BayouBelle_LA
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 31, 2012
- Messages
- 4,312
- Reaction score
- 16,632
Another explanation for why the mom didn't recognize the kidnappers is because their faces were covered or the vendetta was against the baby's father.I'm not yet ready to pass judgement in this case but I'm also not ready to run and give money to the mother. To be honest I only donate to campaigns where I either know the person or feel confident in the cause (I gave twice to WS because I trust Tricia) but I would caution others to be sure before donating.
The timeline has me asking questions. I understand the kidnapping happened about an hour before the fire was reported but right now we don't know how long the fire had been burning before it was spotted.
Please don't misunderstand - early reports stated only one person called in about the fire. Later reports say "residents" reported it so it's unclear.
More troubling though is the mother's report that the kidnappers were unknown to her. So if it wasn't a vendetta then why on earth would the suspects think a mother living in a trailer park would have something of value anyway? And why take the baby? There was no ransom call. Apparently they said nothing to mother about giving them something or else they'd harm the baby. What was the purpose?
All I can think of is that this is a case of a couple of psychopaths looking for a thrill kill of the most extreme kind. Whoever are responsible committed a deliberate act of violence on the poor baby and didn't care if they left a witness - mom - who could identify them.
I'm suspicious but I have to acknowledge that there are sickos out there who do vicious acts for reasons that we normal people can't comprehend. Still, this is a baffling case. If mom didn't know the people and it was a random act of violence then my heart goes out to her.
As for how long the fire was burning, we don't know. But I think it was reported the sweet baby was still alive when police arrived so probably not that long.