Posted on 03/17/2003 1:23:52 PM PST by varina davis
There certainly do seem to be a lot who are anxious to demonize this family. God help you if your child is ever abducted and recovered in this country and it is nationally publicized. Suddenly it becomes everybody's fault except the perpetrator's.
If you had not seen or heard any of the media stories about this case over the previous nine months, and you were asked to review the facts of the case as you know them now, would you still believe that the abduction story was entirely true?
All I'm saying here is that many people on this site are working through this case backwards in a logical sense -- by first presuming what the truth is, and then going back and trying to prove the case. In the process, they are using specific evidence that supports this assertion, and dismissing any contradictory evidence with claims that (even if true) are admittedly speculative in nature.
If there are two possibilities in this case -- 1) Elizabeth Smart was abducted, or 2) her departure was not entirely "involuntary" -- and her initial response to a police officer was a denial that she was the girl "who ran away," then it would seem that the evidence on this specific point of fact would clearly point toward #2 as being the more likely scenario.
If you were to go through all of the facts about this case that have been made public, and list all of the ones that call into question the validity of the abduction story, you'll find that almost every one of those facts can only be reconciled with an abduction scenario by dismissing them with speculative, unprovable claims such as: "she was brainwashed," "it was too dark to see," "she wasn't herself," etc.
If, on the other hand, you were to go through all of the facts that have been made public and list all of the ones that seemingly contradict a "runaway" scenario, you'll find that almost every one of those facts is based entirely on eyewitness accounts and personal statements from family members -- many of which have changed since the story first broke last June.
I don't get where a sudden recollection by the younger sister equals changing her story.
If, and I emphasize "if", because I do not think it is very likely, but if it was, I am not willing to pass judgement on parents who would do anything to get their missing kid home safely. Desperation can motivate people to do extraordinary things.
Telling of what? These people were living in the hills for the first 2 months and on the streets after that. I doubt seriously that Elizabeth had access to television, and even at times when they might have, I doubt she was allowed to hear what was being said. The nutjob probably told her that's what everybody thought, as part of the brainwashing, and I do believe that is what this was. It has all the earmarks of a cultic type brainwashing.
Give the guy a lean-to, a bar of soap and a long stick to beat himself with and be done with it.
If a mother left her child in a hot car and the child became sick or died you would undoubtedly say she was negligent and endangered her child. Or if she left a young child alone for an extended period of time and the child became ill or died,...same thing.
Why then is it so difficult to see the dangerous impact that the actions of Ed and Lois Smart had on their children, actions which ultimately led to property theft as well as the kidnapping and suspected sexual abuse of their daughter.
People want to believe they are excellent parents, and perhaps in most respects they are. But what kind of parent so openly and easily endangers the health and welfare of their own childen. The simple fact is that if they were "Smart-ER" they never would have opened this Pandora's Box of evil. This entire episode should never have happened.
You are far too kind. Regardless of whatever the "truth" is found to be, nothing can be gained by a bunch of sick bastards trying to drag a child through the mud, be she Mormon, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, or whatever.
I'm certain, however, that the lawyers and other components of the oft-bungling judicial system will do that in a manner sure to please a large number of people here and elsewhere. And if the "predominant religion" in her Elizabeth's environs is smeared at the same time, many will consider such as frosting on the cake...
If indeed she is willing to testify.
If such is the case, then there is all the more reason to shield her from nastiness related to the "gory details" and afford her the privacy mandated during the legal process for one who is a minor and a possible victim of sexual abuse.....
Strange, even with all the social science wierdo so called "expert" explanations and "do-gooder" explanations.
If this was the case, did it ever occur to you that Elizabeth might have been found much sooner if the truth had been told in the beginning?
No, but they may very well have made up a story to cover for the fact that their relationship with this Emmanuel character was more involved than simply hiring the guy to work on the roof of the house one day. Or to make sure that the police and the public stayed involved in the case.
Did they cut the screens that night and 'brainwash' their 9 yr old with their story within the few hours it took for the police to take the report in the morning?
If this case ever goes to trial, I can guarantee you that the younger sister's story will make or break the case. Even the limited information the public has seen about her story has a lot of holes and inconsistencies in it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.