Mother Let Boyfriend Rape Her 14 Month-old daughter

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

IdratherB,

You said ...I will quote you...
" If something was posted tommorow that changed the facts, I would consider that too."


What we read and hear arent facts... they are the "reported/understanding/perception.."

Many of us believe we read and hear facts..which influences us to believe what we hear and read...

Let me qualify, facts as I know them. I am not a forensic investigator or jurer so I don't need to use the strict legal terms of these words. I view a fact as our current perception of the truth as it has been presented.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Guilty till proven innocent, is next to impossible..

You also said..."oh for ch**st sake, if there are any different reasons that chis child died, we will be told eventually,"

-------------------------------------------

Tallolla,

By who?

Nothing here was said by me that I recall.

 

[no more drugs]

Let me qualify, facts as I know them. I am not a forensic investigator or jurer so I don't need to use the strict legal terms of these words. I view a fact as our current perception of the truth as it has been presented.


Nothing here was said by me that I recall.

Dear Id rather B,

We forget that we are all potential jury members, and many of us dont realize the impact of believing evrything we read/hear then airing our opinions (especially in these types of stories where ones guilt or innocence get debated) where opinions of guilt are extremely dangerous.

The jury of public opinion holds more power than many of us consider or realize... With social media in our world, the jury of public opinion is more influencial than ever....

It is more important now (because of social media) that we realize we have all basically been taught to believe what we read, and that law enforcement and the people within investigations, (coroners DA's and police) arent always right in their theories/charges...

We tend to uinderestimate the power of public opinion and the (erroneous) outcomes that we can exacerbate..

I quoted Tallolla (not you )


Talloola said....."oh for ch**st sake, if there are any different reasons that chis child died, we will be told eventually,"

I quoted her and then asked her BY WHO?

and I apoligize as it wasnt clear as to who I had quoted and I couldnt go back in and fix it as it appears you cant edit ....

 

[JLM]

oh for ch**st sake, if there are any different reasons that chis child died, we will be told eventually,

but until any of your imaginative stories become facts, I will still have the initial information

filed in my brain, and I, (as I stated in my earlier post) will gather further information as it becomes

available.

Don't you know how to gather information, file it, gather more, file that, and follow a situation till
its conclusion, its not really difficult at all.

Because I have certain information in my brain, filed, doesn't mean it can't be changed as needed, as
time goes on.
I think that is called open minded thinking.

I don't disbelieve everything I read, or am told, and I don't believe everything I am told, and make
that 'end' of story.

I am a patient person, and I will know what happened, along with everyone else, but until then, I
have the initial information to think about.

Right on, Talloola, one can only act on the information at their disposal, realizing of course it's only information until further evidence bears it out. Forming an opinion on an idea, doesn't require such stringent information as forming an opinion of a person.

 

[taxslave]

Yes. I usually try not to wish misfortune on others, but in this case, I take some solace in the fact that this guy may not be popular with fellow inmates.

I bet he is going to be real popular and sore.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

Dear Id rather B,

We forget that we are all potential jury members, and many of us dont realize the impact of believing evrything we read/hear then airing our opinions (especially in these types of stories where ones guilt or innocence get debated) where opinions of guilt are extremely dangerous.

The jury of public opinion holds more power than many of us consider or realize... With social media in our world, the jury of public opinion is more influencial than ever....

It is more important now (because of social media) that we realize we have all basically been taught to believe what we read, and that law enforcement and the people within investigations, (coroners DA's and police) arent always right in their theories/charges...

We tend to uinderestimate the power of public opinion and the (erroneous) outcomes that we can exacerbate..

I quoted Tallolla (not you )


Talloola said....."oh for ch**st sake, if there are any different reasons that chis child died, we will be told eventually,"

I quoted her and then asked her BY WHO?

and I apoligize as it wasnt clear as to who I had quoted and I couldnt go back in and fix it as it appears you cant edit ....

If I was put on a jury, I would not consider anything but what was presented. But this would be a great way to make sure one would never be as unfortunate as to be placed on a jury.

Once somebody replies I don't think you can edit.

 

[taxslave]

As far as I know they are not allowed to put anyone in general pop, where there is perceived to be a danger to life and limb.

Myth to create more jobs for highly paid government employees.

 

[no more drugs]

If I was put on a jury, I would not consider anything but what was presented. But this would be a great way to make sure one would never be as unfortunate as to be placed on a jury.

Once somebody replies I don't think you can edit.

I dont think its possible to "forget or remove" suspicions against someone and start fresh.. cant expect to hear anything good ..(even if there are good things about these accuseds)

It is a lot harder to prove innocence than to prove guilt... thats why!

What ends up happening in this type of situation (where we hear allegations of heinous crimes) immediatelt we want to think the bad guy is caught and everything that was alleged/charged is the truth... and now with social media many of us end up writing our opinions where the majority are usually guilt (because we believed everything)

 

[Sal]

Sal,

Respectfully, it appears that you are incorrect. You said ..I will quote you ..

"I HIGHLY doubt many here would trust a news items for accuracy although they would use a news item to demonstrate a certain angle"

Sal, clearly the angle that is being discussed is the one where people believe the story to be true.... which is why I brought up the reality that stories arent necessarily true at all.....

Also, I didnt say the entire forum doesnt use critical thinking.. I said the posters that have commented on the thread all had the belief that what they read was the truth... I went on to say that their thinking seems to be a good example of how our society in general thinks... (even the ones who dont vocalize their opinions in a forum..because we were brought up to think that way.. Unless you explore the way you think and why, you wouldnt be aware of it..



SLM, you made my point when you stated .. (I will quote you...)

You said "opinions based on the story assuming it to be correct."

NMD if your purpose is to educate people on critical thinking this is not the story to have chosen. It is an emotionally charged issue. When issues are emotionally charged even the most logical and rational of people use that opportunity to vent and let emotion flow. There is a reason for that; it is because the crime itself is completely devoid of emotion and any human compassion or empathy...so we fill the gap.

My point to you was...there are few to none here that need you to teach them about critical thinking. You know nothing about the posting habits of the people in this thread therefore it invalidates your lecture.

Respectfully you have jumped into an area out of your depth criticizing and finger wagging at people whom you do not know. It just pisses people off to have someone parachute into the forum and a thread and drop a bomb on them about how they are. It is viewed as pretentious at best. While I believe your intentions may be pure your approach invalidates your opinion. You need to get to know us before you can instruct anyone on anything and even then, you should walk softly as perhaps it is you who will learn.

 

[JLM]

NMD if your purpose is to educate people on critical thinking this is not the story to have chosen. It is an emotionally charged issue. When issues are emotionally charged even the most logical and rational of people use that opportunity to vent and let emotion flow. There is a reason for that; it is because the crime itself is completely devoid of emotion and any human compassion or empathy...so we fill the gap.

My point to you was...there are few to none here that need you to teach them about critical thinking. You know nothing about the posting habits of the people in this thread therefore it invalidates your lecture.

Respectfully you have jumped into an area out of your depth criticizing and finger wagging at people whom you do not know. It just pisses people off to have someone parachute into the forum and a thread and drop a bomb on them about how they are. It is viewed as pretentious at best. While I believe your intentions may be pure your approach invalidates your opinion. You need to get to know us before you can instruct anyone on anything and even then, you should walk softly as perhaps it is you who will learn.

- There are "know it alls" in every crowd Sal!

 

[talloola]

IdratherB,

You said ...I will quote you...
" If something was posted tommorow that changed the facts, I would consider that too."


What we read and hear arent facts... they are the "reported/understanding/perception.."

Many of us believe we read and hear facts..which influences us to believe what we hear and read...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Guilty till proven innocent, is next to impossible..

You also said..."oh for ch**st sake, if there are any different reasons that chis child died, we will be told eventually,"

-------------------------------------------

Tallolla,

By who?

um its talloola, and I know what I said.

 

[no more drugs]

NMD if your purpose is to educate people on critical thinking this is not the story to have chosen. It is an emotionally charged issue. When issues are emotionally charged even the most logical and rational of people use that opportunity to vent and let emotion flow. There is a reason for that; it is because the crime itself is completely devoid of emotion and any human compassion or empathy...so we fill the gap.

My point to you was...there are few to none here that need you to teach them about critical thinking. You know nothing about the posting habits of the people in this thread therefore it invalidates your lecture.

Respectfully you have jumped into an area out of your depth criticizing and finger wagging at people whom you do not know. It just pisses people off to have someone parachute into the forum and a thread and drop a bomb on them about how they are. It is viewed as pretentious at best. While I believe your intentions may be pure your approach invalidates your opinion. You need to get to know us before you can instruct anyone on anything and even then, you should walk softly as perhaps it is you who will learn.

Sal,

Emotions becoming involved make my point.. The allegations must be believed for emotions to be ruling one's logic...

There are many parents who were wrongly accused (where many went on to be convicted) and some later exonerated..for hurting their children where it was later discovered that the baby/child died of natural causes. The lucky ones were the ones who got and won their appeals..

Do you think Amanda Knox's mother thought her daughter would ever be accused of such heinous allegations? and then convicted (becuase everone wanted to believe Magnini's crazy story) .... It was the jury of public of opinion that helped in her wrongful conviction who believed everything they heard and read....and found her guilty through the media..

 

[Sal]

Sal,

Emotions becoming involved make my point.. The allegations must be believed for emotions to be ruling one's logic...

There are many parents who were wrongly accused (where many went on to be convicted) and some later exonerated..for hurting their children where it was later discovered that the baby/child died of natural causes. The lucky ones were the ones who got and won their appeals..

Do you think Amanda Knox's mother thought her daughter would ever be accused of such heinous allegations? and then convicted (becuase everone wanted to believe Magnini's crazy story) .... It was the jury of public of opinion that helped in her wrongful conviction who believed everything they heard and read....and found her guilty through the media..

This is not Amanda Knox... you do not get it...SHE TURNED HER BOYFRIEND IN, which is equivalent to CONFESSING. She sacrificed her baby...This baby was raped to death...if there is no emotion here for you other than to wonder if they did it and what is wrong with our forum members then all I can ask is...are you that freaking out of touch with reality? I was trying to be kind but you are on my last effing nerve now...you are beyond obtuse...look the word up and figure out why I used it...I am done, it's like trying to teach trigonometry to a child that can't add yet.

 

[no more drugs]

This is not Amanda Knox... you do not get it...SHE TURNED HER BOYFRIEND IN, which is equivalent to CONFESSING. She sacrificed her baby...This baby was raped to death...if there is no emotion here for you other than to wonder if they did it and what is wrong with our forum members then all I can ask is...are you that freaking out of touch with reality? I was trying to be kind but you are on my last effing nerve now...you are beyond obtuse...look the word up and figure out why I used it...I am done, it's like trying to teach trigonometry to a child that can't add yet.

Sal,

Your comments reflect that you have been totally hooped by the articles in which you read... hook line and sinker...

You have justified that this case is somehow different than Amanda Knox and it is the exact same thing..

Especially where you you talk about the "CONFESSION"..... that is the exact same situation as Amanda (except confessed her boss did it)

Do you know how rampant false confessions are?

Not only are you assuming that the allegation of this confession did in fact occur, but you are also believing that (if this confession was even given at all, that it was done , willingly , properly and not coerced....

So you are saying sometimes we can believe what we read????????

In fact

Trig is is hard...

Learning to think critically is easy.. but not until you admit to yourself that you do it...

You dont need to be academically gifted to stop believing everything you read ...

It seems like you dont admit to yourself that (apparently), you believe that reported allegations and reported "charges" equal guilt...

 

[Mowich]

I've watched Nancy Grace on occasion and I think she is very sincere and takes the right side in any contraversy, but perhaps she's too emotional to be reporting news!

I've watched Nancy but I find her really irritating at times as she frequently interrupts her guests - why ask a question if you don't want to hear the answer? The one that really gets to me is Jane Velaquez-Mitchell - she is sooo over the top, I simply have to laugh.

 

[Sal]

Sal,

Your comments reflect that you have been totally hooped by the articles in which you read... hook line and sinker...

You have justified that this case is somehow different than Amanda Knox and it is the exact same thing..

Especially where you you talk about the "CONFESSION"..... that is the exact same situation as Amanda (except confessed her boss did it)

Do you know how rampant false confessions are?

Not only are you assuming that the allegation of this confession did in fact occur, but you are also believing that (if this confession was even given at all, that it was done , willingly , properly and not coerced....

So you are saying sometimes we can believe what we read????????

In fact

okay you are 100% right...they are all innocent, what was I thinking...it's all a media conspiracy...the cops are to blame. The confessions were beaten out of them, in fact there isn't even a dead baby. As for believing what I am reading I can't believe that you would insensitive enough to choose this particular case to try to "teach us" how stupid we all are. Good luck on the next forum professor.

 

[gerryh]

okay you are 100% right...they are all innocent, what was I thinking...it's all a media conspiracy...the cops are to blame. The confessions were beaten out of them, in fact there isn't even a dead baby. As for believing what I am reading I can't believe that you would insensitive enough to choose this particular case to try to "teach us" how stupid we all are. Good luck on the next forum professor.

There's the asinine reply I was waiting for.....lol


I gather you can't dispute what he is saying.

 

[Sal]

Sal,

Your comments reflect that you have been totally hooped by the articles in which you read... hook line and sinker...

You have justified that this case is somehow different than Amanda Knox and it is the exact same thing..

Especially where you you talk about the "CONFESSION"..... that is the exact same situation as Amanda (except confessed her boss did it)

Do you know how rampant false confessions are?

Not only are you assuming that the allegation of this confession did in fact occur, but you are also believing that (if this confession was even given at all, that it was done , willingly , properly and not coerced....

So you are saying sometimes we can believe what we read????????

In fact

Trig is is hard...

Learning to think critically is easy.. but not until you admit to yourself that you do it...

You dont need to be academically gifted to stop believing everything you read ...

It seems like you dont admit to yourself that (apparently), you believe that reported allegations and reported "charges" equal guilt...

I wrote out a long reply and decided it was too rude. So yeah okay, you are completely right, I am totally hooped by the press and all articles I read...I suck it all up as truth...good luck on your next teaching endeavour professor.

 

[no more drugs]

Sal,

Recently (in Canada) there was a Mr Big Sting that received a lot of publicity.. (transcripts of the trial were tagged in many articles)

Before the trial we heard about 2 teens who had been charged been charge with murder.. A murder did occur and the trial backed that up 100 percent, but the trial also explained that when the 2 teens were interrogated one had a lawyer, and the other didnt.

It turned out that in trial, it was said that Law enforcement interrogated the teen without a lawyer for hours and hours in the all night with no food and no sleep..

They finally got a confession out of the unlawyered accused where it was said that Law enforcement told this teen that the other teen was accusing this unlawyered up teen of having it done it..Its caled playing one against the other... telling the person that they are going down unless they can explain what the other accused did.. this is the reason they say a person should always get a defense lawyer especially if they are innocent..

 

[Sal]

There's the asinine reply I was waiting for.....lol


I gather you can't dispute what he is saying.

that's right gerryh...you are right in the same league as him I knew his stuff sounded familiar...now sweetie I will no longer answer your posts because you are beginning one of your little spins. You have an awesome time playing with yourself there Ger. Night night hon.

 

[Mowich]

Sal,

Recently (in Canada) there was a Mr Big Sting that received a lot of publicity.. (transcripts of the trial were tagged in many articles)

Before the trial we heard about 2 teens who had been charged been charge with murder.. A murder did occur and the trial backed that up 100 percent, but the trial also explained that when the 2 teens were interrogated one had a lawyer, and the other didnt.

It turned out that in trial, it was said that Law enforcement interrogated the teen without a lawyer for hours and hours in the all night with no food and no sleep..

They finally got a confession out of the unlawyered accused where it was said that Law enforcement told this teen that the other teen was accusing this unlawyered up teen of having it done it..Its caled playing one against the other... telling the person that they are going down unless they can explain what the other accused did.. this is the reason they say a person should always get a defense lawyer especially if they are innocent..

:banghead: