Dear Prudence
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2009
- Messages
- 2,088
- Reaction score
- 2
Your wife doesn't separate her identity as different and outside of what Casey does. She spent a great deal of time describing to me what kind of mother she was, down to details of her discipline, how she packed a bag for her kids, how she potty trained. Unable to see Casey as a wholly separate person, she wanted to illustrate to me that Casey couldn't have done this, because SHE couldn't have done this. Casey loved her child because SHE loves her children. Admitting , even to herself, that Casey harmed her baby is tantamount in her mind to her having hurt the baby. The no, no, no NOT MY CHILD, THE CHILD I RAISED.... is actually a common phenomenon. Indeed the jury is often instructed if they deem a witness to have a clear bias , such as this, they of course can set aside their testimony. She is in denial and it does appear to be quite an emotional block. That being said...you sir and I know her prism is not factual, all of Casey's lies, all of the evidence, all of the stories utterly make no sense, yet mom regurgitates them, and endorses them with no awareness of how they are just as silly , the second time around and easily disprovable as they were when they came out of Casey's mouth.
I don't think the agent said the above - he may mean it but I don't think he would be that blunt to George. Am I write that this is TWAs translation of what the FBI agent meant?
Or maybe I am wrong. Anyone?
I think you're right. Before those paragraphs, TWA writes "my take on what he said" meaning it's her interpretation of what the FBI agent said.