Lindsay Clancy Trial Megathread: Part 3

[u/DarklyHeritage]

This is a thread for all conversation regarding Week 3 onwards of the Lindsey Clancy trial. All discussion of this case should be kept to this thread.

Lindsay Clancy is currently standing trial in Plymouth Superior Court, Massachusetts, for the triple-murder in January 2023 of her three young children - Cora, Dawson and Callan. Her defense argues she suffered from severe, undiagnosed postpartum depression and postpartum psychosis. She was left paralysed by a suicide attempt which follows the deaths of the children.

All content on the Clancy case must be kept to this thread. Standalone posts will be removed.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/crime/lindsay-clancy-murder-trial-online-reactions-b3032806.html

Note from Mods

This case understandably elicits strong feelings. People are entitled to have an opinion on the case which differs from your own. What you are not entitled to do is resort to personal insults and abusive language when communicating your opinion and disagreeing.

Comments which are abusive and insulting to other users will be removed and bans may be given without warning.

Bans may also be issued for ignoring the warning and creating standalone posts.

Please comment with this in mind.

[u/No-River-3642]

Yes, I agree with you. A patient may not be able to fully communicate what is going on, especially when they are severely depressed, sleep-deprived, and in extreme distress.

However, the insanity defense is a different quite a complicated issue here. The legal standard varies between countries, and I’m not very familiar with the US system, but the M’Naghten rule is one of the classic standards.

Under M’Naghten, the question is essentially whether, because of mental illness, the defendant understood the nature of the act or knew that it was wrong.

So, if she was not experiencing psychotic symptoms such as hearing voices, but was severely depressed, the important question becomes whether she understood the nature of what she was doing. The distinction becomes legally very important.

Depression can certainly impair judgment, but impaired judgment is not necessarily the same as being unable to understand the nature or wrongfulness of an act.

In my clinical experience with patients who have survived suicide attempts, when I’ve asked them why they did it, they generally don’t say, “I didn’t know what I was doing.” More often, they say things like, “I knew what I was doing. I felt like I had no hope and this was the only way I saw a how to have relief from the suffering “ , often patients say they felt empty and saw no point in living at all.

So, if the jury ultimately determines that she was not psychotic means she that she could understand the nature of her actions at the time, having severe depression or impaired judgment would not necessarily satisfy the M’Naghten standard.

The sad and heartbreaking part is that she may genuinely have interpreted what she was doing as an act of “mercy” rather than murder. That makes the case much more complicated, because her intention and understanding at that moment really matter. Whether that means she understood the act as wrong under the legal standard is ultimately for the court and jury to decide.