Found Deceased MO - Clauddinnea 'Dee Dee' Blancharde, 48, Springfield, 10 June 2015 - #2 *Arrests*

[Lulu14]

snip

That's a rather cavalier approach to the basic concepts of Western jurisprudence and trial by jury.

I believe in the eye for an eye type of justice. Plus, the Western legal system should really have no say in this case, seeing how it failed Gypsy for 24 years.

 

[wfgodot]

I believe in the eye for an eye type of justice. Plus, the Western legal system should really have no say in this case, seeing how it failed Gypsy for 24 years.

Anarchy then: mob rule.

 

[gitana1]

Though this convoluted case would seem to have a clearly identifiable villain, other murderers themselves have had childhoods fraught with horrible personal injustices meted upon them by parents from beyond the nether-regions of hell; will those who find sympathy here for Gypsy because of the perceived bizarre and painful circumstances of her upbringing also in the future carry the same quality of caring for other alleged killers on trial?

Perhaps it doesn't matter. Sadly, circumstances, while they may mitigate, do not negate the act. Murderers must be punished. Such is the law.

Are those murderers murdering their abusers or are they turning on innocent third parties? There is a difference. If Jaycee Dugard at age 23, when she was allowed to go out in public, work at her captor's business, etc., had killed him, would you say she needed to be punished?

How about women who kill their abusers? Same thing? If so, then you're consistent.

I feel all three persons in such scenarios have incredible mitigators. Incredible.

 

[human]

Gitana,
I have posted before that I don't like to compare degrees of abuse but IMO there would be a difference between a grown man molesting a child daily and a mother that in public put her child in a wheelchair and shaved her head.
But I didn't say in my earlier post that negated any abuse that Gypsy may have suffered.What I posted was that I hoped that Gypsy did have some good days with her mother and I think it's okay to hope for that. IMO

I agree that you really can't compare degrees of abuse because there are so many other factors.

I'm sure she did have some happy days. I think it would be naive to assume her life was nothing but unhappiness and misery. Most likely in her younger years, she had quite a lot of fun at times. I have no doubt in my mind that those trips to Disney and wherever else were absolutely delightful for her. But she was still in an abusive, oppressive situation that had to become more unbearable with time, especially as she outgrew that adorable child phase and into her teen years and adulthood.

Other children are running and jumping and having a great time. She is severly ill Gypsy.

 

[human]

What would you have done in Gypsy's shoes? She tried running away. Someone cane in 2009 after a report. Nothing was done.

Tell someone? Did she think she could tell anyone? Why not?

 

[Lilibet]

Are those murderers murdering their abusers or re they turning on innocent third parties? There is a difference. If Jaycee Dugard at age 23, when she was allowed to go out in public, work at her captor's business, etc., had killed him, would you say she needed to be punished?

How about women who kill their abusers? Same thing? If so, then you're consistent.

I feel all three persons in such scenarios have incredible mitigators. Incredible.

I may be missing your point, Gitana, but Jaycee Dugard chose not to kill her captor. If she had killed him in his sleep, or if an abused woman kills her husband in his sleep, yes, there has to be some accountability. If there is an immediate threat of death, self defense comes into play.

There are obviously mitigating circumstances, but there has to be accountability. Otherwise it's a free for all. JMO

 

[gitana1]

I agree. I think it's easy to get tangled up on the fact that this was her mother, who made a big obvious deal of how much she loved her daughter. But I suspect that all that "love" DB so overtly lavished on GB disappeared as soon as their door was closed. Things probably got extremely bad before GB finally found a way out.



I agree. If I were solely in charge of this case (and probably a good thing I'm not because this is NOT an unbiased opinion), I'd sentence her to intensive inpatient therapy followed by intensive outpatient therapy until she was healed enough to move forward in her life. I believe that healing is possible to a degree. The human brain is remarkably plastic and resilient.

I found this interesting in light of this case:



http://www.cbsnews.com/news/qa-why-kids-kill-parents/

I'm with you for the most part. But we differ in that I am not as confident in the ability or all to heal. IMO, Gypsy has an excuse for killing her mother. But I do thik she is dangerously damaged and likely a danger to society. The question is what should happen to someone like that?

 

[kimlynn]

What would you have done in Gypsy's shoes? She tried running away. Someone cane in 2009 after a report. Nothing was done.

Tell someone? Did she think she could tell anyone? Why not?

I don't think enough is known about Gypsy as far as how capable she would be as far as her ability to just walk away.And I don't mean "walk away" in a physical sense.
Also we don't know her ability to communicate her issues. From the few vids I have watched (scams with mom and court) she seems able to communicate very well.
It seems to me that planning and pulling off a murder would be more difficult than if she had walked,which she ended up doing anyway.
At this point we really don't know for a fact why she had her mother killed. I know she must have said it was so she could be with NG. But we only have her word for that,and we are only going to have her word for whatever she wishes to convey from here on out. IMO

 

[gitana1]

I may be missing your point, Gitana, but Jaycee Dugard chose not to kill her captor. If she had killed him in his sleep, or if an abused woman kills her husband in his sleep, yes, there has to be some accountability. If there is an immediate threat of death, self defense comes into play.

There are obviously mitigating circumstances, but there has to be accountability. Otherwise it's a free for all. JMO

I hear you. It's just that I think the mitigating factors justify reducing the charges and possible sentence down to something that results in intense therapy, not years in prison.

And my question remains - had Jaycee killed her captor, as an adult, what do you think should've happened to her?

 

[kimlynn]

This is a very food article and might explain NG a little better.
Someone I love dearly is an aspie and I can see and totally understand how NG ended up where he is!

Im not saying in any way he should not pay for what hes done but Aspies are wired totally different then we are.

http://ownshrink.com/empathy/psychopaths-vs-aspies-who-has-more-empathy/

As I have said before, the difference in the empathy of Psychopaths/Sociopaths and Aspies is that the former is a social predator and the latter is social prey.

ETA in regard to NG and GB








An Aspergers patient will not have the same ability to mimic that the Psychopath does – us aspies are oblivious to social cues unless trained by professionals or ourselves, and we do not have the ability to turn empathy on and off. I know a few highly empathetic Aspies, but they do not actually feel what the person they are empathizing with feels – they can only sense logically that it is a good thing or a bad thing and their emotions respond accordingly, which can be very frustrating to the Aspie.

Very good and informative read. This MAY be what we are dealing with in this case. IMO

 

[pepelepolecat]

I agree that you really can't compare degrees of abuse because there are so many other factors.

I'm sure she did have some happy days. I think it would be naive to assume her life was nothing but unhappiness and misery. Most likely in her younger years, she had quite a lot of fun at times. I have no doubt in my mind that those trips to Disney and wherever else were absolutely delightful for her. But she was still in an abusive, oppressive situation that had to become more unbearable with time, especially as she outgrew that adorable child phase and into her teen years and adulthood.

Other children are running and jumping and having a great time. She is severly ill Gypsy.

Nowhere have I argued that she wasn't abused, neglected and grossly mistreated. But I still don't think her childhood was day after day of unhappiness and misery. Even severely abused children are often able to eke some happiness out of their lives. That doesn't mean they weren't abused or that the occasional joys outweighed the more pressing/oppressive miseries; it simply means their lives had some bright spots.

 

[gitana1]

Remember the case of the little girl adopted by a pedophile from Russia? Who raped her nightly and used her to make child ? Restricted her diet to keep her small and prepubescent? Well he also bought her toys and took her to Disney. So should we say maybe he loved her and it wasn't all bad? If that kid had not been rescued and had instead grown up with him, and then coerced an online boyfriend to have him killed, would there be any sympathy for the abuser? As much need to hold her accountable for his murder and to have her thrown in prison for 50 years or whatever?

I see little difference. The mother here destroyed this child's life. Decimated it. Ruined her kid. Twisted her. Devastated her future. Emotionally amputated all her limbs.

I excuse Gypsy.

Gitana,
I have posted before that I don't like to compare degrees of abuse but IMO there would be a difference between a grown man molesting a child daily and a mother that in public put her child in a wheelchair and shaved her head.
But I didn't say in my earlier post that negated any abuse that Gypsy may have suffered.What I posted was that I hoped that Gypsy did have some good days with her mother and I think it's okay to hope for that. IMO

I'm getting the feeling that many are unaware of what happens in these medical abuse cases. Clearly, much more was done to Gypsy than just shaving her head and confining her to a wheel chair (which is sick enough). She was subjected to various medical procedures. Doctors have been interviewed in the past who worked on her.

Here are a couple cases that may illuminate what these horrible women do and how they do it. One is a classic Munchausen's case and one is more of a malingering case as she defrauded thousands:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-Spears-5-dies-of-salt-poisoning-January-2014

(The other is in the Parking Lot, "Oregon Mother of 8 Arrested for Medical Abuse).

I have been horrified and fascinated by medical abuse cases for years and have read many case histories. The kids who survived past toddler hood had been brainwashed to believe they were sick but also knew certain things abut themselves - that their pain was not what their mothers claimed it was; that they actually could eat or walk- yet they had been so conditioned by their monstrously "loving" mothers to believe they were sick that they obeyed, acted the part and still remained convinced that they were sick despite evidence that they were not. It's like being a cult member - cognitive dissonance.

It is not a coincidence that many of the child victims of this type of abuse who survive, grow up to have Munchausens. Essentially, their mothers have abused them into insanity.

 

[gitana1]

Thank you for saying what I have been struggling to find the words to say. Although I have tremendous sympathy for Gypsy, her circumstances did not give her the legal right to kill her mother. DeeDee did not "deserve" to be killed by her daughter. We have laws to prevent people from carrying out vigilante justice as Gypsy did. She needs to be held accountable, hopefully in a mental institution where she can get therapy. But acquitted by a jury...absolutely not. JMO

"Legal right" and defense or mitigation, can be two different things.

I predict that Gypsy is not going to face anywhere close to the kinds of sentences others have for conspiring with a mate to kill their parents.

Finally, "excuse" and "right" are different things as well. I excuse Gypsy. But she did not have the right to do what she did. Defensible and appropriate are different concepts.

Oh and ETA: Mental health treatment is not "accountability" or punishment and it is not a sentence handed down by a jury. And the only way she would receive such treatment INSTEAD of a prison sentence is if, indeed, she was acquitted by a jury and found not guilty by reason of insanity.

 

[kimlynn]

I'm getting the feeling that many are unaware of what happens in these medical abuse cases. Clearly, much more was done to Gypsy than just shaving her head and confining her to a wheel chair (which is sick enough). She was subjected to various medical procedures. Doctors have been interviewed in the past who worked on her.

Here are a couple cases that may illuminate what these horrible women do and how they do it. One is a classic Munchausen's case and one is more of a malingering case as she defrauded thousands:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-Spears-5-dies-of-salt-poisoning-January-2014

(The other is in the Parking Lot, "Oregon Mother of 8 Arrested for Medical Abuse).

I have been horrified and fascinated by medical abuse cases for years and have read many case histories. The kids who survived past toddler hood had been brainwashed to believe they were sick but also knew certain things abut themselves - that their pain was not what their mothers claimed it was; that they actually could eat or walk- yet they had been so conditioned by their monstrously "loving" mothers to believe they were sick that they obeyed, acted the part and still remained convinced that they were sick despite evidence that they were not. It's like being a cult member - cognitive dissonance.

It is not a coincidence that many of the child victims of this type of abuse who survive, grow up to have Munchausens. Essentially, their mothers have abused them into insanity.

One more quick post and then I have to run for a bit. I am aware of what happens in cases when caregivers pretend an illness of those they 'care' for.
Some of which is horrific.
But in this case I'm not sure we know that is the case with GB.
We don't even know if Gypsy started out with any medical issues that would have put her under the care of a hospital/doctors.
If it turns out that Gypsy was given certain medicines or poisons that made her ill...then yes that would alter my opinion on it being more than a shaved head/wheel chair while in the public eye.IMO
eta So far we only have some stories from family that had lost contact over the yrs. I'm waiting for more detail from the medical records.

 

[gitana1]

One more quick post and then I have to run for a bit. I am aware of what happens in cases when caregivers pretend an illness of those they 'care' for.
Some of which is horrific.
But in this case I'm not sure we know that is the case with GB.
We don't even know if Gypsy started out with any medical issues that would have put her under the care of a hospital/doctors.
If it turns out that Gypsy was given certain medicines or poisons that made her ill...then yes that would alter my opinion on it being more than a shaved head/wheel chair while in the public eye.IMO
eta So far we only have some stories from family that had lost contact over the yrs. I'm waiting for more detail from the medical records.

That's fair.

I feel it is obvious - her stature, missing teeth and the following:
1. The Angel Flight trip which required "documentation from a "legitimate physician".
2. The stays in the Ronald McDonald house which require clearance from a social services worker in the hospital at which she was staying.
3. The write up by Mercy Children's Hospital magazine.
4. The statements by two doctors who treated her, including one who treated her "for years" in New Orleans.
5. The American Cancer Society statement about the case.
http://www.ky3.com/news/local/famil...haved-head-to-support-gypsy/21048998_33638978
http://www.rmhc.org/frequently-asked-questions
http://www.childrensmercy.org/content/uploadedFiles/Treasures_Summer_09.pdf
http://www.news-leader.com/story/news/crime/2015/06/16/pokin-around-house-wheelchair-scam/28837205/
http://fox4kc.com/2015/06/16/invest...rder-investigation-that-has-metro-connection/

Clearly, the kid has been in hospitals for years. But you don't outgrow cancer or muscular dystrophy.

Nevertheless, there's nothing wrong with waiting for more info.

 

[atmosphere]

Wish Dr Phil had gotten ahold of DD. He is blasting through every one of this women's numerous lies one by one.

 

[Sutton]

...I think Gypsy would've be better of choosing anyone over her mother, including this guy! I agree with the posters who state the eventual outcome would've been Gypsy's death, had she not killed her mother first...

...I see little difference. The mother here destroyed this child's life. Decimated it. Ruined her kid. Twisted her. Devastated her future. Emotionally amputated all her limbs.

I excuse Gypsy.

Snipped for space as indicated by ellipses.

I really need to say, RIGHT ON.

I feel no sympathy towards DeeDee's death. Sorry she had such a need for attention/control/money/admiration/whatever that she caused herself and others so much damage.

I'm sorry this was the only way Gypsy could escape. But good for her for escaping (to the degree that she did, you never truly escape that type of childhood, IMO).

I don't follow this thread because many posters feel Gypsy could have escaped differently and that Gypsy was compliant in scamming the community for many years. I disagree so passionately that I can't post constructively. (No disrespect towards posters with other opinions intended.)

 

[bluesneakers]

You are wrong. When abuse happens, it doesn't matter if the victim and the abuser "had some good days" as well. And I really don't see any difference between a pedophile and DD. Personally, I would rather be molested than be in gypsy's shoes.

I agree. Those good days are part of the cycle of abuse.

It's an interesting idea to consider, but without knowing how much physical damage DD did I couldn't say which I would choose, especially if anything she did will have long-term effects.

 

[gitana1]

Snipped for space as indicated by ellipses.

I really need to say, RIGHT ON.

I feel no sympathy towards DeeDee's death. Sorry she had such a need for attention/control/money/admiration/whatever that she caused herself and others so much damage.

I'm sorry this was the only way Gypsy could escape. But good for her for escaping (to the degree that she did, you never truly escape that type of childhood, IMO).

I don't follow this thread because many posters feel Gypsy could have escaped differently and that Gypsy was compliant in scamming the community for many years. I disagree so passionately that I can't post constructively. (No disrespect towards posters with other opinions intended.)

It is easily one of the most horrific cases of abuse I've read about. She was tortured. And it confuses me that people believe an 11 year old or 13 year old can be complicit in her parent's fraud in this manner. It totally defies logic or any understanding of child development. That's like saying, IMO, that the kids in India who had limbs amputated or were blinded so they'd make more money begging, were complicit in what was done to them.

 

[pepelepolecat]

I agree. Those good days are part of the cycle of abuse.

It's an interesting idea to consider, but without knowing how much physical damage DD did I couldn't say which I would choose, especially if anything she did will have long-term effects.

bbm, and yes, yes, yes to that.

A few things clicked for me. Thank you for pointing that out.