We have no idea how deeply the Lindsay Clancy jury has damaged the concept of a trial by jury, but it's profound and bodes poorly for the future of our already broken system. Not only did the nurses on the jury fail to follow rules by trying to introduce their so-called "expertise" during deliberations, but the media have possibly broken the law by doxxing the lone holdout juror who wanted to convict Clancy for murdering her three young children.

One of the jurors, Paula Davlin, took it a step further and admitted the jury had a political agenda and not justice in mind when deliberating. 

"We knew that this was a turning point and that this would be something that could change something, to make it better for women in the future, for other families. You know, justice for those children is this never happening again," Davlin said.

This will happen again, however, because now the message has been sent: if you're a woman, you can kill your child and claim insanity and get away with it.

It makes things indescribably worse for women. Employers would be justified in not hiring women who might snap at any moment if their hormones are surging. Governments would be right to limit women's ability to drive because giving a woman a 2,000-pound weapon on wheels is just too risky.

Recommended
Don’t Believe the Hype About James Talarico Kurt Schlichter Bernie Sanders Just Proposed Legislation That Would Reduce Your Paycheck Amy Curtis

This makes nothing better for anyone, and children are the ultimate losers here.

This shows the jury didn't look at the evidence.

It's the textbook definition of a runaway jury.

The courts and prosecutors must clamp down on this swiftly and severely, or the jury system is finished.

Maybe women shouldn't sit on juries, either.

Lawyers, both for the prosecution and defense, would be right to strike all women from jury pools over this.

Nothing good comes of activist judges, and things will get even worse with activist juries.