Be careful, SusiQ. I made the same suggestion in a post earlier today and was accused of saying PF was a bad parent, that parents who have their own businesses are bad parents, that PF was not a farrier.
What I did say was that PF was a farrier who would not have taken his baby K with him in the sheds, barns and muck to shoe horses that kick, rear and stamp, especially if he were to hot shod with all the smell and smoke. Instead, he would have left baby K in the comforts of a nice farmhouse where his mother could take care of her.
I never thought such an innocuous post would receive so much push back. My intent was to show K did not just have a relationship with KB or PF but also with PF's mother. That complicates the situation and also provides pressure on who will get custody of the baby, whether KB is alive or dead. We've already seen the quote from KB's family member saying KB could not live at the ranch house with PF because his mother lived there.
There is much more to this than just sharing custody. It has to do with who thinks who belongs to whom, and the ties that bind.
even the reporter's reporting is confusing. So the gist is the neighbor did NOT see his truck there that day......
