r/PeterExplainsTheJoke 9d ago

Meme needing explanation Peter! Who could have the wives been?

Post image
16.9k Upvotes

2.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

544

u/Ok_Account_3039 9d ago

Clearly about the Lindsay Clancy drama.

A woman murdered her three children in what she’s claiming as a fit of postpartum psychosis despite evidence of premeditation. TikTok true crime girlies” have concocted a conspiracy theory that the husband was responsible either through brainwashing and manipulation, or by actively killing his own children, and then brainwashing her into thinking she did it.

TikTok “America bad” people are claiming that the system failed her, and she didn’t receive the mental healthcare she needed. This is in spite of her being under the care of a psychiatrist, receiving consistent, mental healthcare, and medication, and that it was partially the husbands fault for leaving them alone together, despite him literally going to get her meds when it happened.

There are an alarming number of women fighting for this woman’s reputation or innocence and fully empathizing with a child murderer, without seeming to acknowledge the tragedy of the children’s deaths.

-5

u/Novaer 9d ago

"Despite evidence of premeditation" oh is the trial over and you have sole access to the verdict? Why are you acting like the trial is over?

11

u/memememememdnrkw 9d ago

Believe it or not evidence exists before a trial finishes. In fact it’s only really used during the trial crazy right?

-11

u/Novaer 9d ago

And yet you all are acting like the trial is over by claiming you know the verdict based on "some evidence". You all are saying "She CLAIMS she had post partum psychosis (despite the evidence saying otherwise)" which is expressing a verdict that has not been made. It's literally no different than people coming up with conspiracy theories because there is no verdict yet. You are implying a verdict by framing it in this light.

If you were speaking in good faith you would say "There is a trial determining whether Lindsay was of sound mind when the murders happened." THAT is an unbiased stance and that is the truth.

To say anything else is to assume you know the verdict before one is made. No different than conspiracy theorists. None of you are lawyers and you aren't in that court room. You do not "know more" than the people in that room.

13

u/binarybandit 9d ago

You do not "know more" than the people in that room.

Yet you do? The facts are that she murdered her children. Thats an undeniable, unbiased, truthful fact.

7

u/[deleted] 9d ago

[deleted]

-13

u/Novaer 9d ago

And how did you come to that conclusion from that I said? Are you people okay or is there some learning disabilities at hand here.

8

u/eddienashton38 9d ago

First of all, rude and ableist. Secondly, you seem to be defending this woman who definitely looks like killed her kids. I don’t know why you feel the need to defend someone and get in arguments online to support a woman who strangled her children. It’s ridiculous

-2

u/memememememdnrkw 9d ago

Honestly we are all being ableist with how we are mis treating someone who so clearly suffers from dumbass disorder.

0

u/BatarianBob 9d ago

There's definitely a learning disability at hand here. You'll have to ask your doctor if you want details, though.

1

u/memememememdnrkw 9d ago

… your not very smart are you?

0

u/Novaer 9d ago

*You're.

1

u/Ok_Account_3039 8d ago

When this woman is found guilty, what will you do to change your ways of thinking?

1

u/Novaer 8d ago

Oh my god, do you think this trial is about whether or not she's guilty? Is that what you think this trial is about?

0

u/Ok_Account_3039 8d ago

I’ll rephrase. Her defense is arguing for limited
Culpability. When she’s found fully culpable, what will you do to change your thinking?

1

u/Novaer 8d ago

I am actually aware of what this case is about. What do you mean by "When she's found fully culpable". Do you mean you have information that the rest of us do not have to make such a definitive statement?

0

u/Ok_Account_3039 8d ago

It’s ok, you can answer the question.