It may well be another Susan Smith case. However...
Fact is? Fire can spread very, very fast. Particularly in older homes that were built before fire retardant materials were developed. A house can go from zero to full on conflageration in a blink of an eye. Fire is very unpredictable, how it behaves is not always predictable. Furthermore, people who die in fires usually die of smoke inhalation, not of burns. Fortunately. The smoke can get you very, very quickly, particularly if the fire is burning toxic materials. Sometimes people go to sleep in a perfectly safe house and they never wake up because a fire started and the smoked killed them before they were even aware that it was there.
It's always very easy to judge someone else's actions in a situaion that we have not experienced ourselves. It's very easy to think and behave rationally when the adrenalin is not pumping and we're not crazed with fear for our lives. Instinct kicks in. Fight or flight becomes a factor. In an emergency, people don't always behave as expected. With adrenalin pumping, people have done pretty amazing things, up to and including lifting vehicle rollovers off of someone. Even with broken bones, much less a sprained ankle. When survival is at stake, the body overrides pain and injury until it can get out of danger.
Point is, unless you have lived through it yourself, you cannot accurately judge another's actions in an emergency, life threatening situation.
Again, I'm not saying you're wrong or that she's innocent. I don't know. I can't know. I wasn't there. Neither were you. I'm trying to get you to think a bit objectively here and not jump to conclusions. We don't know if she had a sprained ankle. We can't know. Who said she had a sprained ankle? Supposedly, she told the cops and they told the newspapers and the newspapers told you. Ever play Telephone? If you had, you would know that even a perfectly innocent message could get garbled. Just because something is in print, doesn't mean it's true.
There is a reason for the principle of Innocent Until Proven Guilty and a reason why hearsay evidence is not admissible in court. Newspapers are hearsay evidence. If the cop told you directly, it's hearsay evidence, unless he is sworn under oath in a court of law. Unless this woman told you directly or you actually heard her claim this, it's hearsay.
It's a horrific thing and it's too early to say what happened or who's at fault, but try and think objectively when you hear these stories. Do not believe everything people tell you. Understand that newspapers are in the business of making money and they are going do whatever they can to sell papers. Cops and district attorneys have agendas. When a case captures the imagination of the public, the pressure to resolve it, is enormous. It ceases to become a matter of finding the truth and becomes a matter of getting someone, anyone to pay. This is how innocent people end up in jail. Not saying she's innocent; again I can't say, but you have got to think objectively about things like this. You have to weigh everything in context. Innocent until proven guilty, Chrissy and an arrest and newspapers reports doesn't provie squat.
no subject
Fact is? Fire can spread very, very fast. Particularly in older homes that were built before fire retardant materials were developed. A house can go from zero to full on conflageration in a blink of an eye. Fire is very unpredictable, how it behaves is not always predictable. Furthermore, people who die in fires usually die of smoke inhalation, not of burns. Fortunately. The smoke can get you very, very quickly, particularly if the fire is burning toxic materials. Sometimes people go to sleep in a perfectly safe house and they never wake up because a fire started and the smoked killed them before they were even aware that it was there.
It's always very easy to judge someone else's actions in a situaion that we have not experienced ourselves. It's very easy to think and behave rationally when the adrenalin is not pumping and we're not crazed with fear for our lives. Instinct kicks in. Fight or flight becomes a factor. In an emergency, people don't always behave as expected. With adrenalin pumping, people have done pretty amazing things, up to and including lifting vehicle rollovers off of someone. Even with broken bones, much less a sprained ankle. When survival is at stake, the body overrides pain and injury until it can get out of danger.
Point is, unless you have lived through it yourself, you cannot accurately judge another's actions in an emergency, life threatening situation.
Again, I'm not saying you're wrong or that she's innocent. I don't know. I can't know. I wasn't there. Neither were you. I'm trying to get you to think a bit objectively here and not jump to conclusions. We don't know if she had a sprained ankle. We can't know. Who said she had a sprained ankle? Supposedly, she told the cops and they told the newspapers and the newspapers told you. Ever play Telephone? If you had, you would know that even a perfectly innocent message could get garbled. Just because something is in print, doesn't mean it's true.
There is a reason for the principle of Innocent Until Proven Guilty and a reason why hearsay evidence is not admissible in court. Newspapers are hearsay evidence. If the cop told you directly, it's hearsay evidence, unless he is sworn under oath in a court of law. Unless this woman told you directly or you actually heard her claim this, it's hearsay.
It's a horrific thing and it's too early to say what happened or who's at fault, but try and think objectively when you hear these stories. Do not believe everything people tell you. Understand that newspapers are in the business of making money and they are going do whatever they can to sell papers. Cops and district attorneys have agendas. When a case captures the imagination of the public, the pressure to resolve it, is enormous. It ceases to become a matter of finding the truth and becomes a matter of getting someone, anyone to pay. This is how innocent people end up in jail. Not saying she's innocent; again I can't say, but you have got to think objectively about things like this. You have to weigh everything in context. Innocent until proven guilty, Chrissy and an arrest and newspapers reports doesn't provie squat.