New trial order for Brockton mom who killed her two children 17%

By Colleen Cronin12%

8/6/2026, 3:44:05 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 15 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Unattributed Quote, and Appeal to Authority, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 46.1% saturation with 182 hits. Analysis detected 703 faulty-reasoning hits from 395 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 24.8% and a BS Rank of 17% (25,644 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 83.80% of the article peer group.

The Supreme Judicial Court overturned the murder convictions for a Brockton mother who was found guilty of killing her two children in 2018. 
The judge who oversaw that case, William Sullivan, is currently presiding over the triple murder trial of Lindsay Clancy, the Duxbury mom who killed her three children then tried to kill herself in 2023. 
The SJC wrote that it was ordering a new trial for Latarsha Sanders because Sullivan did not allow her defense to admit the defendant’s post-arrest medical records. 
Sanders was arrested in 2018 after her two sons, Edson, 8, and La’Son, 5, were found brutally stabbed to death in her Brockton apartment. 
“The victims were found in separate bedrooms, swaddled in sheets and blankets, having suffered multiple, horrific knife wounds,” the SJC ruling stated. 
Like the Clancy case, there wasn’t a question that Sanders killed her kids; the only issue was whether she was criminally responsible for their deaths. 
Clancy is claiming that she was suffering from postpartum psychosis at the time of the killings, while Sanders claimed she’d been in a psychosis more generally. 
A jury convicted Sanders of first-degree murder, and she was sentenced to the mandatory life without parole sentence. 
But on appeal, Sanders’ defense in that trial was impeded by Sullivan’s decision to exclude her medical records from evidence. 
The excluded medical records included information about Sanders “licking windows and staring at walls,” claiming that someone was trying to poison her, and “hyper religiosity” after she was arrested. 
She had also reported, while in custody, that after the birth of her first child, she’d experienced hallucinations and delusions that worsened over time. 
The SJC said that the exculpatory evidence that would have helped her case in those records exceeded the evidence of moments of lucidity also included. 
“By all accounts, [Sanders] was a loving, caring, and affectionate mother,” the SJC ruling started. 
She didn’t have any history of violence and witnesses testified that she always put her kids first. 
Although she didn’t have a documented history of mental health issues, Sanders had developed an obsession with the Illuminati and watched videos of the “24 hours a day” in the lead-up to the killings. 
Sanders at first blamed the deaths on her ex, then later claimed that she’d killed the children to please the Illuminati. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 6.3%Colleen Cronin: 2.8%bostonherald: 2.7%Confirmation Bias6.3%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.2%bostonherald: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 22.0%Colleen Cronin: 1.4%bostonherald: 3.2%Availability Heuristic22.0%This article: 6.6%Colleen Cronin: 1.0%bostonherald: 1.4%Representativeness Heuristic6.6%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.5%bostonherald: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 1.5%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 9.1%Colleen Cronin: 1.8%bostonherald: 5.6%Framing Effect9.1%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.2%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.5%bostonherald: 1.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.4%bostonherald: 2.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.3%bostonherald: 0.9%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 46.1%Colleen Cronin: 4.9%bostonherald: 5.6%Negativity Bias46.1%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.8%bostonherald: 2.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 5.3%Colleen Cronin: 0.2%bostonherald: 0.8%Fundamental Attribution Error5.3%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.8%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.2%bostonherald: 1.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 8.1%Colleen Cronin: 4.2%bostonherald: 1.5%Halo Effect8.1%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.4%bostonherald: 1.9%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 4.3%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.4%Primacy Effect4.3%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.2%bostonherald: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 1.8%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 13.2%Colleen Cronin: 1.1%bostonherald: 2.8%Appeal to Authority13.2%This article: 6.3%Colleen Cronin: 0.6%bostonherald: 1.3%False Dilemma6.3%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.3%bostonherald: 3.2%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.9%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 12.9%Colleen Cronin: 2.1%bostonherald: 6.2%Appeal to Emotion12.9%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.1%bostonherald: 0.9%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.6%bostonherald: 1.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.2%bostonherald: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 1.9%bostonherald: 1.0%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.7%bostonherald: 1.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 8.6%Colleen Cronin: 0.2%bostonherald: 0.2%Special Pleading8.6%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 16.7%Colleen Cronin: 0.3%bostonherald: 1.0%Unattributed Quote16.7%This article: 2.8%Colleen Cronin: 1.0%bostonherald: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection2.8%This article: 9.6%Colleen Cronin: 1.2%bostonherald: 3.1%Biased Writer Voice9.6%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.6%bostonherald: 0.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.7%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Colleen Cronin: 0.0%bostonherald: 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

395 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.