
9-10-26 - 9am - The Lindsay Clancy Jury
About this episode
In a recent high-profile trial, a jury delivered a verdict that has left many scratching their heads. The case involved a mother who killed her three children, and the jury's decision was not what most people expected. But what's even more surprising is the reasoning behind it. The speaker takes a deep dive into the intricacies of the trial, exploring the nuances of the law and the dynamics of the jury's decision-making process.
This episode delves into the specifics of the case, including the unique burden of proof in Massachusetts, where the government must prove a defendant's sanity beyond a reasonable doubt. The speaker examines the role of expert jurors, particularly a nurse who shared her medical expertise with the other jurors, and how this may have influenced their decision. The discussion also touches on the concept of "reasonable doubt" and how it can be used to justify a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity.
The speaker raises important questions about the implications of this verdict, including the potential for abuse of the insanity defense and the impact on postpartum women. They also highlight the need for a more nuanced understanding of the law and its application in real-world cases.
If you're interested in a thought-provoking exploration of the complexities of the justice system, this episode is a must-listen. The speaker's analysis is engaging, informative, and raises important questions about the nature of justice and the role of the law in our society.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Get every episode summarized
Each time The Situation & The Weekend with Michael Brown publishes, we email you a written briefing from the transcript — the topics, who appeared, and any specific claims, with the ad reads skipped.
Email me new episodesFree for 3 shows. No card needed.
Hosts & guests
Transcript ready
708 searchable segments. Every word is indexed and playable.
Full transcript
The Situation & The Weekend with Michael Brown — 9-10-26 - 9am - The Lindsay Clancy Jury. Machine-transcribed; use the interactive transcript above to jump the player to any line.
Why you deal with listening to Armstrong and getting on demand? We're not boring. Lot of news is boring. And tedious. And depressing. And makes you angry. You don't want to live your life like that. Hey, I'm Jack Armstrong. He's Joe Getty. We're Armstrong and Getty. We try to bring you the truth and help you figure out this crazy modern world. About something about a comedic tone. What? We have a winner? Yes. Listen to Armstrong and Getty on demand on the iHeart Radio app. Apple podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. I believe that whoever was in that room and did that was a murderer. A new podcast series, Fault Line Haditha, tells the story of a shocking crime and a cover-up at the highest levels of the United States Marine Corps. If you've got five players and you offer immunity to four, you better be right about the fifth because if you're not, then you've just given immunity to your color. Listen to Fault Line Haditha on the iHeart Radio app. Apple podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.
This episode sponsored by HomeBase. HomeBase is built for small businesses trying to do it all. The neighborhood coffee shop, the local gym, the family run restaurant. With HomeBase, you can schedule your team, track time, run payroll, and manage hiring from one easy app. So you can spend less time chasing time sheets and more time running the business your customers love. More than 150,000 small businesses already use HomeBase to keep their teams on track. Start free at joinhomebase.com. HomeBase, built for small businesses that do it all. This episode sponsored by HomeBase. HomeBase is built for small businesses trying to do it all. The neighborhood coffee shop, the local gym, the family run restaurant. With HomeBase, you can schedule your team, track time, run payroll, and manage hiring from one easy app. So you can spend less time chasing time sheets and more time running the business your customers love. More than 150,000 small businesses already use HomeBase to keep their teams on track.
Start free at joinhomebase.com. HomeBase, built for small businesses that do it all. This episode sponsored by HomeBase. HomeBase is built for small businesses trying to do it all. The neighborhood coffee shop, the local gym, the family run restaurant. With HomeBase, you can schedule your team, track time, run payroll, and manage hiring from one easy app. So you can spend less time chasing time sheets and more time running the business your customers love. More than 150,000 small businesses already use HomeBase to keep their teams on track. Start free at joinhomebase.com. HomeBase, built for small businesses that do it all. Come on and Dragon, come Roddy, Stingenberger. Tell me yesterday to go back and read 100 years of trade history so I can understand. What I understand is it hasn't been working for the longest time. And so some people are doing it differently. Now I understand it.
If Mr. Stingenberger can't understand it, it can't be understood. That's pretty damn American, sir. Even though this dumbass truck driver can understand some things. Those things I got out of the entire text, by the way, it's good to be back. Good to see you Mr. Stingenberger. Oh yeah, it's so great to have you back. By the tone of that thought back sounds like past couple days didn't go very well. But yeah, they've been sparring a little bit about the trade war with Canada and everything. So it's fine. Well the only thing I got out of that thought back was that the truck driver's still alive. Yeah, that's good news. Immigration has not come up with him yet and taken away his fake CDL that he got from Walmart. That's pretty good. Yeah, it's pretty good. Pretty good. Yeah, here we go. How much of those truckers going back and forth between here and then disclose location in New Mexico? Or, by the way, I was just telling. Rocked on the way out. Yeah, something about, you know, is the underscales location.
Desert. Which I didn't know was a word. Desert or forestry for forestry for I forget what the word. Sunday night is a force of desert. That's it will study 8,000 feet. So it's going to force. I like the desert too. But New Mexico, you know, right now the current governor will on the moon. Remember we've talked about will on the moon before. She's leaving. But that's they really need to pull this head out of it. But they don't realize all you've do is with North. Like all we have to do is just look to the West, California, or to the east, New York or to the North, Illinois, or we could even look to the South New Mexico or New America. Whoever you must tell them, I don't care. New America. Good grief. The Trump straight of Hormuz. That's a good one too. I heard that. The straight Trump straight of Hormuz. I think it was just the Trump straight or something. Trump straight. It's Trump straight.
I didn't know that. I don't know. No one knows. There's nothing wrong with it. One more good thing was that the South Park. Oh, yeah, yes. Yes, have you seen it as an air yet? I honestly, I'm not sure. I don't know, but I just saw the whole press stuff. Yeah, I do want to see it. South America. Yeah, I'm not really a South Park guy. I kind of like it. I don't want, but I'm not a fanatic about it. I don't watch it all the time. But I would like to watch it. But anyway, go back to New Mexico for a moment. Whatever we're going to call it. I don't know, you know, the new world. I don't, but anyway, the people running for office in New Mexico. Make the people running for office in Colorado. Looks like freaking geniuses. I get there on Saturday and I don't know. Tamer's going to watch. We're going to, you know, one of the social directives we're going to do. We're going to do. And so we're going to dinner and we're going to go out to dinner. So we're going to drive. We're going to drive an hour to go have dinner. Okay, that's that's that long to get anywhere.
So we're going to drive an hour to have, you know, 45 minutes to an hour meal and drive back. And then we're going to watch something on TV. But before we get to the proper place on TV, we have to, you know, when it comes on, it's just the over the air that, you know, the rabbit ears kind of thing. The what do you call it? The end or antenna. And I swear it's just bam, bam, bam, bam, bam. Thank you, ma'am. Commercials. Every Democrat running for office, just commercial after commercial work. And they're just dumb. They're just dumb. Oh my gosh. Maybe actually feel good about the less dumb politicians we have running for office in Colorado. There you have it. You know who we've got running, right? That's what that's why I'm trying to point out about how dumb they are in, in New Mexico. And they're all, I think they all have the same consultant because every commercial has the same theme, the same everything, you know, Trump bad, I'm great. You know, economy sucks. I'll make, I'll make the economy wonderful, which
for my entire lifetime, the economy in New Mexico has never been good. So anyway, I'm, I don't have to break this to you. I'm going to talk about something that I very specifically avoided talking about the entire time it was going on because I did not care at all. Do you guess what this might be? You're going to bring up Lindsay. I certainly am. Yeah. Yeah. But before you start clicking the dial, whatever you do, you know, changing your preset, whatever, you ought to listen to this because this is based solely upon nothing about the trial but a place that you and I will never get to go. I certainly will, I'll never get to go anywhere near one of these places. You might, although if I were one of the, if I were either prosecutor or a defense lawyer, I would never put you on a jury.
Never, I would never put you on a jury. On the other hand, I will never get on a jury simply because who I am, one of them, lawyer and always that guy, that guy, yeah, we're not putting him on a jury. So I want to take you into a room that you will never be allowed to see. It's that jury room in Brockton, Massachusetts. It's day six and somewhere north of 38 hours of deliberation. So 11 people who came in as strangers have now argued with each other for the better part of of a week and they're just, they're worn down to the studs. They're exhausted. And the four person of the foreman is a woman named Ronnie Carlson believes it is finally over. Now, I know I said 11, just keep that in mind for a moment. Oh my goodness, the jury is a jury of 12. What are you talking about? Just 11 right now. She believes that it's just about over because of number 12.
The one who's been holding out all week long has just said the words that she has been waiting to hear all week over 38 hours of deliberations. He's told the room he has a reasonable doubt. So she gets, this is all according to her, her, her own, not testimony, but her own. Let me find it real quick. This is based upon what she has said, not what somebody else has said, but what she has said because they have actually talked to different people in different organizations about it. And it's absolutely amazing. Let me get things out of just time. Get everything set up here. Are you ready? Just wanted to be harsh, so very, very harsh. I mean, again, I may be talking out with ourselves here, but the fact is that they had no character witnesses to being begotulent of being a bad mother.
I mean, we're out of the gate. It's like you're presenting all these medical professionals, but nobody's presenting and for the prosecution a woman and a mother of three children. So I found this to be biased right out of the gate. We weren't trying to figure out if she murdered the children. She did. And she's admitting that. We're trying to figure out, did she know right from wrong at that time? And with everybody saying she loved your children so much and everything proved she loved your children from our journals to her mother-in-law, everything proved that she loved your children. So she had to have SNAP. She had to have SNAP. These jurors wanted the prosecution to focus on all the touchy-feely stuff surrounding the case. You know, like maybe Ellen DeGeneres would have done or maybe Oprah Winfrey would have done. I don't know, but the 12th juror who's been holding on all week finally says the words
that that first nurse you just heard says he has a reasonable doubt. So the first person you heard just there in that town by Ronnie Carlson picks up her pen. She starts filling out the verdict forms. Now she later said she was so excited. She was so excited. She could barely keep her hand steady. What are you excited about? There's a woman that even your cohort, your other nurse on the jury, says that yes, we know she murdered her children. She murdered her children. But oh my gosh, they're so excited now. They are so excited. She signed your name. And then the 12th juror says this. But I'm still not going to say that she's not guilty by reason of insanity. Boom. Crash. Burn. Now just sit in that room for a minute. Because that one sentence is the entire case and almost everything you've been told about what
it means is upside down. This is the epiphany I had when I'm off the air for a while and I'm looking to stuff I don't really care about. You know when you're just kind of dead scrolling and you come across something you go, that's backass. Where did that come from? That's what happens when because this was to me before over the weekend, just another murder case. Yeah, really perverted one, but another another another murder case. Here's the story that's been sold to you this week and all of last week. And I'll bet you've already heard at least some version of it. There's a jury of 12, 12 angry people, right? 12 angry men. You haven't watched it. You should go watch it. Nine of them are women. 11 of them we are told ready to let a mother who killed her three children walk out on an insanity defense. And one man, one old man standing in the middle of the storm refuses to go along.
You know me being the kind of passive aggressive, the kind of, oh, you everybody's well, that way, doesn't that be? Look the other way. I'm that kind of person. So I'm already looking at this guy going, hmm, maybe we should pay attention to him. One lone man standing in the middle of the storm refusing to go along, the last adult in that room in my opinion, the one who wouldn't let them get away with it. That is the story. The brave hold out against the weepy feel good, that you feel a majority. And I'm saying white lambs because I feel that pull myself. Three children are dead. She strangled them. You know, it's fine because I just took down my notes. In my notes, I've got somebody strangled them. No, we know who strangled them. She did the mother dead. Every instinct that you and I were born with says somebody needs to answer for that. And the man who would not budge feels like the one person who is trying to honor those kids
lives. So I'm going to ask you to hold that instinct in your hand for just a minute. And what you look at it, because by the end of what I have to say, I think you'll see it's exactly the instinct the law was built to protect us from, including you and me. Let me tell you what is not in dispute. None of this is in dispute. On January 24, 2023, indexbury, Massachusetts, Lindsey Clancy strangles her three children in the basement of their home. Chora was five, Dawson was three, Calum was eight months old, eight months. She used her exercise bands. And when she was done, she went upstairs and she tried to kill herself. She cut her own wrist, her thighs, her neck, and she jumped from the second story window and she lived. She's now paralyzed. Everybody saw that because they all they wanted to show their wheelchair in the courtroom all the time. She will be in the wheelchair for the rest of her life. No, I will not say anything about that, whatever.
Nobody at that trial argued that she did not do it. Her own lawyer did not argue that she did not do it. If this case had been about whether Lindsey Clancy killed her children, the jury would have returned to verdicts in the afternoon. Probably, you know, just, hey, this get our free lunch, then we'll sign the verdict and then we'll go home. Maybe he will stay through dinner. Maybe we'll tell the judge we must stay through dinner and then we'll do it. Just get you a lunch and dinner. There would have been nothing to deliberate. So what were those 11 people and the one holdout arguing about were 38 hours over those six or seven days? What was the trial actually about? Have you thought about that? Because remember, it was not about whether she did it. And that right there is the thing nobody explaining this case to you seems willing to say out loud. Here's what it was about and you've got to follow this closely because this is the hands that the entire case turns on. And it's the part that got left on the cutting room floor that nobody in the editorial rooms of the New York Times,
the Washington Post, the Denver Post, or that matter, the networks, or the anybody in the cabal. Nobody wants you to think about this. In Massachusetts, when a defendant raises the insanity defense, the burden of proving insanity does not sit where you think it's sit. Remember, the defense is insanity. Like last night guilty by reason of insanity. Where would the logical place for that burden to prove insanity rest? With the person making the claim. Just as if the claim was about murdering the first degree, where does that burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt exist? With the government, with the prosecution. But in Massachusetts, when a defendant raises the insanity defense, the defense does not have to prove she was insane.
This is insane. It's the other way around. Once the question of her sanity is just properly introduced into the case, then the government, the prosecution, has to prove she was sane and not just prove it a little, like any other element, they have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. That's not my opinion, and it's not a clever defense trick. That's the law in Massachusetts going back decades, and it's written right into the instructions. The judge read to this very jury before they walked into that room. And the judge told them in the state's own words, there is no burden on the defendant to prove she lacked criminal responsibility. Even though they are the ones claiming that she lacked criminal responsibility because she was back home crazy, if they don't approve it, just assert it.
And in Massachusetts, that shifts the burden off the person claiming to be insane onto the government to prove, ah, that you were saying, and we're going to prove that beyond, and we will have to prove that beyond a reasonable doubt. Beyond a reasonable doubt. So think about what that does to the question that's in front of those 12 people. Because the question was never did she kill them? Everyone agreed she did. So what was the question? Next. A shocking crime and a cover-up at the highest levels of the United States Marine Corps. Someone opened the door and was the primary shooter. Is it possible you could do that and then suppress the number? A new podcast series, fault-line Haditha, tells the story the United States government, wants to keep buried. How can you not know? There were women and children there. Can you tell us here that you don't know what happened that day?
Based on thousands of pages of previously classified documents, and over a hundred hours of secretly filmed video, the truth about one of the most infamous crimes in Marine Corps history can finally be told. If you've got five players and one of them is guilty of murder at least, and you offer immunity to the other four, you better be right about the fifth, because if you're not, then you've just given immunity to your color. Listen to fault-line Haditha on the My Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. This episode sponsored by HomeBase. HomeBase is built for small businesses trying to do it all, the neighborhood coffee shop, the local gym, the family run restaurant. With HomeBase, you can schedule your team, track time, run payroll, and manage hiring from one easy app, so you can spend less time chasing time sheets, and more time running the business your customers love. More than 150,000 small businesses already use HomeBase to keep their teams on track.
Start free at joinhomebase.com. HomeBase, built for small businesses that do it all. Hey, drag, and I thought the guy that was auditioning for Michaels job early this week was doing a fantastic job. One is I've heard them to flip the switch and make the change. Thanks. Hopefully, any minute now, I'm talking like any minute now. Every minute now. You're already bust open. Well, every time the door swing is open, makes me nervous. Although that last door swing open was pretty interesting. What, like tell that story on there? Did you hear it? I did not. You guys weren't doing it. No. We weren't too, so or whatever you call it. Whatever you engineer is called it. I don't know. Yeah, I'm talking about cleansing. I myself can't believe I'm doing this, but I hope that you understand I'm doing it from a perspective that I don't think anybody else, if if somebody else has told you this, then I want to hear about it because I didn't hear about it. I had an epiphany driving down to 25.
The question was never did she kill them? Everybody agrees that she did. Everybody admits that. The question was, did this is so perverted? Did the prosecution, the state, the government prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was in her right mind when she did it? Did they knock down the post-paramocycosis? Did they prove she could tell right from wrong and could stop herself and chose not to stop herself? And the part that matters the most? The part that turns this entire story right side up? But when the burden sits on the government, the state, reasonable doubt is not a feeling that you're allowed to sit on. It is an instruction. If you have a reasonable doubt about whether the state proved she was saying,
the law does not tell you to hesitate. It tells you exactly what to do. You find her not guilty by reason of insanity. That's the outcome of the law hand you when the government has not carried its load. It doesn't mean you've decided she's blangeless. It means the state didn't prove its case. Now, go back into the jury room. Back to the pan in the foreman Ronnie Carlson's hand. The holdout told the rest of the jury the 11 angry people that he had a reasonable doubt. He said it out loud. According to the foreperson and according to two other jurors who have now spoken publicly, he admitted it. He admitted the government had not proved to him beyond a reasonable doubt that Lindsey Clancy
was saying. So he refused to give the verdict that admission requires. Now, pause. Let that bounce around in your head for a moment. Under the law that judge read to him, the moment he conceded a reasonable doubt about her sanity, he had his answer. The law had already made the decision for him, not guilty by reason of insanity. He didn't have to like it. Jures almost never liked that. He just had to follow it. He wouldn't. By the jurors account, he told them he had the doubt. And then said he would still not vote to a quit, because in his words, she murdered her three children. Remember, that's not the question at this point. That was the one thing in the entire trial.
Nobody seemed to be arguing about. So he took the one fact that was never in dispute and used it to refuse the one job the law actually gave him. The people calling that man the last adult in the room have it exactly backwards. See how convoluted this is? Call that... Call that keeping your eye on the ball if you want to. I'd say he picked up the ball in the middle of the game and he just walked off the field. On this record, the 11 who wanted to a quit were landing exactly where the judges' own instructions pointed. The confusion was not theirs. Now, before we go any farther, let's kill one word. Walk. You keep hearing that 11 wanted to let Lindsey Clancy walk. She's not walking anywhere. Not for the foreseeable future. At some point, yes, but not for the foreseeable future. A verdict is not guilty by reason of insanity.
Does not open the courthouse doors, but you back on the sidewalk. Under Massachusetts law sends her straight back to a locked psychiatric hospital. They evaluate her. And if they find her mentally ill and dangerous, they keep her. And they can renew that commitment year after year after year, potentially for the rest of her life. Or maybe after five years, she's gotten enough lithium in or that she's psych... Oh, we think she's okay now and she goes out. She goes out. So those 11 jurors that everybody is calling soft, they weren't voting to set a child killer free. They were voting to put her in a hospital instead of a prison. You can believe that's the wrong address. Just don't let anybody tell you it's letting her walk. Now, I want to give a side seriously. I mean this. Let me build their case. Because this is spot where I think most of the really loud commentary on both ends is really lazy. There were nurses on that jury. And during deliberations by the jury's own telling,
those nurses spoke about medications. What the drugs Lindsey Clancy was on would do to a person. How they work in the body. Here is the trap in that discussion. And I've spent a lot of years reading how juries actually behave. So let's walk. Let me walk you right into those studies that I've had. The danger was never that somebody sneaked a medical textbook past the bailiff. Nobody's got to do that. All it takes is for a juror to say the words, well, I'm a nurse. It's like, as last talk back, well, I'm an engineer. Or I'm a lawyer. Or I'm a whatever, fill in the blank. Whatever you want, whatever Monica you want to put on yourself. You walk into a jury and you sit down. And in a case like this where there is medical evidence, tons of medical expertise put in.
And you say to the other nine, well, on the nurse, everybody now sees you as an expert. All it takes is for the juror to say the words, I'm a nurse. And then start telling the other 11 what those drugs would have done to her mind. And the second that juror does that, she has stopped being a juror this weighing the evidence. And she has started being an expert witness inside the jury room. Except she was never sworn in. The prosecutor never got to cross examine a single word of what she said. And unless another juror has the nerve to say out loud, you don't actually know that. Or say this. What you're saying is not in evidence. If nobody says that, that means that whatever that nurse or nurse says said in the jury room
sits there and the longer it sits there, the more it hardens into fact. And most of the time nobody says anything about it. The research on this is old and it is solid. The landmark study, the book I've actually read, 1983, called Inside the Jury. And that book found that the faction holding the majority on the very first vote gets its way in the end about 90% of the time. It found that the jurors who looked like experts inside the jury room, they control the room. So you put a confident nurse in a room full of people who are not nurses, talking about drugs that most of the other jurors have never even heard of. And she's going to move that room whether or not she is absolutely right or completely wrong about every word she says. So I'm not going to stand up here and tell you that that was just 12 neighbors using their common sense.
Some of it may have been exactly the thing. The rule, I guess, acts not in evidence. That's the rule. That's what the rule exists to stop. Facts not in evidence. That's a real problem. And here's why it still does not crown the whole map as a hero. Follow that guy's own word. He did not tell the ring the nurses bullied him. He did not tell the government approved she was saying. According to three jurors who have spoken, he told them he had a reasonable doubt. That's his admission about his own mind. And the expert juror problem, real as I believe that is and was in this case, that explains how 11 people got to the number 11. But it doesn't explain a man who says he has a reasonable doubt. But then will not return the verdict, the law ties to that doubt. Unless, unless. And this is the honest part of the entire discussion.
Maybe he never really had that doubt. Maybe all right, there's some doubt. Was just something that a really worn out guy said out loud on day six. After a week of getting worked over by a room, it had already made up its mind. A shocking crime and a cover-up at the highest levels of the United States Marine Corps. Someone opened the door and was the primary sugar. Is it possible you could do that and then suppress the number? A new podcast series, Fault Line Haditha, tells the story the United States government wants to keep buried. How can you not know? There were women and children in there. And you're going to tell us here that you don't know what happened that day? Based on thousands of pages of previously classified documents, and over a hundred hours of secretly filmed video, the truth about one of the most infamous crimes in Marine Corps history can finally be told. If you've got five players and one of them is guilty of murder at least, and you offer immunity to the other four, you better be right about the fifth, because if you're not,
then you've just given immunity to your color. Listen to Fault Line Haditha on the Lie Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Very sad that we're remembering Charlie Kirk was assassinated a year ago today. Charlie was an amazing human being. He was so smart and intelligent to remember many things off the top of his head and discuss it. At a moment's notice, he has definitely missed. So go back, follow this guy's own words, Juror number 12. He did not tell that room that the nurses were bullying him. He did not tell them the government approved she was saying. According to the three jurors who have spoken, he told them, so it's here to say, he told them he had a reasonable doubt.
That's his admission of as no mind. And the expert juror problem real as it is, that explains how 11 people got to 11, but it doesn't explain a man who says he is reasonable doubt, but will not return the verdict that the law ties to that doubt, because remember the law is upside down and Massachusetts. The burden now shifts to the government. Maybe he never really had that doubt. Maybe I'll write there some doubt. Again, it was just that one out guy after six days, you know, getting worked over by a room that had already made up his mind. And what he actually believed, down in his gut, was that the state proved its case, that she was saying. And if that's the case, then he has a reasonable doubt about insanity, because that's on the table too. See how messed up this is?
He was digging in against a room he thought had gone off the rails, and I was just clumsy with his words. I can't rule that out. I don't think you can either, but look what that story costs to tell, because it runs entirely on distrusting the three jurors who told us what happened in the room. And those same three jurors are the only reasonable, or those majors are the only reason that anybody out here knows that there was a lone holdout to lie in eyes in the first place. So you do not get to believe them when they hand you a hero, and then disbelieve them when they try to take him back. If their account is good, the holdout admitted a doubt, but refused to honor it, because he didn't like the law during notification. If their account is no good, then nobody in America knows what that man was actually thinking, and the people crowning him a hero have even less to go on than I do.
I don't think anybody in this case is a hero. I think they're all a bunch of scumbags. I think they all, I think he killed her kids. I think the people in the Massachusetts legislature who've inverted the law and said that, oh, sanity now runs to the government. The government must prove you're saying, be on the reasonable doubt. Oh, so I just raised my hand. That's what to a certain degree, Dragon said, oh, I'm kind of, I shouldn't say what Dragon said. But some people said that they fear what this jury verdict may do to postpartum women. May give an excuse for just about anything. That may or may not be true. But what is true here is that now you will have people claiming insanity almost every time they possibly can, and in a state like Massachusetts, boom, now you've got to prove the government has to prove not just the elements of the crime, but the elements of sanity.
I think about myself. Because someone proved beyond a reasonable doubt that I'm saying, no, just somebody proved beyond a reasonable doubt that I'm insane. Yep. See? And with that lovely pink shirt, we were going today. It's not my duck. You know, if I even thought about that, I wouldn't even put the shirt on today. It's not pink, but anyway. And one last thing because it matters. It's nurses really dig crossed the line. There's a fix for that, and it's not a hung jury. It is the judge. The defense actually went to the judge. Then went over his head to a single justice of the state's highest court, and asked them to deal with that one juror. The court said no. This is ordinary disagreement about how to weigh the evidence. You may think they got that call wrong, but that is exactly where a claim like this gets decided in the open on the record by a judge, not privately, by one juror who has quietly decided the burden of proof has taken the day off.
We have heard from three of the 12 jurors. Three. All three of them were on the side that wanted to acquit, based on insanity. The whole doubt has not said a word in public. Now, if he sat down for me across tomorrow, across from me tomorrow, he might describe that room very differently. The line that he, quote, admitted he had reasonable doubt, comes from the people who were arguing against him. It is consistent three of them telling it the same way. No vice come forward to contradict it yet, but that's their account. And you should hold it as their account. So I can't pretend I know what was in the hearts of the other 11 either. Some of them may have gotten their own pure sympathy for a broken woman sitting in a wheelchair in the courtroom. Some may have been pushed by that nurse who wanted to talk like an expert and put into the record, not put into the record, but put into the deliberations, facts that were not in evidence. And some may have simply held the state to its burden and found that it came up short.
I can't see inside that room, but neither can the people telling you those women were fools, or they were spot on. What I can see is the verdict they were reaching for, and that verdict was one of the judges' instructions plainly allowed. You can question their reasons. You cannot call the way they got there lawless. Now this was a hum jury. It's not an acquittal. It's not a conviction. Nobody won. She didn't walk. The mistrials settled nothing, which means the DA can turn around and try her all over again. But one guy, let's say he had reasonable doubt. And he said, I'm not going to convict because I've got reasonable doubt. At that point, what do you do? What would you do? Standing in your conviction or just go along the alone because you know it's going to cost the state
tons of money to retry the case. You all like to say, if you truly believe it, be the holdout. We're not boring. Lot of news is boring. And tedious. And depressing. And makes you angry. You don't want to live your life like that. Hey, I'm Jack Armstrong. He's Joe Getty. We're Armstrong and Getty. We try to bring you the truth and help you figure out this crazy modern world. About something about a comedic tone. We have a winner. Yes. Listen to Armstrong and Getty on demand on the iHeart radio app. Apple podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. I believe that whoever was in that room and did that was a murderer. A new podcast series, Fault Line Haditha, tells the story of a shocking crime and a cover-up at the highest levels of the United States Marine Corps. If you've got five players and you offer immunity to four, you better be right about the fifth because if you're not, then you've just given immunity to your color. Listen to Fault Line Haditha on the iHeart radio app.
Apple podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.
More episodes
More from The Situation & The Weekend with Michael Brown

9-11-26 - 9am - The Empty Sky on September 11th
The Situation & The Weekend with Michael Brown

9-11-26 - 10am - CoCo Tax and UNBELIEVABLE Gaylord Tax
The Situation & The Weekend with Michael Brown

9-11-26 - 11am - Tax Payer Relief Shots
The Situation & The Weekend with Michael Brown

9-11-26 - Daily Talkbacks
The Situation & The Weekend with Michael Brown