I didn't mean to imply that I think detectives should trust everyone.
You know, as an investigation unfolds, it should become more clear both who's a suspect and who isn't.
Of course, for that to happen, interpretations must be accurate or needless to say, they'll find themselves barking up the wrong tree.
Sorry if I implied they should have "always" leveled with her.
Re "still prone to trying to protect him", I'd like to share my interpretations. First, she believed Madeline was abducted and that LE were going the wrong way, therefore wasting time- by focusing on Sterns. 2. As she tried to explain to that detective in her last interview the day Madeline's body was found, what may have been interpreted as making excuses for Sterns was actually her effort to provide insight re Sterns. 3. She wouldn't nor hadn't accepted that it was Sterns in those photos.
She was already looking back and that's the thing; she didn't see anything she'd missd. In other words, it wasn't a oh- now- it- all- makes- sense situation.
I'm sure there are plenty of cases in which victim loved ones look back and can say that but not in this case.
It isn't that I'm ignoring anything, it's that my understanding of it is different than yours.
Thanks, likewise!
Going to try to do paragraph by paragraph so you now what I'm responding to.
First, not necessarily. There are some cases they never know in a family even if they can trust all and some just keep it to the vest entirely all along. Even in a case they might come to knowing it is one, they still need to be sure to all exclusion that the partner, parent, etc. (as here) had no knowledge and wouldn't cover for them, didn't help, didn't have a clue, etc. before they will share facts with them when asked and even then they may well not. It did become clear to them I think in fairly short order he was not the wrong tree but sharing that with JS early on I wouldn't have done either (if them) and she was thinking they had the wrong tree, okay, but because of that and her "we" and all else, they certainly am not going to make it more clear to her what they know, found or think, until totally vetting her.
Second. the first one really answers this. My first response. And she was wrong wasn't she. And no they aren't going to level, they are going to do as they did and vet her intensively and make her explain things if they can. And that's what they did. Hey, they haven't charged her when the majority of the public thinks she should be charged. By the way, I've meant to ask, what does Gray have to say about his thoughts on mom? Probably a bit noncommittal but I'd bet questions some...
Third, I think she can or will look back and see it makes perfect sense if she can lose the need for denial and self preservation and his first. She seems to have lost that for him, but I doubt she's really there and would prefer to believe otherwise but the entire case and no one will let her...
As far as them zoning right in on the "wrong" person when they should have been doing other things too, in her opinion, in the beginning, they were doing other things. They searched near the school, they were verifying the facts of their morning and finding them not to be true, and whereabouts, etc. They were doing exactly what they should have been. Maddie left home for school so they started looking at video of the complex for instance, the dumpster, where shed' been and even if she'd have planned to run away and live in the woods for instance, she may have thrown her laptop. They were starting from where she started that morning, AND searching near the school she was said to be dropped off and more. How is that not what any LE would and should do? and in very short order, he tripped their trigger. JS may not have known that and shoudln't have been told that imo.
I get you were mainly talking from her perspective but I think investigators did exactly as they needed to do and were not only onto him but nailed him in short order and should not of course been leaving with her or sharing all, and they still shouldn't imo to this day.
Imo you give her a lot of leeway and that's fine but even at minimum she sent her child to bed with this man, that just can't be taken away, and missed this for years on end (if even true). She's neglectful and failed to provide protection for her child in her choices and she didn't just do this for one neive year of her life, but for years on end. many a mother has been charged for a lot less seen it many times in cases. BUT they aren't going to do that when he has the huge charges and when that's the primary thing.
I see other cases too though where such isn't charged but I believe it is pending the conviction of the big fish. Audrey Cunningham, dad and grandma could be charged in my opinion. Leilani Simon just convicted, grandma could certainly be charged imo. And here, JS could be imo. With time I could name others I can recall if I think about it. No coffee yet lol but already can name a few.
So let's say she's never charged. What would you think she should do with her life now...? Get married? Have more children? Or learn to adult and get some help seeing what her own problems are? And facing them? Hide out for the rest of her life doing whatever drugs and living off someone? \
I can say one thing with certainty, she isn't a parent that will want to help others, do something in their child's name, commit themselves to it and make a difference.
I guess I should dial back and say I'm not convinced what her knowledge was, if any, but I'm off of square one of thinking she had no signs, never saw anything, ignored things or took the easy route for HER.
Anyhow, no surprise we don't agree entirely of course. And as always, at least we agree on him, that's an easy one.
And I hope she gets her sh*t together but I don't see it in her. She won't ever.
And getting lost of course is a poor 13 year old child of hers molested since a babe. A child now dead. And all took place under her own roof.
My tone is at what I see and not at you, and I love that you always get that. In return at times you make me feel too harsh at her but it's just how I feel and see it.
But we always get it is just differences in our views of it.
Mostly I love that someone is always willing to discuss this one, or any for that matter. Don't see much point in being here otherwise. Lol.
Have a great day I wish you as always!! I go in a bit later today but then work later and tomorrow go in at 11 and work later. At least it's not a 7 after a late close, etc.. My friend is always given 5s. 5a.m. and then they'll throw a night in there and have to be back at 5 the next morning. I've never had earlier than a 7 although last year I THINK I might have worked 'Black Friday starting at 5. In fact pretty sure I did as the doors weren't unlocked for the customers yet when I got there... That's the only time though. In two years.
