I'm open to listening to interviews and reading documents- it's my preference to learn info from the source, of course- but I won't watch Grizzly or Plunder. I'd rather live without the info than support those channels in any way, shape, or form.
Anyway...
Simply put, I think Jenn was exceptionally naive and trusting of Sterns and that Sterns was/is exceptionally devious and manipulative and so I'd expect she'd have difficulty accepting evidence that he'd been molesting Madeline.
I'm not anti to that point with either but I have been at times where I just go away. They were what came up and Grizzly was the first I saw with released interviews and I'm not so anti I am going to not watch them. My thing with her is just her opinion mostly on one case and that's just my personal snit with feeling that way. BOTH pay FOR and get documents and FOIA all sorts of things.
But I get your point and have been that way myself but I also am never someone's out with one strike type of judgment.
And if they have the court things and no one else does, yep, going to watch such.
I don't support either. Never paid to watch anything in my life. Okay, maybe at a movie theater LOL!
But I get ya, you probably mean even to give them a view and I do get that way. But with Grizzly, I took a break, and I don't seek her out but was never so bad I said never again. With Plunder well she's been around far more years and I've been on both sides of the coin there.
Regardless, this is one of the newer cases I am following closely and am not going to miss things that came FROM the case. And yeah, I didn't need PLunder's whole lead in, just wanted to see the interview. Same with Grizzly, first one I saw she was the first with any that I saw, she had to interrupt DURING the interview and I HATE that.
So I get ya.
I'm beyond Jenn being that naive any longer. I did allow for it for a long time. And as always we do not have to agree. There's just getting to be too much. And boy she's been naive through most of her child's 13 years then and never learned or picked up on a thing.
So okay, she was so naive, even when told and shown video or pictures, she can't accept it? And actually worries about HIM and his dad getting him a lawyer? What did sh tell herself, the cops manufactured the things in her home and Stephen's uhm "unit" in the pictures....??????
Sorry but no.
I know you aren't going to agree and no problem.
And I'm not convinced she was involved but I am REALLY starting to WONDER. And by that I mean in the murder and disposal. I'm convinced she was covering and helping lie for him with the we this and many other things.
Whether she will ever be charged or they have enough or even will, no idea.
Her daughter was 13 years old. That's sure a lot of years of Jenn being naive.
A TWIN BED. So uhm that's okay? There she is in a queen or whatever and can't have her daughter with her. In her "master".
I think the burning question here is the why. This molestation went on for years and why did Maddie need to go now? And I mean whether she was involved OR NOT. He was asked to come up. That's another thing. He was stressed, anxious and nervous as heck the day before per his dad. For me, that means he knew what he was going to do to her. Yet he hadn't even been present for there to be problems recently... WTH is going on here?
I do understand anything his parents say that isn't corroborated with LE is what they said but man they were pretty darned forthcoming. And they did not spare him.
If you haven't seen that interview because Plunder has it, I'd say find it if you will not watch it because of that.
But with what they said and with what IS known and putting all together, well...
I can't clear her. No way, shape or form. In fact, I think this may have been a plan when he went up there, and one even possibly with Jenn.
I'm not sold, don't get me wrong, but she is losing points with me not gaining.
And I think LE is playing the long game because they have to.