bronzebarbarian@redsteeze If the dead kids are your evidence of the perpetrator who strangled them, you have yet to find a manual on operating your brain.