Spellbound
falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2013
- Messages
- 19,026
- Reaction score
- 37,304
Ok, so we never see eye to eye ever, but what? When did anyone say that the dogs are more important than Joe? As far as I can see, never. But the information about the dogs sure is relevant to this case as it paints a picture about that entire household and whether you like it or not, the dogs were apart of that.
No, the dogs are definitely not more important than little Joe Clyde. But they are part of a possible abusive home life he endured and may be an important clue that, if reported and investigated properly, might have saved little Joe’s life.
how often do we read about abused or murdered children, only to later learn that there was a pattern of abuse of animals by the perpetrator? Often it seems abuse starts with animals and continues with the children. I think it is an important factor, and a sign that should not have been ignored .... or maybe no one was aware of either the abuse toward the dogs or the children? Will we one day learn the father or mother had abused animals even before becoming parents? Who knows right now. But was it known and overlooked? I think there may be a lot more signs that slid past any eyes.
JMO