I just want to be clear ( in my best Obama tone
)
I am not defending this guy. I am trying to stick to the facts and be neutral until I see all the evidence, just like I was a juror.
Just because there are some of us who are not jumping on the murderer bandwagon, Does not mean that we are defending him. We are looking for the details and weighing them both ways and seeing how it fits best at this point.
There is no emotion in this for me and added emotion just clouds the facts IMO.
At this point I see a horrid mistake. I don't see murder. I don't see premeditation. I don't see anything that makes me think he wanted to get rid of his child.
Suppose I helped you to a chair in my garden. You were wearing a new dress you loved, dry clean only. And in less than two minutes time, I blasted you with the garden hose. My excuse..."I forgot in that two minutes that you were sitting there." Those would be ..."the facts."
Suppose I asked to try on a very valuable ring you were wearing. and in less than two minutes time, I got in my car to leave, wearing that ring, and drove away. My Excuse..."I forgot in two minutes time that I had your ring on." Those would be..."the facts."
Suppose I asked if your toddler could accompany mine to an event you disapproved of and you said no. Suppose in less than two minutes time, I had your child in my car driving away against your objections. When confronted, I say..."I forgot in those two minutes that you said no." Those would be...again...the raw facts.
If ALL these things happened...wouldn't most of us start to use logic and common sense to move beyond the facts...to conclusions? Conclusions about the friendship, and whether I could be trusted, and what was deliberate and what was "forgetfulness?"
Because odd "facts" have another meaning when they are cumulative.
In other words...if I hit you and your new dress with a torrent of water, walked out with your ring, and took your child somewhere against your express wishes...could any of us just say...SMM is a wonderful friend. All these facts prove is that SSM...forgets.
This is the point I'm trying to make. We have facts and then we ANALYZE and USE those facts.
There are many strange "facts" in this case. We can just leave them alone and say we are waiting for...oh, a note from Mom..."Don't forget to leave the Baby in the car for more than 4 hours like it says on the WEB!"
That is not going to happen. In these hot car deaths, there are not going to be any "smoking gun."
But we can sit and wait for some smoking gun...or...we can use logic, common sense, and probability to knit those odd facts together. To see NO cause,nothing, NADA, even with what we now know...requires defying the probability of all these strange events having a benign explanation.
That Baby deserves our best effort, not to wait for some smoking gun...but use our good minds, our intellect, our reasoning capabilities and our common sense.
No Baby should be forgotten after your hands were on his little body...in just the two minutes it took to turn away from Daycare and head to work. No Baby should be that forgettable.
But I respect your right to believe otherwise....and it adds to our deliberations to make us focus on why WE believe otherwise.
