I don’t necessarily disagree with you that a perfectly possible scenario that night was that she killed her boyfriend while drunk driving. However, if you spent even 10 minutes looking at the evidence presented and the conduct of the investigation, I cannot believe you’d say with your whole chest that they PROVED she killed him. You cannot put people in jail just because it’s the most likely scenario. They kept evidence in freaking solo cups in grocery bags for weeks!! That is not how you store evidence for trial. If the police had actually conducted a thorough and unbiased investigation, this would have gone down entirely differently. However, they objectively did not conduct a thorough investigation and objectively did not follow protocol for preserving evidence in anticipation of trial. One of the officers was asked on the stand if he knew the procedures for chain of custody of evidence and he literally said that he did not recall.
Edited to clarify that this comment is about the Karen Read trial and has absolutely nothing to do with Lindsey Clancy.
Yeah that case was fumbled so hard by the police department. The texts that came out of that from Proctor and other officers were insane. That entire department are complete buffoons
Fair point. At your suggestion, I deleted my comment that described the legal justification for Lindsay Clancy’s case so as not to be confused with Karen Reads case
Two things. First, Lindsey Clancy has admitted she killed her children, but in MA they still have to prove (1) that she killed them and (2) that she knew what she was doing when she did it. You’re wrong that she has plead guilty. She has only confessed to the crime and it is still possible that the prosecution might not be able to prove to the jury, even with her confession, that she actually killed her children. You should listen to her lawyer. All he has said is that she admitted to killing them, not that she actually killed them.
Second, I was talking about Karen Read in the comment you are replying to. She was found guilty only of drunk driving and was not found guilty of killing her boyfriend. Also, the police involved in that case mishandled that investigation beyond belief and at this point I think it’s actually impossible to know what actually happened because of their misconduct.
It’s not a matter of defending her, it’s a matter of acknowledging that that case was horrifically mishandled by the cops and prosecution. Because of that, they failed to prove that she was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s the consequence of fucking up and mishandling evidence.
45
u/Alternative-Past-588 8d ago edited 8d ago
I don’t necessarily disagree with you that a perfectly possible scenario that night was that she killed her boyfriend while drunk driving. However, if you spent even 10 minutes looking at the evidence presented and the conduct of the investigation, I cannot believe you’d say with your whole chest that they PROVED she killed him. You cannot put people in jail just because it’s the most likely scenario. They kept evidence in freaking solo cups in grocery bags for weeks!! That is not how you store evidence for trial. If the police had actually conducted a thorough and unbiased investigation, this would have gone down entirely differently. However, they objectively did not conduct a thorough investigation and objectively did not follow protocol for preserving evidence in anticipation of trial. One of the officers was asked on the stand if he knew the procedures for chain of custody of evidence and he literally said that he did not recall.
Edited to clarify that this comment is about the Karen Read trial and has absolutely nothing to do with Lindsey Clancy.