In post # 46 the words in blue are a link ("The reason").
Or perhaps you didn't figure out I was avoiding absolutes, which speaks for itself.You may have noticed I have avoided speaking in absolutes. You clearly didn't figure out why.
My use of terms like "chances are I would,,," should have been a clue.You may have noticed I have avoided speaking in absolutes. You clearly didn't figure out why.
That is liable to happen when your agenda overtakes reading comprehension.Oh, I must have got distracted when you insisted that people who say their unwanted SSA is a disorder are wrong.
.
We should not base generalizations on one case.
The reasons this particular case did not proceed are troubling.
I don't find the use of the word coward enduring and to make an assumption that someone would for no apparent reason is baseless.
Except we don't know if the 19 yo and/or the little brother have been affected. The 19 yo was deemed unreliable to testify. An 8 yo unable to testify. Suspicion appears to fall every bit as much on the accusers as the accused. I suspect this case should not be such public fodder since nobody seems to be able to bring a comprehensive case to court.i read the article in the link. Thank you for posting it. My heart goes out to the 19 year old and his little brother and anyone else who may or may not have been effected.
I said nothing of the sort. You are proving quite adept at wringing false meaning out of others words.Glad to stand corrected that you do not absolutely deny SSA can be a disorder.
.
Yes. Very sad to read that the two boys have suffered so much trauma.i read the article in the link. Thank you for posting it. My heart goes out to the 19 year old and his little brother and anyone else who may or may not have been effected.
It sounds like they have not been heard yet. Perhaps they can write their story one day. It would be therapeutic.
I don't believe that. If you were trying to understand you would ask a question rather than make such a comment.... just trying to understand when you are/are not talking in absolutes.
.
Except we don't know if the 19 yo and/or the little brother have been affected. The 19 yo was deemed unreliable to testify. An 8 yo unable to testify. Suspicion appears to fall every bit as much on the accusers as the accused. I suspect this case should not be such public fodder since nobody seems to be able to bring a comprehensive case to court.
If the 19 yo was determined to not be reliable, that may be a sign he has anti-social personality disorder or borderline personality disorder. In such cases his testifying wouldn't be in the least therapeutic. It would be indulging a perpetrator.Yes. Very sad to read that the two boys have suffered so much trauma.
.
Yes it does seem he has a lot of trauma. We don't know though if it is because of this suspicious older brother and/or foster mother or if there is any validity to the allegations against the father(s) or something else entirely.Hmmmm...i don't know about that. There's a lot of unknown factors it seems. From the link, i'd be concerned with any trauma especially of the 8 yr old. It seemed he is very fragile. And that alone needs to be explored.
Thank you kindly.
Yes it does seem he has a lot of trauma. We don't know though if it is because of this suspicious older brother and/or foster mother or if there is any validity to the allegations against the father(s) or something else entirely.
Hmmmm...i don't know about that. There's a lot of unknown factors it seems. From the link, i'd be concerned with any trauma especially of the 8 yr old. It seemed he is very fragile. And that alone needs to be explored.
Because the older brother was deemed an unreliable witness who had credibility issues in the first trial.I am wondering why you said "suspicious" brother (and foster mother)?