I want to correct a misconception that a lot of people seem to have. The conditions for an insanity defense in Massachusetts are not “bitch be crazy.” Clearly she was a little bit insane. That doesn’t make it legal for her to commit murder. Even hearing a “command” is not even remotely enough. The standard is stricter:
A defendant is not criminally responsible if, at the time of the offense:
the defendant suffered from a mental disease or defect, and
because of that mental disease or defect, the defendant lacked the substantial capacity either:
to appreciate the criminality or wrongfulness of the conduct, or
to conform their conduct to the requirements of the law.
1 is not enough. In my opinion she failed both tests in 2. By planning for her husband to be out of the house, she clearly showed that she appreciated that the act was forbidden and needed to be hidden. By waiting for him to leave, and by answering the phone calmly and continuing to deceive him and pausing the murder attempt, she demonstrated that she was capable of controlling her conduct.
She was certainly not well, but it seems to me that the evidence does not support reasonable doubt for the above.
It is a little beside the point though. Arguing the case is pointless. Actually the best thing you can do if you are anti-Lindsey is to ridicule her. Chase your kids around the house saying that you’re Lindsey Clancy with them laughing hysterically. Tell your wife that her friend is creepy and “giving Lindsey Clancey.” Etc. Don’t engage directly.
p
I want to correct a misconception that a lot of people seem to have. The conditions for an insanity defense in Massachusetts are not “bitch be crazy.” Clearly she was a little bit insane. That doesn’t make it legal for her to commit murder. Even hearing a “command” is not even remotely enough. The standard is stricter:
A defendant is not criminally responsible if, at the time of the offense:
1 is not enough. In my opinion she failed both tests in 2. By planning for her husband to be out of the house, she clearly showed that she appreciated that the act was forbidden and needed to be hidden. By waiting for him to leave, and by answering the phone calmly and continuing to deceive him and pausing the murder attempt, she demonstrated that she was capable of controlling her conduct.
She was certainly not well, but it seems to me that the evidence does not support reasonable doubt for the above.
It is a little beside the point though. Arguing the case is pointless. Actually the best thing you can do if you are anti-Lindsey is to ridicule her. Chase your kids around the house saying that you’re Lindsey Clancy with them laughing hysterically. Tell your wife that her friend is creepy and “giving Lindsey Clancey.” Etc. Don’t engage directly.
More options
Context Copy link