Lindsay Clancy Jury Forewoman Admits She Was "So Excited" When She Thought She'd Get to Acquit the Killer; Another Female Juror Says the Male Holdout "Just Couldn't Get Past the Fact That She Viciously Killed Her Children"

He just couldn't get over that, huh?

Wow, he's so irrational.

And he wouldn't listen to the nine hens pecking at him and cursing at him! (They admit that profanity was used.)

What a toxic-masculinity monster who won't just do what angry depraved Karens command him to do.

Unbelievable.

The jury foreperson in Lindsay Clancy's high-stakes triple murder trial detailed just how close the panel was to finding the killer mom not guilty by reason of insanity until one male holdout juror blocked the verdict.

"He admitted he had reasonable doubt after we watched the video of the interview," the female juror told NBC 10 Boston in an interview with two other women jury members.

As I said before, I think this is a distortion. I think he said something to try to conciliate the profanity-spraying hens like "I can understand why you say she was insane" and the crazed kid-killer fans jumped on that and took that to mean acquittal, which they were "excited" by.

"I started filling out forms, I was so excited," the woman said.

"There were three forms I had to fill out and I started filling them out, I wrote my signature on each one but then he said, 'But I'm still not going to say she's not guilty by reason of insanity.'"

One of the three jurors, was named Paula and is a former government contractor. Another, Kelly, is a chef in Plymouth, and the foreperson, Ronnie, is a retired fifth-grade special needs teacher.

The jurors called the holdout "arrogant" for refusing to interact with the other members and for refusing to consider their takes on the evidence in the case.

He did consider your takes. You rejected them. Like all left-wing female supremacists, when you say a man must "hear" you, you mean a man must obey you.

"He was very arrogant. He really did not take anything that anybody said," one of the women claimed.

Another said, "every one of us in the hours of our frustration would get up and walk the room because you just couldn't sit anymore. And we would all go to the cart with the exhibits. He, I think, got up to the cart once very briefly and went back to his seat."

"He would not interact with us and try to understand," she continued. "We read to him, on numerous occasions, the definition of reasonable doubt from Judge [William] Sullivan's instruction."

"But he had the hardest time getting over the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children," she explained.

What a monster.

Meanwhile, the she-maniacs said they disregarded the prosecution's case -- see, women don't have to listen to men, men just have to listen to women -- because the prosecution wasn't "compassionate" enough to the triple child-murderess.

The jurors told the outlet the prosecution didn't show enough compassion toward Clancy -- who the jurors learned at trial struggled with crippling insomnia, anxiety, depression and suicidal thoughts and thoughts of harming her kids in the four months leading up to the murders.

"I just found it to be harsh -- very, very harsh," one juror said.

"The fact that they had no character witnesses in regards to Lindsay being a bad mother ... I found it to be biased."

The foreperson said all the witnesses and evidence "proved that she loved her children ... so she had to have snapped."

The trio said they found Reddington to be "entertaining," "arrogant," "compassionate" and "funny."

"His compassion for Lindsay was amazing," one of the women said.

So, just like the highly-invested Lindsay Clancy cultists outside the court, these women feel that the Real Victim Here wasn't the three children murdered in the basement, terrified and confused about why their mother is strangling them, but the housewife these soap opera addicts obviously identified with and projected themselves on to.

You will not be surprised to learn that there were "strong personalities" in the jury room -- which I take to mean Alpha Karens who badgered and berated and shamed the other jurors into letting a child killer go free.

The panel of nine women and three men deadlocked after splitting 11-1, but one woman, identified as Juror No. 5, told local media that the holdout at the end of deliberations wasn't the only one who initially thought Clancy was guilty.

"The stand-alone juror was not the only one that was unwilling to see things from the other side, so I'm going to kind of defend that individual in a sense," she told the Boston-based WBZ-TV. "There were some big personalities in that room, but at the end of the day, it just came down to an inability to move past your convictions."

She, too, was originally in favor of a guilty verdict, she told the outlet.

"And maybe I still believe that in a certain way," she added. "I think that this is a woman who was not mentally healthy."

See? The Alpha Karens pressured her.

It gets worse. The "nurses on the jury" demanded the male (spit) holdout take the claims of other jurors as evidence and make his decision based upon this non-evidence.

See, there were "nurses on the jury" and their stupid uneducated opinions overrule the actual psychiatric expert who testified that Lindsay Clancy was lying about "hearing voices."

They called him "arrogant" and accused him of disregarding information from "nurses on the jury."

See, the (spit) man was arrogant. The "nurses on the jury" offering their lay opinions as expert testimony weren't arrogant. They were giving expert testimony.

Aren't all women experts, when you think about it? They have Lived Experience.

I don't know what's going to happen, guys. I don't know how we survive one-third of women now being viciously insane.

If they have a retrial -- no teachers, no "nurses on the jury." And strike as many women as possible.

posted by Disinformation Expert Ace at 12:12 PM

| Access Comments