FL FL - Michelle Parker, 33, Orlando, 17 Nov 2011 - #22

[Grower]

" ... to get out from under that umbrella of suspicion...if they are innocent" what exactly would they need to do?

They would need to start talkin'.

 

[notmissing]

Sharing the twins with Michelle's family would be a nice start... That's what a decent innocent person would do for his children IMO

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

 

[Kamille]

" ... to get out from under that umbrella of suspicion...if they are innocent" what exactly would they need to do?

Co-operating with LE would be another good start. I know what most people would do and it wouldn't be clamming up and hiding behind a lawyer when the questions got tough. They may use that lawyer to make sure that their rights were being observed but they'd work with LE to try to get the suspicion off them. Especially if solving the case is in the best interests of their children.

Unless they were guilty of course. And had no remorse whatsoever. In which case they'd probably do exactly what DSJr is doing.

MOO

 

[Thor]

Sharing the twins with Michelle's family would be a nice start... That's what a decent innocent person would do for his children IMO

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

Especially where kids are involved both interested parties must make good faith efforts to establish that level of productive communication that is the foundation for productive dialogs. In turn, productive dialogs, are the most efficient conduits to resolve issues such as custody arrangements, visitations schedules, etc ... Finger pointing, accusations, talking past one another etc ... are humanly understandable reactions to difficult situations and perhaps make for good drama from a bystander point of view, but they are not effective in dealing with seemingly intractable issues or any issues for that matter. IMO

As it relates to this case in particular, I think that to suggest that any visitations issues is the fault of one party alone is unwarranted IMO, especially when one is not privy of all the circumstances involved here, to further suggest that a particular party is not decent or to even be guilty of a crime not directly related to the issue at hand (a visitation schedule) is something I'm going to choose not to engage on since it would clearly be redundant given the point I've already tried to make just a few lines above.

Speaking of redundancy ... to put it another way ... I think it obvious to anyone that if two parties have a real interest in having at least a workable relationship with one another, then they need to set aside such things as demonizing each other ... insofar that one party is on the side of the Angels and the other on the side of the Demons, (from their selective point of view), and irrespective of what is factual here or there, each undoubtedly will feel emotionally rewarded in taking such a position and possibly rightly so, but generally they will accomplish nothing of positive consequence and actually they are more likely to exacerbate an already difficult situation. IMO

In sum, I do understand (somewhat) that under these circumstances "mending fences" may be unbearably difficult for MP's family, and, if innocent for DS as well, however unless DS is charged and convicted of MP disappearance, some things here are not a matter of choosing ... generally speaking, doing what's right for the children one loves while under incredibly adverse circumstances is a sign of strength, blaming somebody else for what it's not right, even if justifiable, is not. JMO

 

[notmissing]

Especially where kids are involved both interested parties must make good faith efforts to establish that level of productive communication that is the foundation for productive dialogs. In turn, productive dialogs, are the most efficient conduits to resolve issues such as custody arrangements, visitations schedules, etc ... Finger pointing, accusations, talking past one another etc ... are humanly understandable reactions to difficult situations and perhaps make for good drama from a bystander point of view, but they rarely work to resolve issues, if ever. IMO

Speaking of this case in particular, I think that to suggest that any visitations issues is the fault of one party alone is unwarranted IMO, especially when one is not privy of the particular circumstances of the issues involved here, to further suggest that a particular party is not decent or to even being guilty of a crime unrelated to the issues at hand is something I'm going to choose not to engage on since it would clearly be redundant given the point I've already tried to make just few lines above.

Speaking of redundancy ... to put it another way ... I think it obvious to anyone that if two parties have a real interest in having at least a workable relationship with one another, then they need to set aside such things as demonizing each other ... insofar that one party is on the side of the Angels and the other on the side of the Demons, (from their selective point of view), and irrespective of what is factual here or there, each undoubtedly will feel emotionally rewarded but in almost all cases they will accomplishes nothing of real consequence. IMO

K.
A father innocent or not would do this for his children because it isn't about him it's about what's best for his kids. So far dale has done what is best for dale which in my opinion is why he is under that umbrella.
Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

 

[Thor]

K.
A father innocent or not would do this for his children because it isn't about him it's about what's best for his kids. So far dale has done what is best for dale which in my opinion is why he is under that umbrella.
Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

If you care to make me understand, can you please state what DS has not done for his children that you're aware of and how does it relate to his innocence or guilt in relation to MP disappearance? It seems to me that you are stating generalities that I can possibly agree with assuming you can provide specific facts to support your assertions.

 

[sandina]

On the family FB page yesterday they mentioned a new search being organized. Would anyone know where it might be conducted? Happy to hear they are still searching.

 

[HeinekenMan]

I took my kids to meet their teacher on Friday and saw a child wearing a "missing" shirt for Michelle. It had never occurred to me that her children were zoned for my son's school. But I think her own son is too old for elementary school.

 

[Pias]

I took my kids to meet their teacher on Friday and saw a child wearing a "missing" shirt for Michelle. It had never occurred to me that her children were zoned for my son's school. But I think her own son is too old for elementary school.

It is nice to hear of individual stories like yours.

To know that some caring persons out there are still taking their time to get the message out and are effectively doing so as attested to by your observation and commentary, and undoubtedly, the many others impacted by it that crossed that child's path that day and everyday they, and others, wear it.

Bless them all for their continued efforts and support!

 

[Thor]

I went to the MP Facebook page here and the MLP website here but I could not find info on how to get the T-shirts ...

 

[andalso]

I love your posts about you loving my posts and therefore the whole thing is rather lovely, especially considering my loving your original posts as well ... I mean ... not just loving your replies to my lovely posts, but also your posts which are originally lovely .... or something like that ... :silly:

This is hysterical....
:goodpost:

 

[Pias]

I don't know if anyone has heard of Sixth Sense Technology, but it is quite interesting. If you haven't heard of it, you might want to watch this.

http://youtu.be/YrtANPtnhyg

It is really quite something! The video is a little long, with the first several minutes being about development, but I think you may be astounded at what is already possible. It seems Microsoft is already working with the developer to use some of the potentials of this technology, which can be seen by following associated links you will find.

If you watched the video or already have heard of it, could you imagine t-shirts plastered with multiple images of missing persons that one could scan with sixth sense to learn more about the faces they may recognize? An entire t-shirt line of walking billboards could become fashion that makes a real statement, if you will.

But what could we do to affect major change today that is within our grasp?

What about distributing free papers similar to the little nickel for places like beauty salons and emergency rooms, filled with the faces and stories of the missing, where people are always grabbing something to read while they wait? Funded by advertising... That is something that could be done today and could actually be open to an array of unsolved crime types, swaying more towards an America's Most Wanted design, perhaps.

Where would a person feel comfortable getting their hair done, for example, if they knew they had been in a free paper where anyone could have seen them?

What about people grabbing that free paper at the corner store? Now wouldn't that put a real cramp in a wanted criminals lifestyle.

Gas pumps are starting to have screens. What about using this technology at the pump? Not just for Amber Alerts and the missing, but for wanted criminal alerts?

Could you imagine not even being able to go into a corner store or to buy a gallon of gas without risking getting caught cuz your picture is being seen by the guy on a pump near you? You could call it "Possibly Coming Soon To A Pump Near You"

There are likely a variety of things we will soon be able to implement effectively as technology changes if we dare to dream it into reality, and there are those things which are within our grasp to make a reality today.

It isn't about how much money a paper like that or these other things would make. It would likely fair quite well. It is about how much of a difference they might make And speaking for the paper, what business that advertises wouldn't want their name associated with that type of positive impact effort?

 

[Pias]

I went to the MP Facebook page here and the MLP website here but I could not find info on how to get the T-shirts ...

I would ask how to get a t-shirt on the MP Facebook page here and/or the MLP website here

 

[notmissing]

If you care to make me understand, can you please state what DS has not done for his children that you're aware of and how does it relate to his innocence or guilt in relation to MP disappearance? It seems to me that you are stating generalities that I can possibly agree with assuming you can provide specific facts to support your assertions.

I thought I was pretty clear but maybe not so here goes... He does not share the twins with Michelle's family whom have been a major part of their lives until mommy disappeared. It doesn't prove that he is innocent but it shows that he wants what's best for his children. What does he have to lose by doing that, ya know?

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

 

[Thor]

I thought I was pretty clear but maybe not so here goes... He does not share the twins with Michelle's family whom have been a major part of their lives until mommy disappeared. It doesn't prove that he is innocent but it shows that he wants what's best for his children. What does he have to lose by doing that, ya know?

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

Ok, what do you mean "... He does not share the twins with Michelle's family ..."? DS apparently has full custody of his children, therefore your use of the word "sharing" is somewhat ambiguous. For example, I'm not sharing my 11 years old daughter with my mom or her maternal grandparents, they parented their kids and I'm parenting mine and that's how it generally ought to be. What you probably are referring to are the "visitation issues" as expressed by MP's family ... and I have a long post (#516) on this very issue not far above this one which can really be summarized that in order to resolve issues of visitation (as well as others), people ought to stop the finger pointing, accusations and talking past each other and try to communicate productively notwithstanding their own personal feelings (justifiably or not) and for the life of me I can't understand who can disagree with that approach particularly where the children's best interests are the real concern. IMO

Also I'm not entirely clear how one ties together emotionally difficult issues such as visitations problems, especially under these tragic circumstances, with whether or not DS is guilty in the MP disappearance since the two need not to be lumped together, and insofar that they are, I'm further at a loss to understand how any of it can relate to these children's best interests especially considering that they live with their own father. IMO

Lastly, issues of custody and visitation schedules are often very difficult issues and I can write an entire dissertation on that single subject, and I cannot really summarize them in a series of sentences that can very well fit on several bumper stickers; To try to make sense of them requires a great deal of understanding and care and both of which are of paramount importance where children's welfare are the concerns, and one needs not to be a trained professional on such issues to understand this very point ... one can ask any divorced parents to explain the magnitude of such issues ... they probably would know it better then anyone else. IMO

 

[southern_comfort]

I thought I was pretty clear but maybe not so here goes... He does not share the twins with Michelle's family whom have been a major part of their lives until mommy disappeared. It doesn't prove that he is innocent but it shows that he wants what's best for his children. What does he have to lose by doing that, ya know?

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

I have not committed any crimes and I would be extremely hesitant to allow my children to visit with anyone (grandparent or otherwise) if I suspected they might malign or say or do things that were unsupportive of me, my character, etc.

I would consider that to be in their best interest. :twocents:

 

[Pias]

Wouldn't supervised visitations help to insure no slinging of hash? It isn't the adults you can't control here, it is the children, IMO. It is likely possible they hold key information that would be helpful and you can't stop a child from saying what is on their mind. I think THIS is wherein the problem likely lies. Otherwise, I see no real reason to interfere with supervised visits in a controlled environment. To have at least some contact with people that were in your life daily and that you loved and who loved you back, is better than no contact at all. There is no benefit to cutting them off. Dale obviously sees the value of sharing the children with HIS parents. Wasn't it the first place he went after Michelle safely left? To his parents? Within 72 minutes according to the SV of Michelle's arrival and the eyewitnesses who can back up his alibi of having been at his parents house BY 4:30... NOT by 4:43, (which I suspect may be more likely the case, but that's JMO). It wasn't even dark yet. What may have been the rush? I can't say 'off to grandma and grandpas' straight away would be my first choice of what to do with my children when my time with them is so limited. On the other hand, since the time is so limited, Grandma and Grandpa need time with them, too. Hmmm... It seems either side one takes on this issue, a visit with grandparents seems to be in order. Is it possible the problem doesn't lie in the twins seeing grandparents, but rather, in which ones? Though there would seem to be no reasonable explanation for it because Dale is innocent. Right?

 

[Thor]

I have not committed any crimes and I would be extremely hesitant to allow my children to visit with anyone (grandparent or otherwise) if I suspected they might malign or say or do things that were unsupportive of me, my character, etc.

I would consider that to be in their best interest. :twocents:

I agree, I would feel exactly the same way ... I think it's a standard legal condition in any custody arrangements the neither party should directly or indirectly malign the other, question each other's characters and things of that nature, and that is done in recognition that such behavior is not consistent with what is best for the children. JMO

 

[notmissing]

Wouldn't supervised visitations help to insure no slinging of hash? It isn't the adults you can't control here, it is the children, IMO. It is likely possible they hold key information that would be helpful and you can't stop a child from saying what is on their mind. I think THIS is wherein the problem likely lies. Otherwise, I see no real reason to interfere with supervised visits in a controlled environment. To have at least some contact with people that were in your life daily and that you loved and who loved you back, is better than no contact at all. There is no benefit to cutting them off. Dale obviously sees the value of sharing the children with HIS parents. Wasn't it the first place he went after Michelle safely left? To his parents? Within 72 minutes according to the SV of Michelle's arrival and the eyewitnesses who can back up his alibi of having been at his parents house BY 4:30... NOT by 4:43, (which I suspect may be more likely the case, but that's JMO). It wasn't even dark yet. What may have been the rush? I can't say 'off to grandma and grandpas' straight away would be my first choice of what to do with my children when my time with them is so limited. On the other hand, since the time is so limited, Grandma and Grandpa need time with them, too. Hmmm... It seems either side one takes on this issue, a visit with grandparents seems to be in order. Is it possible the problem doesn't lie in the twins seeing grandparents, but rather, in which ones? Though there would seem to be no reasonable explanation for it because Dale is innocent. Right?

Excellent post!! Well said:thumbup:

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

 

[all4justice]

While I can see both sides of the issue re whether Dale should allow the twins to spend time with their maternal grandparents, I have trouble understanding why he would avoid doing whatever necessary to clear his name, if he is truly innocent. Even if, for example, he's concerned about other criminal activity he may have been engaging in during the time Michelle went missing, that can be addressed by simply having an attorney with him while he speaks with LE to ensure his legal rights are protected. Given Dale's lengthy criminal history, he knows his way around an interrogation room. He knows how to protect his rights. The fact that he hasn't cooperated fully to the satisfaction of LE makes him look guilty. (I say to the satisfaction of LE because they still declare him to be their primary suspect.)

I understand the importance of looking at an issue from both sides. We had to do that when I was in college and law school. Most often though, the issues we argued then were based on hypothetical facts not real life situations. Here, we're talking about a beautiful mom of three who has been missing for almost an entire year. No one has seen or heard from her since she left Dale's condo. If Dale had nothing to do with Michelle's disappearance, surely he would have done everything in his power to clear his name so the real culprit could be found if he were innocent. The fact that he hasn't done so is powerful evidence of his guilt, in my opinion. JMO, IMO

Where is Michelle?