news roundup | Two Nurses, Six Dead Children: The Deirdre Morley Parallel by @theouterlight on 3Speak
news roundup | Two Nurses, Six Dead Children: The Deirdre Morley Parallel --- ▶ Watch on 3speak.tv
Tags: #news
Hi, this is Ed back again here with another video. Thank you to everybody on Patreon and Subscrib Star, by the way, for your support. Let's just get right into it here. So here's an oddity. Now, I almost need, like, a checklist to put on both sides. But the Lindsay Clancy case, and we're going to talk about a parallel case in Ireland in a moment, update on the Lindsay Clancy case very briefly. Lindsay Clancy, the trial was declared, basically a mistrial, and this is because one juror would not be swayed over to the direction of not guilty. 11 of the jurors all. you know, had ridden down basically not guilty. And this one juror said, no, she's guilty. Very odd. I thought it would be the complete opposite, actually, just instinctively, but what an odd case, I'll tell you. So anyway, Lindsay Clancy, are you familiar with this particular case? So let's have a look at this case in Ireland and the parallels. just turned down my mic a little bit. I think I'm like blowing it out. Hopefully that's better. So here is a case in Ireland called Deirdre Mawley. The Deidre Mawley case. Morley was accused of killing her children on January the 24th, 2020. And then it lists the children there. She had three children, and they were all found dead in the Dublin home. So, how does this run parallel apart from the fact that there are three dead children? Well, first of all, the children were found by the husband, Andrew McGinley, who came home and found the bodies, and obviously it's horrible, but that's just what happened in the Lindsay Clancy case in America. The husband came home and found the bodies. So, she, or at least Deidre Mawley, was also a nurse, the same as Lindsay Clancy, is a nurse, right? So they're both nurses. What does that say? I mean, there's many nurses, obviously, they don't kill their children, there's nurses listening to this, more than likely, or... someone that's a sister, rather a husband of a nurse, but they are both nurses. Now, here is some other weirdness, apart from less close up here on the Deidre Mawley, at least that particular case, she was found not guilty in 2021 after the court heard that Morley was suffering from severe psychotic depressive illness at the time, per the BBC report. So what else? Well, January the 24th. On January the 24th, when Deirdre and Morley killed her children in 2020, January the 24th, if you're following the case of Lindsay Clancy in America, is the same day. She killed her children on the same day and month. Now, not the same year. This happened on 2020, whereas Lindsay Clancy happened on 2023. So both murders involved three children on January the 24th. Both were, the children were murdered by the mother and by a nurse. And also, the children were then found by the father. So that's kind of crazy to me, and both, and the children also died via suffocation. Isn't that odd? It's one of those things that makes you go, you know, are we living in a simulation or something? You know, some type of, we're not in base reality. That is the oddest thing. So there is something which is called the parallel case there in Ireland, which, you know, which covers a lot of these things. Now, interestingly enough, a lot of people calling the Lindsay Clancy case a copycat. And obviously, given the date difference, makes sense, there's three years later, that there is this almost... very similar particular type of case where she has killed her children now it's true that people are insane right people can go insane and they can believe they're a glass of orange juice when they're not it doesn't take much in the way of wrong or heavy metals or chemicals to be in the brain for someone to really not be in touch with reality anymore The question in the Lindsay Clancy case is this. The only thing being used as evidence that this happened to her is her own testimony, really. Now, they're pointing to the drugs, but she was never diagnosed with postpartum depression or psychosis in the past. It would be very different if she had a history of psychotic breaks. where she ended up in like, I know she got on a flight to London or something, and she believed she was a completely different person. But as far as I'm aware, there is no evidence of that. So the evidence that's being used is all circumstantial, you know, it's just, hey, she did lots of drugs, which can do things. Weird, I'm not saying it can't. But there's nothing specifically you can point to. Apart from using basically the same argument that was used in the Deirdre Mawley case, she's using pretty much the same argument there. Anyway, a lot of people on X were pointing this out, and it's very odd, especially the dates January 24th. When you hear that they both happen on January 24th, both were three sets of children, or sorry I should say, were a set of three children that this happened to, both where the husband found them, and they were both nurses. I mean, it's very interesting, isn't it? So there is the case there, I thought, was kind of weird. Now, there are other copycats of people pointed out here. So here you have numerous accounts, and these are all, which is strange, okay, these are all recent. Like, you can go look these up, these are all actually recent cases, as Cernovich talks about here, or at least Libs of TikTok, says, if you thought it was just Lindsay Clancy, think again, these are all from the last few months. She states, there's an epidemic of mothers murdering their children. Now, there's a difference between being able to pick up a bunch of articles, right, and say that there's definitely saying here, and something that is a, you know, has a signal, like, on a graph, like, is, you know, is statistically out of place. Now, I wonder if that's the case here, but it seems kind of strange to me. So what you have here is all of these particular cases. Mum injected three children with insulin before dying by suicide. It's just so horrible and sad. Mother accused of killing nine-month-year-old child after holding blanket over its head as she cried bloody murder. If you don't want the child, why not give it up to her adoption or put it in a basket on the fire department steps or something? What is this? This is different. This isn't wanting to get rid of the child. This is a desire to kill the child. Mother slits the throats of her three children. Say goodbye to your kids, she apparently says the father. I can't read that headline very clearly. Mother accused of fatally shooting her two-year -old daughter charged with murder. It was a really sad one. This was so sad. But this was a different case, it's not recent. I think this little girl, her father, I think it was her mother or father, I can't remember, shot her. And her last words was, I think, Mommy, you've killed me. Like on the dispatch of saying, it's so sad. Child 2 killed in Frankfurt home, mother hospitalized from self-harm police say. Mother indicted on capital murder charges and deaths of kids found in burning SUV. Death penalty still undecided for mother accused of killing her till children. Doctors say mother who confessed to killing sons that New York shelter was in state of psychosis. What is going on? Cernovich puts a bit of an interesting take on it. He says the old gods, quote-unquote, have returned. Of course, from a Christian perspective, they are demons. Other traditions have different terms and understandings. Whatever the case, the veil has been opened and child sacrifices now are common practice. Mollock, he says. You know, the scales on society have been, have tipped in a certain direction. You can see it, you know, It's very strange. There's lots of these videos, I talked about them in the past, in the UK, where after night, it's like every single town, I should say in England actually, has these people who go out after night and record these videos of the nightlife, and all they do is fight. It's like every... 30 feet, there's a brawl and a fight. And this isn't just men fighting, this is women fighting and men fighting, and women, like, it reminds me of the old Hogworth, as I've said before, Hogwartsworth paintings, you know, about, as a gin alley, I just looked this up, I can't remember it. So, which I've seen an entire presentation, actually, at art school on Hogwarts. which I found very interesting because it shows you how rapidly things can fall apart when there is basically an abundance, I think. And there were these two paintings by Hogworth. One was Gin Street or Gin Ali, and the other one was Beer Street or Beer Alley. And then Beer Alley, because it's a traditional English drink, that they use... which gained popularity because it was used basically as a way in order to disinfect water, right? So you could drink fluid without dying because the Thames or the rivers were so polluted, and they should have down in the country, obviously. So, but the city waters were heavily polluted, so it became a tradition. And the gin and the beer one, they're all fine, but then when you added this other element like gin, became quite a bit stronger, it was just chaos. I think there's actually pictures of a woman like holding an infant above something, like, you know, implying murder or something, in those photographs. But I don't know what's going on here, but kind of, when I was watching Ghostbusters, I don't mean to bring it back to fantastical movies. But in Ghostbusters, Well, why not actually? Why is an allegory developed from a movie lesser than it is traditional fairy tale or mythos? Well, I could actually explain why. That's because mythos or fairy tale survives on the backs of it having some kind of usefulness to society throughout generations, where a movie just is there. But I'll tell you, Ghostbusters... has this moment where all the ghosts are released, because the bureaucracy, I think it was the EPA comes in, the guy comes from the EPA and shuts down the actual catchment system, or the storage system for all the ghosts, and then all the ghosts escape. It's just such a great movie. You've got to insert goodness into this. I've got to insert some, some... nice things in this conversation about what we're having in here because it's very dark. But, you know, it's such a good movie, and the ghosts come out and, you know, all hell literally breaks loose, its end of the world, it's the apocalypse, so on and so forth, and then the stay-puffed marshmallow man, remember that? I mean, it's just such a fun movie, you know. They don't make things like that. They can't make things like that. Their soul isn't the same to make things like that. I'm not saying the kid's soul, but just the soul of society just, it's like sick or something. But that kind of reminds me of this, except here we are in the real world, the serious world. And the lawyer is upset, obviously the defense attorney is upset regarding this one juror. She admitted to killing her children. There was no post-evidence of any serious diagnosis of psychosis. So the evidence, how I see it, following this, the evidence that she's not guilty, solely relies really on her own testimony that she was hearing voices. Now, everyone's seeing the end of primal fear, right? Was she hearing voices? Who knows that? But that's what you're supposed to accept, that she's hearing voices, based on what? That she say she's hearing voices. You are using her diagnosis that she was in a psychosis. It would be different if she was diagnosed with postpartum depression. Prior to this, she had been in a psychosis before. Then you would just assume that, you know, it was such a horrible thing. and she was in a psychosis, which is a real thing, which is a real thing, okay? It's a, you can actually wake up in the morning. This wouldn't happen to many people, but it's possible via different things, whatever those mysteries are of the mind, you could wake up tomorrow and think you're an alligator, and go looking for a sewer to jump in. And all your dimensions of your reality, you believe you're an alligator. And you need to be in the sewers. I've seen it. I've worked with... you know, as I said, I used to work with the homeless and I would talk to them, and if there was someone like that, okay, I would make a phone call to the cat team, basically, who would come over. They would come over, and they're very reactive, especially if you say, hey, this person should not be here because they can't cross a road. and there are people that had that level of delusion that they weren't safe crossing a road with buses on it, okay, so they've got to be somewhere else until their medication catches up with them or whatever is happening. It's a real thing, this specific thing. But you are trusting her testimony. Now, you might trust it, you might not, but it's just something to keep in mind, when he is really coming down on this guy for not, you know, handing down and not guilty of it. It's the strangest thing. I feel like I'm in an episode of Sliders. Remember that 90s TV show? I don't mean to bring everything back to TV shows. But they would skip through parallel universes, which were the same as ours, but slightly different. That's where I feel like I am. Let's listen to the lawyer anyway. They know that they were robbed by one man for whatever his agenda was, who stole seven weeks of the life of these other jurors that was so attentive, so beautiful, so wonderful, and listened to this evidence. And you could see how defeated they were sitting there. And I got a funny feeling that they would have gone on for another week if they had to. So I hope that guy can sleep well at night. It's incredible to turn that. They know that they were wrong. To turn that around on that guy and then say to him, I, you know, I hope you can sleep well at night. He's done, he has done this kind of like, he's like a wizard or something. You know, he's managed to turn, like, You know, he's like a wizard or something. He's like something that, I don't know, like, if you caught him when he wasn't playing the lawyer, you know, he'd have like a big cloak or something would slowly move up and down his form and he'd, like, grow this long beard, like, out of a storm of the century, and then hold his hand out, and, you know, a cane would appear with a silver wolf's head on it. Although I never thought that there was actually a wolf's head. I thought it was a... in that movie, I thought it was like a ferret or something. Let's keep on going here. I just need to pause it to have a drink there for a moment. In trying to really put orange juice into myself since I recovered from that stomach thing. I am 99% there, I'd say, well, not really, but say about 80% there. But on the pain threshold, not that anyone cares, so I won't go into it, but the pain threshold, I am 99 there, but I've still got a little bit of the bug. I can kind of feel it, but it is going away. Before there was a bit of pain in my belly. I remember what my father would say, actually, I'd say, poor little Lord Fonteroy. He's got the pain in his belly. he reminded me, well, that's actually a line from, what, in this movie, I won't go into it. Anyway, it's just, is what it is, let's continue here. So here is the price of an education. Well, here is an education. So this person now currently is Professor Emeritus. At the University of Santa Cruz, here they are, is 20, 30 years ago. Let's listen to what they had to say. I remember going to the last above-ground weather, it was the weatherman or the weather underground, the last above-ground convention. And sitting in a room and the question that was debated was, was it, was it? was it or was it not the duty of every good revolutionary to kill all newborn white babies? At that point, it seemed like a relevant framing of an issue. The logic being, hey, look, through no fault of their own, these white kids are going to grow up to be part of an oppressive racial establishment internationally, and so really, you know, your duty is to kill newborn white babies. And I remember one guy kind of... tentatively and apologetically suggesting that that seemed like it may be contradictory to the larger humanitarian names of the movement and being kind of booed down. Now, I do not know the exact context of what he's repeating. He's talking about going there, and this was the conversation of the day at the weather, underground, and of course they are famous for bombings and all types of things, but... This is how ideas get into society, right? And think of the spellcraft used and the way that there is a reconfiguration of reality to get you to accept via whatever philosophies, to get you to accept the idea that killing a child is a good idea. By the way, all children welcome before Jesus Christ. What do you reckon Jesus Christ would say to that? he would take you by your feet and throw you in the air or something. Because it's so far away from his message, it would be extraordinary, right? Actually, it's far away from nearly any deity's message, whatever deity, right? Buddha, whatever, it's seen as like, you know, this is just, what is that? So... Well, I shouldn't say every deity, because there are many deities that would be acceptable. So, in fact, child sacrifice is part of that, right, like bow worship. So, yeah, I mean, you can see how the idea gets in there. It's extraordinary to me that words can turn something evil into something acceptable, as long as they have the structure of them, like a combination lock is in the right way. This can actually convince people of something, like killing children. Now, I will, I am my old anthropology teacher. This is like 30 years ago at university. My anthropology teacher put forward a case to us. I can't remember he was a protege of, I can never remember his name, but in the United States, there is this guy who is this, he's like a figurehead of Indian intellectualism, and he's like always wears this, like, I can't remember his name, but he always used to walk around in this denim jacket and stuff. He was older, like his, he died recently only, well, not recently, but, no, not recently, actually, maybe a decade plus ago, but anyway, my anthropology teacher was, you know, a big protege of his, and my anthropology teacher, you know, was talking about how the Inuit, what they'll do is they'll take the baby, and they'll put it out in the snow. and it will die, and the reason they do this is because, in his calculus and others, I guess, that the Inuit themselves can only support so many life forms, so over time, this became an instinctive thing that happened, so on and so forth. And someone said to him, I think it might even be me, I said, well, if you could go, if you were watching this, as anthropologists did, or said that they watched it or observed, and maybe after the baby died, but would you go out and save that baby? And he was saying that he wouldn't be, he wouldn't want to get involved in, you know, kind of like affecting their culture by saving the baby? I thought it was such a stupid thing that, you know, the most stupid thing I ever heard. Can't remember if it's me that brought it up, it doesn't matter anyway, time washes away, all these things, but I would 100% grab that baby. 100% I would grab that baby before it died. And I always thought to myself later, how could, like, his, like, academic, like, his thinking, like, this kind of structuralist thinking... about things, which is just designed in order to measure things, right, and categorize. Measure and categorize, therefore, you have words and phrases and structuralist, structural thinking to do that. How could that let you look at a life form like a baby and just want it to die? Like, you'd rather die in front to you because it threatens your structural, how you structurally think, right? Your structural lens. and you would let that baby die. And then I thought, well, that's basically craft. It's like witchcraft, right? As in, you know, some kind of dark force, not…