The left often complains that only they are accused of virtue signaling, but the right is currently engaged in an offputting degree of high stakes moral grandstanding about Lindsay Clancy. Punishing her won't bring back her kids. It won't instill remorse - she already feels awful. The surviving victims of her crime don't want vengeance. The trial did nothing but provoke less sympathetic copycats to kill their own children. A guilty verdict (which is never going to happen under MA laws of reasonable doubt) is not going to do anything to prevent future crimes of the same nature. The thing that's going to prevent the least amount of suffering, the fewest dead kids, and the most justice is the thing they're arguing against - a not guilty by reason of insanity acquittal or a plea deal, and redoubled efforts to fix maternal mental healthcare. They aren't in this fight for the children. They're in this fight for their own moral grandeur.

We've seen this kind of thing before, though. Letting her go just for reasons of "eh, she feels bad" is the best possible way to inspire copycats, and someone who's committed murder three times is probably quite likely to keep going. clarin.com/us-news/in-1954-b…