State collapse is inevitable when a society’s leaders are insulated from the negative consequences of their bad decisions.
Mike Shelby
From Grok:
If found not criminally responsible, Lindsay Clancy would not go free.
The murder charges would be dismissed, but she’d stay in a secure psych facility: up to 40 days observation, then a 6-month commitment that can be renewed yearly with no time limit if she’s still deemed mentally ill and dangerous.
Release requires a later court finding she’s no longer a threat. The DA can oppose it. In homicide NCR cases this often lasts years or decades.
Repeal the 19th.
Doesn’t sound so nuts anymore, does it?
They’re trying to acquit? Jesus, Mary and Joseph…. what in God’s name is going on here?
She confessed.
How can they acquit?
I’m voting for the SMOD next time. Enough.
The hold-out juror was a male that refused to acquit.
It has been declared a mistrial.
I understand that…. I was just aghast at the fact that acquittal was being sought at all, and trying to clumsily express the resulting outrage.
I would hope that the prosecution decides to re-try her. I had a world-class defense attorney explain to me once that a mis-trial always benefits the prosecutors much more than the defendant. The reason being that the prosecution has now seen the defense’s best strategy, and they now know how to better attack and defeat it in a re-trial.
This case has taken on the same sort of quality as the OJ trial. Not nearly as big and hyped up obviously, but it is a circus with “miscarriage of justice” written all over it. Now that it has been declared a mistrial, the only real justice will be if someone disgusted enough with the whole matter decides to take her out as a gift to society. And I wouldn’t be the least bit upset if that happened.
I really don’t understand why we choose to treat mentally ill criminals with mercy. If they’re not sane enough to understand that what they did was wrong, then I don’t see any reason they’re sane enough to go on living. Why not just execute them, instead of warehousing them at great cost? Nothing of value would be lost. Once again, bleeding hearts have sowed the seeds of societal destruction by coddling the most unfit, who should be culled instead. We cannot have a civilization, if we never take out the trash.
We cannot have a civilization, if we never take out the trash.
The trash is ruling us so we will continue to slide into the abyss…
What I can’t understand for the life of me why White People don’t want their own Homeland again but alas comfort is hell of a drug…
Since the woman and children in question are ah White, how would having a “Homeland” have saved her children from those brutal non-whites?
Please explain rather than your usual slam the messenger tactics.
Because we wouldn’t be living under jewish rule but you already know that kike…
LOL so a pure white homeland would somehow be immune to the basic lusts of money, sex and power like every other nation on earth?
How do you think the {{Tribe}} gets in charge of so many things?
LACK of MORALS. Lack of a CULTURE of self respect.
Or as my pastor might say “Sin” and “Satan”.
Please point out one “White Nation” that doesn’t have Jewish influence.
Sorry for you I’m not a kike or I’d be a co-worker of yours.
“Once again, bleeding hearts have sowed the seeds of societal destruction by coddling the most unfit, who should be culled instead. ”
Correct.
Repeal the 19th.
Wow, couldn’t agree more. I believe the same should apply to pedophiles and anyone else who chooses to harm a child in any way whatsoever. These mentally deficient individuals can NOT be rehabilitated at all; meds don’t work. So why are they left here to harm others?
And for those who may be opposed to the death penalty, what if it were your child/spouse/parent? I have zero sympathy or empathy anymore for these disgusting sub-humans.
The only rightful opposition I can see to capital punishment is in cases where the evidence isn’t a 100% slam dunk certainty. If the suspect is known dead to rights by having been witnessed (all the more so if multiple witnesses and clear video exist) and other physical evidence is present (absent any other plausible explanation), then murderers and pedophiles should be executed promptly upon being convicted.
An insanity defense just means they cannot be rehabilitated at all, so I maintain that’s all the more reason to dispatch such offenders. We are already bankrupt as a nation, we cannot continue to afford the program of housing and feeding the very worst criminals for decades (or longer).
Big Ruckus D: Hear, hear!! I said almost the exact same thing just the other day (why do we need to keep housing and feeding the insane). Nothing has ever been proven to ‘fix’ their minds. The magic drugs just keep them a little less dangerous but even less functional.
And no, I do not believe in any of the cases that being mentally ill absolves one of guilt for wrongdoing. God may forgive them, but nowhere does Christianity teach that even repenting is a get-out-of-jail free card when it comes to punishment owed to society. Jesus told the robber on the cross next to him he’d see Him in Heaven; he didn’t say “You are absolved of any debt to society or earthly laws.
The Clancy case is just another example of women demanding they never be held responsible for anything, up to and including murder. Not at ‘x’ weeks pregnant, not at birth, not at 5 years old. They are just so burdened by society’s expectations.
Indeed. Modern mainstream Christianity has taken on the property of a suicide cult, where “believers” seem to think it is incumbent upon them to forgive any and everything, and that no Earthly judgement and punishment can be imposed. Well, let’s see how long your civilization lasts when you keep doing that over and over, until the violently defective dregs of our species reach critical mass (we are there now, and have been for a while, in point of fact).
The reason we executed violent criminals in the past was not only to punish them and prevent their recidivism, it was to cleanse society of their ruinous and corrosive influence on morals and standards of behavior. It is no coincidence that we are in a terrible place now, when murderers are routinely given short sentences, or an outright pass (most especially if the perp is of a protected “class” like blacks, or in the present case, women). Monkey see, monkey do, and allowing these behaviors to proliferate unpunished has only caused there to be more of the same.
And honestly, I don’t know why so many perps resist a death sentence. I’d find dying highly preferable to spending decades in prison (assuming we actually still imposed such sentences on a consistent basis). Death would be a relief from suffering in captivity, at least in my mind. And even if one manages to serve a lengthy sentence, it’s not as if they’ll find a decent quality of life once they’re released. Convicted murderers tend not to be high on the list of individuals most people want to associate with.
That demonic witch confessed, abortion up until birth is murder. She should get the death penalty, PERIOD!
Yes. Regardless of the circumstances. They tried to argue that her hormones made her do it. Perhaps drugs made her do it. Likely Satan made her do it. Whatever the cause, she did it.
The mere suggestion that she can get off with a lesser sentence BECAUSE SHE IS A WOMAN AND HAS HORMONES SHE CANNOT CONTROL makes for an extremely good argument that women should never be in positions of authority or responsibility, because their HORMONES could drive decisions that affect possibly great numbers of people.
Hmmm… kind of like women judges.
Let that idea float around and maybe the “hormones” argument will fade away.
What the hell is the point of a judicial system if the GOVERNMENT can simply throw out rules like UNANIMOUS VERDICTS in criminal cases when it doesn’t like the outcome?? Abolish government.
But it wasn’t a unanimous verdict. It was an 11-1 standoff. And why I haven’t seen absolute confirmation of this yet, it appears that the 11 were favoring either acquitting her, or perhaps convicting her on a lesser charge, and the lone holdout was for convicting on the full month. That speaks very poorly of the majority of the jury in this case, IMHO.
D: If you ever had any experience with juries, you might end up tearing your hair out. This case is not unique. In the late 1980’s in Orange County, CA a young mother could not cope with the crying and demands of her firstborn. She put the baby under the rear tire or her car and backed over it.
Her family had money, so they hired a very sharp defense attorney who flew in women “experts” from Great Britain who testified about post-partem depression. The 12 ripe radishes on the jury bought it and returned a NG, despite a herculean effort by the prosecutor and his investigator.
When the CSI shows first hit the idiot box in the early 2000’s, the “jurors” would send out questions during their deliberations asking why the cops didn’t solve the case like Gil Grissom and his team in Las Vegas! I kid you not! Always remember what H.L. Mencken wrote: NO ONE EVER WENT BROKE UNDERESTIMATING THE INTELLIGENCE OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. A much better description of this corrupt, syphilitic-thinking country was written by Saint Paul: 2 Tim 3:1-9. Bleib ubrig.
Believe me, I know. Nothing like this present case (one civil trial for fraud, and one for felony assault) so I’ve personally witnessed the sort of morons who can get empaneled on a case. God knows I wouldn’t want to be on the Clancy jury. If the sole holdout was in fact the one who wanted to convict, the koterie of krazy kotex Karen’s will be out for his blood. Hopefully he has somewhere he can lay low for a while, until the coven finds a new cause celebre to distract their hormone addled minds.
You are looking at this the wrong way. Look at it from a problem-reaction-solution angle. Problem: women might have PPD or other mental/ hormonal issues that cause them to endanger their children. Reaction: Oh look here is an awful example of such and we can’t hold her responsible of course (the other side asks “What about the children). Solution: take away the parent’s rights, new mothers must be monitored, drugged, etc. in order to guarantee child safety. And only government can be trusted with this care, of course. This case is tailor made for chipping away at parental rights and enriching BigMed and BigPharma at the same time while keeping the plebes distracted.
Yes, that would be the typical response in the current day, where every problem seems to lead to trying to justify more top down control via statism/corporatism. But, that is also a downstream effect of the feminized mindset that has screwed everything up. Perps just need to be convicted and severely punished, and that should be the end of the discussion. Cutting off the undue policy influences of women (who generally are wired to want to avoid accountability, and impose authoritarianism, plus “feels”) is the whole issue. If we whup that problem, most of this stupid crap goes way quickly once men take a firm stand and forcefully tell them “NO!” and leave them no recourse to challenge that.
Now imagine is this gal has taken some type of drugs that made her dangerous to drive… and she ran a school bus full of children off a cliff, killing them all? How is this different? The one holdout on the jury was the only person (a real man BTW) who had any common sense in this whole thing… and what did he exercise? He exercised his right for “Jury Nullification” –in the opposite that is. You can nullify a jury decision to convict if you think the law/s are unjust or being unfairly applied… also you can nullify if you think your fellow jurors have gone off their nut, as we see in this case. No one in the media has mentioned the term… ‘Jury Nullification’ at all in this case. Not one show. Not one legal commentator. Some years ago I was called into jury duty and was on a break in the courthouse, when a woman came storming through the place handing out “Jury Nullification” pamphlets saying, “know your rights as a juror.” This turned the whole courthouse upside down–and they searched everywhere for her (she made her escape BTW) and they literally searched everyone for these pamphlets along with all the trash cans. Then the judge questioned everyone in the jury pool if they had any connections to this woman… such is the fear of nullification knowledge to the system. So this lone man who held out was exercising a nullification of the dunces on his jury. You DO NOT HAVE TO OBEY OR ABIDE by a Judge’s written or oral instructions regarding ‘following the law’ or other wise–as their are supreme court decisions upholding your right to do so FYI.
Leave a Reply