BBM: Her statement is a hot mess. The photo she claims to have taken inside the truck and sent to AS? Then why was AS so surprised and upset seeing the video showing him that she lied about leaving the house with Gannon? The story about him cutting his foot in the garage? But the very next day she takes him on a hike? Like I said, this story is a hot mess and then some.
Not to mention, AS knows immediately whether it is or is not true, that TS always marks random passages of time by sending him selfies of the action at home to keep him up to date.
My translation of the word salad: TS knows that her relationship with AS is a lost cause, and that she's dunzo. She is simply trying to amass friends/cheerleaders who will post in her behalf during the trial, after having believed her muddy-the-waters insanities and unlikelihoods.
Yes, in her statement she implies that 'LE' has discovered video evidence using specific technology that proves Gannon got out of the other side of the truck.
Since LE would never share this kind of information with her, it's just her own conclusion which she likely got from following the case on line. Jmo
Yes, and a large part of the reason why I debated not posting anymore on these threads, because again, this is snatching at straws on her part.
I predict that this is because TS is at least natively cunning enough to see/interpret from long public discussions of what "shadows" do and don't prove, that people very much Want to Believe (TM X-Files) in a conspiracy that brings Gannon home alive, and for which a huge part would be mysterious mentions to this "technology" that doesn't exist; which is naturally flattering to people who are positive that they can divine something legitimate from the shadow record. (I mean, what happened to confirmation bias vs. glass-half-full and glass-half-empty types of people?)
There is just nothing about her statement that hangs together. There’s deception in not only what she says, but how she strings it together. Stories have essential parts, with background info for meaningful context re: the event or incident. In her story telling, the background of cute dogs, Legos, flower pots, tools, gates, keys, hamburgers, foot injuries, etc., are her focus, with the critical event (Gannon’s gone) just kinda floating around all the details shes hauling out to sound like she’s telling a story.
I always marvel that these kinds believe they’re making sense.
IMO, this is the "if you can't dazzle them with brilliance then baffle them with BS" tactic.
Did I read TS's newest interview wrong or did she not say in her first one that Gannon walked to his friend's house? Now she is saying someone picked him up from the house? What just happened here?
More Mysterious Conspiracy Hinting Language where she's hoping against hope that someone gives her what she wants, i.e., jumping on a bandwagon tying LH to "disappearing" her own kid.
Which, I mean, she also can't win, because either LH is inattentive and uncaring and TS "basically raised him for 2 years", OR: LH is an individual so desperate to have her hands on GS that she'd arrange for him to be abducted.
Common thread between these above entirely conflicting scenarios: TS hates LH and would love to make her hurt/pay/be responsible for something, anything, doesn't matter what.
Trust me, my best friend throughout most of middle and high school was just such a, whatever we/a court-appointed psychiatrist eventually discovers LS is. I'm well used to gaslighting, ever-shifting goalpost conversations taking a new turn any time I backed said friend into a corner. Combined with the attitude that whenever I was successfully backing her into a corner I was wrong, wrong, wrong in every aspect of logic I used to put her there; instead of being the extremely intelligent and perspicacious individual I in fact am.