seagull65
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2008
- Messages
- 2,667
- Reaction score
- 0
I haven' t seen anyone attempt to offer a medical opinion on Casey, they have offered opinions. Their opinions in this situation will not affect any medical treatment Casey may receive. .
But they are making public statements about KC Anthony's character, trustworthiness, and even strongly implying her guilt in a murder, night after night for weeks, on prime time TV.
If you consider the amount of info a therapist normally has prior to offering a medical opinion/diagnosis you would have to admit that it is usually very limited and skewed by the person presenting in a guarded manner. I'm not advocating making diagnosis via media, just highlighting that I do believe there is enough information for people to have opinions on Casey's psychological profile without being unethical or unprofessional. .
People can definitely have opinions, I was talking about a mental health professional appearing on a prime time TV show repeatedly and saying that KC Anthony is a psychopath and implying heavily that she is lying about her daughter's death and her involvement in it.
There are a million reasons a person may act in a certain way. However, most people tend to base their opinions on the most reliable information. There is absolutely no evidence of kidnappers or that Casey is in fear for Caylee. Her own attorney states that it is in Casey's, not Caylee's, best interest for her not to share information. .
What evidence is there that Caylee is deceased, or that KC harmed her in any way? We'll have to see what the evidence actually turns out to be if/when it's presented in court. What information is actually known by the public or media in this case? Not enough to say yet who is lying or how much or about what. Much less to know anything about the personalities of those people, their motivations, or their feelings. How can you say there is no evidence of kidnappers? What evidence would there be? What evidence does a kidnapper leave behind? Also, what evidence would prove KC's fear?
Whatever may motivate a person to lie, steal or harm others is one thing...their response to such behavior is another. The apparent lack of remorse for these behaviors speaks volumes. The pervasiveness of the behavior does as well. Casey chose to lie about having a job instead of actually finding one. That isn't the behavior of someone who is attempting to take responsibility for herself or her child. This was a conscious decision she made about something well within her control..
We still don't know what type of work she may have been doing currently, whether it took place at Universal or wherever else. She did not work for Universal theme park itself. We don't know yet why she took police there. The nature of her current work could even be why she's not been forthcoming, there could even be an element of blackmail. Not known yet. It appears that she did (presumably unpaid) work for two friends in their party/club events promotion.
It isn't a giant leap or pulling things out of thin air for someone to have the opinion that Casey is a sociopath/psychopath. There are many, many behaviors that may lead someone to that belief. It also isn't far-fetched to think that she harmed her child. That is a very reasonable, logical belief based upon the known facts of the case. Could this belief be wrong? Certainly and evidence presented in the courtroom may show as much. .
Whena child is missing and the mother can't say where her child is that is obviously very alarming evidence that something serious could have happened to the child, I agree with you there. We don't yet know what happened, or who was responsible. The child could be alive (hopefully so). (We don't know the details of the "evidence" yet that supposedly proves the child is deceased. We'll see what it actually turns out to be if/when it's brought to court.)
People need to understand things and will seek out information to make sense of events. This is how we learn. If information comes along that disproves our understanding then we learn some more. Otherwise we'd still believe the world is flat. So I guess my point is that having an opinion based on reason isn't "wrong" although it may be proven wrong. If we were prescribing Casey medication or sentencing her to prison then we would be obligated to make sure we have all the information possible. However, to my knowledge no one here or in the media is doing this.
Well, if someone were prescribing Casey medication or sentencing her to prison I sure would hope they would have all the pertinent information! But I also think before someone (especially an "expert" on a primetime TV show) calls someone a psychopath or suggests they have the capability of murdering, that they would want to wait until they had a whole lot more facts. Personally I would never make such a public statement in the media about anyone until they had been convicted of a crime. Statements that have been made repeatedly that I've seen are, that the person in question is a psychopath, is "coldblooded", is "vicious", that her whole life has been a lie, that she's maliciously used everyone she ever knew, that she is lying about her child's death (as if that is a given) and her involvement, etc. I have even heard the word "evil" used. Who could make statements like that about a person on prime time national TV without first waiting to hear the evidence in court? General statements about psychopathic behavior or lying or stealing, sure, but not specific comments about a person by name, with so few facts known. Surely.