To those who are expressing skepticism - I respect that there is a legal requirement to presume that someone is innocent until proven guilty. However, that doesn't mean that those of us not on the jury have to turn off our brains and refuse to make logical conclusions based on evidence presented -- including a logical assessment of what is and isn't credible.
I actually agree with you that there may well be some claims being thrown out that aren't accurate, especially claims coming from assorted neighbors/classmates/relatives. But in order to "reserve judgement" on the fundamental issue of this being a horrific case of abuse, we'd have to presume a massive conspiracy on the part of LE, a medical team, and assorted witnesses, probably including some of the kids. And to what end? There simply isn't any motivation for all of these people to be fabricating evidence wholesale.
So we have:
- LE responding to a 17 year old claiming terrible abuse.
-LE showing up and reportedly finding three children in chains.
-Medical officials reporting that the children were dangerously malnourished and both physically and developmentally well behind age level.
-Continuing reports that the children are confirming and elaborating on the abuse
-Multiple stories from neighbors and classmates that would support the notion that something was very off in the home.
So, I wouldn't say, at this point, that we "know" that all the neighbors stories are true, or even that every specific claim that is being reported as coming from the kids is accurate. But I say again that we do know -- to the extent that we can "know" much of anything we didn't see with our own two eyes -- that there were chained, malnourished, and emotionally stunted children and adults living in that house, because the alternative is to get into conspiracy theory territory.