Why it worked
The video likely resonated due to its controversial and speculative nature, tapping into public interest in a high-profile trial and offering a unique, albeit unverified, perspective from a professional in a related field.
Summary
The creator, a hairdresser, questions the details of the Lindsay Clancy trial, specifically regarding the presence of hair on the exercise bands used. She posits that due to postpartum hair shedding, Clancy's hair should have been more prominent on the bands and children if the described events occurred.
Structure
- 1Introduction to the Lindsay Clancy trial and a hairdresser's perspective
- 2Observation about Lindsay Clancy's medium-long hair
- 3Hypothetical question about hair being wrapped around exercise bands
- 4Consideration of postpartum hair shedding
- 5Conclusion that hair should have been more evident
On-screen text
Like everyone else, I've been
watching the Lindsay Clancy
trial, but I keep thinking
about something that seems
obvious to me, as a
hairdresser.
Lindsay has/had medium-
long hair.
If she strangled her children
with exercise bands,
wouldn't her hair have been
wrapped around at least one
of the bands?
Especially as a postpartum
mother? A lot of us know
how much hair you already
shed postpartum. If she was
bent over strangling her
children, her hair should've
been all over the kids and the
bands?