At least one “see no evil” feminist jury member is refusing to find Lindsay Clancy guilty of the first-degree murder of her three kids in early ‘23. She strangled them to death, you see, but it’s kind of understandable and certainly not a classic case of homicide, her attorney is arguing, because she was really bummed out about stuff.
Some are saying that the Clancy jury being deadlocked over empathy issues is analogous to some members of the “downtown” jury refusing to find O.J. Simpson guilty of murder (who remembers Brenda “Moron”?) because, like, far too many dudes of color had been railroaded by the racist fuzz and this was an opportunity to turn the tables despite an overwhelming evidence showing O.J had nearly cut Nicole Brown Simpson’s head clean off.
By the same token at least one femmebot jury member is unshaken in her belief that Clancy should be afforded a break, partly because her husband was allegedly catting around and partly because a lunatic voice from within had told her to kill the kids in the same way that a black dog had ordered David Berkowitz to become the “Son of Sam” killer.
The woke femmebot left isn’t exactly big on the primacy of family. They feel that the arduous psychological and emotional burdens that many suffering moms carry around isn’t sufficiently understood.
HE earnestly believes that Clancy should suffer the same punishment that Bjork’s character suffered at the end of Lars von Trier ‘s Dancer in the Dark (‘00).
