wenwe4
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2008
- Messages
- 9,499
- Reaction score
- 7,359
No one could possibly know whether those kids would have continued to be safe. The outcome could have been exactly the same even if the kids were left with him. Or they might all have disappeared to some other country. Or any number of things might have happened.
What we have to deal with is what actually happened - the man who was given visitation with his children turned around and killed his children. He didn't do it because he never saw them - he was able to do it because he had visitation in the place of his choice.
Therefore, Josh was able to kill his children and himself because the system was too lenient, not because they were too strict. :cow: Just my opinion only.
Those kids are dead at the hand of the own father.
Susan has been missing for years, and Josh was the last one to see her.
Those are facts. Why should anyone dismiss facts?
Because child *advertiser censored* is illegal? And people who keep that stuff on their computers are often a danger to children?
That seems like erring on the side of keeping children safe.
That's a good question, and I hope we get answers. However, it seems that Josh had lots of time when first Utah then Washington gave him the benefit of the doubt. As a suspect, he was very lucky for a long time. Unfortunately, his own psychology caught up with him - but not quickly enough to save those boys.
Nobody knows what he said or did to those children. They seem pretty traumatized about losing their mother. Should Josh get a pass on making their mother disappear? That's the only reason we are still talking about him after all these years (or was he before he practiced murder-suicide).
Well said Thoughtfox!!! Thank you for your calm and straightforward comments. I completely agree.