I see. Well, I have done reading on this case.
I read that the rescuer kicked out the bottom of a screen door.
Nothing about some 90 feet of chain. No duct tape. I read about these women
being well fed and clothed. No permanent scarring from manacles and chains or psyches, apparently.
[Evidently in your vast reading you missed where they found a letter dated 2002 from AC in which he expressed remorse for the kidnapping and his treatment of the girls? And perhaps you missed the words of AC himself in which he admitted kidnapped the girls. Of course he more or less said it was their fault, but he admitted it nevertheless. And maybe you missed where they found ongoing diaries all three of the girls where they discussed what was happening to them at the hands of AC. Thankfully the diaries weren't in the media but they were discussed in court. IIRC I believe the chains were also discussed in court. Oh and your last statement about the girls 'psyche'? LOL that reminds me of AC's statement in court (I heard it coming from his mouth, not in the media) suggests that if the girls are able to get out and about then they evidently weren't harmed. First we only see their public faces, we don't know how much pain they are hiding inside or the scars they are managing to cover. Second their getting out and about is more indicative of their ability to recover than it is a measure of their harm. Well fed? Well if you don't trust the doctors who made statements that they were malnourished, then maybe it would be helpful to you to compare the pic of AB in the hospital to the ones of her more recently. ]
I read where AB ran out carrying a baby. What happened to that story? Later, her child is six years old. I read that neighbors saw them naked in the back yard on dog collars being guarded by 3 men. I guess that' when the story was going to be when all
three brothers were going to be charged. Later, the other two are not involved.
[LOL at her carrying a baby vs. a 6 year old. Perhaps the witness who talked about her carrying the baby is like me. At my vast age (I am over age 6) I call 6 year old babies (Of course I call some 19 year olds babies.) About the two brothers being arrested, I think one was arrested for charges unrelated to the girls. They were both questioned though then released when evidence indicated that they were not involved. In defense of the media though the bros did get on media and discuss the events so they really did happen.]
Here's the problem, I have with obvious inconsistencies to the stories, making it difficult to glean fact from fiction.
[Most stories rely on witness statements and it is a documented fact that witness stories don't always match and sometimes even contradict each other. That explains why sometimes the early reports differ from later ones after the evidence has been analysed.]
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanhol...ia-manipulation-a-definition-and-explanation/
It's been known since OJ that the public has an interest in real life cases.
But, from OJ to Trayvon Martin, each has been fraught with media manipulations
to shape public opinion, distract from some other, political usually, story.
My sig on my posts regards Benjamin Franklin's own cautions of yellow journalism, when HE owned the presses. I try to get people to at least be aware of how the media works, in these type of high profile cases.
If you want to pretend the media is giving you the straight scoop akin to The Gospels, that is your prerogative, I guess.
[I believe most of us on here have seen times when media got parts of it wrong. Of course most of us have seen times when LE got it wrong too. Should we just assume that all of it was wrong and let AC out of prison?]
I'm afraid I've never heard of a plea bargain involving the signing over of a deed.
How convenient. Well, my search of property records and who lived on the street skipped all the homes on the block for some reason.
[In your knowledge of the law do you know where signing the deed over is prohibited? What is important is he signed it (allegedly). ]
It might be a good idea to start your "investigations" into cases with the reports themselves and not just jump on the popular "group think" bandwagon.
It may be 100% straight truth on this case that's been reported.
Or not.
[Sure I would be glad to. Unfortunately LE has this pesky little rule that says if you are not LE and not involved in the investigation you don't have access to the investigative reports. But that brings up the point though, even those reports can be wrong since they contain witness statements and witness statements have been known to contradict each other.]
