Hi Usardog,
Thanks for your response. A few things I want to say in response to your post.
I can completely understand your not being able to believe CA. I agree that much of what she says does not seem plausible (to use your word  ), believable, or even likely.
In the example you give re: the pictures of Jeff and Zach, you are quite right. As in other statements shes made, she comes across as evasive (IMO) by not giving the most straightforward, logical, and honest sounding answer (of which you give a good example.)
Of course, people have the right to believe or disbelieve anyone regardless of whether or not they come across as plausible or honest sounding. But, because GA and, especially, CA often seem less than straightforward, most folks do not believe them.
There are a few reasons I have challenged some posts where people say (Im paraphrasing) Here, or there, is where a misstatement was made and this is the proof its a lie/misstatement:
- Its fine for someone to say: I dont believe X because its not plausible, or its not likely, or it seems evasive, or because I have a gut feeling, or because he/she lied before, etc. etc. I could go on but I wont-lol.
No doubt that person is often correct to believe X is a lie.
- It is not accurate, though, for someone to say: X is a lie/misstatement and heres why, or heres proof, if the proof they give is not logical or based on sound reasoning.
IMO this is especially important here at WS where we are trying to get at the truth behind, or solve, these cases. How good can our sleuthing be if someone can easily pick apart our arguments, facts, and theories? Also, we build fact upon fact. IOW, when trying to solve cases, we sometimes draw conclusions by saying: Okay, if X is a fact, then, logically, it must follow that, Y. What good is what we are building if it is based on faulty reasoning?
Admittedly, speculation is a large part of sleuthing. However, one must be clear, with both himself and others, that he/she is speculating and that his conclusion is not yet proven fact or it loses its value.
Very often (a pet peeve of mine
), I see things accepted as fact when they are not. It goes like this:
- Person 1 posts something with inaccurate or unproven information but they state it as if its a proven fact.
- Person 2 (and maybe 3-18 lol) reads it, doesnt check it out but, rather, assumes its true/accepts it as fact. It becomes part of their thinking and their posts. Now its all over the board.
- Now, even more people accept it as fact due to the sheer volume of people repeating it as if it is true.
- If this continues we arent sleuthing, merely gossiping.
Thank goodness for the mods who work to keep this under control. It happens more often on busy threads like Caylees. IMO, this due to the large number or posters and emotions (understandably) riding high.
I just kind of wanted to tell everyone where Im coming from. Its not me trying to defend the As.
At times, I do wonder if CA isnt in so much cling-desperately-to-KC-denial that she actually believes what she is saying. If thats true, then she wouldnt really be lying. Im not sure about this.
That said, even if I couldnt stand Cindy and was convinced every word that left her mouth was a deliberate lie, I would still comment on or challenge the same posts on this thread in the same way that I did.
P.S. As JBean mentioned earlier, just because the news reports something does mean it is true.
Thanks to anyone who read this far down lol.
