I have been lurking to catch up on this before posting. I was local to the Jorelys Rivera case which brought me here to WS.
Most of my questions were answered in the earlier threads, most of my ideas posted by others, so I have little to add so far, just 2 things that popped into my mind on the last threads
1. Swabbing people for DNA doesn't necessarily mean that LE has the perp's DNA, it could be a method of judging their reaction and compiling a list of those who refuse, or storing it to compare with hopeful future additional evidence yet to be discovered.
2. Teaching about stranger danger, I see many people mentioned they spare their kids the details. Of course it depends on the child's age and maturity level, but my choice as a parent has been NOT to spare my chidren (preteens) the details. I don't want them to live in fear, but I believe that if one day they are approached, I want it in their memory banks that some people rape and dismember kids. (I am aware we don't know if either of those things happened in this case) because I feel that knowledge will inspire them to do everything in their power to allude the potential abductor. I think movies and sugar coating have some kids thinking that getting kidnapped means being taken to live with another family and worse case scenario is missing their family, and I want mine to know that the danger is far greater.
They are both active girls , not paranoid or fearful, but very aware of their surroundings. For example, some young teens in my neighborhood were hanging out in an empty open for sale house, and my daughter said, "what if a carpet guy or something came in there and found Jane in there? That's dangerous!" so I think my tactic is working... My point is that if kids of a certain age are aware that that van pulling up might contain a sadistic killer, they will react stronger than if they are unaware such horrible things exist.
My thoughts are with the family & community. Hoping for a swift arrest.
Sorry my first post on this case rambled so long
Most of my questions were answered in the earlier threads, most of my ideas posted by others, so I have little to add so far, just 2 things that popped into my mind on the last threads
1. Swabbing people for DNA doesn't necessarily mean that LE has the perp's DNA, it could be a method of judging their reaction and compiling a list of those who refuse, or storing it to compare with hopeful future additional evidence yet to be discovered.
2. Teaching about stranger danger, I see many people mentioned they spare their kids the details. Of course it depends on the child's age and maturity level, but my choice as a parent has been NOT to spare my chidren (preteens) the details. I don't want them to live in fear, but I believe that if one day they are approached, I want it in their memory banks that some people rape and dismember kids. (I am aware we don't know if either of those things happened in this case) because I feel that knowledge will inspire them to do everything in their power to allude the potential abductor. I think movies and sugar coating have some kids thinking that getting kidnapped means being taken to live with another family and worse case scenario is missing their family, and I want mine to know that the danger is far greater.
They are both active girls , not paranoid or fearful, but very aware of their surroundings. For example, some young teens in my neighborhood were hanging out in an empty open for sale house, and my daughter said, "what if a carpet guy or something came in there and found Jane in there? That's dangerous!" so I think my tactic is working... My point is that if kids of a certain age are aware that that van pulling up might contain a sadistic killer, they will react stronger than if they are unaware such horrible things exist.
My thoughts are with the family & community. Hoping for a swift arrest.
Sorry my first post on this case rambled so long