"One side sees Clancy as a victim of catastrophic mental illness, viewing
her mistrial as evidence that postpartum depression is still not taken seriously enough in the US. The other side sees her as a calculated murderer, viewing her mistrial as evidence that our empathy can be too easily exploited."
In either case, her dead children are the victims. The act was evil.
Two questions: What happens to Clancy in either outcome? And how would this be different if everything was the same, except it was the husband who killed the children?
She is guilty of killing three children. Regardless of the reason, other than self defense, which is highly unlikely, she needs to be put away from society. Otherwise, this may happen again:
I believe we solved this (supposed) dilemma in AZ a number of years ago. 1993, then revised in 2007. Not guilty by reason of insanity was changed to “Guilty, but insane” and the standard of evidence changed from “reasonable doubt” to “clear and convincing evidence” (highest standard to prove). In 2007 revision, it was revised to make clear that the defendant was to be sentenced to the “normal” prison term, but referred/transferred to a secure mental institution for treatment. Upon completion of treatment, the convicted resumed the normal/standard prison sentence imposed. The defendant received credit for time spent in the mental institution—and yes, we have a secured facility for such “patients”.
I suppose the finding of “guilty, but insane” might mitigate one’s sentence, but not eliminate it. Since the law’s revision, almost no one attempts this defense anymore so the (potential) conundrum of what to do with a convicted individual given the death penalty remains unresolved. Yes, even with a Dem governor, we continue to execute convicts in AZ. Two so far this year.
Massachusetts is its own worst enemy, but that’s expected in a Blue State.
There is a third possibility, that Lindsay Clancy has one or more Cluster B personality disorders... or character disorders, if you will... and that some event triggered a Narcissistic Collapse, which led this modern day Medea to kill her children and then jump out of a second floor window.
From Google AI: Personality disorders are classified as mental health conditions or mental disorders by major medical organizations, though they differ in key ways from acute mental illnesses like major depression or schizophrenia
Well... you might need the prior history of mental illness first, but sure.
Obviously the purpose of a case like this (or, e.g, George Floyd's unaliving) entering the public conversation isn't to sift the facts and evidence. It's to act as a litmus test for who is loyal to which political team.
"One side sees Clancy as a victim of catastrophic mental illness, viewing
her mistrial as evidence that postpartum depression is still not taken seriously enough in the US. The other side sees her as a calculated murderer, viewing her mistrial as evidence that our empathy can be too easily exploited."
In either case, her dead children are the victims. The act was evil.
Two questions: What happens to Clancy in either outcome? And how would this be different if everything was the same, except it was the husband who killed the children?
She is guilty of killing three children. Regardless of the reason, other than self defense, which is highly unlikely, she needs to be put away from society. Otherwise, this may happen again:
https://www.timesnowworld.com/us-news/historical-constance-fisher-case-resurfaces-amid-lindsay-clancy-trial-article-156034930
I believe we solved this (supposed) dilemma in AZ a number of years ago. 1993, then revised in 2007. Not guilty by reason of insanity was changed to “Guilty, but insane” and the standard of evidence changed from “reasonable doubt” to “clear and convincing evidence” (highest standard to prove). In 2007 revision, it was revised to make clear that the defendant was to be sentenced to the “normal” prison term, but referred/transferred to a secure mental institution for treatment. Upon completion of treatment, the convicted resumed the normal/standard prison sentence imposed. The defendant received credit for time spent in the mental institution—and yes, we have a secured facility for such “patients”.
I suppose the finding of “guilty, but insane” might mitigate one’s sentence, but not eliminate it. Since the law’s revision, almost no one attempts this defense anymore so the (potential) conundrum of what to do with a convicted individual given the death penalty remains unresolved. Yes, even with a Dem governor, we continue to execute convicts in AZ. Two so far this year.
Massachusetts is its own worst enemy, but that’s expected in a Blue State.
There is a third possibility, that Lindsay Clancy has one or more Cluster B personality disorders... or character disorders, if you will... and that some event triggered a Narcissistic Collapse, which led this modern day Medea to kill her children and then jump out of a second floor window.
A personality disorder is not a mental illness.
From Google AI: Personality disorders are classified as mental health conditions or mental disorders by major medical organizations, though they differ in key ways from acute mental illnesses like major depression or schizophrenia
What? Hormonal induced insanity is now a not guilty plea for criminal acts. What are you talking about?
Right or wrong, this has been the case for decades.
Bro she killed her kids. Torture then execution, this isn’t hard.
Reads like a justification for not guilty from hormonal induced insanity when men rape women.
Great point.
Well... you might need the prior history of mental illness first, but sure.
Obviously the purpose of a case like this (or, e.g, George Floyd's unaliving) entering the public conversation isn't to sift the facts and evidence. It's to act as a litmus test for who is loyal to which political team.
https://blog.exitgroup.us/p/seriously-but-not-literally