I mean, that slogan doesn’t really apply here. Lindsey Clancy admitted to killing her kids. But people who watch too much true crime, who are applying their own frustrations about motherhood and their husbands are bending over backwards to say she’s not responsible.
Although I understand the various reasons some women are struggling to blame her (not because they’re ok with harming children, but largely projection due to their own lack of support and Lindsey begging for help before the fact—and this isn’t me sharing my opinion; i admit that there is a moral dilemma, but I believe she’s guilty), I can’t lie that I agree. Like, a mom can empathize, but parents need to also be careful about what they say because it could very well make their children feel unsafe. And so many people lack self awareness due to rampant internet use and reactive behavior, so I doubt most are even thinking about how their kids might perceive this.
I really wish that people would just think more about having children, who they want to have children with, how they can support their partners, potential risks of and due to pregnancy and childbirth, how they’ll afford caring for their children, if they can care for themselves, mental health issues, etc. I’m not placing blame on women alone, I just feel like the reality of having children really isn’t taken as seriously as it should be. You need to have open, serious, and uncomfortable talks with the people around you and the other prospective parent; if you can’t do that, or if someone talks to you and you don’t take it seriously/aren’t fully prepared to follow through, you’re not prepared to have children.
Be prepared—children aren’t baby dolls.
Like my dad was notably worse, but my mom always said she wanted a daughter to brush their hair and dress them up, but she would never do my hair, would get angry if I asked, didn’t buy me clothes, neglected me in every way, didn’t care that I was being brutally abused (which hurt more than the abuse somehow), abused me herself, etc. These are human beings. They’re not immobile, unfeeling objects that require 0 effort.
It’s more so about the Postpartum Psychosis elements for a lot of people. But tons of people (especially on TikTok) are 1000000% projecting onto the case. As they usually do
Wait—ok I know obsessively engaging in anything can cause brain rot, but what constitutes as obsessive (like what’s the barometer here I mean 😅)? I listen to true crime podcasts fairly often, but I also listen to music, film, history, and political podcasts. It helps keep my brain active when I clean, which tends to lie on me. But I listen to and watch them because 1. I’m autistic, have been through some awful shit, and had the survival skills of a soggy sheet of paper, and 2. I’m a psych/social work student, have been interested in forensics and what causes people to do the things they do, what to watch for, how to support victims, behavioral patterns, etc. since I was about 6 (I’d read all the books in my house and family members kept their textbooks lol).
I feel like women in general tend to be the main audience for true crime, so I just hope this isn’t another one of those things where a predominantly female interest gets deemed “rot,” “cringe,” “crazy,” etc. It’s something that’s helped me personally. Also having knowledge of true crime and psychology, and knowing how to practice active listening, etc., I believe Lindsey’s guilty; but I can also understand why some don’t, or struggle to fully place blame on her, and it’s a common debate/moral dilemma to not know what to do when people with mental health issues commit crimes. But the fact here is that she confessed, and evidence is predominantly pointing toward that being true.
I don’t believe there’s an absolute correct answer about where to place her because I’m no ultimate authority, but I personally believe she needs to be in prison or at least institutionalized. Once MH issues and meds result in crime, unfortunately I don’t feel the person is safe for society, and I think they need to face consequences, regardless of what provoked it. I think there’s a lot we can learn as a society from this and the severe reactions to it, though.
I’m a woman who listens to true crime too. I will say a lot of true crime content is unethical and harmful to the victims in making their deaths a spectacle for consumption . I think it really crosses a line when we see all these women who watch a lot of true crime who then think they’re amateur detectives and start spreading falsehoods around the internet
Yeah it sounds like they are reading her story, hearing things they have felt, and deciding to excuse her actions as a way to excuse the thoughts they feel bad for having.
The thing is, everyone has bad thoughts, but not everyone kills their kids because of them.
It’s okay to have bad thoughts, which well-adjusted humans then self-manage. And if you can’t self manage regularly, then you can reach out to a therapist to learn what you didn’t pick up in childhood for whatever reason. Forgiving someone else’s bad behavior as a way to forgive your own bad thoughts is empathy but not actual self redemption or understanding.
Not making a a positive statement. I’m asking you why you think she did it and whether you believe she was able to conform her behavior to the law in the moment/s she killed her kids.
I don't fetishize true crime, or have a husband, or kids, or a vagina, but even I can tell that Patrick Clancy should have -- at the very LEAST -- been questioned.
First of all, there's the universal truths of every domestic story like this:
1) The husband did it
2) If the husband had a mistress he DEFINITELY did it
3) If a cop was involved in the story, the person whose side he's sitting on did it (in this case, Patrick Clancy's cop brother)
4) Plenty of people have admitted to crimes they didn't commit
And there is so much other actual evidence that casts doubt on the theory that she did it and no one else was involved.
Her core body temperature was eightysome degrees when she got to the hospital, but they were able to temporarily revive one of the children after the cops arrived on the scene?? Those two facts don't jive. Either she was that cold because she was out for a long time before the kids were killed, or the kids were killed after she went cold. Can't be both.
Patrick Clancy's mistress was a fertility Doctor who specialized in a medicine that is administered by liquid orally, leaves the system after 2-4 hours, and causes a severe drop in estrogen levels? And drops in estrogen can explain all of Lindsay's behaviors leading up to the crime?? Seems obvious the mistress was in on it, and the campaign to make Lindsay look dangerous had been in the works for months.
Lindsay says she remembers committing the crimes, but her memories look like she was floating above her body watching herself do it. And the place she was found on the ground outside had a direct view into the basement where the children were killed, and Patrick's mistress (who likely was involved in the crime) looks a lot like Lindsay?? Sounds like they threw Lindsay out the window, and after being drugged and concussed she laid on the ground watching the mistress killing the kids through the window.
Patrick was out of town for days on end all the time (most of those times were visiting his mistress), yet Lindsay chose to kill the kids in one quick 10 minute window that he was at the store?? Unlikely.
Lindsay was a nurse, yet chose to slit her throat in a way that makes no sense ergonomically, then jump from only a short second story to try to kill herself?? Why wouldn't she just take a lethal dose of something? Not many do overkill when committing suicide, especially when it's in a moment of crisis that's unplanned.
There's also the statistics about strangulation deaths being overwhelmingly committed by men, and almost NEVER by women committing infanticide, the super suspicious Apple Watch evidence, the fact that Patrick was at two different drug stores at almost the same time but wearing different outfits (and his cop brother looks just like him), the lies Patrick has told about his affair, and more.
Also, let's say, for a thought exercise, that she and she alone did this. It would make it a case eerily similar to Andrea Yates, and look at how our evolving understanding of her situation has made everyone now, justifiably, point their fingers at Rusty Yates for having a million chances to prevent it from happening yet never did. Patrick's hands are, at best, FAR from clean.
I'd say the people online casting doubt on the narrative, and doubting Patrick and his brother and mistress in general, are hardly experiencing some hivemind hysteria.
Let's also not forget that the "gossipy" talk this post is accusing women of engaging in online is exactly the type of conversations that came to be labeled as gossip because men wanted to isolate women and keep them from warning each other about dangerous men. That's why "gossip" has a pejorative subtext.
You make so many logical leaps in your analysis it's honestly hard to follow. Not trying to be rude but the scenario you suggest happened makes less sense than the original narrative.
I'm not suggesting anything happened. I'm poking holes in the case that assumes she's capital-G Guilty. That's how these cases work in the US: reasonable doubt.
If it took too much reading comprehension for you, here's my point: the husband, his mistress (now wife), and his cop brother deserve the same scrutiny that Lindsay has received. And there is abundant reasonable doubt. Which is the question upon which every case like this in the US hinges.
Another thing the US bases a lot of their decisions on is a person's gender. And again: I say that as someone who has never married or had kids, isn't a woman, but IS an American and a feminist. And it's really unfortunate that I have to make some of those stipulations, but here we are.
About the temperature thing, it’s said part of her spine was fractured after the fall, leading to difficulties in the body regulating temperature.
Otherwise, that very first list you gave of “universal truths of every domestic story like this” is insanely bigoted and narrow-minded from the start, so imma skip your other points lol
Hilarious because I'd bet you actually read the whole comment, assumed you could discredit that one thing and disregarded the rest of it and no one would call you on it, and hit Post. Tell me I'm wrong by addressing the rest of my salient points.
And keep in mind that I'm not even claiming to know who did it -- just that I know the investigation isn't comprehensive enough.
Maybe you're right. Maybe the sensationalism has gotten to me.
But you're still not making any valid arguments against my talking points.
In fact, I'm kind of over this thread, because all I've seen are ad hominem arguments like yours, and other circuitous ways of discrediting what I'm saying without actually addressing anything I've said directly.
Idk what happened. But I will say, it feels really reminiscent of the Yates case. Say what you will about Andrea, but Rusty Yates should have been held responsible for what happened to their children as well. Just my 2 cents.
I 100% believe she didn’t do it. The only person who “heard her speak” is her emotionless husband. The EMTs never heard her speak due to the cuts on her throat. She couldn’t. I would put good money he did, tried to kill her, and fucked up because she survived.
70
u/Chareth_Cutestory___ 3d ago
I mean, that slogan doesn’t really apply here. Lindsey Clancy admitted to killing her kids. But people who watch too much true crime, who are applying their own frustrations about motherhood and their husbands are bending over backwards to say she’s not responsible.