BREAKING NEWS:
Matthew Farwell has been found GUILTY on both charges as to the murder of Sandra Birchmore and her unborn Baby Boy.
The jury deliberated for a total of 15 hours and 30 minutes.
If your kid goes to school and you don’t see them for FOUR FUCKING DAYS, why haven’t you called the police? Trump wants you to believe parents just sit around waiting for Tim to come home as Sally. And a bunch of you fucking dipshits are falling for it.
Today is October 26th, 2026. 6+ years later, our family is still asking the same questions....and still being denied the truth.
#JustonRoot was already on the ground, incapacitated and holding nothing in his hands, when officers fired 31 shots at close range.
Michael Proctor told our family that Juston had shot someone and refused to drop a weapon. That was not true. We now know Proctor’s text messages dating back to 2013 were obtained in the Karen Read case. So where are his messages from 2020, when he was involved in Juston’s investigation?
You cannot demand transparency in one case and deny it in another. Release the texts. Reopen the investigation. Tell the truth. @MassAGO
#TruthMatters #MichaelProctor
#JustOnRoot
#JustOne
https://t.co/WEbC0fYKaL
@BrianEntin Brian do you ever sleep? Are you one of those people who manages on like, 4 hours? I love always having your episodes to watch but I hope you are taking care of yourself! Your dedication is amazing, as long as it isn't at the extent of your health!
So the Massachusetts "Justice System" is willing to put the victims:
Patrick Clancy, the Clancy Family, the Musgrove family, everyone that knew & loves. Cora, Dawson & Callan, 18 jurors & the court staff through the trauma of another trial - over one juror who
"made statements acknowledging doubt but refuses to apply it to the verdict as the law states".
‼️
There are 2 OPPOSING views within the group of people who believe Lindsay Clancy should be found not guilty:
1. Not guilty bc they believe Patrick did it.
2. Not guilty bc although she did it, she is not criminally responsible due to mental issues.
WE ARE NOT THE SAME.
👍🏼
It's interesting... All three rebuttal witnesses have acknowledged that they have no real recent experience treating a woman with postpartum psychosis. They have also all three acknowledged that the defense's expert, Dr Resnick, is a leader in his field.
Obviously, jurors will give weight to the experts they find the most credible. How much do you think the experts’ actual experience with postpartum psychosis—and how recently they’ve treated it—will matter to the jury?
Does Resnick’s specialized experience give his opinion more weight for you? Or are the prosecution’s experts just as persuasive despite not treating these conditions in so long or on a much more limited basis?
I’m curious how the jury will view this. Battle of the experts is always interesting.
One thing that really bothers me about this line of questioning is the suggestion that because Lindsay’s family didn’t have her committed or report her to someone, that somehow proves that either she wasn't that sick, or they didn’t think she was.
But think about what we’ve heard in this trial. Lindsay was actively seeking professional help. She was seeing psychiatrists and psychiatric nurse practitioners. She went to the emergency room. She was admitted to a psychiatric hospital. She was being evaluated, diagnosed, prescribed medications, and monitored by people specifically trained to recognize mental illness.
So if her own medical providers didn’t recognize how serious her condition may have been, how can they turn around and expect her mother, her sister, or her husband to have recognized something the professionals themselves may have missed?
Her family wasn't qualified to diagnose postpartum psychosis or determine whether she met the criteria for involuntary commitment. They were relying on the medical professionals Lindsay was already seeing.
Suggesting that because her family didn't have her committed, she couldn't have been seriously mentally ill... That's wild.
So you think you know more than Kevin Reddington?
If there were any evidence that Patrick Clancy had a role in the deaths of his three children, Reddington would use it.
A lawyer who has spent his entire career identifying the strongest available defense does not concede the act if there could be any chance of tying Patrick to it.
Reddington has never left evidence on the table.
In the Lindsay Clancy case, the defense was literally willing to stipulate to the murders to skip that part and get to the insanity defense, and some of yall are still trying to create conspiracies where she was framed. Come on.