But all that is gonna come anyway. All it takes is folks like us to sleuth like crazy on the main players. The Sherrif and FBI can tell people not to talk, but it's not a legal order. They can do so if they choose.
And to be quite honest, if my child was injured or worse by a perp, you couldn't keep my mouth shut. But that's just me.
Just my opinion.
Mel
I have rarely ever been critical of LE. I was in this case when I thought they stopped the search too soon. I now have to eat my hat.
This LE did a fantastic job. They found Aliahna and solved the case in days. If they advise the family to not talk about certain aspects of the case, I trust them wholeheartedly.
If it were my baby, there would be no way that I would be feeding a hungry public about details of my child's death. To what end? That would be highly personal to me and no one's business but the LE, the DA, the judge, jury and God.
Yes, it would all come out but I wouldn't be helping. The only time I feel family should be out there talking incessantly with the media is when the baby is still missing. When family fails to do that, my hink meter goes haywire.
We care and want to know what happened to Aliahna. The criminal justice system will provide that info to us. But we do not require info until then, info that could harm an investigation and criminal case against a monster, and maybe others. If Alihana was my child or relative, I wouldn't give a you know what about the public's need to know. All I would care about would be making sure the monster received the ultimate justice, and trying not to jump off a bridge so I could be there for the rest of my family. :twocents:
It really upsets me that this article, which contains much inferred speculation about the possible sexual abuse of Aliahna's sisters, contains those girls' photos. Man! I think that is such irresponsible reporting. But thank you for posting. The article, aside from that, was informative.
(responding to the bolded part)
Respectfully, some of us are wondering whether this assertion is actually true (unless by "safe" you mean alive). I myself have an almost automatic urge to say "well, of course they only wanted the best, of course they thought it was safe" but that's only because that's what I want for MY baby and I cannot imagine thinking any other way.
The problem comes in when we try to apply that sentiment, that "of course they thought it was safe" to what we know they actually did. That's where it just falls apart. No, that's where it freaking implodes.
Do any of these sound plausible?
"
I thought it was safe for my three daughters to play with the power saw."
"
I thought it was safe for my three daughters to hitchhike to Cleveland.."
"
I thought it was safe for my three daughters to move in with the strange single man down the street."
Giving people the benefit of the doubt is a noble thing, but not when doing so demands the sacrifice of objective reason. In my opinion, that's where we are at when talking about the motivations of the parents in this case.
Thank you for this. And I think this conversation needs to occur, everywhere, repeatedly, until parents around the country are fully educated about safety, danger and how to ensure the welfare of their children.
Of course here, at Websleuths, we all know how to parent and keep our kids safe. But this is an opportunity, as I see the subject being bantered about on FB and other sites, for people to learn a thing or two.
It doesn't mean Aliahna's family should be crucified at this time. They have made hideous choices and they and their children are paying the ultimate price for that. But, IMO, their negligence needs to be discussed in the very shocked, horrified and disgusted tones in which we have been discussing it. Often and everywhere.
Some parent, somewhere can learn from this. But only if society makes a big enough deal about how seriously Aliahna was failed by those who were supposed to protect her.
