MassGuy
The Monsters Aren’t The Ones Beneath The Bed
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2018
- Messages
- 25,681
- Reaction score
- 606,074
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It almost seemed like the kind of presser they hold just to get clips in the news. Maybe to get people to put pressure on anyone involved/with knowledge to say more? JMO, etc.My opinion: they are waiting for those involved to speak out against one another.
I did think her using past tense and saying interview in the singular, said much.well said regarding an attorney. IMO, Chief H was evasive but I have a few theories why as many do.
Chief H did say this: the mother has cooperated, she did give us an interview (not plural and used past tense).
IMO, in a case such as this, its not a one and done interaction with mom/LE who is attempting to resolve the death of her child. (and sexual abuse). it should be ongoing as information comes to them that may provoke additional questions that need answers. I apologize if I am picking words apart, but the manner in which Chief H answered the question, leaves it open to interpretation...IOW, she did not say anything about JS being currently front and center assisting LE.
she did say, "our detectives are dedicated to pursuing every lead, uncovering every fact and holding those responsible accountable". she also said they are 'working with the state's attorney's office to ensure every piece of evidence is revealed and uncovered'.
I wish they asked that, and if it was true that mom's story didn't line up.I did think her using past tense and saying interview in the singular, said much.
I wish she was asked when any detective last spoke with mum.
I almost feel like the reporters (having well over 24 hrs to prepare) were expecting much bigger news and were stunned by the lack of info… which caused them to use less complex questions and 1/3 of those were just a waste.I wish they asked that, and if it was true that mom's story didn't line up.
Sadly, I think you're right. The consensus seemed to be that major information was coming, to potentially include murder charges. It's shocking that the chief there had no ability to read the room in that regard, and didn't do anything ahead of time to temper expectations.I almost feel like the reporters (having well over 24 hrs to prepare) were expecting much bigger news and were stunned by the lack of info… which caused them to use less complex questions and 1/3 of those were just a waste.
if mom says she had no idea he was sexually abusing her daughter, evidence needs to be obtained substantiating she did know. if no evidence, what then? possibly others who did not report suspicions but did alert her and she too did nothing. what then...its suspicions not acted on. which Chief H made a point to bring up, suspicions shouldnt be ignored.I wish they asked that, and if it was true that mom's story didn't line up.
sorry, duplicate response.I wish they asked that, and if it was true that mom's story didn't line up.
100%.Sadly, I think you're right. The consensus seemed to be that major information was coming, to potentially include murder charges. It's shocking that the chief there had no ability to read the room in that regard, and didn't do anything ahead of time to temper expectations.
Could it be that they were actually going to give some major information and something happened ,maybe a legal intervention ,which prevented them from divulging it.Sadly, I think you're right. The consensus seemed to be that major information was coming, to potentially include murder charges. It's shocking that the chief there had no ability to read the room in that regard, and didn't do anything ahead of time to temper expectations.
.Sadly, I think you're right. The consensus seemed to be that major information was coming, to potentially include murder charges. It's shocking that the chief there had no ability to read the room in that regard, and didn't do anything ahead of time to temper expectations.
Hell, I hope so. At least that would make that make sense.Could it be that they were actually going to give some major information and something happened ,maybe a legal intervention ,which prevented them from diverging it.
Drugged at or near the time of death, but also for signs of chronic drugging. Perhaps her hair will have its own harrowing story to tell.
When Chief Holland spoke at the end about reporting abuse to LE, I wondered if she was also still speaking in reference to this case, and not just generally.Also adding grandma seems to have strong opinions. I would NOT be surprised if the family turns on eachother. If it comes out that people saw signs and told JS and she helped him cover this up… it’s pretty bad
if mom says she had no idea he was sexually abusing her daughter, evidence needs to be obtained substantiating she did know. if no evidence, what then? possibly others who did not report suspicions but did alert her and she too did nothing. what then...its suspicions not acted on. which Chief H made a point to bring up, suspicions shouldnt be ignored.
then there is the second huge component, her death. was mom involved directly with her death? if not, did mom assist him in a coverup? they require evidence of that. do they have it? LE is not saying.
heavy sigh...just a wait and see if a case is truly being compiled against any other person for the abuse she suffered and ultimately her death.
I wondered if they were using that to scare someone else into coming forward - but not necessarily *her* family. I wondered if they're looking at people close to SS (friends / family / gross associates)....It almost seemed like the kind of presser they hold just to get clips in the news. Maybe to get people to put pressure on anyone involved/with knowledge to say more? JMO, etc.
I wondered that, except she read from a pre-written scriptCould it be that they were actually going to give some major information and something happened ,maybe a legal intervention ,which prevented them from divulging it.