Charles wrote:
>In article , Rosalie B.
> wrote:
>
>> I couldn't read the newspaper account because it expired by the time I
>> was interested enough to try. But...
>
>I just clicked the link and the article came up.
Well I tried again and got
"Sorry, we can't find that page"
Maybe the article is in your cache or you've got a different link.
>Since you have not read the article the rest of your post is specious.
NO it isn't. What I said applies to ANY disappearance of a person
from anywhere. It is universal. All the weeping and wailing of
mothers whose daughters have disappeared (almost always daughters and
not sons) about how they need closure are useless and probably in most
cases also counter productive.
And in the case of someone falling or jumping or being thrown off a
ship or boat (accidentally or intentionally), once five minutes has
passed, there can be retrieval only by the most extraordinary good
luck. Someone would have to have been there and SEEN it. In which
case, what happened wouldn't be unknown.
Even in cases when the person has been seized by terrorists and held
for some kind of ransom, it probably doesn't do any good to go on TV
and plead and beg. Most of the time those folks are as good as dead.
They can't be released because the kidnappers or terrorists would be
signing their own death warrants and someone who has murdered someone
is also unlikely to 'confess' for the same reason. They certainly
aren't likely to want to do that just so some mother can have 'peace'.
If they were the kind of person who wanted to give someone else's
mother peace, they wouldn't have kidnapped or killed in the first
place.
What did the parents in this case learn from the lawsuit that helped
them? Did they find their daughter? Did they get 'closure'? All
they got was the ability to blame someone else.
grandma Rosalie |