If Terri is guilty...why isn't she cracking?

[pittsburghgirl]

I started to tack on a comment about calling Th a psychopath or diagnosing her as a narcissistic personality. I am troubled by the glib way these terms get thrown around without benefit of knowing the person involved or without the training to understand how a person's behavior fits into the wider perspective of psychology or psychiatry. First of all, it's unfair to the person we are diagnosing long-distance, even if that person is a murderer. I think it is possible for some to murder and be neither a psychopath not a narcissistic personality. I think we use these terms in a way that obscures rather than enlightens what is going on in a case.

For example, we don't know the dynamic of the relationship between TH and KH; nor do we know the dynamic between TH and DS. We can't know, for example, the role that rage may play in this case (depending on the Th-KH relationship dynamic) or the role that might be played by an accomplice who makes the unthinkable thinkable. And maybe not all people who do evil things have diagnosable mental problems. Maybe some people are just evil.

And, on the chance (however slim some may find it) that TH is innocent in the disappearance of Kyron, then do we still think she's a psychopath? I am not defending TH, who, if she isn't guilty has sure made herself look that way. I am defending people in general against instant, long distance diagnoses without observation and a case history.

 

[wenwe4]

Thanks to Grandmaj on another thread for providing this link:

Irreconcilable
The Kyron Horman case: An interview with Terri Moulton Horman’s first ex-husband

In the latest developments, Kyron’s father, Kaine Horman, filed for divorce from Terri Moulton Horman on June 28, citing irreconcilable differences. He also took out a restraining order against her under the Family Abuse Prevention Act. A judge has sealed that request."

http://wweek.com/editorial/3634/14214/

This was posted 6/30/10.

 

[wondering1]

LOL, there certainly are plenty of folks who believe TH isn't cooperating because she wont tell where Kyron is. To do that would be confessing to an involvement in his disappearance. 'She wont tell where Kyron is she isn't cooperating'. 'She isn't cooperating, she must be guilty'.

That is an assumption of guilt based upon her refusal to confess.

Maybe for DY, but I haven't seen anyone else assuming that she's guilty because she hasn't confessed by telling where Kyron is. Quite the opposite. I think most of those who think she's guilty do so based on a boatload of other incriminating factors that have been discussed at length. They are not surprised at all that she won't confess under the circumstances, because they have FIRST concluded that she's guilty and would face life in prison or worse if she did confess. Those who wonder why she hasn't confessed, aren't presuming her guilt from it as far as I've heard here.

I'll assume the LOL wasn't directed at me personally

 

[Morag]

I started to tack on a comment about calling Th a psychopath or diagnosing her as a narcissistic personality. I am troubled by the glib way these terms get thrown around without benefit of knowing the person involved or without the training to understand how a person's behavior fits into the wider perspective of psychology or psychiatry. First of all, it's unfair to the person we are diagnosing long-distance, even if that person is a murderer. I think it is possible for some to murder and be neither a psychopath not a narcissistic personality. I think we use these terms in a way that obscures rather than enlightens what is going on in a case.

For example, we don't know the dynamic of the relationship between TH and KH; nor do we know the dynamic between TH and DS. We can't know, for example, the role that rage may play in this case (depending on the Th-KH relationship dynamic) or the role that might be played by an accomplice who makes the unthinkable thinkable. And maybe not all people who do evil things have diagnosable mental problems. Maybe some people are just evil.

And, on the chance (however slim some may find it) that TH is innocent in the disappearance of Kyron, then do we still think she's a psychopath? I am not defending TH, who, if she isn't guilty has sure made herself look that way. I am defending people in general against instant, long distance diagnoses without observation and a case history.

Thank You!!

 

[RubyRed]

Why isn't Terri cracking? TH has lost her home, possibly car, her daughter, her son went elsewhere to live, DY and KH have said some not so nice things about her, LE tried to do a sting on her, and her marriage is over. Revenge! jmo

 

[Jack]

Why would ANYONE confess and give up a chance at freedom?

Because the police can and will use tactics to wear a person down and convince them they are going down for the crime so they may as well make it easier on themselves by confessing. They will question a suspect to the point of exhaustion, lie to them, and convince them they have evidence that proves they did it. Feeling weak, alone, and confused some people do crack and confess when in fact they are not guilty. My personal theory as to why some people do that and others don't goes back to childhood and how some children are raised with overbearing parents who assume the child is guilty of everything and the poor kid doesn't get a chance to defend themselves and are in effect 'trained' to accept guilt just to get through a situation even if they aren't. I find it interesting that those same people could stop participating or get up and leave the questioning but don't because they somehow feel like the police have some sort of authority over them and they bow to that authority. I don't think there has ever been a study on it, would be hard because you wouldn't have any 'known facts' to work with.

I am also one who thinks I wouldn't confess if I weren't guilty, but then I've never been up against a situation like that so I really don't know what I would do. And some people have done it so there has to be a reason.

And before some of you jump all over me for suggesting that police lie and use what seem to be underhanded tactics I would suggest you research it. It is legal and an acceptable tactic for police to lie to a suspect as an investigative tool (most places, perhaps there are places where it is not acceptable).

Sorry for getting a bit off topic, sometimes conversation just leads from one topic to another.

 

[wenwe4]

I started to tack on a comment about calling Th a psychopath or diagnosing her as a narcissistic personality. I am troubled by the glib way these terms get thrown around without benefit of knowing the person involved or without the training to understand how a person's behavior fits into the wider perspective of psychology or psychiatry. First of all, it's unfair to the person we are diagnosing long-distance, even if that person is a murderer. I think it is possible for some to murder and be neither a psychopath not a narcissistic personality. I think we use these terms in a way that obscures rather than enlightens what is going on in a case.

For example, we don't know the dynamic of the relationship between TH and KH; nor do we know the dynamic between TH and DS. We can't know, for example, the role that rage may play in this case (depending on the Th-KH relationship dynamic) or the role that might be played by an accomplice who makes the unthinkable thinkable. And maybe not all people who do evil things have diagnosable mental problems. Maybe some people are just evil.

And, on the chance (however slim some may find it) that TH is innocent in the disappearance of Kyron, then do we still think she's a psychopath? I am not defending TH, who, if she isn't guilty has sure made herself look that way. I am defending people in general against instant, long distance diagnoses without observation and a case history.

To be fair, I may have been "glib" in a previous post about how I viewed the situation, but I did not diagnose her. I did say she demonstrated some patterns that I recognized in others that have been dx w/NPD. I appreciate your concern about the fairness and ethical ramifications of labeling people. I do appreciate that you are attempting to keep a sense of fairness and avoid a "group think" sort of mentality. That is why WS is so great. We have to opportunity to voice our opinions as well as keep us on the main focus (Kyron). Thank you for pointing out my post may be "dangerous" as it is not fair to diagnose. I promise - I was only relating my experiences in a compare and contrast situation. My opinion and I will try to word better but I still enjoy the opportunity to bounce ideas off each other.

 

[Aedrys]

I started to tack on a comment about calling Th a psychopath or diagnosing her as a narcissistic personality. I am troubled by the glib way these terms get thrown around without benefit of knowing the person involved or without the training to understand how a person's behavior fits into the wider perspective of psychology or psychiatry. First of all, it's unfair to the person we are diagnosing long-distance, even if that person is a murderer. I think it is possible for some to murder and be neither a psychopath not a narcissistic personality. I think we use these terms in a way that obscures rather than enlightens what is going on in a case.

For example, we don't know the dynamic of the relationship between TH and KH; nor do we know the dynamic between TH and DS. We can't know, for example, the role that rage may play in this case (depending on the Th-KH relationship dynamic) or the role that might be played by an accomplice who makes the unthinkable thinkable. And maybe not all people who do evil things have diagnosable mental problems. Maybe some people are just evil.

And, on the chance (however slim some may find it) that TH is innocent in the disappearance of Kyron, then do we still think she's a psychopath? I am not defending TH, who, if she isn't guilty has sure made herself look that way. I am defending people in general against instant, long distance diagnoses without observation and a case history.

For me, it's because I've dealt with narcissistic, sociopathic people in my life. And I've followed cases where the defendant is narcissistic/sociopathic. I see parallels here and that's why I think she might be that. But I don't throw those labels around easily either. No, I don't have a degree and can't diagnose her, but honestly, I don't want her to be narcissistic/sociopathic because if she is, poor Kyron might never be found because she'll never crack and tell where he is.

I go on what I know. And from what we do know, and her actions, I am seeing the same characteristics from people I know and cases I've followed of narcissistic and sociopathic people. It's something I can't ignore. I don't think it's fair to say that we just throw those labels around because I know I don't.

Now, it could come out that she's not and I could be wrong, and I accept that. Only a professional can properly diagnose her. But her actions scream to me of someone that is selfish and has conned people into believing she's this poor victim of an over controlling/abusive husband, and who's not afraid to use her body to get what she wants, even soliciting someone to murder her husband. She is dangerous, unbalanced, and looking more and more guilty of hurting a child each day. And she says nothing to defend herself, nothing to find Kyron and end this nightmare she has put herself in, and no concern whatsoever about the two still living biological children that she has.

If she is innocent, I know I'd never be her friend or trust my children around her. I'm glad I'm so far away from her as it is. If she's innocent, she's putting herself, her family, her former friends and friends if she has any left, and her children through hell for no reason. If she's innocent, she's doing everything in her power to indicate she's not and that's just weird to me. But she could be innocent for all I know, and until more solid proof is there, none of us really know if she's innocent or guilty.

I think labels are the last thing she's worrying about right now anyway. She'd rather hide behind her lawyer and let everyone think what they want of her instead of proving her innocence once and for all. She's willing to let her whole world collapse around her instead of letting LE concentrate on someone else if she's not the guilty one. Doesn't look like a selfless victim of media and public scrutiny to me.

But what do I know, I'm not a professional

 

[wondering1]

I started to tack on a comment about calling Th a psychopath or diagnosing her as a narcissistic personality. I am troubled by the glib way these terms get thrown around without benefit of knowing the person involved or without the training to understand how a person's behavior fits into the wider perspective of psychology or psychiatry. First of all, it's unfair to the person we are diagnosing long-distance, even if that person is a murderer. I think it is possible for some to murder and be neither a psychopath not a narcissistic personality. I think we use these terms in a way that obscures rather than enlightens what is going on in a case.

For example, we don't know the dynamic of the relationship between TH and KH; nor do we know the dynamic between TH and DS. We can't know, for example, the role that rage may play in this case (depending on the Th-KH relationship dynamic) or the role that might be played by an accomplice who makes the unthinkable thinkable. And maybe not all people who do evil things have diagnosable mental problems. Maybe some people are just evil.

And, on the chance (however slim some may find it) that TH is innocent in the disappearance of Kyron, then do we still think she's a psychopath? I am not defending TH, who, if she isn't guilty has sure made herself look that way. I am defending people in general against instant, long distance diagnoses without observation and a case history.

I understand your perspective...sort of. But we label people based on limited information all the time (albeit not necessarily publicly and in writing), and have since the beginning of time. It protects us, but not often enough imo, from those who can harm us in one way or another -- physically or emotionally, in big ways and small. I think it would be extremely dangerous if individuals DIDN'T label people to some extent. And for those of us with personal long-term experience with people who exhibit what appear to be similar behaviors, I think it is perfectly fair and valid to comment on it. If I couldn't conclude that someone was a narcissist, for example, without knowing their complete history and a diagnosis -- well, I would almost never be able to conclude that, b/c narcissist's aren't known for their critical self-examination or availing themselves of professional assistance in that regard. And I think most would agree that they can recognize narcissistic behaviors. So what, they just have to pretend they don't notice until there's a formal dx? That makes no sense to me. I posted in another thread a while ago, that people have been identifying narcissists probably for all time, and at least since ancient Greece, but it's only been a formal diagnosis since about 1980. With respect and jmoo

 

[wondering1]

For me, it's because I've dealt with narcissistic, sociopathic people in my life. And I've followed cases where the defendant is narcissistic/sociopathic. I see parallels here and that's why I think she might be that. But I don't throw those labels around easily either. No, I don't have a degree and can't diagnose her, but honestly, I don't want her to be narcissistic/sociopathic because if she is, poor Kyron might never be found because she'll never crack and tell where he is.

I go on what I know. And from what we do know, and her actions, I am seeing the same characteristics from people I know and cases I've followed of narcissistic and sociopathic people. It's something I can't ignore. I don't think it's fair to say that we just throw those labels around because I know I don't.

Now, it could come out that she's not and I could be wrong, and I accept that. Only a professional can properly diagnose her. But her actions scream to me of someone that is selfish and has conned people into believing she's this poor victim of an over controlling/abusive husband, and who's not afraid to use her body to get what she wants, even soliciting someone to murder her husband. She is dangerous, unbalanced, and looking more and more guilty of hurting a child each day. And she says nothing to defend herself, nothing to find Kyron and end this nightmare she has put herself in, and no concern whatsoever about the two still living biological children that she has.

If she is innocent, I know I'd never be her friend or trust my children around her. I'm glad I'm so far away from her as it is. If she's innocent, she's putting herself, her family, her former friends and friends if she has any left, and her children through hell for no reason. If she's innocent, she's doing everything in her power to indicate she's not and that's just weird to me. But she could be innocent for all I know, and until more solid proof is there, none of us really know if she's innocent or guilty. Labels are the last thing she's worrying about right now, I'd say. She'd rather hide behind her lawyer and let everyone think what they want of her instead of proving her innocence once and for all. She's willing to let her whole world collapse around her instead of letting LE concentrate on someone else if she's not the guilty one. Doesn't look like a selfless victim of media and public scrutiny to me.

But what do I know, I'm not a professional

Thank you. You said it much better than I did

 

[Emma Peel]

We share opinions here, and discuss them respectfully, and with superb moderation. No one is diagnosing anyone. Please don't think anyone here is practicing medicine. And please don't withhold your opinion because someone might suggest you are trying to practice diagnostic medicine on a crime board. Because we won't think that you are trying to do that. Really. We won't, we don't. However, we just might challenge your opinion. While respecting your right to have it.

 

[believe09]

The police have put serious pressure on Terri, letting it be known that they think she is responsible for Kyron's disappearance. They've focused on her friends to influence her further & the press has demonised her. She has also lost her daughter, husband & home. There is a lack of evidence in this case & I was initially scepticle that she was involved. However, her behaviour since is starting to convince me. What I can't understand is why she hasn't cracked yet. She must be under enormous strain, I feel that it's just a matter of time before she breaks. After all she's not got much left to lose! Has she got more of a support system than we realise, I thought she hadn't got contact with Dede & other friends now...

I agree with others that there are a few ways to look at this...one might be that she stands to lose far more than just her family if she does crack. Another is that she is immune to the pressure being placed upon her. Another is that she does not believe that the changes to her life are negative changes so what you are interpreting as pressure she may not believe is pressure.

just some observations.

 

[Chablis]

I started to tack on a comment about calling Th a psychopath or diagnosing her as a narcissistic personality. I am troubled by the glib way these terms get thrown around without benefit of knowing the person involved or without the training to understand how a person's behavior fits into the wider perspective of psychology or psychiatry. First of all, it's unfair to the person we are diagnosing long-distance, even if that person is a murderer. I think it is possible for some to murder and be neither a psychopath not a narcissistic personality. I think we use these terms in a way that obscures rather than enlightens what is going on in a case.

For example, we don't know the dynamic of the relationship between TH and KH; nor do we know the dynamic between TH and DS. We can't know, for example, the role that rage may play in this case (depending on the Th-KH relationship dynamic) or the role that might be played by an accomplice who makes the unthinkable thinkable. And maybe not all people who do evil things have diagnosable mental problems. Maybe some people are just evil.

And, on the chance (however slim some may find it) that TH is innocent in the disappearance of Kyron, then do we still think she's a psychopath? I am not defending TH, who, if she isn't guilty has sure made herself look that way. I am defending people in general against instant, long distance diagnoses without observation and a case history.

Even if she had nothing to do with Kyron going missing, which I am sure she did, she tried to have Kaine killed. So, logically, anyone capable of having the nerve to approach someone you hardly know to off your husband, kill your daughters father, is pretty dang crazy, I just dont think theres any getting around that. That is not normal behavior.

 

[wenwe4]

We share opinions here, and discuss them respectfully, and with superb moderation. No one is diagnosing anyone. Please don't think anyone here is practicing medicine. And please don't withhold your opinion because someone might suggest you are trying to practice diagnostic medicine on a crime board. Because we won't think that you are trying to do that. Really. We won't, we don't. However, we just might challenge your opinion. While respecting your right to have it.

TY Emma Peel and others who pointed out that we share opinions here and that is the beauty of this particular board. I am a proud WS'r and I also think that Professional Disagreement is healthy and productive as well. Just saying . . .

 

[Kat010]

I started to tack on a comment about calling Th a psychopath or diagnosing her as a narcissistic personality. I am troubled by the glib way these terms get thrown around without benefit of knowing the person involved or without the training to understand how a person's behavior fits into the wider perspective of psychology or psychiatry. First of all, it's unfair to the person we are diagnosing long-distance, even if that person is a murderer. I think it is possible for some to murder and be neither a psychopath not a narcissistic personality. I think we use these terms in a way that obscures rather than enlightens what is going on in a case.

For example, we don't know the dynamic of the relationship between TH and KH; nor do we know the dynamic between TH and DS. We can't know, for example, the role that rage may play in this case (depending on the Th-KH relationship dynamic) or the role that might be played by an accomplice who makes the unthinkable thinkable. And maybe not all people who do evil things have diagnosable mental problems. Maybe some people are just evil.

And, on the chance (however slim some may find it) that TH is innocent in the disappearance of Kyron, then do we still think she's a psychopath? I am not defending TH, who, if she isn't guilty has sure made herself look that way. I am defending people in general against instant, long distance diagnoses without observation and a case history.

Thank you, thank you. I don't mind in theory discussing, from a layperson's standpoint, the elements of say, a sociopath's personality.

However, no one has yet been diagnosed as such. And if we choose to attach those labels to people who have not yet even been charged with a crime, let alone found guilty, then I want the right to lay down labels on others involved in this mess. Because I think that there are multiple "problem personalities" here.

 

[Kat010]

Even if she had nothing to do with Kyron going missing, which I am sure she did, she tried to have Kaine killed. So, logically, anyone capable of having the nerve to approach someone you hardly know to off your husband, kill your daughters father, is pretty dang crazy, I just dont think theres any getting around that. That is not normal behavior.

She is alleged to have asked someone to kill her husband. And whatever happened, the person she is alleged to have asked did not feel that the incident was important enough to immediately report it to the police.

The latter is a major point for the defense, IMHO.

Most important--alleged.

 

[wenwe4]

Thank you, thank you. I don't mind in theory discussing, from a layperson's standpoint, the elements of say, a sociopath's personality.

However, no one has yet been diagnosed as such. And if we choose to attach those labels to people who have not yet even been charged with a crime, let alone found guilty, then I want the right to lay down labels on others involved in this mess. Because I think that there are multiple "problem personalities" here.

WOW! kinda nasty don't ya think?

 

[Jasmine_xoxo]

If you look back through history and nature the mothering instinct is well-documented. Even in adoptive and surrogate type relationships...
But also as you look back through history (in humans) there are many cases of mothers whose mother-instinct was horribly broken. Whether it's hard-wiring, genetics, circumstances, abuse etc that tipped them that way is a topic for debate.
As mothers we all look at someone capable of turning her back on her young daughter without a fight with suspicion. The words 'over my dead body' come to mind when I think of what it would take to keep me from my children.
If Terri is guilty of harming or disappearing Kyron she has a malfunction in her mother-instinct...IMO.
I mean think about it, who wakes up one day and thinks 'wow I hate my stepson I think I'll make him go missing'? No-one but the most cold and wrong hearted...
Which means (to me) that the baby may have been collateral damage in a bigger picture...(ie the freedom of Terri Moulton)...
Which is the reason Terri isn't cracking if she's guilty - she KNEW and accepted that she may very well lose the baby in order to gain her freedom.
JMHumbleO

ETA* many men turn their backs on their children & this doesn't make them more suspicious (just jerks LOL)...hmmm interesting double standard...

 

[Kat010]

We share opinions here, and discuss them respectfully, and with superb moderation. No one is diagnosing anyone. Please don't think anyone here is practicing medicine. And please don't withhold your opinion because someone might suggest you are trying to practice diagnostic medicine on a crime board. Because we won't think that you are trying to do that. Really. We won't, we don't. However, we just might challenge your opinion. While respecting your right to have it.

Great post, Emma. I think that we are struggling to find that very fine line between stating our opinion about, say, someone being a sociopath, and stating it as fact, which then gets picked up and repeated.

And yes, we do disagree,but with great respect. :woohoo:

 

[Emeralgem]

IIRC.. I do believe some professionals who have been interviewed on several shows I have watched have referred to her as having an antisocial personality disorder with narcissistic sociopathic tendencies....Criteria I have read also point to that being the case..JMHOOTS