Skip to comments.
Elizabeth Smart Thread, 9/17/02 to ???
Posted on 09/16/2002 11:10:48 PM PDT by Utah Girl
Just thought I would start a new thread.
TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 1,081-1,092 next last
To: varina davis
2. We have no idea at this point whether Elizabeth Smart was a victim of incest. Well, OF COURSE we don't! And not likely to, either.
So you're saying Elizabeth Smart was not abducted but ran away from an incestuous relationship at home. Yes? No?
To: Jolly Green
Hey Jello Green, was that your J. Golden Kimball impression?
Seriously, I was reading an early article today on the case and it was mentioned that the kitchen window screen had not only been cut but that the window itself had been jimmied to the extent that the entire window had to be replaced. Is this an established fact or just rickety journalism?
122
posted on
09/18/2002 6:07:47 PM PDT
by
jo6pac
To: Utah Girl
I thought your long treatment of the smear article was well reasoned. Honestly,though I'm no Mormon, I don't care for this train of thought, that the Smarts' faith has something to do with the child's abduction.
Don't be upset about it. The people that go on about that and imply weird incest things are just looking for excitement, when the case seems just another embittering, disgusting crime.
To: anatolfz
You'll never get a straight answer to your question out of Varina. And if I'd said the thing Scaredkat said about, if Ed were involved, it would maybe explain some things, IMO Varina would have been all over me like white on rice. Scaredkat has that prerogative, however, b/c she has not gotten involved in some of the infighting around here the way I have. And I value Scaredkat's contributions to this discussion; in fact, I value everyone's, including Varina's (except when she gets all teary-eyed about Rick and Angela.)
The very first day this story hit the media--the very first day--on another forum someone said in their opinion, Ed's on-camera crying reminded them of Susan Smith. That thought flashed through my mind, too, the first time I saw Ed on camera.
But as I learned about him and his family, to me they just began to sound like the average suburban family. I still can't see Ed in the role of a killer. Plus, if it was something that happened within the family, how on earth could he keep all those kids--not just the siblings, but the cousins--quiet? Even Ward Weaver couldn't keep his kid quiet, and he is a much more formidable-looking character than Ed Smart. Even Westerfield couldn't keep his own son from taking the stand to refute Westerfield's disgusting allegations that the kiddie porn was the son's. (Which it was not, I think.) Those Smart family women are not downtrodden-looking to me. One of them is a practicing physician. Lois looks educated and well-heeled. Even if for some insane reason she was keeping quiet, figuring turning her husband in wouldn't bring Elizabeth back to life, I don't think she'd take part in a charade of constantly asking people to keep searching.
Ed has no criminal record. He's in his 30's or 40's. Someone who has gotten that far w/o getting in trouble is not likely to start that late. Yes, he could have done something terribly, horribly wrong, but I just don't think he could hide it so well, what with all the people who are always around.
I see no facts at this point that point to Ed. I see some facts which point to Ricci--and I'm by no means even sure of HIS involvement.
To: Devil_Anse
Interesting article, that one posted by jo6pac above. That's the article that mentioned Charles, the article that said when he was awakened at 4 a.m. with the news that Elizabeth was missing, he said he "just thought Elizabeth had gone running."
To: anatolfz
So you're saying Elizabeth Smart was not abducted but ran away from an incestuous relationship at home. Yes? No?How on earth would I know??!!
To: jo6pac
"I just thought she went running," Elizabeth's brother said. "We just started yelling for her. . . . My mom walked down and noticed the screen was cut and she just screamed." Earlier this week, Elizabeth's father acknowledged that he hadn't turned on the home's alarm system that night.I "I grew up in this neighborhood," Edward Smart said. "I was never one for locking doors or windows. I went down and locked all of the doors on the basement and the main floors."
But the man suspected of abducting Elizabeth cut through a screen in the kitchen and pried open the window to crawl in. After taking her at gunpoint from her bed, the kidnapper allowed Elizabeth to put on a pair of white, canvas Polo brand shoes, police said.
Interesting. Sounds like she often went running in pre-dawn hours. Also, the brand of the canvas shoes is different in this earlier story.
To: scaredkat
Cool post, scaredkat. BTW, what happened to the regular Tuesday press conferences by the Smart family? Don't think they had one this week.
To: Devil_Anse
Yes, I like the points you make.
Scaredkat has added some frightening things. I'm afraid I 've never seen the tv treatments because I only watch dumb sci-fi and comedy on tv.
I agree everyone has said sonmething interesting at some time, even Mme Varina.
I'm hoping that continued public scrutiny of cases like this will result in better prevention and more efficient investigation.
To: varina davis
So you're saying Elizabeth Smart was not abducted but ran away from an incestuous relationship at home. Yes? No? How on earth would I know??!!
Yes, I agree with you 100% and without reservation on this, your own admirably frank appreciation of your mastery of this dossier.
I mean, how on Earth would you know? And therefore why would you imply it?
To: anatolfz
I mean, how on Earth would you know? And therefore why would you imply it?This forum is supposedly a place to explore any and all possibilities of this case. Why would anyone wish to just continually parrot one aspect? Particularly when there is absolutely NO evidence to support any specific conclusion.
To: GovernmentShrinker
self-ping
To: Palladin
These folks are on drugs. Or else they're good fantasy writers who enjoy pulling the chains of gullible evangelical Christians.
To: varina davis
The thing is there has to be some kind of relationship between observation and theory. You always make intersting point, but it seems to me best points are made by those who link published, resonably attested facts to an explanation; who try to account for all those things we have seen being revealed. "If they say so-and-so, how can we fit that into a theory", they say. It's less helpful, however, when one adduces a theory which does not answer any question; does not account for the (admittedly limited) things we are told; which in fact relies on events we are yet not told about. My two kopecks, anyway.
To: anatolfz
How on earth would I know?your own admirably frank appreciation of your mastery of this dossier.
LOL!! Told ya you'd never get a straight answer!
To: anatolfz
It's less helpful, however, when one adduces a theory which does not answer any question; does not account for the (admittedly limited) things we are told; which in fact relies on events we are yet not told about.No doubt this is true. However, if one never thinks outside the box (a phrase I detest,but appropriate here), and fails to incorporate possible scenarios which, in fact, are realities in this society, then one is left with nothing but pap and pat formulas.
To: Devil_Anse
Yes, you did. But it's good to have all sorts saying their word on this. I wish I could quote you a good poem by a local poet that goes:
Y a toutes sortes de gens
pis ils connaissent toutes sortes de gens [...]
But I can't remember the rest. He's from Moncton, New Brunswick.
To: GovernmentShrinker
I knew that....but at least it got you to return to these threads! ;)
To: anatolfz
Well, at least give us a translation of the lines you remember! Just think, all the time I've spent in Louisiana, and I don't know a word of French except "lagniappe," "boudin," and "eh labas."
To: Devil_Anse
Ed has no criminal record. He's in his 30's or 40's. Someone who has gotten that far w/o getting in trouble is not likely to start that late.Oh, puhleeze! David Westerfield is 50 years old and had no criminal record...until the night he decided to kidnap Danielle Van Dam.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 1,081-1,092 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson