I find myself caught in the middle again because I do understand what Carli is getting at. I know that this is a victim friendly forum and I'm totally good with that. Conversations go on and you find yourself discussing things that perhaps shouldn't be discussed. But.... being a victim friendly forum, I do think that courtesy should be extended to
all of the victims. Why should WM and LB be treated any different than TB? If one wants to use the logic that there is information available in MSM about WM's lifestyle, there is also not only information in MSM, but an entire
e-book about TB if one cares to read it. To discuss someone isn't necessarily besmirching them or victim blaming, depending on what is discussed. For example, in this particular instance, I don't find wondering how someone did so well so early in life nearly as besmirching (for lack of another word) as it is digging into WM's life to perhaps discover why DM may have turned into the person many think he is. Even if not intended, is that not also, in a way, victim blaming? To suggest that the way DM was raised is the reason he turned into a murderer, and even allegedly killed his own father, is also inadvertently suggesting that things could have been different and WM may still be alive if he had only raised his son differently.
JMO
16 - 21 > attended Mohawk College, worked summers at his dad’s HVAC company, apprenticed in HVAC at an Oakville company, got his refrigeration ticket and his gas ticket, joined his dad’s company for several years then went on to set up and operate his own business
21 > first house > small house, rent from upstairs probably paid the mortgage
23 > second house > reno’d downstairs, rent probably paid the mortgage
29 > Trinity Rd property > purchase amount unknown, unknown if mortgaged
29 > Trinity Rd house > built with the help of friends and family, cost unknown but mortgaged (payments and amortization unknown but could have been up to 35 years)
Given a solid background, strong family ties and parental support, a good salary and wise investments at a young age, not to mention owning his own business, I fail to see how Tim’s financial success could in any way be construed in a negative light.
Given the lack of anything remotely negative about TB in MSM, I think it’s natural and logical that we can extrapolate in a positive direction; given the negatives we read about others (whether DM, WM, MS, EG) in MSM, I think it’s only natural and logical that we extrapolate in the opposite direction.
I think it’s the questioning, the insinuation that TB may not have come by his acquisitions honestly that is such an affront to the victim when there is zilch to indicate otherwise. Again, if someone gets some goods on a victim, post it, link it, and then it’s up for consideration ... failing which it's baseless and wilda$$ spec about a victim, which is not the norm at WS.
