THREE CHILDREN WERE KILLED. WHAT DID THEY GIVE TO THEIR MOM?

⭐ I WATCHED A LITTLE OF THE LINDSAY CLANCY CASE.

And one thing immediately jumped out at me that seems to keep getting brushed aside under the giant umbrella of:

“MENTAL HEALTH.”

As I finished this Parking Spot on August 28, 2026, Lindsay Clancy’s case was in its second day of jury deliberations.

Everybody agrees on the most horrible fact.

She killed her three children.

• Cora was 5.
• Dawson was 3.
• Callan was 8 months old.

The argument at trial is over why, what was happening inside her mind, and whether she was criminally responsible for what she did.

The defense says postpartum psychosis, overmedication and failed psychiatric care played a central role.

Prosecutors say she knew what she was doing and deliberately killed her children.

The jury gets to decide the criminal question.

I have a different question.

⚖️ THE DEFENSE RESTS. THE QUESTION DOESN’T.

WHAT WAS IN HER SYSTEM?

💊 BECAUSE THESE NUMBERS ARE HARD FOR ME TO IGNORE.

In roughly four months before the children were killed, court records show Lindsay Clancy was prescribed:

13 DIFFERENT PSYCHIATRIC MEDICATIONS.

And more than:

30 PRESCRIPTIONS.

• Four months.
• Multiple providers.
• Psychiatrists.
• Nurse practitioners.
• Emergency-department physicians.
• Staff at an inpatient psychiatric program.
• Medications being started.
• Medications being stopped.
• Dosages changing.
• Different prescriptions being written only days apart.

Read that again.

13 psychiatric medications.
30-plus prescriptions.
Roughly four months.
Multiple medical providers.

And somehow I’m supposed to hear all of that and stop at:

“She had mental-health problems.”

Really?

⭐ I’M NOT CLAIMING SHE SWALLOWED ALL 13 AT THE SAME TIME.

I had someone make that argument to me on a Facebook post.

That’s not even the point.

And I don’t understand why people keep acting like it is.

The question isn’t:

“DID SHE TAKE THIRTEEN PILLS AT ONCE?”

The questions are:

• What was she taking?
• What had she recently started?
• What had she recently stopped?
• What medications overlapped?
• What dosages were changing?
• What side effects was she experiencing?
• What happened when medications were added or removed?
• Were all of the providers seeing the same information?
• Did anybody actually have the entire picture?

And ultimately:

DID ANY OF THE DRUGS OR THE TREATMENT ITSELF CONTRIBUTE TO WHAT HAPPENED?

I don’t know.

That’s why I’m asking.

🍺 LET ME PUT IT ANOTHER WAY.

If a guy or gal has five drinks, gets behind the wheel of a car and kills a family of five…

…what is one of the VERY FIRST things everybody wants to know?

WHAT WAS IN THEIR SYSTEM?

Nobody says:

• “Maybe they were depressed.”
• “Maybe they were overwhelmed.”
• “Maybe they were going through something emotionally.”
• “Maybe they had a really bad day.”

We check their blood alcohol level.

Why?

Because we already understand something incredibly basic:

DRUGS CAN ALTER HUMAN BEHAVIOR.

Alcohol is a drug.

Psychiatric medications are drugs.

Are you walking into a bar and asking the bartender for psychiatric drugs?

No.

These aren’t something you order off a menu.

They require a prescription and medical oversight.

And in roughly four months, Lindsay Clancy received more than 30 prescriptions involving 13 different psychiatric medications from multiple providers.

This wasn’t an afternoon trip to Hooters to throw down a few after a golf game with the boys.

The pharmacology doesn’t disappear because one came from somebody behind a bar and the other came from somebody in a white coat with a few degrees behind their name holding a prescription pad.

⭐ THAT’S THE DISTINCTION THAT BOTHERS ME.

A bartender gives somebody enough alcohol to become impaired and everybody immediately starts asking questions about:

• Judgment.
• Impairment.
• Decision making.
• Responsibility.

But cycle somebody through psychiatric medication after psychiatric medication…

…while that person is struggling emotionally…

…while prescriptions and dosages are changing…

…and somehow everything being put into the person’s body gets mentally filed under:

“HEALTH CARE.”

That’s where I stop.

A prescription pad tells me a drug was legally prescribed.

It does not tell me what that drug—or a changing combination of drugs—did inside one particular human body or brain.

🍸 AND THIS WASN’T ONE BARTENDER CONTROLLING THE TAB.

This is another part of the analogy that matters.

We’re not talking about one psychiatrist sitting in a room carefully controlling every single medication, every dose and every change over four months while personally seeing the entire picture.

The prescription history involved multiple kinds of providers across different settings.

So imagine the drinking analogy differently.

Someone goes to one bar.

Gets a drink.

• Then another bartender somewhere else pours something different.
• Then another bartender changes what they’re drinking.
• Then somebody says stop that drink.
• Somebody else adds another one.

The person’s behavior starts changing.

And eventually something catastrophic happens.

Would anybody seriously respond:

“Well, none of the bartenders individually served everything, so let’s stop talking about the alcohol.”

No.

You’d reconstruct the entire timeline.

I thought that was called police work.

Isn’t that what detectives in a homicide case are supposed to be doing?

🧪 AND THE TRIAL ACTUALLY DID ASK WHAT WAS IN HER SYSTEM.

This is where my original question became pretty literal.

A forensic toxicologist testified about prescription psychiatric medications detected after the killings.

Among the medications identified in her blood were:

• Mirtazapine.
• Lamotrigine.
• Trazodone.
• Quetiapine.

The toxicologist did not testify that she had suffered some massive drug overdose.

The measured levels generally did not indicate that.

Fine.

That’s useful evidence.

But “she didn’t have toxic overdose levels” and “the months of medication changes played absolutely no role in her mental condition” are two completely different questions.

Not even close.

Toxicology can help answer whether somebody overdosed.

But that doesn’t tell me what four months of starting drugs, stopping drugs, changing drugs and mixing different drugs did to her brain.

That’s the question I’m asking.

⭐ BECAUSE THIS CASE DIDN’T BEGIN THE NIGHT THE CHILDREN DIED.

There were months leading up to it.

• Medication changes.
• Insomnia.
• Depression.
• Anxiety.
• Suicidal thoughts.
• Psychiatric hospitalization.

And testimony about intrusive thoughts involving the children.

Patrick Clancy himself became concerned about his wife’s reaction to psychiatric medication.

A psychiatric nurse practitioner testified that he believed some of her symptoms began after she started being medicated and that medication changes were made in response to those concerns.

That matters to me.

Not because it proves the drugs caused the killings.

Because it proves people around her were already questioning what the drugs were doing to her mind.

💥 AND WE’VE SEEN THIS MOVIE BEFORE WITH PRESCRIPTION DRUGS.

America already learned a brutal lesson from prescription opioids.

Apparently, most of America has a short-term memory problem because this has been going on for decades now.

For years, people were given powerful drugs by medical professionals.

• They were legal.
• They came from pharmacies.
• They had labels.
• They had dosages.
• They came with a doctor’s signature.

And people still became addicted.

• People still overdosed.
• People still died.
• Drug companies were sued.
• Companies paid enormous settlements and criminal penalties.

Purdue Pharma ultimately pleaded guilty to federal felonies involving the marketing and sale of prescription opioids.

So we’ve already established something that shouldn’t be controversial:

A PRESCRIPTION DOESN’T MAKE A POWERFUL DRUG HARMLESS.

Yet suddenly when the category changes from “opioid” to “psychiatric medication,” some people seem offended by the mere suggestion that the treatment itself deserves scrutiny.

Really?

Why?

⭐ I’M NOT SAYING PSYCHIATRIC MEDICATION CAUSED THESE KILLINGS.

I don’t know that.

Neither does somebody who simply says:

“POSTPARTUM MENTAL ILLNESS.”

That label doesn’t answer every question either.

• Maybe her underlying illness was responsible for everything.
• Maybe the medications helped.
• Maybe some medications made certain symptoms worse.
• Maybe changes in medications mattered.
• Maybe several things went catastrophically wrong at the same time.

That’s what an investigation is supposed to figure out.

👀 AND YES, PEOPLE ARE ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT HER HUSBAND TOO.

If you’ve followed this case online, you already know that.

People have dissected his testimony.

• His actions.
• What he knew about Lindsay’s condition.
• Why he didn’t take one or all of the children with him.
• Why he left the children with his wife when he knew she was mentally ill.
• His later divorce and remarriage.
• And practically everything else imaginable.

Some of it has gone straight down the true-crime rabbit hole.

That’s not where I’m going with this Parking Spot.

Patrick Clancy is not accused of killing his children.

He has not been identified as a suspect in their deaths.

There are plenty of theories circulating online about him, his testimony and what happened inside that house.

I don’t have evidence that Patrick engineered anything, and I’m not claiming that he did.

What interests me is much simpler: What did the people closest to Lindsay know, and why was a woman this mentally unstable being left alone with three little kids?

And remarriage doesn’t prove some sinister theory.

But Patrick himself testified about:

• Her worsening mental condition.
• Suicidal statements.
• Medication concerns.
• Thoughts involving harm to the children.

And he later filed his own civil lawsuit against medical providers alleging that negligent psychiatric treatment and the medications they prescribed contributed to the deaths of his children.

Think about that.

THE FATHER OF THE THREE DEAD CHILDREN IS ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT THE TREATMENT TOO.

Sure, that doesn’t prove he will win in court.

But it makes it pretty difficult to dismiss the medication question as some crazy idea somebody invented on Facebook.

🍺 WHICH BRINGS ME RIGHT BACK TO THE DRUNK DRIVER.

Let’s make the drunk driver a woman if that makes anybody feel better.

A woman gets intoxicated.

She drives.

She kills a family.

One of the first questions remains:

WHAT WAS IN HER SYSTEM?

The gender was never the point.

The substance was the point.

The impairment was the point.

The possible effect on behavior was the point.

So after a woman with months of rapidly changing psychiatric treatment strangles all three of her children…

…I think asking the same basic question is completely reasonable.

WHAT WAS SHE TAKING?

• What had changed?
• What had stopped?
• What overlapped?
• What symptoms appeared after changes?
• Who knew?
• Who was coordinating?
• Was anybody coordinating everything?
• Did anybody actually know everything she was being prescribed?
• Did anybody have the whole picture?

And what role—if any—did the medications play?

📺 AND THEN THERE’S ANOTHER REASON I’M SKEPTICAL.

Pharmaceutical companies spend enormous amounts of money advertising their products through the same media companies telling us stories like this one.

Turn on television sometime.

You can barely make it through the evening news without somebody asking you to:

“ASK YOUR DOCTOR IF ______ IS RIGHT FOR YOU.”

That doesn’t mean journalists are secretly covering up this case for drug companies.

I’m not claiming that.

But it does make me skeptical of a culture that seems perfectly comfortable asking:

“HOW MENTALLY ILL WAS SHE?”

…while sometimes acting uncomfortable when somebody asks:

“DID THE TREATMENT ITSELF CONTRIBUTE?”

I think both questions belong on the table.

⚖️ AND NOW TWELVE PEOPLE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION.

As I write this, the jury is deliberating.

They have heard weeks of testimony.

• More than 80 witnesses.
• Doctors.
• Toxicologists.
• Psychiatrists.
• Family members.
• Investigators.
• Experts for both sides.

The jury isn’t deciding whether something terrible happened.

Everybody already knows that.

They’re deciding what Lindsay Clancy understood when she killed her children and whether the law holds her criminally responsible.

Whatever they decide, the medical questions aren’t going away.

⭐ WHATEVER THE VERDICT, THREE CHILDREN ARE STILL DEAD.

That’s the part that shouldn’t disappear underneath any argument.

Cora.

Dawson.

Callan.

Three children.

A family destroyed.

A mother permanently paralyzed after jumping from a window.

A father who buried all three of his children.

Doctors who were trying to treat a woman who was clearly in serious distress.

And now lawyers and experts trying to reconstruct what happened inside one person’s mind after the fact.

There isn’t a clean answer here.

But I don’t think complexity is a reason to ask fewer questions.

I think it’s a reason to ask more of them.

PREMEDITATED OR PRE-MEDICATED?

Let me be clear after this rant of mine: asking about the drugs doesn’t mean I’m saying Lindsay Clancy wasn’t responsible for killing her children.

She killed her three children.

My question is what got her mind to the point where that became possible.

Was it premeditated?

Was she pre-medicated?

Was it both?

That’s the part I think deserves a much harder look.

🏝️ THAT’S WHY I PARKED THIS ON GRAVE FREAK.

Grave Freak is about everything around the grave.

And sometimes what’s around the grave isn’t comfortable.

• Death.
• Medicine.
• Responsibility.
• Family.
• Courts.
• Drugs.

Questions nobody really wants to answer.

I’m not asking you to agree with me.

I’m not picking a Facebook team.

I’m not claiming I know what happened chemically inside Lindsay Clancy’s brain.

I don’t.

But I do know that three children are dead.

And I think we’re entitled to ask a lot more than:

“HOW MENTALLY ILL WAS SHE?”

I’d also like to know:

AH… WHAT DID THEY GIVE HER? AND WHY?

That’s my take anyway.

You’re welcome to have your own.

WANT TO GO DEEPER INTO THE DARKNESS?

This case raises questions about drugs, doctors, responsibility, mental illness, family and accountability.

But underneath all of those questions is an even bigger one.

What happens when human beings stop being accountable to anything beyond themselves?

• Courts can assign legal responsibility.
• Doctors can debate diagnoses.
• Experts can argue over medications.
• Families can point fingers.
• Juries can reach verdicts.

But again, three children lost their lives because of someone else’s actions.

The jury can argue about what Lindsay understood and whether she was legally responsible.

Three children who should have had entire lives ahead of them are dead.

That is destruction.

That is the kind of darkness I’m talking about when I use the words Wicked Darkness.

In John 10:10, Jesus is recorded as saying:

“The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.”

In my Christian worldview, I see that same pattern of stealing, killing and destroying all over this case.

Two parents’ lives were shattered in completely different ways.

And now doctors, lawyers, experts, jurors and millions of people watching from the outside are trying to decide where responsibility belongs.

The reality of this tragedy has swept across the media and the Internet and has people asking questions about life, judgment, right and wrong, punishment and who is at fault.

I decided to write an entire Parking Spot about the topic here on Grave Freak.

Eventually every one of us runs into the same question:

What does this life mean if death isn’t actually the end of the story?

That’s one of the many questions I explore in:

Wicked Darkness: Johnny’s Survival Guide to the End Times

I look at Scripture, prophecy, human nature, wickedness, judgment, eternity and where I believe this world is ultimately headed.

To me, the Lindsay Clancy case is one more ugly little window into the wickedness of this world.

Three children are no longer alive, everybody is arguing about who is responsible, and somehow we’re still trying to figure out who was actually watching the store while this woman was being bounced through psychiatric drugs.

Visit WickedDarkness.com to buy the book or read more of my commentary about the spiritual implications of this life, death, prophecy, eternity and what may be coming next.

And stay tuned here at GraveFreak.com.

I’ll be creating more commentary under this particular WickedDarkness account around graves, death, faith, eternity, strange history and the things sitting right in front of us that most people walk past without ever stopping to think about.

SOMETIMES THE DEAD HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY.
THEY DON’T HAVE TO SPEAK DIRECTLY.
YOU JUST HAVE TO STOP LONG ENOUGH TO LISTEN.