Summary of Undisclosed: Unfiltered 8.20.2026

Overview of Undisclosed: Unfiltered 8.20.2026

This episode is a fast-moving “unfiltered” discussion that blends listener feedback, legal updates, and deep dives into a few major true-crime and criminal-justice topics. The hosts revisit the Colin Gray case, examine privacy concerns around Flock license plate cameras, discuss a Fifth Circuit death-row case involving Brittany Holberg and jailhouse informant testimony, and spend much of the episode unpacking the online reaction to the Lindsay Clancy case and the realities of postpartum psychosis defenses.

Main Topics Covered

Colin Gray sentencing update

• The hosts briefly update the audience on Colin Gray, who was sentenced to 15 years in prison with parole eligibility.
• His son, Colt Gray, pleaded guilty to all 55 charges and received life without parole.
• Colin Gray has filed a motion for a new trial, arguing the verdict was against the weight of the evidence and contrary to law.
• The hosts debate whether the sentence feels proportionate, with one host calling it fair and another suggesting it is very harsh by international standards.

Flock cameras, surveillance, and privacy

• A longer segment focuses on Flock Safety cameras, which are automatic license plate readers used by thousands of law enforcement agencies.
• They capture:
  • license plate data
  • vehicle make/model/color
  • distinguishing features like bumper stickers or damage
• Benefits discussed:
  • locating stolen vehicles
  • helping with Amber/Silver alerts
  • finding fugitives
  • aiding homicide and kidnapping investigations
• Major concern:
  • misuse by police officers, including a Florida case where an officer allegedly searched his estranged wife’s plates hundreds of times.
• The hosts argue for stronger guardrails, including:
  • requiring a case number or investigation reason
  • limiting access to legitimate law-enforcement purposes
  • better auditing and user accountability

Brittany Holberg and jailhouse informant testimony

• Colin discusses Brittany Holberg, a woman on death row in Texas for the 1996 killing of A.B. Towery Sr.
• Holberg’s defense was essentially self-defense after an alleged attack; prosecutors argued robbery and drug theft motivated the killing.
• The key legal issue is a Brady violation involving a jailhouse informant, Vicki Kirkpatrick, whose deals with police were allegedly not fully disclosed to the defense.
• The hosts explain:
  • the Fifth Circuit had previously granted relief
  • the case was then reheard en banc
  • the full court ultimately reinstated the conviction and death sentence
• The episode emphasizes how heavily incentivized informant testimony can distort trials, especially when undisclosed benefits are involved.

Lindsay Clancy case and the online conspiracy response

• A major portion of the episode is devoted to Lindsay Clancy, who is charged with killing her three children in Massachusetts.
• The hosts strongly push back against viral theories blaming her husband, Patrick Clancy, and walk through several commonly circulated claims:
  • CCTV/CVS footage speculation
  • the timing of an email
  • remarriage and dating after the tragedy
  • forensic evidence and fingerprints
  • body-temperature arguments
• They argue that much of the online speculation is unsupported and distracts from the actual legal and medical issues.

Key Legal and Medical Takeaways

Postpartum psychosis vs. postpartum depression

• The hosts stress that postpartum psychosis is not the same as postpartum depression.
• A guest doctor’s explanation is highlighted:
  • psychosis can be episodic
  • people may appear lucid at times and delusional at others
  • fear of the symptoms may fade, which can signal a worsening condition
• They note that common screening tools, like the Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale, do not screen for psychosis or bipolar disorder.

Mental-state evidence is often misunderstood

• The episode explains that a bedside psychiatric consult after the fact is not the same as a full forensic evaluation.
• The hosts also point out that by the time Lindsay was evaluated in the hospital:
  • she had undergone severe trauma
  • she had substantial blood loss
  • her medications had changed
• Therefore, her later presentation cannot be cleanly read as proof of her mental state at the time of the killings.

Massachusetts insanity law matters

• Colin explains that Massachusetts recognizes both:
  • not understanding what one is doing
  • inability to control one’s impulses
• That makes the Clancy defense legally significant, because some states no longer recognize the “irresistible impulse” component.
• The hosts also note that if she succeeds on the defense, it would not mean she walks free; she would likely be confined to a psychiatric facility until no longer considered a danger.

Notable Themes and Takeaways

• Surveillance tools can be useful for law enforcement, but they create serious privacy risks if not tightly controlled.
• Informant testimony remains a major source of wrongful-conviction concern when deals are hidden from the defense.
• True-crime speculation online can quickly outpace the evidence, especially in emotionally charged cases.
• The Clancy discussion highlights broader systemic problems in postpartum mental-health care and the U.S. medical system’s lack of coordination across providers.

Community and Support Notes

• The episode includes reminders about the show’s:
  • Facebook community group
  • Patreon
  • voice-note submission option
  • new ability to accept tax-deductible contributions and grants
• There are also sponsor segments for Vinted and Upwork.