Testimonies 10/16/08

jmflu said:

First of all, I haven't defined controlling behavior. Second of all, I am attacking no one. Third of all, anyone who prevents someone from doing something is controlling them. I really think you are confusing control with justification of that control.

Click to expand...

jmflu said:

I am specifically speaking of this situation, where NC's family knew of BC's controlling nature, problems, and KL's fear that NC was in danger. Their thoughts when NC disappeared were probably immediate that BC did something to her, and then his actions afterwards strengthened that feeling. There's no way they are going to trust BC with those kids after they feel he killed their daughter... they obviously felt the children were in immediate danger given the manner in which they took the kids from BC. And LE obviously felt that, too, or they would not have taken them.

Click to expand...

ncsu95 said:

Then by all means, please show me a clinical definition that defines taking passports to prevent your spouse from illegally taking your children out of the country (which would be considered kidnapping) as a controlling behavior.

Click to expand...

jmflu said:

Wow-wee. If you are married, and your spouse murdered you, you would want your parents to sit back and act rationally about your children, rather than taking them from the person they feel murdered you?

And, IMO, those children have GAINED stability. They are doing great where they are, probably better than they were doing here. And if you're worried about their privacy and anonymity, why would you want to place them back in the middle of all this mess??

Click to expand...

rwesafe said:

No, I think that it is you that is confused. You must not have children or this would not be such an issue for you to wrap your mind around. Not wanting to lose your children does not make you a controlling person.

Click to expand...

jmflu said:

Would someone who does a lot better research than I care to insert the reasons and missing info from this story that paint Brad as a saint?

Click to expand...

shack said:

I can't grab on to the fact that some are still calling BC controlling. NC had a car and could go anywhere she wanted to. She was a frequent visitor to the coffee shop. She jogged almost daily. I assume BC watched the girls so she could. She had just gotten back from a trip to Hilton head with her family. She was at the beach earlier with a friend neither Brad nor the friends wife was there. She had a cell phone that SHE felt free to lock. Because BC saw that NC was driving them into the poor house and he took her ability to get money from her he was controlling. I say he was trying to preserve their home .

Click to expand...

jmflu said:

I don't believe I am having difficulty wrapping my mind around controlling behavior. I have seen it, witnessed it, and been guilty of it. I'm sorry you can't seem to understand it.

Click to expand...

ncsu95 said:

Okay, I'll play along. Was BC justified in taking the passports? If so, I'll agree that by controlling the passports, he controlled her ability to leave the country with his kids without his consent. And by her having the passports prior to him taking them, she controlled his ability to do the same.

Click to expand...

jmflu said:

Wow-wee. If you are married, and your spouse murdered you, you would want your parents to sit back and act rationally about your children, rather than taking them from the person they feel murdered you?

And, IMO, those children have GAINED stability. They are doing great where they are, probably better than they were doing here. And if you're worried about their privacy and anonymity, why would you want to place them back in the middle of all this mess??

Click to expand...

shack said:

I can't grab on to the fact that some are still calling BC controlling. NC had a car and could go anywhere she wanted to. She was a frequent visitor to the coffee shop. She jogged almost daily. I assume BC watched the girls so she could. She had just gotten back from a trip to Hilton head with her family. She was at the beach earlier with a friend neither Brad nor the friends wife was there. She had a cell phone that SHE felt free to lock. Because BC saw that NC was driving them into the poor house and he took her ability to get money from her he was controlling. I say he was trying to preserve their home .

Click to expand...

jmflu said:

It's hard to agree on things that are more opinion than fact. I'm pretty sure, given our differing opinions, that we are not going to agree on what was "right" and what was "wrong."

If we had a situation where NC, for instance, wanted to move back to Canada to be with another man, and there had never been any controlling or intimidating behavior from Brad, nothing he had done to justify her doing this, then I would say he was justified in taking the passports to keep his children here. However, because I believe what I believe, I do not think he was justified. In either example, whether his behavior was justifiable or not, it was still controlling.

Click to expand...

ncsu95 said:

Because they are his kids and he hasn't been charged with a crime.

Click to expand...

ncsu95 said:

I didn't paint him as a saint. I personally don't like anything about the guy (based on what has been presented publicly...I don't actually know him).

Click to expand...

jmflu said:

Yep. And I'd much rather they be in control than Brad.

Click to expand...

rwesafe said:

That, I don't doubt.

Click to expand...

jmflu said:

Again, it's not about BRAD. It's about the kids.

Click to expand...

momto3kids said:

Does anyone object to opening a thread on CONTROLLING?:crazy:

Click to expand...

jmflu said:

But you can't just present some facts and leave out others in order to sway opinion to view BC a certain way.

Click to expand...