September 10, 2026
"A male juror in the mistrial of Lindsay Clancy said the lone holdout... wrapped one of the exercise bands the mom used to kill her children around a water bottle..."
"... to mimic their strangulation in the deliberation room. Juror number 10 Nick Dargie said the holdout had every right to his opinion but that the reenactment using the same exercise bands left the room speechless. 'I was so shocked. We’re not here to play detective – it’s not a game of Clue. This is serious,' Dargie, 25, the fifth juror to come forward in the macabre case out of Duxbury, Mass., told ABC’s 'GMA'.... 'I asked him why are you doing that? That’s a band that was used to strangle a child. That’s disgusting.'"
Posts
99 comments:
Lone Juror is legend. I hope someone figures out how to AI cast Jimmy Stewart in the not Netflix series.
The Meida getting jurors to trash other jurors is kind of a new low for them, no?
So there were three men on the jury, and the two who are not in danger of being doxed have publicly revealed their names. Are they trying to make it easier to dox, and then kill, the heroic holdout? Or do they not care about him, and are just trying to avoid being doxed, and killed, themselves, when someone finds out they were on the jury and figures they might be the guy (one in three chance)? Either way, they're contemptible barely-human beings.
'...“We spent seven weeks on this trial, almost two months of all our lives dedicated to it.”...'
More time than those kids, though.
I think this mad rush to get their faces and their stories out there is pretty interesting. They all seem to be seeking validation from the public that they were right, RIGHT ! as in, the kind of insecurity that comes from realizing how self-righteous their reasoning actually is. I could be wrong, but I'm not seeing much affirmation or sympathy there.
It's also interesting that some of them still want to be anonymous, and they're the ones saying they thought that Mr. Holdout had some good points. Like, they know a mob when they see one.
Ah, the 10th female juror has decided to speak! I'm sure the man who held out isn't sorry he hurt Nick's vagina.
Do they hear themselves? Yes, those bands were used to strangle three children. Yes, strangulation is extreme-close-up murder, impossible to do by accident and very nearly impossible to do in a moment of high passion. Isn't that the point?
And didn't we just hear that at least one of the nurses was trying to interpret the toxicology testimony through her own body of knowledge? The only difference I see is that her interpretation didn't cause anyone the bad feelings engendered by the mental image of three dead children.
how would that juror have that item?
Why are you leftist jurors doing that? Allowing a mom to kill her own children, cruelly and methodically, without consequence?
That's DISGUSTING.
My hatred of our soviet(D) hack media deepens. Didn't think it could.
Too bad the female jurors cant sue someone for "Sexism". Or can they?
One angry man is guilty of strangling 11 women's feewings in the 1st degree, possibly with premeditation. And he's not even sorry! Monster!
They'd love it to be, but it's not a crime though. Yet.
I'm talking about GMA.
Good Morning America (D)
Am I missing something here? Per Peachy +2's question: What is a piece of evidence doing in the jurors room, being handled by everyone? Is that SOP? Or, was it just some other random exercise band used as an example?
Either way, the comment from the one juror, "I asked him why are you doing that? That’s a band that was used to strangle a child. That’s disgusting.", tells me that he gets it, but doesn't quite see that he gets it.
Yes. It is disgusting. And why is it disgusting?
Everyone: Because she used it to strangle her small children one at a time over the span of minutes with the older of the kids having to watch their 'mommy' do this to all of them.
It is not just insane, it is cruelty on clear display. And yet...the leftist mind still clouds over and instead asserts it's higher than thou place in the room.
Was he idly playing with the murder device or was he attempting to perform theater to express the idea of how horrible it would be to strangle a child for the time it would take to kill? It made me think of some of the demonstrations of kneeling for 9 minutes to express outrage over the death of George Floyd.
"how would that juror have that item?"
He went out an bought an identical version. ; )
Kind of reminds me of “swinging dicks” outrage.
Or a school board stopping a constituent who is reading one of the books in the elementary school’s library because it is too graphic. Greater offense is taken at pointing the horrific thing out rather than the horrific thing itself.
Unfortunately one of the dozens of medications Lindsay was prescribed wasn't fentanyl, which is too bad considering poisoning her children the way George poisoned himself would genuinely have been more merciful.
So the hold out wasn't the young guy. Was it the old guy or the bald guy? I'm guessing the old guy.
Richard Feynman redux! Two weeks after the Challenger Shuttle went down in 1986, a commission met to determine why it exploded. In a classic display of simplicity, Feynman pulled out a piece of rubber O-Ring material and stuck it in a glass of 32 degree ice water. After a minute, he pulled it out, and the ring DID NOT return to its original shape. Feynman showed that launching in cold weather directly impacted the O-Ring sealants and caused the explosion. The other panelists were impressed with this simple demonstration.
These jurors who run to the camera to cash in their 15 minutes of fame are crazy.
However, if this is the mindset in Boston / Plymouth Massachusetts area, they are definitely competing with Madison, WI for the self-righteous, liberal, looney-tunes award.
Strangulation takes time to kill someone. It’s not a quick thing like in the movies. Think about that when you imagine a Mother strangling her kids.
Reenacting the murder to get a better sense of the mind of the killer is a perfectly legitimate thing for a jury to do. Some juries have been taken to the scene of the crime. But no, this other guy is outraged because he doesn't want the very knowledge he is tasked with evaluating.
Caroline said...
"Lone Juror is legend. I hope someone figures out how to AI cast Jimmy Stewart in the not Netflix series."
He is the only sane one and will more than likely avoid the camera and media. Plus, considering where he lives, it could be dangerous. He could end up with a crowd of pink wearing liberal white women in front of his house, shrieking their bullshit.
I'm surprised the jurors that have been on TV and bitching about this guy have been smart enough not to name him or dox him.
Strange how the riots over Clancy from the "right wing extremists!" never materialized.
Temujin - exactly.
Our nation's misplaced empathy makes me ill.
It's right up there with all the lies that pour out of the Islamic lobby, and the Communist lobby.
Shorter GMA juror:
"How dare that guy remind us of why we are here."
"disgusting!"
The jurors were disgusted by a water bottle reenactment?
What did the children feel, not only seeing their mother kill them one by one, but feeling the life sapped right out of them by the one person they trusted most?
Could that jury be as callous as the mother?
Lem #### !
Roger von Oech said...
Richard Feynman redux!
Congrats! You beat me to it.
“But no, this other guy is outraged because he doesn't want the very knowledge he is tasked with evaluating.“
He has the knowledge and he knows he has the knowledge. He’s purposefully denied or buried its existence within him for some pitiful reason. Generally, men are wired to protect others. Women are wired to protect their children. That’s why he’s outraged. He doesn’t want to be forced to face the brutal reality and shamefulness of his current belief system. Look what’s he now forced to rationalize - a young mother viciously murdering her very young children.
Yeah seems like something the prosecutors should have done.
It’s like juror #8 in Twelve Angry Men throwing down the switchblade — very dramatic, but a big no-no on n the jury room
Everybody is wrong and disgusting except the woman who premeditatedly and slowly murdered her three small children. That's the mindset deciding people's fate. Let me add that to the disgusting list.
I wonder if I'm right in guessing that the holdout juror has children and likely grandchildren, and that the other two males (not men) have no children. Have the males ever paid for, encouraged, or at least assented to, a wife's or girlfriend's abortion? I wouldn't be surprised. And I'm not at all surprised that the journalists didn't ask them, or the females (not women) on the jury, how many children they'd had, and how many abortions they'd had (the females) or helped with (the males).
"..We’re not here to play detective.."
we're here to listen to the 3 nurses and the retired school teacher
"What is a piece of evidence doing in the jurors room, being handled by everyone? Is that SOP?"
Yes, SOP with some exceptions.
The prosecution didn’t introduce expert witnesses testimony as to the agonizing death by strangulation? It appears those jurors needed to hear that kind of testimony. But then the defense would have claimed on appeal that the jury had been prejudiced by that kind of testimony.
"He’s purposefully denied or buried its existence within him for some pitiful reason."
"Cowards die many times before their deaths." - Shakespeare
It's down there keeping his many other ego deaths company.
ai answers: “Yes, strangulation and drowning are similar because they are both forms of asphyxiation, meaning they deprive the brain and body of vital oxygen. However, they achieve this through entirely different mechanical and physiological pathways.”
It's a rush to out and deep background check the lone juror. I'm sure parts of the media have already done so, they are just establishing the groundwork to allow them to do it without looking too insane.
Edging each other on it.
As with the claim the holdout juror said he had 'reasonable doubt' I'm taking this 'reenacted the strangulation' claim with a grain of salt.
FYI, I don't think he's in any physical danger, but they are going to try to ruin his life; like that plumber and rodeo clown.
@J Scott, it's time to start ruining the media's lives.
"I asked him why are you doing that?"
Really? You can't figure out why he'd do that?
There should be IQ tests for prospective jurors.
"a young mother viciously murdering her very young children" Young? (the mother, not the kids) I dunno. 36 is more on the middle-aged side. Maybe that was the problem - too old to deal with kids. It turned her vicious.
I'm surprised the jurors that have been on TV and bitching about this guy have been smart enough not to name him or dox him.
If I ever got impaneled on a jury with a bunch of short-haired nurses, I'd use a pseudonym with them and not tell them the smallest detail of my personal life.
Perhaps I am missing something. "Toxicology" evidence has been mentioned, but details are hard to find. There are some exceptions like lithium where a specific range is important to be considered therapeutic. But other than that? Is it alleged that she was on dangerously high levels of some of her drugs? Or if they were not detected did that mean she was non compliant? Something does not add up here. It's trying to put solid "sciencey sounding" data into a discussion of the human soul and its demons....
On the other hand, the rush to the media shows maybe that these "Nurses" are also trying to get ahead of the reputational hit. Though, they could have stayed anonymous though maybe game theory comes into play.
The more the jurors talk, the dumber they seem.
Not only was she on a cocktail of like 30 meds, she was A) not taking some of them against doctors orders, B) not adhering to prescribed doses for others and C) mixing, matching and experimenting with them in ways that would've made Hunter S. anxious. She was told not to do this by both her doctors and her husband, and she did it anyway.
"the rush to the media shows maybe that these "Nurses" are also trying to get ahead of the reputational hit."
Too late. They should talk more. The more they talk the more disgusted people are becoming. I hope these bitches blab till Boxing Day.
--- they are definitely competing with Madison, WI for the self-righteous, liberal, looney-tunes award. [Gusty Winds]
Good point. The Althouse Club's self-righteousness is off the charts!
A college friend of mine was murdered by strangulation. The defendant tried to argue that he had some kind of mental defect caused by alcohol subscription. The prosecution stated that it takes 3 minutes to kill someone by strangulation and it's not just some minor thing to strangle someone. He set a timer at 3 minutes and let it run to demonstrate how long that was. I'm assuming the juror was making a similar demonstration.
--- Not only was she on a cocktail of like 30 meds, she was A) not taking some of them against doctors orders, B) not adhering to prescribed doses for others and C) mixing, matching and experimenting with them in ways that would've made Hunter S. anxious. She was told not to do this by both her doctors and her husband, and she did it anyway. [Ride]
The list is actually 14, but who's counting? At least four of them on the same day in November, with two others within a week. What were all the doctors advising, while you're at it?
I read at another source (AoSHQ, I think) that there were three men on the jury, but the two others just gave up and gave in, so they wouldn’t have to listen to the harpies continually harangue them. Pathetic. I wonder if they were thinking their wives would make their lives a living hell if they voted guilty.
And I thought all these gay communist racialist federal judges were a problem. Sheesh. Juries, like armies, replicate the values of the societies they're drawn from and so it's a short step from the infanticide mindset to the general idea that it's OK to kill your children. And the Massholes have taken that step.
I wonder how long it will be before one of these nurses walks into some patient's room in her hospital and the patient immediately hits the buzzer and demands a different nurse. I certainly would, and am very glad I live far from Massachusetts and never visit there.
We don’t hang people in the US, because most consider that form of capital punishment to be cruel and unusual. The cruelty is because often the death is from strangulation (sometimes it can break the neck or even decapitate). It causes the victim to suffer too long.
According to hollymathnerd, the evidence was that the only time that Clancy said that she "heard voices" telling her to kill the children was the day of the killings. Not before and not after. Apparently that is not how psychosis works--people hear voices for an extended period both before and after acting--"acting does not extinguish the voice" was the way she put it.
I presume that there was expert psychiatric testimony to that effect. (If not, shame on the prosecution--or hollymathnerd is making things up).
I could believe and even have sympathy for someone doing something horrible while having a psychotic episode.
That isn't what happened. And the Clancy claim that she heard voices appears to be a lie.
Disgusting? That was the god damn point. What Lindsey Clancy did was disgusting.
Many of you noted properly the problem with the nurse juror providing testimony in the jury room that wasn’t tested by the trial. I see another problem with that behavior. Nurses are nurses and not doctors for a reason. They are not trained and especially not qualified to make a diagnosis (unless they are a nurse practitioner). They are also not lab technicians trained to analyze lab results.
Sure, they’ve read enough labs and seen enough symptoms to be very good at analyzing labs and making diagnosis. However, doing so in a professional capacity is a no no unless under the guidance of a doctor (even for nurse practitioners). It would be like a person that completed two years of law school after being a paralegal all their life suddenly representing themselves as a lawyer without the degree or accreditation.
They were just very protective of the water bottles.
*The Althouse Club's self-righteousness is off the charts!*
You're the ghoul who says it wasn't premeditated. Why should we listen to anything you say?
“"A male juror in the mistrial of Lindsay Clancy said the lone holdout... wrapped one of the exercise bands the mom used to kill her children around a water bottle to mimic their strangulation in the deliberation room.”
Reminds me of when Feynman dipped a rubber O-ring in a glass of ice water to demonstrate the cause of the Challenger disaster.
It would be worse if the body was carbonated, which produces anguished cries when shook or strangled. Out, out, damned spritz.
Looks like their feewings were hurt. The rise of women does not fill me with confidence.
“ChrisC said...
The Meida getting jurors to trash other jurors is kind of a new low for them, no?“
They didn’t have to stoop very far.
Are we to put the jurors on trial or should we just jump to the end game - the arena where twelve go in and one comes out. We are so close to Hunger Games.
Observing several aspects, we're already in the Hunger Games and Idiocracy. More parts than anyone should feel comfortable with.
Someone here commented the other day that a juror should not attempt to make him- or herself an expert in the jury room (which seems to be precisely what the nurses were doing), but could rely upon their own personal expertise to inform their judgment.
Perhaps the lone holdout is a clinical psychologist.
--- Why should we listen to anything you say? [Jim at]
Because you have an open mind? It would take an open mind to understand how a destroyed personality, desperate, full of delusions and fears -- brought on in large part by the credentialed doctors she was relying upon -- might still be capable of making and following a basic plan of action.
Did she therefore know what she was doing, or could she nonetheless have been insane? Twelve people watched and listened to the trial every day and voted 11-1 that she had reached an insane state.
But apparently the keyboard warriors on this site know better.
Clancy killed her children. She lost her husband. She is now paralyzed. She has nothing but a miserable remnant of life. That's not enough punishment for you? Fry her, it might be the most merciful outcome for her.
No matter what her current state is. She need to pay legally for murdering three children. It is important to society.
Were the "exercise bands" the type that are like giant rubber bands? Did she stretch them out as she wrapped around kids neck and then move on to next child as 1st slowly dies? Or, the elastic rope type that she wrapped around the neck and held tight until child died? Seems manual strangulation would have been quicker. Did the babies say anything to mom?
Saw true crime where killer dad revealed his 5 year old boy looked him in the eyes and said repeatedly"Please daddy, stop hurting me".
Hopefully killer mom didn't have to suffer that.
Clancy killed her children. She lost her husband. She is now paralyzed. She has nothing but a miserable remnant of life.
And she did it to herself. No one else put her into her current circumstances. At least SHE has some circumstances to be put into unlike her children.
That's not enough punishment for you?
NO. She could also be deaf and dumb as well as paralyzed... and not have any contact with humanity for the rest of her miserable life. Living in complete isolation and unable to even end her own life.
Fry her, it might be the most merciful outcome for her.
She doesn't deserve mercy. I hope she suffered for decades.
suffers....not suffered
Many years ago, I was doing an internship that involved a rotation with Medical students. The MD Professor asked them how a patient dies from hanging. None of them had the right answer, the Professor looked at me and said “L bet the Psychologist knows”.
It was my moment of glory. Hanging breaks the C1-C2 vertebrae. Otherwise, it would take to long to kill someone by strangulation. I was so proud of myself. lol!
“ Because you have an open mind?”
You don’t. In fact, your mind is so closed, you make up things about others arguments. You claimed I wanted to execute Lindsey Clancy, when I was actually quite understanding of the insanity argument. But since you think the only blame should go to the pharmaceutical companies, and I once embarrassed your analysis of how markets work by calling it gibberish; you lied about my thoughts on this case to bolster your own arguments.
If you don’t think you lied, then find a quote by me with a link and time stamp that proves you were right. You won’t, because I tried to avoid even discussing this case, and the only comment I made prior to your lie was questioning whether the 11 jurors were seeking not guilty by reason of insanity or full acquittal. It is something I’m still not certain has been cleared up.
Mostly, I don’t think any of your arguments are being made in good faith, since you resort to ad hominem replies rather than bolster your arguments with facts and logic.
Don't those things have go back into the evidence locker, rather than being given to jurors to play with?
Do the twelve jurors, tried and true, also get to shoot off or slash with other murder weapons in the jury room?
You can't strangle in here - this is the murder room! CC, JSM
*Because you have an open mind?*
Far more than yours.
The lengths you're going to defend a woman - who pre-planned to murder her three children - is astounding.
God help your children should you have any.
Birches said...
Yeah seems like something the prosecutors should have done.
It is pretty obvious that the female prosecutors on this case purposely tanked the prosecution.
This entire situation has proven that you cannot give women responsibility.
Until other women start standing up and calling for the execution of Clancey our society is broken.
Quite frankly the prosecutors, defense attorney, and the 11 jurors need to be seeing significant jail time at a minimum for what has happened here.
Every woman who has publicly supported Clancey needs to be exiled from the country at a minimum.
Strangling a water bottle is disgusting. A Clancy child, not so much. Apparently, trying to make a point to the amoral 11 was a waste of time.
I should not leave out the male cucks and simps that are begging for leniency for this demon.
There is something really off about all of this. There is no way this is a real thing.
I used to be a libertarian at one point. This episode has convinced me that Tik Tok should have been shut down and all of its executives should be waterboarded to death.
Just amazing to me that the five jurors all have basically the same issue- none of them wanted to be reminded of what Clancy did to the children.
She wants to get away with murder.
The left be all: 'We got you, honey. '
"Twelve people watched and listened to the trial every day and voted 11-1 that she had reached an insane state."|
Well, no. At best those 11 reached the conclusion that the prosecution didn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Clancy was "sane" by whatever definitions of sane and insane were to be applied.
But answer me this, Kai- is Clancy sane as of today? Doesn't she have to be- the judge allowed the trial to go forward, so she is competent as of right now according to the court and whatever experts it retained to make that determination. If the vote had been 12-0, Clancy would be almost certainly be released inside of a few months because she has been determined to be sane enough to stand trial. Are you really OK with happening?
"Just amazing to me that the five jurors all have basically the same issue- none of them wanted to be reminded of what Clancy did to the children."
Pretty much the same with abortion.
Yes, officially admitted case exhibits are generally provided to the jury for review during deliberations. [1] (https://www.tdcaa.com/journal/paying-attention-to-jury-charges/), [2] (https://www.bexar.org/375/Trial-Jury-Events)How Exhibit Review WorksAdmitted Evidence Only: Only physical items, documents, photographs, or recordings that were formally entered into evidence during the trial (and approved by the judge) can go back to the jury room
“The holdout was reminding the room what this case actually was: three murdered children. Not a therapy session.
—— John Curtis
Kai Akker said...
Clancy killed her children. She lost her husband. She is now paralyzed. She has nothing but a miserable remnant of life. That's not enough punishment for you? Fry her, it might be the most merciful outcome for her.
This is juvenile emotionality.
Where will we be in 10 years if we let women like Clancey off?
How many children will look up with pleading begging eyes as their mother strangles them because you want to emote.
It is pathetic that you think Clancey has suffered enough for what she did. At minimum she needs to be strangled publicly the same way she strangled her children.
Everyone of those kids spent their last moments wondering what the fuck was going on as the one fucking person in the world that should be protecting them was mercilessly choked them to death. It took several minutes for each child.
Maybe people like you need to be sedated enough so we can let Clancey strangle you like she strangled her children. A copycat has already hung her 2 year old.
People just do not think about the effects of the words they say.
"Everyone of those kids spent their last moments wondering what the fuck was going on as the one fucking person in the world that should be protecting them was mercilessly choked them to death. It took several minutes for each child."
And after experiencing, or enjoying, the suffering of the first child, she moved on to the next.
These jurors should realize they are not smart enough to publicly discuss the verdict without saying dumb things. In this case, it was the left wing media guy who led the juror into claiming it was "mimicking." Any intelligent media person would understand the showing of how the band was used to strangle a screaming child is evidence of knowing it was wrong, mental illness or not.
This whole thing has started to resemble the setup for Norm MacDonald's joke about Bill Cosby, told in the front seat of Jerry's Porsche.
Did the prosecution strike any prospective juror?
Don't mimic what the woman who you want free did to 3 innocent little children. He should be put in prison!!!!./SNARK
The other jurors were all mentally ill Progressives that are okay with killing children...but don't mangle the water bottle....that's disgusting!!! WTF???
--- since you resort to ad hominem replies [Leland]
Leland, we've disagreed on a couple topics and it has obviously stuck in your craw. I've read your retorts to comments I make; some sound a little angry, some get a little nasty, but what I've noticed most is the projection from you in several of them. And now this one, especially. It's the fantasy according to annoyed Leland. FYI.
If you can't handle people disagreeing with you in this environment, perhaps you should reconsider whether you belong on an adult discussion forum such as this one.
--- If the vote had been 12-0, Clancy would be almost certainly be released inside of a few months because she has been determined to be sane enough to stand trial. Are you really OK with happening? [Yancy Ward]
@ Yancey..... I can't picture this woman being released so soon. I'm not sure that attending her own trial makes her legally sane and competent for such a custody adjudication; other perps are found not guilty by reason of insanity, so..... ? Someone with legal background can answer that one.
In an older post, I said I agreed with another commenter that she belongs in some asylum-custody setting. But do I think this broken-down, wheelchair-bound woman is a threat to anyone on the outside? No. Do you? Does anyone else?
I suspect she is guilt-ridden beyond belief. I believe her own mind will torture her more or less relentlessly for the rest of whatever her life might consist of. If so, that is the suffering that God is inflicting. I don't think, at this point, that there is any purpose served by putting ourselves in His place and taking her life. No social or legal purpose. In fact, I think if she does return to something closer to normalcy, sanity, that it is possible she will spend her remaining days trying to expiate and atone in some fashion.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.