The reaction of interviewer Gayle King, upon being told by a White female juror that the single hold-out male-juror, who refused to conform and find that Lindsay Clancy was insane rather than a murderess, is one of the most fascinating pieces of footage I’ve seen. King was visibly surprised, paused and then admitted, “I have to sit with that for just a second,” before pausing further.

It was fascinating because it revealed so much about the workings of the broadly Woke mind. It never occurred to King – it never occurred to any of us who followed the trial – that this man was Black. The narrative was very clear. A White mother suffered from post-partum psychosis and killed her three children. The jury, being predominantly female, were high in empathy and were, of course, entirely reasonable. Of the three men, who were presumably White, one of them was unreasonable and insisted on convicting Clancy of murder, despite, apparently, admitting to having doubts. The jury went so far as to complain to the judge about his behaviour, while Clancy’s lawyer demanded that he be removed from the jury in order to break the deadlock, which the judge (rightly) refused to do. A mistrial was duly declared.

However, if your life is based around virtue-signalling in relation to “marginalised” people where the only non-marginalised person is the inherently wicked “White man,” then the holdout juror being a Black man changes everything. This would have induced in Ms. King the most severe cognitive dissonance, meaning that she had to pause and think to herself, “What is the right thing to think? What is the Party Line in this unusual situation? I am completely conflicted and at sea.”

A Black man, surely, is higher on the grievance hierarchy than a White woman. As such, in order to feel that you are morally superior, you must surely take his side. However, we expect him – as a “marginalised person” – to take the side of the broader coalition of marginalised people, such as the supposedly “insane” Lindsay Clancy. But . . . he hasn’t. As such, he is a bad man and I must condemn him as such. However, on the other hand, he is a Black man who bravely refused to change his opinion in the face of profound social pressure exerted on him by a bunch of White people; the kind of people who enslaved his ancestors and imposed the Jim Crow laws upon him. Also, the fact that I assumed that he must have been White, because a Black person would surely take the “Woke” viewpoint, means I made stereotypical assumptions about him and am, therefore, “racist,” the worst possible sin; worse than killing your three children.

Continued at link below:

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2026/09/16/the-black-juror-in-the-lindsay-clancy-case/