Crime

Standing Ground

A child gets on a school bus with a pizza. One of his fellow students (a 14 year old feral) by the name of RJ McIntyre decided he wanted a piece and when he didn’t get one, struck the student. The father reported the attack to the bus driver and asked that the “teen” be disciplined.

The next day, dad took his son to the bus stop himself and had another confrontation with the bus driver. The 14 year old called his brother (Trevor Ivory, note the different last names) to the bus stop. Why the 16 year old had to respond from home was predictable- he was already suspended for being a violent little turd. When he arrived, Ivory confronted the dad. That’s when the 14 year old son decided to get off the bus, followed by McIntyre. They both dropped their backpacks and were about to fight while Ivory attempted to hold the father back from interfering.

That’s when the father pulled his son behind him and told the two attackers to get back. The article then says the two “approached” the father. I’m sure they were being calm and not threatening at all. That’s when dad, who has a concealed weapons permit, drew a handgun and told them to get back. This defensive use of a firearm appears to have ended the attack without anyone getting hurt.

Detectives from the Martin county sheriff’s office spent an entire day investigating this and decided that no charges would be filed against the father, and the father declined to press charges against the two ferals. Of course, the two attackers went immediately to the press and acted like choir boys.

They and their families attended a meeting of the National Association of African Convicts and Parolees (NAACP) to vent their frustrations. They are staunchly opposed to white folks being armed. After all, if would be victims are armed, this could severely disrupt the livelihoods of those in the black community. Here is a quote from one of the little criminals:

“I feel like under any circumstance, however you felt, no firearms should be displayed at a bus stop where there’s a bunch of kids on a bus looking forward to going to school,” Ivory said. “Instead, they had to see a man with a gun on two teenagers that they know ride the bus in the morning.”

Those same kids were on the way to school and had to be attacked by negro criminals.

“The dad had a thousand options. He chose the wrong option,” said Pam Ivory, Trevor’s aunt.

It looks to me like the correct option was chosen. He legally displayed his firearm, and the incident ended without harm to anyone. Perhaps your criminal nephew shouldn’t be attacking people.

Jimmy Smith, president of the NAACP Martin County Branch, also addressed the situation:

“We know guns aren’t allowed on school property. They also shouldn’t be allowed in school bus stops,” Smith said.

You know what else isn’t allowed at school bus stops? Little criminals who have been suspended. Still, he is incorrect. The news didn’t care about that, and jumped on the bandwagon by having some idiot lawyer make this comment:

But attorney and former Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Aronberg said there is another issue at play: Florida law generally prohibits possessing a firearm at a school, school bus or school bus stop, subject to exceptions. “Florida law makes it a low-level misdemeanor to have a firearm at a bus stop. There are some exceptions,” Aronberg said.

Aronberg said one exception involves a firearm secured inside a vehicle.

“Parents can have a firearm in their car during school drop-offs as long as it’s securely encased or not readily available,” he said.

He said that protection can change once someone leaves the vehicle with the firearm.

“But the moment an adult exits the vehicle and steps onto the bus stop with a gun, that vehicle exception expires, and it’s a potential crime,” Aronberg told WPBF.

Firearms ARE prohibited at bus stops, even for CCW holders. However, the law (Florida statute 790.115) also says this:

A person who exhibits any sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, destructive device, or other weapon as defined in s. 790.001, including a razor blade, box cutter, or common pocketknife, except as authorized in support of school-sanctioned activities, in the presence of one or more persons in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner and not in lawful self-defense, at a school-sponsored event or on the grounds or facilities of any school, school bus, or school bus stop, (emphasis added)

The dad has decided to pull his son out of school to homeschool. I think that is a great option.

By Divemedic, ago

Why Not?

A shooting in the parking garage for the Orange County courthouse was a man shooting at his wife. He missed. The man escaped deputies, who were searching for him. The sheriff’s office knows who the suspect is, but they are not releasing that person’s identity at this time.

Why not? What advantage does law enforcement gain by not telling anyone who it is? In this case, the dude shot at his wife, who the article plainly says wasn’t hurt, so it isn’t like he doesn’t know he’s been identified.

By Divemedic, ago

It’s Not Your Job

Here is a case of a woman who decided that, because she had a gun, she was going to chase down what she believed was a criminal and be a hero. The story goes like this:

She was a witness to a car accident, along with an off duty police officer, another witness. Hannah saw the accident and believed him to be intoxicated, according to her own statements on the phone to 911. (It actually turns out he was having a diabetic emergency) The man who caused the accident left the scene. Hannah called 911 and engaged in a vehicle pursuit.

The dispatcher, upon finding out Hannah was engaged in a vehicle pursuit, said “We actually don’t want you to chase him,” then asked her to return to the scene of the accident.

Hannah replied, “There is a police officer at the scene, but this guy is drunk, and I am not NOT going to follow him, because he is going to cause another accident.”

When she caught up to him, Hannah pulled her vehicle into the path of the man’s car, to block him from going further. She got out of her car to confront him, yelling for him to get out of the car. She is heard to say, “He was fighting with me, and he pulled the trigger on my gun.” The thing is, he was still in his pickup with his seatbelt on. She claims her finger was indexed and not on the trigger. You decide, here is a screen grab from the video:

In 2023, Hannah was convicted of felony murder, false imprisonment, and weapons charges, and sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole, plus 8 years and 5 years. The story would end there, a wanna be cop with a gun who decided to shoot someone over a traffic accident she wasn’t even involved in, but there is more.

The Supreme Court of Georgia weighed in on her appeal just this spring. The prosecutor in the case had used AI to write her legal briefs and motions. The case law cited by the AI was fake, either made up cases, or the cases cited didn’t say what the lawyer claimed they did. So the Supreme Court of Georgia, as they should have, ordered the conviction tossed out, and granted Hannah a new trial.

By Divemedic, ago

Quarter of a Century

A quarter of a Century, and I still remember that morning in more detail than all but of a few of the mornings that have come since. The sky was a beautiful blue, the sun was warm, and there wasn’t a cloud in the sky. A typical Central Florida day. My shift, C shift, had just started our 24 hour workday.

I was driving Engine 2 that morning. Dennis was riding in the seat next to me as the Lieutenant, and Justin was the back seat firefighter. Our shift had begun at 7:30 that morning as it always did. We did our morning routine as we always do. At 8:30, we left the station to do annual flow testing of fire hydrants.

By 8:45, we were behind the Winn Dixie and just about to test our first hydrant. Our Battalion Chief called us and told us to return to the station and turn on the TV. I remember jokingly asking Dennis who the guy on the radio was and what they had done to the Chief, since he would never tell us to watch TV during the workday.

We arrived back in the station just in time to see the second plane hit the south tower. I remember watching Fox news and seeing them switch to the DC bureau, where reporters said they could see a column of smoke. Things were happening so fast, I couldn’t figure out what that smoke was coming from. I commented “There is no way that the smoke from NYC is visible in Washington.” It was then that a fellow firefighter told me that the Pentagon had been hit.

The chief called us to disclose the plans for the remainder of the day. While I was on the phone with him, the first tower fell. The chief said to me, “Oh my God. 30,000 people just died.” I remember being stunned that so many people could be in a building.

By noon, we had an armed SWAT officer with an MP-5 riding along with us on all of our calls “for security.”

For weeks, we firefighters were stunned at the loss of 343 firefighters. I had friends who were in New York and in DC that day- military, firefighters, and paramedics who I’ve known for years. I felt a sense of awe and respect for the guys who went into that second tower after watching the first tower fall. They went into that building knowing that they would never come out of the second tower. What was going through their minds? I asked myself if I was capable of making the same choice if I knew that I would not come out?

We all wanted to be able to say yes. It isn’t the same thing when you go into an ordinary fire. Firefighters are a cocky, professional bunch. When we run into a burning building, we tell ourselves that we are trained and experienced enough that it will not happen to us. Not so with those guys in the towers. They went in KNOWING that they wouldn’t come out. That is a time that you don’t know what you would do until the moment of truth comes.

I just hoped that I would have the fortitude to make the choice that needed to be made, to have the courage to choose duty and honor over self preservation and the fortune to never be placed in that position. I hoped that I would never have to make that choice.

I spent the majority of my adult life in one uniform or another, dedicated to the protection of American lives and values. I spent six years in the Navy, doing two combat tours in the Persian gulf. I wasn’t a big hero or anything. I, like millions of others, did my job. After that, I spent two decades in a firefighter’s uniform. In that time, I ran into hundreds of burning buildings, jumped into a dozen lakes, thousands of medical scenes, and traveled to 22 natural disasters. I was injured three times in the line of duty. I saw a couple of thousand dead bodies, dozens of shootings and stabbings, and saved more than a few lives.

In 2011, I retired. I had seen enough death, misery, and blood for one lifetime. In the intervening years, many changes have come about. Dennis is dead. Justin is dead. I thought that the time of risking life and limb for the good of this nation and its people was over. I had given enough. I deserved to be left alone to grow old and enjoy the rest of my life in as much peace as I could manage.

What we should be mourning today is the death of a free nation. The terrorists killed it that morning. The Patriot Act, TSA’s warrantless searches at airports, shopping malls, sporting events, and even on the highways, the NSA spying, the establishment of secret prisons, secret courts, and secret searches of people’s homes all began on that day. Sure, there were people who had sought these powers before that day, but it was people’s fears of further attacks that were used to destroy the freedoms that made America what it was.

What made America special was the fact that we were, each of us, free individuals that were fiercely protective if individual liberties. The last of that spirit died when those towers fell. Now we are neither free, nor are we safe, except we are now using our military to protect the very organization that slaughtered our countrymen and our freedom. We stand in line to be searched at the airport, when we go to public gatherings, and when we drive on the highway. Our electronic communications are monitored, and our homes searched at the whim of authorities, without even the benefit of a warrant. Our police organizations are more heavily armed than many nations’ military forces.

Yet today, the mayor of New York has given a ceremonial pen to one of the associates of the very people who carried out that attack. Our President gave billions of dollars in weapons, ammunition, and other military supplies to the same people who were part of that.

By Divemedic, ago

3, 2, 1…

Now that it’s known the lone juror with the large testicles on the Clancy jury was a black man, the left will quietly drop the entire narrative of attacking him rather quickly. This will disappear from the news cycle and from social media by Monday morning.

The defense attorney has filed a motion for a forced “not guilty” verdict because he claims the jury got it wrong.

By Divemedic, ago

Balls of Fire

This post is late because it’s concerning the Lindsay Clancy trial. I wrote and scheduled it before the mistrial was declared. I decided to postpone it so I could do some edits. This is the result.

The Lindsay Clancy case has brought the TikTok Detective bureau out of the shadows. These women, experts in everything from police procedure to medicine, psychology, forensic evidence collection, law, military tactics, and nuclear physics are on the case and have declared Lindsay to be not guilty for reasons ranging from insanity to “her husband did it.”

Of course claims she didn’t do it at all for some reason, including claims that it was her husband are demonstrably false. As evidence, we can take the word of her attorney. No, not the attorney in the current criminal trial, but her attorney from January, where she was the plaintiff in a lawsuit against her doctor. I’m posting a pdf of the notes from the case and the actual complaint filed with the Norfolk, Mass. court (pdf warning).

In that lawsuit, she made the following claim:

and this one, also from her lawsuit:

Keep in mind, she was indicted for killing those children in October 2023, yet waited to file this lawsuit until January of 2026, shortly before her criminal trial. This is part of a claim Lindsay and her attorneys are making, that she was not in control or aware of her actions at the time she killed the children.

For that reason, there is no doubt, zero, that she in fact killed those children.

Killing someone isn’t always illegal, but in those cases, the defense requires admitting to the facts. For example, if I shoot and kill someone who tried to rob me at gunpoint, claiming self defense requires that I admit to shooting and killing the person, but I have an affirmative defense in that self defense is legal. I make the claim of being in reasonable fear for my life. The prosecution then has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the shooting wasn’t in self defense.

The actual controlling Massachusetts rule is the doctrine of criminal responsibility, originating in Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court case law rather than a statute specifically saying “psychosis.” The foundational case is Commonwealth v. McHoul, 352 Mass. 544, 546–547 (1967). The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s current 2026 Model Jury Instruction on Criminal Responsibility states:

A person is not criminally responsible for his conduct if he has a mental disease or defect, and, as a result of that mental disease or defect, lacks the substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality or wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.

The evidence never required anyone to believe Lindsay Clancy was well. She clearly was not, as anyone who will kill their children is not mentally well. But being profoundly mentally ill and not being responsible for your actions are not the same thing. The law in this case requires the person making the insanity claim be unaware of the wrongfulness of their actions.

None of the providers who treated Lindsay Clancy diagnosed her with postpartum depression or psychosis. The evidence instead pointed toward a serious mood disorder, with multiple of them diagnosong her as bipolar.

As many who are bipolar do, she resisted that diagnosis, changed providers, often skipping or refusing to take medications. Lindsay was prescribed 13 different psychiatric medications over several months. That does NOT mean she was taking 13 medications simultaneously. The prosecution’s evidence indicated roughly 2–3 at a time. Then there’s the actual pill inventory presented at trial:

  • Zoloft: 30 prescribed — 23 remained
  • Ativan: 30 prescribed — 24 remained
  • Buspirone: 30 prescribed — 28 remained
  • Hydroxyzine: 30 prescribed — 27 remained
  • Buspirone refill: 30 prescribed — ALL 30 remained
  • Trazodone: 30 prescribed — 22½ remained

She hid some of her most disturbing thoughts from the people treating her because she knew it would result in her kids being taken. Above all, people with this condition are well known for resisting treatment, because they “aren’t crazy.”

Lindsay claims through her attorney that she became convinced that her brain was damaged and she would never return to her old self. She was suicidal, but her children were a tether to life, according to her claims.

Then there is the alleged voice. After months of treatment without documented psychosis, Lindsay said she heard a voice telling her to kill the children in the days and minutes before the killings. We are talking about roughly an 18-minute window where a voice commanded she kill her children. She never spoke of this voice before, or mentioned it until after the killings.

Yet during the killings and the hours preceding them, she was capable of purposeful, sequential behavior.

She created the opportunity to be alone with the children. She researched how long her husband’s trip would take and added another errand to extend that time. She killed the children one by one over a 15 minute period. When her husband called during this time, she missed his call and then made the decision to call him back. In the middle of a psychotic break so profound that it compelled her to kill her three children without realizing the gravity of her actions, she still recognized her husband had called, understood that not responding could warrant him returning early, and took affirmative action to call him back. That is difficult to reconcile with the narrative that Lindsay suddenly “snapped” and had no awareness of what she was doing.

Lindsay was profoundly mentally ill and genuinely wanted to die. But she still understood what she was doing when she killed her children. Those things are not mutually exclusive. She took steps to hide her psychosis, this alleged voice compelling her to kill, to get her husband out of the house, and to one by one kill her children.

Mental illness deserves compassion, and postpartum mental health deserves treatment, attention, and resources. However, compassion can’t replace the legal standard for criminal responsibility.

If the standard becomes, “She was a loving mother, therefore she must have snapped,” we’re no longer applying the law to the evidence. We’re creating our own definition of justice based on emotion and feelings.

In my opinion, this woman knew exactly what she was doing. She took steps to hide her behavior while she was carrying out her plan. All of this suggests cunning and a sense of guilt. You don’t hide your actions if you are unaware of the wrongness of what you are doing. In Massachusetts, the legal term for this is “consciousness of guilt.”

The legal issue to which those facts are relevant is whether the Commonwealth proved that the defendant retained substantial capacity to “appreciate the criminality or wrongfulness” of the conduct and to conform conduct to law. Massachusetts defines “appreciate” as understand, “criminality” as the legal significance of the conduct, and “wrongfulness” as its moral significance.

In this case, taking steps to prevent her plan from being foiled:

  • conceal what they intended to do
  • waited until her husband was gone
  • created a diversion to get her husband away from the scene
  • lied about what she intended to do
  • selected the time or place designed to avoid intervention
  • took steps calculated to ensure nobody discovered or stopped the act.

In my mind, that is what it boils down to: Did this woman know what she was doing was wrong, as evidenced by the fact that she took active, complex actions to ensure no one could discover or prevent her from carrying out her plan.

I think the answer is that she knew full well what she was doing. I tip my hat to the one juror who had the cajones to stand his ground in the face of the other 11 members of the jury, the judge, and the defense attorney. He stood up for those children, despite surely knowing what would happen to him in the aftermath, once his identity is discovered. The left is going to make his life miserable.

Now there are actually dumbasses out there who are calling for the elimination of the jury trial, saying we should use professional tribunals instead.

By Divemedic, ago

It Continues

Read this article about a Charlie Kirk sign being vandalized in Loganville, Ga. back in September of 2025. In case you are wondering, SYBAU means “Shut Your Bitch Ass Up.” Now watch the following two videos.

If you look in the comments to the video, some are claiming vandalism is free speech. So if I begin holding down leftists and tattooing swastikas on their foreheads, would THAT be free speech as well? No? What’s the difference? Would it be OK if instead of your forehead, I simply painted it on your house or keyed it into your car? Why?

It doesn’t matter, because they caught the fat ugly Antifa bitch.

Here is a video of the arrest:

Unsurprisingly, she looks like a frumpy 2. They all look similar. I tried to find the outcome or status of the case, but perhaps her charges were dropped, because no case was found under her name in the Walton county court records system.

By Divemedic, ago