Yes, this is a thread about Tracy's interview, which I will get to, but first...
Early on, when I first heard about the maggots from a friend who opined there was an accident and that KC tried to cover it up out of panic, I figured KC had murdered her daughter. After all, who, in their right mind would drive around with a decomposing body in their car, much less the decomposing body of not only a child, but their very own child? So, the question of murder was simply never an issue for me. Nor was my view that KC was sadly, a cold-blooded killer.
My view wrt the "why" has however changed. While I am still of the opinion that KC murdered little Caylee, I am now inclined to think the murder was the result of a childish, yet deadly, tantrum as opposed to the calculated murder. Why?
When the crime scene photos of KC's room were released, I was struck by the "young" mentality they portrayed. And not young, as in young woman, rather, young as in young teen, as in child. This caused me to revisit my earlier view. Imo, KC is emotionally young, very young. Both Tracy's and Rob's interview confirmed that.
Does such make the murder anymore right? Of course not. But I do think, if correct, it can perhaps shed some light on the dynamic that led to the final tragedy. But what might that dynamic be?
This is certainly something I have pondered and have yet to reach a firm conclusion. In fact, I have wavered btwn thinking the family are victims of KC's out of control and antisocial behavior, simply grasping at everything and anything, as their world and everything they hold dear is shredded beyond repair... to... feeling there is a volatile and toxic element that is generational in nature and that goes well beyond the tragic outcome we are witnessing.
If the former, then the Anthony's deserve our utmost sympathy. If the latter, then imo, SS is quite correct in their observation that everyone who comes in contact with that family is and has been "eaten alive." I admittedly lean toward the latter and SS's viewpoint.
As for Tracy's response? I am not the least bit surprised that she would write KC and even send her money. Remember she started out thinking KC was innocent. Also, Tracy has noted she is a mother. And this, imo, is something that is important. Nature has designed us to respond to certain behaviors to increase the likelihood that we will care for our children to adulthood. And this starts with the rooting and grasping reflex of a new born and continues throughout a child's developmental stages.
In this case, KC, seems to be stuck in very early developmental stage. One where, 'wear your watch on your ankle so you are like me' to 'playing the sun glass game' to 'look at my baby pictures' when Tracy mentioned Caylee's baby pictures. While opinions wrt what developmental age this type of behavior indicates, I suspect most recognize this is not the type of behavior that one would expect from a 22-year-old woman.
In other words, I do not think Tracy's response was so much that of a BFF, rather that of a person whose maternal heartstrings were pulled. I imagine Tracy, herself, even wonders why she felt the way she did (hence, the nervous laugh which sounded more like a puzzled laugh to me) that may very well have gone beyond what she had expected. Bc on one side there is the mother who wonders how anyone could harm, much less murder their child and on the other, she finds herself drawn into the seemingly childlike innocence that KC's non-public behavior may very well exude. If this is indeed the case, I imagine that has got to be quite unsettling for her... Or otherwise put, what is that about Nietzsche's abyss?
That being said, I agree with those who think Tracy was not cut out for this job. But not bc I think she actually did anything wrong, rather, from the personal effect it has likely had upon her and may very well continue to have upon her. Esp if KC is found guilty and sentenced to death.