Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

This juror is telling you from the prosecution’s opening statement that she was team free Lindsay regardless of any evidence they would produce.

Lisaelizabeth's profile picture

Lisa Elizabeth

58,829 subscribers

1,672,181 görüntüleme • 23 saat önce •via X (Twitter)

Haberler & Politika
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

"There is plenty of evidence that she was calling suicide hotlines and telling providers she was harming herself that I accept that she was killing herself," says Megyn on Lindsay Clancy.
1:05

"There is plenty of evidence that she was calling suicide hotlines and telling providers she was harming herself that I accept that she was killing herself," says Megyn on Lindsay Clancy.

The Megyn Kelly Show

19,516 görüntüleme • 13 gün önce

Another female juror in the Lindsay Clancy case has come forward to say that other jurors wanted to acquit Lindsay from the very beginning. The unidentified juror says she initially thought Lindsay was guilty but she was seated by the others. Video: CBS Boston
2:12

Another female juror in the Lindsay Clancy case has come forward to say that other jurors wanted to acquit Lindsay from the very beginning. The unidentified juror says she initially thought Lindsay was guilty but she was seated by the others. Video: CBS Boston

Anthony Brian Logan (ABL) 🇺🇸

19,135 görüntüleme • 22 saat önce

If Lindsay Clancy told her attorney that she was abused throughout her entire marriage and he never used that as evidence in this trial than he should be disbarred. And why was there no evidence of any abuse brought up at all? You're telling me out of all of the investigations that there was, he's so good at abuse that there is absolutely zero evidence of any abuse? They are just making things up. I don't think they even bothered to watch the trial. Because if all of these women are right then every single person involved should lose their careers.
0:32

If Lindsay Clancy told her attorney that she was abused throughout her entire marriage and he never used that as evidence in this trial than he should be disbarred. And why was there no evidence of any abuse brought up at all? You're telling me out of all of the investigations that there was, he's so good at abuse that there is absolutely zero evidence of any abuse? They are just making things up. I don't think they even bothered to watch the trial. Because if all of these women are right then every single person involved should lose their careers.

MAGA Lorrie Ann 🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇸 AMERICA FIRST

20,200 görüntüleme • 4 gün önce

Reddington: “And based on this note from this juror, it clearly and unequivocally indicates that they are basically 11 to 1, and this person will not apply reasonable doubt to the evidence to return a NOT GUILTY verdict.” Okay. So, my prediction was accurate. This is crazy. (Lindsay Clancy Trial)
0:45

Reddington: “And based on this note from this juror, it clearly and unequivocally indicates that they are basically 11 to 1, and this person will not apply reasonable doubt to the evidence to return a NOT GUILTY verdict.” Okay. So, my prediction was accurate. This is crazy. (Lindsay Clancy Trial)

Lindsay 🇺🇸

25,441 görüntüleme • 5 gün önce

🚨🚨 Juror in #RobertRoberson’s trial just testified that she now believes he is INNOCENT, that the entire case against him was 'shaken baby syndrome' - not beating - and that the jury did not have all the evidence. I keep being told to believe the jury. So I went and found an actual juror from 2003. She couldn’t wait to testify. Here’s what she had to say: Fact: this was ONLY a shaken baby case. Fact: the prosecution never gave evidence that Nikki was beaten. Fact: the jury knew nothing about the severity of Nikki’s illness and her extensive history of illness. Fact: the jury did NOT hear everything they needed to in order to make a correct decision in this case. Fact: this juror, having learned the new scientific evidence, now believes Robert is INNOCENT and would NOT have voted to convict. I believe this juror, who knows more about the trial than those opining on Twitter. Justice demands a new trial. Watch 👇 #txlege
36:28

🚨🚨 Juror in #RobertRoberson’s trial just testified that she now believes he is INNOCENT, that the entire case against him was 'shaken baby syndrome' - not beating - and that the jury did not have all the evidence. I keep being told to believe the jury. So I went and found an actual juror from 2003. She couldn’t wait to testify. Here’s what she had to say: Fact: this was ONLY a shaken baby case. Fact: the prosecution never gave evidence that Nikki was beaten. Fact: the jury knew nothing about the severity of Nikki’s illness and her extensive history of illness. Fact: the jury did NOT hear everything they needed to in order to make a correct decision in this case. Fact: this juror, having learned the new scientific evidence, now believes Robert is INNOCENT and would NOT have voted to convict. I believe this juror, who knows more about the trial than those opining on Twitter. Justice demands a new trial. Watch 👇 #txlege

Brian Harrison

27,671 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

The most important thing to understand before closing arguments today is what Massachusetts law actually requires, because the legal posture of this case has been wildly misrepresented. The Commonwealth must FIRST prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Lindsay Clancy committed the alleged acts. Only then does criminal responsibility become the question. There is NO stipulation before this jury that Lindsay killed her children. Her plea is NOT GUILTY. Reddington has not conceded that she killed them either. You’ve probably seen his opening statement quoted as, “she knows that she killed these children.” Except that’s not what he said. His actual statement was, “And they would bring their evidence in front of a jury that she knows that she killed these children. We’ll sit here, listen to the evidence, but I suggest to you that the issue of consideration is what was going on in that woman’s mind.” He was describing what the COMMONWEALTH would attempt to prove. Cutting off the beginning completely changes the meaning. The civil filings don’t change this either. They are not evidence in this criminal trial and are not before this jury. Reddington twice sought to bifurcate the trial so whether Lindsay committed the acts and whether she was criminally responsible could be considered separately. The judge denied those requests. He also requested a Bowden instruction regarding deficiencies in the police investigation. The judge declined to give the specific instruction, but Reddington can still argue that those investigative failures create reasonable doubt during closing. This case has become a complete cluster of selectively edited quotes, legal misunderstandings, assumptions repeated as facts, and emotion substituted for evidence. Strip all of that away and the jury’s job is straightforward: What does the evidence actually prove? Has the Commonwealth proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Lindsay committed these crimes? And ONLY if it has, was she criminally responsible? Your feelings about Lindsay do not change the burden of proof. Cora, Dawson and Callan deserved a thorough investigation and a case proven with evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Whatever this verdict is, I pray those three precious children ultimately receive the complete truth and justice they deserve.
1:44

The most important thing to understand before closing arguments today is what Massachusetts law actually requires, because the legal posture of this case has been wildly misrepresented. The Commonwealth must FIRST prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Lindsay Clancy committed the alleged acts. Only then does criminal responsibility become the question. There is NO stipulation before this jury that Lindsay killed her children. Her plea is NOT GUILTY. Reddington has not conceded that she killed them either. You’ve probably seen his opening statement quoted as, “she knows that she killed these children.” Except that’s not what he said. His actual statement was, “And they would bring their evidence in front of a jury that she knows that she killed these children. We’ll sit here, listen to the evidence, but I suggest to you that the issue of consideration is what was going on in that woman’s mind.” He was describing what the COMMONWEALTH would attempt to prove. Cutting off the beginning completely changes the meaning. The civil filings don’t change this either. They are not evidence in this criminal trial and are not before this jury. Reddington twice sought to bifurcate the trial so whether Lindsay committed the acts and whether she was criminally responsible could be considered separately. The judge denied those requests. He also requested a Bowden instruction regarding deficiencies in the police investigation. The judge declined to give the specific instruction, but Reddington can still argue that those investigative failures create reasonable doubt during closing. This case has become a complete cluster of selectively edited quotes, legal misunderstandings, assumptions repeated as facts, and emotion substituted for evidence. Strip all of that away and the jury’s job is straightforward: What does the evidence actually prove? Has the Commonwealth proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Lindsay committed these crimes? And ONLY if it has, was she criminally responsible? Your feelings about Lindsay do not change the burden of proof. Cora, Dawson and Callan deserved a thorough investigation and a case proven with evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Whatever this verdict is, I pray those three precious children ultimately receive the complete truth and justice they deserve.

Kylie Jane Kremer

26,368 görüntüleme • 13 gün önce

Dear #KevinHart Maybe you made this statement in this video before you heard the response from the family of George Floyd and from The Black Community but regardless, for you, as a Black Man, to not have any issue with that joke from Tony Hinchcliffe is beyond disappointing
0:38

Dear #KevinHart Maybe you made this statement in this video before you heard the response from the family of George Floyd and from The Black Community but regardless, for you, as a Black Man, to not have any issue with that joke from Tony Hinchcliffe is beyond disappointing

Etan Thomas

28,963 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

A juror said she changed her vote from criminally guilty to not guilty by reason of insanity so that Lindsay Clancy could get the "help" she needed.
1:35

A juror said she changed her vote from criminally guilty to not guilty by reason of insanity so that Lindsay Clancy could get the "help" she needed.

Libby Emmons

11,004 görüntüleme • 22 saat önce

Lindsay Clancy juror reveals how upset she was at the one male holdout "He had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children”
0:21

Lindsay Clancy juror reveals how upset she was at the one male holdout "He had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children”

Matt Wallace

74,011 görüntüleme • 1 gün önce

WAIT WAIT WAIT... So Lindsay Clancy's lawyer just stood up in open court and revealed that the jury is split 11 to 1 for NOT GUILTY and that the holdout is a MALE????? How is that information being aired publicly while deliberations are still happening?!!!! "We have a person who looked you in the eye and lied. That juror told you that he would be able to apply the law to the facts as you asked them!" "And based on this note from this juror, it clearly and unequivocally indicates that they are basically 11 to 1, and this person will not apply reasonable doubt to the evidence to return a not guilty verdict." "I would go so far as to reluctantly say that the individual has made a false statement under oath to this court."
2:23

WAIT WAIT WAIT... So Lindsay Clancy's lawyer just stood up in open court and revealed that the jury is split 11 to 1 for NOT GUILTY and that the holdout is a MALE????? How is that information being aired publicly while deliberations are still happening?!!!! "We have a person who looked you in the eye and lied. That juror told you that he would be able to apply the law to the facts as you asked them!" "And based on this note from this juror, it clearly and unequivocally indicates that they are basically 11 to 1, and this person will not apply reasonable doubt to the evidence to return a not guilty verdict." "I would go so far as to reluctantly say that the individual has made a false statement under oath to this court."

Matt Van Swol

194,359 görüntüleme • 5 gün önce

Liberals are in a cult Liberal woman says Lindsay Clancy is innocent, she gets her evidence from TikTok. She says she 100% supports Lindsay Clancy She’s asked if Lindsay Clancy was a Trump supporter, would she still support her. Her answer, “Maybe not” …. It’s a cult
1:55

Liberals are in a cult Liberal woman says Lindsay Clancy is innocent, she gets her evidence from TikTok. She says she 100% supports Lindsay Clancy She’s asked if Lindsay Clancy was a Trump supporter, would she still support her. Her answer, “Maybe not” …. It’s a cult

Wall Street Apes

106,881 görüntüleme • 3 gün önce

Candace Owens now says there’s more evidence that Charlie Kirk was killed with an exploding microphone than there is evidence that Tyler Robinson killed Charlie Kirk. Of course she’s unable to produce any of that evidence. She can however show slow motion videos from the day Charlie was killed while pretending that other people haven’t already been playing this same game for months. Keep in mind that she already told her fans that she knows for a fact that Charlie was shot. And she totally dismissed the microphone theories until all of her own theories dried up.
0:20

Candace Owens now says there’s more evidence that Charlie Kirk was killed with an exploding microphone than there is evidence that Tyler Robinson killed Charlie Kirk. Of course she’s unable to produce any of that evidence. She can however show slow motion videos from the day Charlie was killed while pretending that other people haven’t already been playing this same game for months. Keep in mind that she already told her fans that she knows for a fact that Charlie was shot. And she totally dismissed the microphone theories until all of her own theories dried up.

Cinema Shogun

30,851 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

One of my favorite parts of this idiot's statement was when she says "where was the evidence prior to 7/18/2014" basically admitting there is evidence after. Why not say there is absolutely no evidence that ties me to this crime. Just an absolute moron to the end #donnaadelson
0:45

One of my favorite parts of this idiot's statement was when she says "where was the evidence prior to 7/18/2014" basically admitting there is evidence after. Why not say there is absolutely no evidence that ties me to this crime. Just an absolute moron to the end #donnaadelson

Jay

17,585 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce

NEW: ABC News speaks exclusively with another Lindsay Clancy trial juror, the *fifth* to have spoken out since the trial ended. ABC said Nick Dargie, one of the two men who sided with the nine women who voted not guilty, was “devastated” he couldn’t to set Clancy free, and SLAMMED the male holdout juror... “There was — there was several times would ask him to show us, like, evidence or, you know, describe a witness testimony that helped to prove what he was saying. And — and he couldn’t. There wasn’t a single piece of evidence or witness testimony that he used to prove why he was thinking the way he was, which is why we ultimately sent in that note. Otherwise, like, there’s nothing wrong with somebody having a complete opposite opinion. Like, that’s — you know, that would be a hung jury. That — like, that is our justice system.”
1:05

NEW: ABC News speaks exclusively with another Lindsay Clancy trial juror, the *fifth* to have spoken out since the trial ended. ABC said Nick Dargie, one of the two men who sided with the nine women who voted not guilty, was “devastated” he couldn’t to set Clancy free, and SLAMMED the male holdout juror... “There was — there was several times would ask him to show us, like, evidence or, you know, describe a witness testimony that helped to prove what he was saying. And — and he couldn’t. There wasn’t a single piece of evidence or witness testimony that he used to prove why he was thinking the way he was, which is why we ultimately sent in that note. Otherwise, like, there’s nothing wrong with somebody having a complete opposite opinion. Like, that’s — you know, that would be a hung jury. That — like, that is our justice system.”

Curtis Houck

612,987 görüntüleme • 2 saat önce

“Politico reports the allegations of inappropriate behavior have come from multiple left-leaning influencers and other social media accounts without evidence.” That statement is a fact. There hasn’t been any evidence revealed at this time. Just hearsay rumors. And on top of that, these “influencers” have been saying repeatedly for weeks that the evidence is coming soon. Yet they keep posting about it.
0:57

“Politico reports the allegations of inappropriate behavior have come from multiple left-leaning influencers and other social media accounts without evidence.” That statement is a fact. There hasn’t been any evidence revealed at this time. Just hearsay rumors. And on top of that, these “influencers” have been saying repeatedly for weeks that the evidence is coming soon. Yet they keep posting about it.

Christopher Webb

75,161 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

🚨 NOW: Lindsay Clancy's defense attorney is now PUBLICLY ATTACKING the one male juror who held out to force a mistrial, saying he's "PROUD" of the female foreperson for blowing the whistle on that juror Disgusting. "Where do I begin to thank these jurors — minus 1? The forelady of the jury I was so proud. When she indicated...one of them would not listen to the law. She came with the question stating this is 11-1 for acquittal."
0:55

🚨 NOW: Lindsay Clancy's defense attorney is now PUBLICLY ATTACKING the one male juror who held out to force a mistrial, saying he's "PROUD" of the female foreperson for blowing the whistle on that juror Disgusting. "Where do I begin to thank these jurors — minus 1? The forelady of the jury I was so proud. When she indicated...one of them would not listen to the law. She came with the question stating this is 11-1 for acquittal."

Eric Daugherty

64,353 görüntüleme • 5 gün önce

Amanda telling Lindsay West was pursuing her and then admitting “it would be in group texts”? Does she not realize how stupid she sounds? You would have to waterboard out of me that I thought West inviting the group chat out meant he was pursuing me. She needs help. #SummerHouse
1:28

Amanda telling Lindsay West was pursuing her and then admitting “it would be in group texts”? Does she not realize how stupid she sounds? You would have to waterboard out of me that I thought West inviting the group chat out meant he was pursuing me. She needs help. #SummerHouse

It’s Bravo

348,609 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Would Any Amount of Evidence Convince You that God Exists?
0:51

Would Any Amount of Evidence Convince You that God Exists?

Reasonable Faith

17,403 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

🚨 BREAKING: Lindsay Clancy m*rder trial jury says they're UNABLE TO REACH a unanimous decision You gotta be freaking kidding... ...she killed her kids. The evidence is clear. Juror, or jurors, are HOLDING OUT The judge is now asking them to go back and CONTINUE deliberating THIS IS TOTAL MADNESS!! They want to show her mercy!
0:50

🚨 BREAKING: Lindsay Clancy m*rder trial jury says they're UNABLE TO REACH a unanimous decision You gotta be freaking kidding... ...she killed her kids. The evidence is clear. Juror, or jurors, are HOLDING OUT The judge is now asking them to go back and CONTINUE deliberating THIS IS TOTAL MADNESS!! They want to show her mercy!

Eric Daugherty

457,786 görüntüleme • 8 gün önce