Terri Has Moved -- What is Next in the Pressure Cooker

[Donjeta]

Wouldn't it be equally unfounded to say that if the child is given hamburgers or allowed to play in the park it shows that the child is being manipulated as a weapon to strike against her mother? Something trivial would be assigned a malicious diabolical motive with no proof whatsoever.

 

[debs]

Wouldn't it be equally unfounded to say that if the child is given hamburgers or allowed to play in the park it shows that the child is being manipulated as a weapon to strike against her mother? Something trivial would be assigned a malicious diabolical motive with no proof whatsoever.

It was the intent of that message to suggest using the baby in a psychological warfare against her mother, and it was to that end which I addressed that message.

Playing in the park and eating burgers is not malicious or diabolical. Using video of it to make Terri feel badly, is.

 

[Donjeta]

But the psychological warfare is just in the eye of the observer. It is just as easy to assume that a video of her child playing in the park, eating a burger and having a lark would make Terri happy because her child seems to be having a good time and is nourished and it was about time to see her again, even if it's just on video.

 

[debs]

But the psychological warfare is just in the eye of the observer. It is just as easy to assume that a video of her child playing in the park, eating a burger and having a lark would make Terri happy because her child seems to be having a good time and is nourished and it was about time to see her again, even if it's just on video.

I won't belabor the point, but it was in the intent of the message to use the baby to cause psychological stress to Terri Horman by making videos and putting them into the media to show baby K happy and healthy without her mother there in order to force Terri to feel stress which would (hopefully) culminate in Terri confessing to whatever happened to Kyron.

I addressed it then and it should still be there for others to read for themselves. I remain appalled by the notion.

 

[Patty G]

Roseburg 400 miles away..........what I heard on news HLN.
Harder for LE to watch her ........nice, real nce.
Her parents may give her money to stay in Canada????

It is 179 miles (round trip 358) from Portland to Roseburg. HLN doesn't always get things right! :banghead:

 

[kappy50]

Roseburg 400 miles away..........what I heard on news HLN.
Harder for LE to watch her ........nice, real nce.
Her parents may give her money to stay in Canada????

where does Canada come into play here?

 

[human]

I should imagine if they have proof of the MFH, she'd be arrested. The other day, I was talking to my BFF. We exchange txts and talk on the phone and during the work week, email. Each of us has voiced frustration at our Main Squeezes. Each of us has said "I'll give you a million dollars to b!tchslap him into Tuesday" or something along those lines. Each of us has been vociferous about just ending the relationships, because frustration sets in and anger takes hold. Each of us is still with the same main squeeze, each man still healthy and hale. Each man has no doubt voiced similar sentiments regarding each of us.

Saying you want someone dead to end the frustration is not the same as being frustrated enough to make someone die. The first is a focus on ending the frustration and one can assume if she's in an affair with this person, there's frustration in the marital relationship. The second is a focus upon getting rid of the source of the frustration, the person. If there was any proof that Terri's frustration level was enough to turn it into a search to make Kaine die, the police does not have it. Therefore it must remain as a level of saying she wished her frustration to end and this landscaper deciding to put two and ninety together to come up with 4. Just his say so isn't valid enough.

And to continue to accuse her of a murder for hire plot, a diabolical intent, when there is just simply NO PROOF OF SUCH A THING is slanderous.

How would it be slanderous? There are laws for slander and I don't see how it could be said that it's slanderous.

TH would have to prove that it's a lie. The burden of proof would be on her.
She would have to prove that it was done is bad faith and that there are no grounds for such a view.

I say, "Good luck with that."

 

[BeanE]

How would it be slanderous? There are laws for slander and I don't see how it could be said that it's slanderous.

TH would have to prove that it's a lie. The burden of proof would be on her.
She would have to prove that it was done is bad faith and that there are no grounds for such a view.

I say, "Good luck with that."

Actually, it works the exact opposite way - the person who makes the statement has to prove it is true. It's an important distinction to keep in mind when posting on the internet.

 

[newone]

As far as the pressure cooker is concerned, I see a few of areas of 'risk'...
1. Search teams get burnt out
2.Parents of missing child might start melting down too - difficulty coping
3. LE team gets fatigued too

 

[jokie7348]

As far as the pressure cooker is concerned, I see a few of areas of 'risk'...
1. Search teams get burnt out
2.Parents of missing child might start melting down too - difficulty coping
3. LE team gets fatigued too

Agree with you. Also, notice that there are no new news stories today. That worries me.

 

[xin]

Agree with you. Also, notice that there are no new news stories today. That worries me.

Why does that worry you?

 

[newone]

Either we are sailing through the doldrums of the Sargasso Sea and not making much headway OR it is truly the quiet before the storm

 

[Calliope]

Agree with you. Also, notice that there are no new news stories today. That worries me.

No worries. I'm sure we'll soon be subjected to yet another salacious and / or tabloid-esque turn of events that has absolutely nothing to do with locating Kyron.

 

[human]

Actually, it works the exact opposite way - the person who makes the statement has to prove it is true. It's an important distinction to keep in mind when posting on the internet.

from wikipedia

To win damages in a libel case, the plaintiff must first show that the statements were "statements of fact or mixed statements of opinion and fact" and second that these statements were false

 

[RoughlyCollie]

Here is a good article on defamation of character, libel and slander, for people who are not attorneys. Note that state laws differ regarding this type of law, so the article does not pertain to any state in particular.

http://www.attorneys-usa.com/intentional/defamation.html

Also, the burden of proof in civil cases is either preponderance of the evidence or clear and convincing evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt.

The burden of proof is on the plaintiff (the aggrieved party). In a defamation suit, one of the best defenses is that the statements are true, and for that, the burden of proof shifts to the defendant.

 

[For The Kids]

"snipped"

And to continue to accuse her of a murder for hire plot, a diabolical intent, when there is just simply NO PROOF OF SUCH A THING is slanderous.

In all honesty we do not KNOW what evidence if any LE have in regards to this. Desiree seems to have fears in no voice her opinion as to what she believes about this and i assume she knows far more about this than WE do.


IF there is no proof at all regarding this I am curious why she hasnt tried to get access to her daughter.
JMO

 

[BeanE]

from wikipedia

To win damages in a libel case, the plaintiff must first show that the statements were "statements of fact or mixed statements of opinion and fact" and second that these statements were false

This is what I was going by, human:

Truth: Truth is considered to be an "absolute defense" to a defamation action. If the statements made by the defendant are true, a defamation action cannot succeed.

That's from Roughly's linked document. I've seen that same sort of thing over and over regarding libel.

But... IANAL.

 

[captivagrl]

The fact that she hasn't motioned for a change in the visitation order says it all, IMO.
She isn't fighting for her right to spend time with her biological toddler? I can't think of a legal reason for not granting her at least supervised visits.

 

[Aedrys]

I think the pressure cooker is a pot of water simmering now. Seems like things are getting set for a long haul. We'll see if it brings her to a boil this week or next, but it seems to be a slow cooker now.

 

[RoughlyCollie]

How would it be slanderous? There are laws for slander and I don't see how it could be said that it's slanderous.

Actually, if the landscaper lied about the murder for hire plot, that is slanderous. Whether it is actionable slander against the landscaper depends on Oregon law. Even if it is actionable, two very important questions remain: (1) Can the plaintiff afford to pay a lawyer, or will a lawyer take the case on contingency (based on his opinion of the law, as applied to the case), and (2) if the plaintiff wins, will the damages hoped for be sufficient to be worth both the plaintiff's and the lawyer's time, and does the landscaper have the money or assets to pay those damages?

Note that a good, ethical, non-brain-damaged lawyer will not take a case on contingency if he thinks the plaintiff will lose and/OR if he will thinks he will not be fully compensated for the considerable amount of time he will have to put into the case. IOW, many times people have a great case, legally speaking, but the damages they would probably be awarded won't even cover the legal fees unless the defendant has plenty of applicable insurance, so it isn't worth it for the lawyer to take the case on contingency.

People who say they believe the story, or opine that it is true, have not committed slander. People believe all sorts of things that are untrue or which cannot be proved. Therefore, in that context, beliefs are opinions.

For example: Some people believe in ghosts. My son was astonished that all of the kids he knows at his high school hold this belief. He does not believe in ghosts and thinks it is silly to do so. All the kids, including my son, have opinions about ghosts, since neither side can prove the truth of the matter they assert. This is very similar to the situation in which we find ourselves when we discuss Kyron's disappearance.

Another example: Some people believe that the moon landing by American astronauts was a hoax perpetrated by the government. They can have that opinion all they want to, but their beliefs are contrary to mounds of evidence.