And, at the end of the day, is that really justice, if the people most affected are in a worse position than before? Not to my eyes.Matt_LRR said:
Mother Finds Kidnapped Children On Facebook
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
For once, I won't complain about the word farmville in a news story without the words "'s creator should be kicked in the balls".
OT: See, the internet is not completely heartless, it can be used for good sometimes.
OT: See, the internet is not completely heartless, it can be used for good sometimes.
When you consider the way most kidnappings go, the fact that the kids had any kind of internet access whatsoever shows that they weren't abused an locked in the basement. Really, it was an incredibly selfish move on the behalf of the mother that destroyed a clearly competent family.Nukey said:
Dear lord this thread is appalling.
Just try to imagine you are the mother. Your children, your own flesh and blood, were taken from you at such a young age that you never even got to spend much time with them. You searched a long time for them, but nothing ever came from it. Then you suddenly find one of them. Would you not be overjoyed? Would you not want to see the children that were stolen from you 15 years ago? I would.
Yes, it will be hard for the two children to build a relationship with their mother and adapt to a new home. Maybe in the end it would have been better to leave them with the father. Maybe the father was justified in trying to run away with the kids, and the mother is the irresponsible parent. But none of that has been revealed yet. You don't know why the father left with the children. So I don't understand why people are calling this women a selfish ***** when all she wanted to do was get her children back, which is a perfectly normal thing for a mother to want.
Just try to imagine you are the mother. Your children, your own flesh and blood, were taken from you at such a young age that you never even got to spend much time with them. You searched a long time for them, but nothing ever came from it. Then you suddenly find one of them. Would you not be overjoyed? Would you not want to see the children that were stolen from you 15 years ago? I would.
Yes, it will be hard for the two children to build a relationship with their mother and adapt to a new home. Maybe in the end it would have been better to leave them with the father. Maybe the father was justified in trying to run away with the kids, and the mother is the irresponsible parent. But none of that has been revealed yet. You don't know why the father left with the children. So I don't understand why people are calling this women a selfish ***** when all she wanted to do was get her children back, which is a perfectly normal thing for a mother to want.
Kidnapping your children isn't a sign of a loving dad (a real loving dad would work it out with the mother to the best interest of the children, not resort to being a criminal), it's a sign of a controlling personality and it's very vicious. 'You want the kids? Well you can't have them! HA! You'll never see the children you love ever again! What, their relationship with their mother is important too? Pffft, they're mine now!' Seriously, that's not really justifiable, even if he does love them, and just because he (possibly) let them use the internet doesn't mean that he was a good father. Chances are the kids could have Stockhom Syndrome.
Edited to add: Haven't you ever heard of Carol Smith? She was horribly abused for seven years, but her kidnapper would let her go to church, even use the phone to talk to her family.
Edited to add: Haven't you ever heard of Carol Smith? She was horribly abused for seven years, but her kidnapper would let her go to church, even use the phone to talk to her family.
how does he sound crazy,we have a pretty warped legal system on stuff like this. How do we know the mother wasn't fit to care for children and the father was. maybe somehow she won custody and he knew she was going to be cruel to them. so he wanted to protect them from her and move to Florida. not all mothers are always that loving to their children you know, in my local newspaper i read someone in a trailer park drowned her own kids for being bad. now how do we know this womens entire intension was to ruin his life and she didn't really want the kids.Enemy Of The State said:
searching for them for 15 years, lol. if she was that dedicated she would have found them without facebook, if she was that dedicated she wouldn't be goofing off in farmville. she most likely ruined three peoples lives with the help of facebok, how is facebook helping anyone other than her and her desire for revenge.
we really need more info on the mom and dad.
So it's okay to commit a horrible crime, as long as nobody finds out for 15 years? Not sure what you're trying to prove here.Nukey said:
are... are you serious?
Kidnapped: as in, someone took them from her. and now you're saying that she is a bad mother, just because some ignorant, selfish fuck was hiding them from her??? You must have a very jaded view of the world if that's what you think.
Not only can you not possibly know what their lives are going to be like, but you also assume that not knowing that their father was a psychopathic kidnapper is better for them?
And you accuse me of ignorance.
yes, I have, and yes, I do. And if I found out that my mother went nuts and kidnapped me as a child, I would make absolutely sure that my younger siblings were taken away from her, and that she was made to rot in prison. Moving away is a small price to pay compared to not knowing your parent/s is/are batshit insane.
And whose fault is that? Whose fault is all of that?
Look, I understand what you are getting at, I really do. But your perception of the situation is exactly backwards. So, we are supposed to blame the victim, rather then the perpetrator? That's like saying "Well, if she wasn't so pretty and fragile, she wouldn't have gotten raped, now would she?"
Whatever. I said it before and I will say it again: I really have no idea what you are trying to prove.
Exactly! How could any of you possibly read an article about a mother being reunited with her long lost children, and think that the problem is the mother?Internet Kraken said:
1. Actually, the legal system tends to give at least joint custody, simply because people believe in that stereotype and so try avoid, to the detriment of the child. There's a lot of cases in which a father is abusing his children but is given sole or joint custody. There's one case when a father sexually abusing his (I think) 3, 4 year old daughter was written off as 'merely kinky' and she was forced to visit him despite the fact that she screamed whenever she had to stay with him.Maverick Siragusa said:
2. If he did want to protect them, there are far better ways to do so than being a criminal.
3. If she never wanted the children why would she keep looking? Why contact the girl? Why fight over custody?
4. Maybe she simply couldn't find them? It's not as easy as you think to locate a missing person, else every kidnapped person would have been found and safely returned.
5. Shockingly enough, even parents of kidnapped children must continue with their lives. What was she meant to do, spend every waking minute clutching their old toys and pining?
6. If she never wanted the children how would she be getting revenge by taking them back? Surely him taking them in the first place would have been a godsend.
Seriously, the chances of a father being awarded custody, even if he's clearly more capable of taking care of the kids, isn't all that good. A friend of mine from middleschool wanted to stay with her dad during her parents' divorce, but she ended up living with her mom up until her eighteenth birthday, when she moved back to Florida to live with her dad. This is inspite of the fact that her mom had never even had a job.
Before making a judgment call, you really should wait for more information.
Before making a judgment call, you really should wait for more information.
Except the father is going to jail. Sure, she can legally leave if she wants, but if she doesn't want to live on the street and starve, she may not have any other reasonable options.gelles said:
What's with so many people saying that taking the children away from the father is a bad thing? Apparently, if you kidnap a kid when they're really young, and keep them for a while, they have no right to take them away from you!
Honestly, do you think the children would have been better off being fully raised by a kidnapper?
Honestly, do you think the children would have been better off being fully raised by a kidnapper?
See, these are all very reasonable and rational points against the father. Certianly more reasonable then "Well, she is a selfish ***** because, well, I think that there is a big chance that she was an abusive prostitute who somehow escaped the notice of the judge so the father had no choice but to kidnap them. Yeah, that makes sense."SarahSyna said:
Okay, so that was a bit juvenile of me, sort of a rant really, but the point stands.
I, frankly, am amazed and appalled that so many people are ready and willing to jump on this stupid "blame the mother" bandwagon. I mean, you have absolutely no information off which to assume that mom was "abusing" the kids, or that they lived in a "needle filled household" or that the father was some kind of hero for committing one of the worst kinds of crimes any person can commit. I just... I'm flabbergasted by you all.
Unless one of the parents is going to move a good distance away, and their financial situation makes it unreasonable to force visits. This comes up fairly often, because most divorce lawyers will advice a move if the Mother wants full custody.SarahSyna said:
did you miss the word kidnapped? It doesn't matter if they are closer to thier dad, he is obviously an a$$hole, a gigantic one. I would rather have to rebuild a relationship with a woman who kept searching for me for 15 years, than keep a relationship with a man who kidnapped me rather than going to court for custody.cainx10a said:
All of those replies about whether or not this was for the best amuse me quite a bit. Of course, we know absolutely nothing about this case, and the mother could just as likely have been a drug abusing psychopath as a loving parent. Still, I can't imagine this resulting in a happy end. Even if the father had indeed treated the children horribly, the mother hasn't seen them in 15 years. Catching up can't be fun when the first words upon meeting are something along the lines of "hey, you probably don't remember me, but I'm your mom"
Bah, previous post screwed up.
Considering he would've gotten away with it if not for a stroke of bad luck with facebook, that's debatable. Unless you're arguing morally better, in which case, I simply have the saw the law is not infallible and makes mistakes.SarahSyna said:
As a child who suffered through a bad divorce, and has seen others, I think there's a tendency for women to view it as a war. The kids are something to be denied to their enemy. My mom seemed very nice and supportive and told me all about how horrible a person my dad was(And being that my dad worked a lot and I didn't really know him, I believed quite a bit of this), but when I said I wanted to stay with him because I knew she couldn't afford to have me around and I didn't want to be a burden, she beat me. Regardless of this, she tried to claim custody of me again when I was sixteen.SarahSyna said:
Because she'd be denying them to him? Revenge isn't about putting yourself in a better position, it's about putting someone else in a worse one.SarahSyna said:
1) Yes, I'm serious.Liquid Paradox said:
2) While the father may have overacted, I happen to be optimistic towards him, mainly becuase I haven't heard of any abuse coming from this case yet. Meanwhile, we have a mom who spent fifteen years searching, and finds her kids through facebook when they're practically adults; any competent person wouldn't have needed that much time and would've been able to find their kids before they're ready to ship off to college.
3) Just becuase I happen to look at the situation differently, that doesn't mean I have a "jaded view", it means I'm simply means I'm looking at it in a different perspective.
1) First of all, you have no damn prove that he was psychopath, so quit trying to make the dad out like some kind of monster and the mom like some damsel in distress.
2) You don't know what their lives are going to be like, either.
3) Yes. I'm sure they were alot happier before they knew that their dad kidnapped them.
4) "Ignorance is bliss" is an expression, meaning that some times not knowing something is more pleasant than knowing. I wasn't calling you ignorant.
Now, how do you know that dad was crazy, again?
Seems like the moms.
You do realize that the victims are the kids, right?
And that kids are being separated from the dad they've known all their life, right?
And that we aren't sure the mom even knows what these kids are like and how they might be fell towards the women who just separated them from their dad, right?
I get what you're saying, but your perception is backwards.
EDIT:
And you have no proof that the mom was doing the right thing.
1. Just because the law isn't infallible doesn't mean that he had to resort to kidnapping the children. There's appeals and all sorts of things, no need to resort to criminality from the get-go. The fact that he told her that she would never see them again makes it look a lot less lovingly motivated as well, since that seems quite like a taunt.infinity_turtles said:
2. Well, I'm sorry that you suffered like that, and I do hope that life has treated you well since.
However, that seems less like 'women' and more like 'people with personality disorders'. No well-adjusted human being acts like that. Plus, that behaviour seems more fitting of the father in the story, since he's the one who went to the extreme of kidnapping and therefore is more likely to be the one that was all 'You can't have them!' than she is.
3. If she's that unstable to spend fifteen years looking for unwanted children just to slight her husband then I'm fairly certain he would have gotten the kids to begin with. As a general rule courts don't let crazy people take care of children and crazy that big usually has signs.
We may never know all the facts. Plenty of kidnapping charges get filed for such actions, and I have yet to hear of many of them being dropped because the plaintiff was being a dilhole. The law is blind, driving us all over a cliff.Matt_LRR said: