Top Tweets for #CLancy

Was the Lindsay Clancy case a psychological social experiment? Always stand for what's right as justice shall prevail but don't fall for the bait and lose your mind in the process of doing so. Fight for greater good (she deserves life in prison at the very least) just remember to take a step back and ask the bigger questions.

She was pregnant every two years for twenty years. Ten children all lived to adulthood. Poor family, husband was a construction worker most of his life. Refused welfare. Hunted. We ate it all from deer to groundhog. But we never starved. She held it all together. Canned hundreds of bottles of veggies and fruit every year to get by. Fed us and ate less herself. Never learned to drive. Died five months before her 70th birthday. She was a saint. This is a tribute to you mom. You made us both literally and figuratively. The world is worse without you.

Lindsay Clancy Juror Traumatized by an Exercise Band on a Water Bottle This is one of the fundamental problems I see with this jury. They didn’t just find the evidence disturbing. They seemed to want to avoid the visceral reaction that came with actually thinking through what happened to Cora, Dawson, and Callan. Part of the evidence addressed how the exercise bands were placed around each child’s neck and how long those actions would have taken. That evidence was uncomfortable because it forced jurors to visualize the killings in concrete terms. That evidence was central to evaluating her actions and state of mind. In this interview, this male juror seems appalled, almost traumatized by seeing an exercise band wrapped around a water bottle during deliberations. Framing his actions as though something was wrong with him. I understand why that image could be disturbing. What I struggle with is the apparent shift in perspective. The discomfort shifted the jurors away from what Cora, Dawson, and Callan experienced to Lindsay's trauma from the act. And when the lone juror continued focusing on the brutality of their deaths, his inability to simply “get past it” became a source of frustration for the jurors. But maybe the problem wasn’t that he focused on the evidence. Maybe the problem was that the others didn’t want to give that evidence the same weight. Several jurors have said the holdout didn’t focus on evidence like the others did. But that does not mean he ignored the evidence. By their own accounts, he was focused on the actual manner in which the children were killed: the bands, the sequence, the time involved, and the brutality of the acts. That is evidence. They may not have liked the conclusion he drew from it, but that is very different from saying he wasn’t considering the case. What I keep hearing in these interviews is frustration that he would not move past the killings and toward the framework the majority had accepted. But in a murder trial, the killings are not something jurors are supposed to emotionally bypass because they are difficult to think about. The discomfort is part of confronting the evidence. Cora, Dawson, and Callan were not secondary. What happened to them was central to determining Lindsay’s mental state, intent, and criminal responsibility. If there is another trial, the prosecution needs to understand this dynamic. They need to introduce Saathoff’s reasoning earlier and reinforce it throughout the trial. There were time constraints. Lindsay made decisions. She moved from one child to the next. She did not hesitate when they struggled, and she did not stop. The defense gave jurors a framework for viewing those actions through psychosis. The prosecution needed an equally clear framework for why the sequence, persistence, decision-making, and response to resistance could support a different conclusion. https://t.co/ekYAgfXmYa