CaCO3Girl posted:hsbaseball101 posted:TPM posted:adbono posted:The charges of abuse in this case were levied by a woman that was bitter about losing the custody of her children in a divorce case. Suppose that (after the fact) she wanted to contest that court ruling. Is there more alarming way to get the court's attention than to allege that abuse is taking place on the watch of the custodial parent? No, there is not. That is the most damaging allegation that can be made. However, just because something is alleged doesn't mean it is true. Women don't usually lose custody of their children unless there is documented case of mental illness or substance abuse - or both. It is not out of the question that the charges were concocted as a ploy by an unstable woman to gain custody of her kids. If a woman is demented enough to do such a thing (and I have seen it happen) its not much of a reach to think she would also coach a young child on what to say that would give weight to the charges. These are the things that manipulative people do. It may have appeared to an unbiased party that there was a pretty strong case against the accused - even if it was a case based on lies. Something as emotionally charged as this subject affects the whole family - no matter what the truth is. Maybe the (religious) family was really afraid of what publicity about this story would do to them. Maybe the family made a bad choice of legal counsel. Maybe the attorney they hired wasn't good at arguing a case in front of a jury. Maybe he wanted to settle. Maybe he gave them bad legal advice - and they took it. Maybe the family panicked. Maybe the family took a calculated risk that blew up in their face because of a clerical error. Maybe a 16 year old kid was convinced to fall on the sword for the sake of the family. That is a lot of maybe's. I will give you a couple more - maybe nothing ever happened and maybe the kid actually is innocent. Its as likely as any other speculation. What a shame that would be!
In most states, it's almost impossible for a mother to lose custody of her children. My ex sister in law told the court that the children ( who were very young at the time) were afraid of their father. Proven later when the girls got older that it came out the mother was telling the girls all kinds of things to make them afraid.
People do crazy things and a very unstable individual might just do whatever necessary not to lose their kids.
Don't ever under estimate what a mom will do to keep her children.
The mother doesn't strike me as one who'd be so vindictive. She agreed to give her ex husband primary custody of their daughter twice. There was nothing difficult about their divorce or custody agreement. She considered having primary custody once, but then decided against it a month later. And she wasn't the one who went to the police. The mother first went to her husband (ex) who confronted his brother Luke and then they both had a meeting with their parents. The brother determined that Luke had the opportunity to and did commit a crime. He's the one who reported his own brother to the police, who then decided to charge the kid. The mother has never aggressively pursued charges with police nor has she ever pursued news outlets to get her story out. She never even went to this with her lawyer (who may have been a mandated reporter, and if Luke's lawyer was bad, hers was far worse as she could've had custody from the very beginning AND half of her ex's paycheck). They all came to her and she refused to speak to most of them. Both her and her ex-husband still believe that a crime was committed. The girl apparently doesn't remember much about it now, but her memory was clear at the time. Though the mother has the opinion that Luke should never have been allowed to play baseball, not once did she picked up the phone to dial his school to get him off the team. So I feel like she's the most passive personality in this family in regards to this case.
HA!!!
What an insightful post! Did you get someone to help you with that ? The statements made by hsbaseball101 are his opinions and that's all they are. They are no more (or less) valid than many other opinions about this case. And since you brought it up RJM, nobody is retrying this case in this thread & nobody is professing the innocence of the accused. What has been stated is, that given the circumstances surrounding the accusation & the strange course of action taken by the family, that there is a possibility that no wrongdoing took place. That's all.