She should have done better an d refrained from murdering her own children!
And murderers go to hell so I hope someone who actually knows the true Gospel
can witness to her before she dies. As it stand now she's going to burn
Modern Relationships and Lindsey Clancy Case. 3 Children Strangled. Overwhelming Support From Females and Male Backlash.
- Thread starter Lightbeamrider
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
She should have done better an d refrained from murdering her own children!
And murderers go to hell so I hope someone who actually knows the true Gospel
can witness to her before she dies. As it stand now she's going to burn
It is a point of well deserved pride that the US is handicapped accessible. I have heard first hand accounts of people from Europe who spend their whole lives in wheelchairs how much they appreciate it in the US. This person came from a country that requires wheel chair access, not the same thing as wheel chair accessible. In his country he can go anywhere, but it requires others to lift his chair over steps, open doors, etc. In the US that is not the case, and I think it is important for foreigners like yourself to understand that. We have gone to great lengths so that a wheel chair bound person can go anywhere in the country by themselves without needing anyone to assist them. In this country there is no distinction between those in wheel chairs and those who aren't.
A friend of mine just came back from Peru, they were there giving away wheel chairs. In this country the parents would carry the invalids in on their backs. The horrific conditions for those who need wheel chairs is too disturbing to repeat in this thread. Bottom line as we heard the report everyone in the meeting was in shock at how horrible other countries treat those who are incapable of walking.
Perhaps other countries can do better.
What are you saying? It sounds like you are saying it is unreasonable to ask for evidence supporting the claim that she was temporarily insane? Imagine that, you get to claim you were temporarily insane, you are not required to provide any evidence, and it is the prosecutors responsibility to prove you weren't beyond a reasonable doubt. Now who is biased?
She whacked her kids and she planned it, so she cannot give proof the was temporarily nuts be cause she was not temporarily nuts since she knew what she was doing was wrong.
What is happening yesterday is not relevant to what happened in the mistrial due to a hung jury.
In that trial are you saying it is not necessary for jury to want to see evidence that the woman did indeed have a psychotic episode, or are you saying that if the killer merely claims they had a psychotic event they should simply accept that since they don't have degrees in psychiatry?
To clarify I am focused on the evidence and the new proceedings, I already stated in another post that the defense was denied separate trials and he provided the best defense he could under the circumstances.
Presently he taking the right course and the charges be dropped until they either have a firm confession or they perform a proper investigation, which is no longer possible.
It was from the start a "Patrick said" case.
You do know it is what was not even possible she talked to her husband when he found her on the ground, considering her injuries and her body temperature?
Have you read what was in her system when she was taken to hospital?
Have you analyzed the blood pattern, noticed what does not add up, I thought you taught forensics in high school?
Oh and how about the DNA evidence on the bands that is not there.
And there is a lot more.
Forensic investigators can tell you the time of death for each child, and they can also give you Patrick's location at given times based on credit card receipts, phone calls, text messages, etc. There are many ways to confirm basic points of the story. They can also confirm Lindsay's location again, based on phone calls, text messages, etc. So they can know without any doubt that she was home, he was not, when they were killed.
That also rules out anyone else being the killer, because you would have seen a struggle, no one else could have taken each kid, one at a time, down to the basement and killed them while she was there.
I suspect the detectives and forensic investigators were able to put together a pretty accurate timeline concerning what happened.
Exactly. No one is going to simply take the Defense claim that she had a psychotic break without evidence.
The only evidence they have is all the drugs in her system, but there is no evidence that those drugs cause a psychotic break. It is possible they were never tested as a cocktail. So, they have collected a million dollars from a go fund me, pay for testing of the entire cocktail. I would think a decent test of that cocktail would cost less than $100,000, a small fraction of what has been given to them.
If I really had had a psychotic break I would be spending the money on that test to prove it. On the other hand if I didn't have a psychotic break then I wouldn't want that test done.
You and others have made a big deal that the fault is with the drug company. If that were true I would be spending the money to prove it because you are talking about a huge lawsuit. Could be as big as the cigarette companies lawsuit. That is how you would win this case and it would make perfect sense for that lawyer to want to pursue it. They have the funds, so do it.
But if the defense is contrived lie, they wouldn't want to do that, it would simply prove they were lying.
What doesn't add up? I watched the entire clip of Patrick on the stand during the trial being broken down by a guy who specializes in lie detection and he didn't see anything deceptive. I posted that clip.
I think you were the one that said that husbands are usually 95% of the time the family annihilator. That was completely wrong because "family annihilator" would include killing the spouse. That is not what happened here. It turns out that women are almost 50/50 the killers of their children when they are this small.
Still Desperately trying to absolve the woman.
Truly repulsive.
It might be time to shut this thread down.
Well, I generally glide past your posts but for anyone reading along we always need to discuss that sociological phenomena known as mob mentality.
There is in society a sector which generally operates in the rarefied sphere of what we call "mob mentality."
Generally speaking, this group suffers from a staggering proportion of tunnel vision.
It is these types of people who have never made the time commitment to critically analyze the data/evidence but feel completely able to render a verdict based on their tunnel vision.
Now, we can be thankful to lawyers who understood this social phenomena exists and created the Innocence Project.
People who suffer from this tunnel vision put an innocent men like Guy Paul Morin in jail because he played clarinet and the victim had a recorder.
Again generally speaking, I think people who employ critical thinking, make the time investment to examine the evidence and facts of the case are able to avoid mob mentality and those rare people who can employ objective analysis and have doubts say yes we have some very reasonable concerns about the evidence and investigation, find people with tunnel vision quite repulsive and the source of much harm in society.
Cases - Innocence Project
innocenceproject.org
Yes, and you dodge and duck every question sent your way, a sure sign of deception.
I learned yesterday that Patrick Clancy made $400,000 a year. That puts this family in the top 3% of American families based on their wealth. Because of that wealth they were able to hire a nanny to assist with the work that Lindsay had to do, also you can now understand why she was able to go to so many different doctors to get the various prescriptions and all the drugs that she did.
I think this is important to understand because comparing her to a single mom on foodstamps trying to raise three kids is false. She lived in a different world.
I think this is important to understand because comparing her to a single mom on foodstamps trying to raise three kids is false. She lived in a different world.
Yeah, cause I do the work, and it is as always a huge waste of my time.
My ideas about this case have evolved, why because I am able to follow the evidence not be stuck in tunnel vision.
If you were really a truth seeker you would examine the evidence for yourself not need someone else to place it before you.
Generally speaking again, people just want others to present their data and then look for ways to rebut it not really take it in and do an objective analysis.
You should know this from the Kirk threads where you asked questions.
A great deal of it is available online.
