In my last article on Elizabeth Smart, I noted the fact that Elizabeth might very well be denying, or repressing, her true emotions. But I am not so sure about that.
What still intrigues me, is why Elizabeth Smart, who has never displayed a victim-like persona, and who took Nancy Grace down in an interview, did not allow several people, including a police detective, to rescue her?
Elizabeth Smart walked around downtown Salt Lake City, was confronted by a police detective in a public library, ate in restaurants, and went to parties with her abductors.
So the burning question in my heart remains: Why…………not even once………why didn’t she run away in public or cry out for help?”
If you are new to my Blog, please know that I fully understand about what has been termed “Stockholm Syndrome,” “traumatic bonding,” and being in fear over death threats. I experienced all of these as a child.
But something struck me the other day, I tried to tell! I was just a small child the first time that I tried to alert someone about what was happening in my home. The second time I was older, but I was still a young girl –only seven or eight. By that age, I had already suffered sexual abuse by my father and his repeated threats of death with a knife. By that time of my life, I was already conditioned -and for many years- to keep the family secrets, to keep my mouth shut, to obey my father (who was a police officer), and I even enjoyed some aspects of the abuse. Yet, Elizabeth Smart, at ages fourteen and fifteen, did not say a word in that library, in those restaurants, on the streets of Salt Lake, or at those parties.
As Scott Carrier writes in his article, The Ongoing Mysteries of the Elizabeth Smart Case, “The easy answer is that she was too traumatized and suffering from a form of Stockholm Syndrome.”
Yes, that is the easy answer. The difficult answer, the answer that most Americans are unwilling to believe, is that she originally ran away willingly with Mitchell and then got more than she bargained for.
According to Carrier, Ed Smart denies that Elizabeth had a form of Stockholm Syndrome.
Defenders of Elizabeth Smart say she was in terror or experienced trauma bonding, where the victim has compassion and loyalty for their captors. My father was a tall, physically strong man. He looked like a giant to me as a child. He was a police-officer. He carried a gun and a knife, and he wore a badge and uniform. My father was a tyrant with a violent temper, but I loved him, felt loyal to him, and lived in fear of him to the point of wetting my bed until I was nine. He held a knife to my throat more than once when I was a child. If this is not a form of trauma bonding, then I don’t know what is. Yet, as a little girl, I tried to tell. At ages fourteen and fifteen, Elizabeth did not.
Carrier writes, “Stockholm Syndrome seems like a good explanation for why Elizabeth didn’t cry out or run away, and perhaps Elizabeth’s father, Ed Smart, now denies this explanation because he is unwilling to accept that Elizabeth ever supported or sympathized with Mitchell, let alone that she believed he was the new prophet.”
When did she come to believe he was a new prophet? After she was kidnapped at knife point and raped that very night? I would say that kidnapping and rape would have been a clear indication that Elizabeth’s abductor was not a new prophet. So when exactly did she believe this? Did she think he was a prophet while he was raping her four times a day, or when she was tied to a tree? Or, did she believe this while she was in contact with him prior to the night she was “kidnapped?”
Carrier writes, “She said Mitchell threatened to kill her and her family if she ran away. But, really, there were many opportunities, in public, where all she had to do was take off the veil…”
Yes, there were. Thanks for being honest Mr. Carrier.
Carrier writes, “In late August, the threesome went to a party thrown by a gang of bohemians just down the hill from Elizabeth’s home.”………” The host of the party, a man named Bub, told me he was a little perplexed that this guy who was spouting religious doctrine was also pounding down a lot of beer. He said somebody pulled out some homemade absinthe and Mitchell tried to get Elizabeth to drink some, but she refused to swallow it.”
Sounds like she was still in her own mind enough to refuse the alcohol, but not enough to remove her veil at the party and ask for help? Numerous sources have reported that Elizabeth was forced to drink alcohol during her captivity. So she could not resist her captor’s insistence that she drink alcohol while at their campsites, but in front of party goers (who had cameras), she resisted without fear?
“A couple of young women at the party started talking to Elizabeth. The women could only see her eyes, but they thought she looked uncomfortable and asked her if she was okay, if she needed any help, but she wouldn’t talk to them. Mitchell then came up and pulled her, by the arm, into another room.”
Was her discomfort because she did no t want to go home yet?
According to testimony at the trial, a few days later, Mitchell, Barzee, and Elizabeth were all approached by a homicide detective in the downtown library. The detective had received a report that Elizabeth Smart was in disguise at the library. The detective confronted them and even asked Elizabeth to take off her veil.
At some point, Mitchell stepped in and got the detective to leave them all alone by telling him that Elizabeth was his daughter, and that it went against his religion for her to speak in public, or to show her face. Smart said the detective pressed on and asked Mitchell if “he could be a part of our religion for a day, just so he could see my face, just so he could go back (to the police station) and say, ‘no, it wasn’t Elizabeth Smart’.”
Elizabeth was in a public library, with many people around her that would have loved to help the missing teen! She was in front of a police detective, essentially asking if he could save her from her daily rapes, and from being held by two horrible monsters, and what does Elizabeth do? She shuns his help.
The reports state that the detective questioned Mitchell for a full fifteen minutes.
Fifteen minutes for Elizabeth Smart to remove her veil and say to the detective, “It’s me, it’s me. Get me away from these people!” But she didn’t.
At the end of her journey, when Elizabeth was spotted on the streets of Sandy Utah, one of the officers said he took her aside and she “blurted out, `I know who you think I am. You guys think I’m that Elizabeth Smart girl who ran away.”’ The Boston Globe reported that she did not disclose her true identity until her father arrived at the police station.
This website points out what I remember when Elizabeth was first found —that she was annoyed with the officer and asked what would happen to her captors. I do remember this being reported many times that year. This report seems to have slowly dissipated, along with many other things about the case that do not put Elizabeth (and thus, the Mormon Church) in a good light.
I have to wonder; if Elizabeth Smart had been a misfit teen, who came from a lower class neighborhood, with non-religious parents……..would the American public, and the U.S. media, have been so believing of her story?
Comments:
Check out this photo of Elizabeth Smart at a party in Salt Lake City with Brian David Mitchell, notice how clean their robes are in the photo? I read they lived in an apartment or two during the time Elizabeth was away. This photo must have been taken during that time, because camping out in the wild isn’t going to provide clean white robes.
Where is the proof of rape four times a day? Where are the forensics on that one? Why didn’t Elizabeth get pregnant? Is Mitchell sterile? Is she? Why, if as her little sister said, Mitchell had hairy hands, were there no fingerprints on the cut screen, the window, or anywhere else in the house? Where are the rest of the forensics taken from the home that would show Mitchell had been the intruder? Did the Smarts call neighbors before they called police? Were there scars on her body from having been tethered to a tree for weeks? Why was Elizabeth so healthy looking when she was found?
Several websites post an Associated Press report that a witness said, “She didn’t seem like she was kidnapped. She acted like she was part of the family.” The link to the associated press article has disappeared.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
There are some good points made by Steel Magnolia at these two links, but there are no references for the claims so I have no way of knowing if they are true or not.
http://thefraudulentelizabethsmart.blogspot.com/2010/12/inconsistances-in-smart-case.html
http://thefraudulentelizabethsmart.blogspot.com/2010/12/i-believe-she-ran-away.html
References for my article:
The Ongoing Mysteries of the Elizabeth Smart Case by Scott Carrier
New Haven Register Detective Nearly Uncovered Elizabeth Smart, She Tells Jury
Boston Globe
EVIL SITS AT THE DINNER TABLE 
there is more to this story than meets the eye, this smacks of a total coverup of something no one wants to let out in the open
I lean more towards this scenario, than the one put forth in the media and by the Smarts. It is a mystery that we may never know the truth about. Same thing with Jon Benet Ramsey.
Why must Ed Smart HOG every show meant for parents of missing and murdered children?
He is part of the “Surviving Parent Collation!” Looks to me with all the therapy sessions with HER PARENTS, ELIZABETH IS SURVIVING JUST DANDY!
From what I know, Elizabeth was immediately whisked to a press conference and not a hospital to do a rape kit! Oh, and why was there no records from a hospital proving Smart was raped?
For once, Ed Smart, stay out of the lime light and let Deana Thompson, Elizabeth Runnion and Mark Lundford talk about their traumas THAT YOU HAVE NO EXPERIENCE WITH! Oh yes, I don’t think Elizabeth was kidnapped. I think she ran away FROM YOU, FREAK! Making a 14 year old share a bed with a 9 year old?
E Leeanne, thank you for saying this! When I saw Ed Smart last night on Dr. Drew, I could not figure out what it was that was irritating me about that. You nailed it.
I also feel that Natalie Holloway’s mother had no business being there. I don’t consider Natalie a complete victim. She was almost an adult, who went out partying and went willingly with some local guys to party and to probably have sex. Not as much of a victim.
Alethea even though Natialie Holloway was almost an adult and we was being wild, she was still a victim. She was killed (no proof but my belief) that alone makes her a victim. Just because she was being young and wild does not mean she deserved to be murdered
Danielle, I never SAID she deserved to be murdered.
Nor did I imply it.
A murdered person is the ultimate victem…no recovery chance from that. I know that you are not saying she deserved it…I get that but I disagree in that she is indeed a ‘complete victem.’
Little children are the only ones who are total victims. Nearly adult teenagers with a will to go off drunk with strangers in a foreign country, maybe to have have sex or get more loaded…ARE NOT TOTAL VICTIMS. This is like putting murdered children in the same category as Natalie Holloway….not okay with me.
Alethea,
This is a relevant clip you were asking about. One could argue that there is some dissociation there but its only minor but she seems almost fully recovered.
Note that it was the Sandy cops who asked directly “are you elizabeth smart
the detective in the library testified that he didn’t ask her directly that question but only said that he was ‘investigating’ the kidnapping.
You are trying to defend things with denial. The detective in the library said he was there to investigate the Smart case, he made it known to Elizabeth and Mitchell that he wanted to see behind her veil to make sure it wasn’t her. He asked her to remove her veil!
yeah, he asked her to remove the veil and Elizabeth froze but Mitchell very cunningly got the detective talking and, based on his ‘religion’, got the guy to leave without forcing the issue. Smart just froze, she didn’t say anything to him because the two kidnappers where right next to her.
All Black, I am answering you here as opposed to below because we are running out of room on this page.
I said, “Facing my own hellish truths has allowed me to see more clearly than many people do.”
You say you wouldn’t call it that, but you have no idea of the power of the mind and the unconscious. You have no clue how hypnoanalysis works and what powers it has for a person. Don’t bother trying to look it up online so you can argue with me. Online articles are useless in this subject.
Uncovering my family’s lies via hypnoanalysis allowed me to penetrate the human denial system in a way that you and most other people do not have the opportunity to do. Most all human beings lie to others and lie to themselves. There is good and evil inside every human being –inside you and me. Even golden child E. Smart has evil and good inside her. This is a fact.
I said, “No other human being can carry the subconscious burdens, the psychological burdens of another person’s trauma! It is scientifically impossible.”
You say, “It’s supposed to be God and the Atonement.” I have no idea what you are talking about here. Yes, I am a Roman Catholic Apostolic, but what you say here will have to be explained further.
The subconscious mind IS an exact science and if people understood that in depth, there would be much more peace and health in the world.
“If anything the family, as well as Smart, are trying to help other people not go through what they went through and trying to help others overcome a tragedy the way they have done so.”
Oh? How? By saying not to allow trauma and rape to affect you, and not explaining how this magical cure can happen?
“Even Oprah agrees!!!! 🙂 ”
Oprah is no God. She is a tool of the New World Order agenda and she has a lot of problems within herself that she has not dealt with. She is not the measuring stick of truth. And do you think she would ever be brave enough to actually question Elizabeth Smart publicly? She most likely has questioned some things about Elizabeth and the case, but I do not believe Oprah is strong enough to be truthful about it.
“but you ..have no clue how hypnoanalysis works and what powers it has for a person.”
C’mmon, I do have a BPsych from the university of sydney, and I work in both an adult prison and a juvenile detention centre during the week. i try to not quote quals ever but you’re kind of forcing me to. But yes, I don’t have a PhD.
“Uncovering my family’s lies via hypnoanalysis allowed me to penetrate the human denial system”
It’s still both controversial and still not an exact science. I don’t trust most of what hypnoanalysis comes up with because I’ve seen it fail too many times with the prisoners I work with.
“It’s supposed to be God and the Atonement.” I have no idea what you are talking about here. “what you say here will have to be explained further”
Well that is available online! I wouldn’t get into that discussion over an anonymous forum.
“Yes, I am a Roman Catholic Apostolic,”
I’m glad you have a faith. That will help you more over a lifetime than any shrinks’ analysis can.
“Oh? How? By saying not to allow trauma and rape to affect you, and not explaining how this magical cure can happen?”
No, by RadKidz, by lobbing to pass sexual predator legislation, by lobbing for a national amber alert system, by showing up to garner support when ‘ethnics’ are missing, by tying to bring the media in to help find other missing people who aren’t of their faith like kelsey smith’s case, but they’re never gone out and said ‘because of my religion I’m recovered’ , they are too respectful to do that.
“Oprah is no God. She is a tool of the New World Order agenda and she has…”
Was a joke seeing Oprah is famous. that’s why the smiley face is there.
All Black,
A BPsych from a university, and not even a PhD, is synonymous with knowing the powers of the subconscious or being educated about hypnoanalysis. There are many professionals, and some with a PhD, who have no clue about it. Those very professionals have fucked up a lot of people with prescription drugs and therapies that don’t work.
Just because something is controversial, or not proven in a lab, does not mean that it isn’t real or that it does not work miracles. You believe in God, you ought to know that.
You don’t trust hypnoanalysis because you have not studied it in depth, and have never experienced it first hand by someone who has been doing it for 30 plus years, and who was taught by the best. You have not seen the miracles that it has done for people.
Re: God and atonement. You don’t want to get into it, and that’s fine with me because my Blog is not a religious one, but you can’t expect me to simply understand what you meant by bringing up God and atonement with regards to other people taking on one’s suffering in the subconscious mind.
“I’m glad you have a faith. That will help you more over a lifetime than any shrinks’ analysis can.”
You just don’t get it. One cannot separate the miracle of good hypnotherapy from God. It is only by cleaning out one’s soul that one can become that much closer to God. No religion, or faith in God can wipe out years of trauma and abuse, especially when the ones who abused the child were “religious.” One’s faith can lead them DIRECTLY to someone who can help them though.
RadKidz and lobbying did not happen the first night that E. Smart came home.
“hose very professionals have fucked up a lot of people”
True, part of what is wrong with the profession.
“It is only by cleaning out one’s soul that one can become that much closer to God.”
Very true, and that’s the first part of any (either) repentance process or healing process for victims.
“No religion, or faith in God can wipe out years of trauma and abuse,”
You are wrong there. the who point of the atonement of Jesus is that through that power, a miraculous power if you will, one is both cleaned and healed. People tend to remember only the ‘cleaned’ part involved in forgiveness of sin but the other half of that miracle is the ‘healed’ part, which Ms Smart, by all indicators, seems to have obtained. But yes, because this isn’t a religious blog I didn’t want to get to far into this but your comment here kind of made me say something at least.
“RadKidz and lobbying did not happen the first night that E. Smart came home.” True, why???
All Black,
Unless a person penetrates deeply, the unconscious realm of their mind, they cannot fully align themselves with God. The unconscious harbors anger, fear, and other emotions, without any knowledge of the conscious mind. If a person does not relieve repressed subconscious emotions, they WILL indeed affect one’s life in one way or another. A person cannot know true peace without discharging those subconscious energies.
@All__Black-In reference to “You are wrong there. the who point of the atonement of Jesus is that through that power, a miraculous power if you will, one is both cleaned and healed..-” I agree & God can bring it about through varying means.. In refernce to “which Ms Smart, by all indicators, seems to have obtained…” um…I dont believe LDS believe in Jesus of the Holy Bible, so if this is so its not through a ‘apparent’ relationship. Also, her actions & response does not seem like that kind of healing…esp so ‘perfect’ & ‘overnight. I may be wrong, and hope so…but it seems either disenguineous or major suppression of trauma at work. Also, based on what I have read from varying sources…I think she ran away…
“You believe in God, you ought to know that.”
yeah, well you got me there! 🙂
“but you can’t expect me to simply understand what you meant by bringing up God and atonement with regards to ”
Actually I was hoping you would look into this more elsewhere, around the web or talking to someone. That’s why I mentioned it, it wasn’t to simply expect you to believe something but to gently get you to think about other possibilities.
All Black, I am not going to find online what your mind is trying to put forth. Unless, you want me to google the word “atonement” and “subconscious mind” and then expect me to know what your position is? If so, I will do it.
Thank you for posting this video, as it confirms what I already believe. I find Ed Smart and Elizabeth to be untruthful witnesses. I do not find them credible people. Both of them stammer and mix up words, they sound like they are lying. Her story about “what if,” and about being asked if she was Elizabeth is not believable to me.
I also find it interesting that Ed mentions the person who questioned Elizabeth about being a runaway and in love with Mitchell. It’s as if he is trying too hard to defend that. You know the old saying, “Me thinkest thou protesteth too much.”
And that she says she never felt any guilt raises a red flag for me. Nearly every victim of sexual abuse feels some kind of guilt. Even prisoners of war have felt guilt for having been imprisoned.
She also proclaims she never experienced any PTSD… “That didn’t happen to me” she says. No PTSD? Then maybe no trauma.
“I’m extremely blessed.” she says. Well then, I guess the millions of other survivors of rape and trauma aren’t blessed at all. Elizabeth is special in the eyes of God? I hate it when people say “I am so blessed.” Because, what does that make others? Dog shit?
I find this family to be non-credible and living in a self-created fantasy world.
“….victims react differently in different situations. She may have also simply lost the will to be free, until the Sandy cops separated her from the other two.”
Lost the will to be free? To my knowledge, she has never stated anything close to this. In fact, she has stated quite the contrary.
correct, she never stated anything like it. I’m just suggesting what I think could have happened back then as “she may have also” lost the will to be free, as many torture victims and even battered wives do for a time.
“correct, she never stated anything like it. I’m just suggesting what I think could have happened back then..”
(read: grasping at straws).
Hmmm…again from my perspective you are struggling to find ways of proving their ‘untruthfulness’.
but you have misunderstood the ‘questioned’ part, it was 6months after she was home and they were two journos from some tabloid who pressed her. But the point was that she just froze -again- and didn’t scream or cry out for help or run out. Just her personality at the time. Because of that Ed started working with Radkidz and putting his kids through it to get them to react differently in those situations.
Plus the ‘never felt any guilt’ is out of context and only a response to oprah’s one question. Remember she started crying once placed in handcuff’s in that police car -after admitting to being elizabeth smart by the way!
But what you say about the other millions of survivors of rape is just seeing the glass half empty. She feels blessed PTS didn’t happen to her but the reciprocal is simply false! ie ‘those who do have it aren’t blessed’. Its like dividing by zero, seems logical but its false. You should be looking at the ‘why’ she seems to have recovered the way she has and what they did different -ie family and community support for example- the strength of her particular religious beliefs which allows someone else to carry her burdens etc… but it seems to me that you start off thinking ‘these people are lying’ and then constructing an argument to back it up.
Note that you find the family and particularly Elizabeth Smart non-credible but a jury of 12 people, 7 non-mormons plus prosecutors and FBI agents -only two mormon prosecutors- found her not only a credible witness but also called her a remarkable young woman who gave her testimony with candor, clarity and truthfulness that moved all of them. That’s something you need to consider here because she got through 3 days of testimony with many journalist in the room but no one found her or suggested at all that her testimony wasn’t credible. Obviously I have a problem with you saying that they are ‘untruthful witnesses’ and so on but you do have a right to your opinion of course.
All Black, your perspective is wrong. I am not “struggling” to find anything. Her/their untruthfulness is evident to me and to many other people. You should know that I am not the only person who finds her and her family to be non-credible people.
You should be aware that many years ago, when someone told me they thought Elizabeth Smart had run away and was fooling America, I coiled in disgust at their remark. At the time, I thought the very idea of someone questioning a victim and calling a victim a liar was abhorrent to me. I became very angry with this person. Then, a few years later, after cleaning out my own mind and by dealing with my own personal truths, I saw how the world is full of the apple-pie vision of things. I then began to see Elizabeth Smart in a whole new light. The person who had originally said she was a runaway, did not ever comment about it again, I saw this on my own.
Once I broke through my own personal denial system with regards to my parents and my family, I was able to see life and people on a whole new level. The human denial system is one of the strongest forces there is, because it is the self-survival system.
I have been liberated from the apple-pie minded way of thinking and seeing the world. I thank God that I finally let go of the notion that ‘what appears to be’ is always the truth. Facing my own hellish truths has allowed me to see more clearly than many people do. Maybe you or someone else wants to call that egotistical, and I don’t care, but it is the truth. I thank God that I am not imprisoned by apple-pie delusions of the world.
And, like I said, there are many other people who also believe that Elizabeth Smart has played a number on America. Some of them are too afraid to say anything because they have a need to be accepted, to be liked, and to get along with others. Thankfully, I have no need to be liked. I have no need to cater to untruths in order to be popular. My only desire is for truth. So far, I have not been convinced that Elizabeth Smart or her family are truthful people. If that should ever change, you and my readers will know about it because I am not afraid to say I am wrong.
“Remember she started crying once placed in handcuff’s in that police car -after admitting to being elizabeth smart by the way!”
So what? Maybe she was crying because she didn’t want to go home yet!
“She feels blessed PTS didn’t happen to her.”
I saw a smugness when she said it.
“..but the reciprocal is simply false! ie ‘those who do have it aren’t blessed’…”
That is essentially what one is saying when they say those words.
“You should be looking at the ‘why’ she seems to have recovered the way she has and what they did different….the strength of her particular religious beliefs which allows someone else to carry her burdens etc…”
No other human being can carry the subconscious burdens, the psychological burdens of another person’s trauma! It is scientifically impossible.
“…but a jury of 12 people, 7 non-mormons plus prosecutors and FBI agents -only two mormon prosecutors- found her not only a credible witness…”
And several juries found Michael Jackson, O.J. Simpson, and MANY other high profile people to be not guilty when anyone with two degrees of common sense knows they were! It is often high profile cases, like the Smart case, where unacceptable truths are not seen.
Again, I am not saying that Mitchell is not guilty of many things. I am saying that Elizabeth Smart is not being truthful, and her family is covering it up for self-gain.
Yeah well we simply aren’t going to agree here.
Sure there are mistakes in court and juries do get it wrong but that doesn’t mean that all high profile cases end up with the wrong verdict. Plus the issue in this case was Mitchell’s sanity not any facts of the kidnapping.
“acing my own hellish truths has allowed me to see more clearly than many people do. Maybe you or someone else wants to call that egotistical, and I don’t care”
I wouldn’t call it that. But maybe you could consider that uncovering your own families lies affects the way you see others. If those closest to us lie and cheat then we tend to think all people do that.
Now I’m not denying that there aren’t gaps in the Smart story eg when she came home both her dad and grandfather publicly said she was brainwashed so obviously that also contributed to her not running away from Mitchell but the issue of how and why she was brainwashed is the question to ask, and that goes back to Mitchell and his abusive techniques.
“No other human being can carry the subconscious burdens, the psychological burdens of another person’s trauma! It is scientifically impossible.”
It’s supposed to be God and the Atonement. You as a faithful catholic (or at least I think you are) should be aware of that.
Again we are back to the arguments that because trauma victims general act one way, and Smart doesn’t act publicly that way, then you conclude she is lying. It sounds a lot like those shrinks who were fooled by Mitchell for so long and caused this case to drag on for so long, all because they tried to match basic observation to previous studies to reach an (erroneous) conclusion. Psychology simply isn’t an exact science and crime causation-conclusions isn’t always true nor accurate and a lot depends on the political orientation of the researcher.
“I am saying that Elizabeth Smart is not being truthful, and her family is covering it up for self-gain”
On the balance of probability, even without knowing every little detail of their homelife and medical information, I’s say that’s wrong. If anything the family, as well as Smart, are trying to help other people not go through what they went through and trying to help others overcome a tragedy the way they have done so.
Even Oprah agrees!!!! 🙂
I have answered this up top. Running out of room here.
Apparently Oprah was also sexually abused and was a young prostitute, “all the girls were doing it”
She has spoken of been sexually molested and raped by a cousin when she was a pre-teen and young teen. She mentioned that the hardest thing to overcome and come to terms with was that it was a sexual relationship which she also enjoyed at times but didn’t cause or solicit. But I’ve never heard her say anything about been a young prostitute. that part may be just one of those myths that find a life of their own.
Lacee, you are an smarmy, insensitive creepy jerk. Nothing personal.
I’M an insensitive, creepy jerk? For sticking up for a kidnap/rape victim? You’re clearly confusing me with those who have no empathy for crime victims.
watch September Clues. Do you know about building WTC 7 ?
watch this – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B65M_smGewo
tho in this video, the guy back tracks and says planes hit, he is a liar.
Andre’ you can’t call someone a creepy jerk and then say, “nothing personal.” Of course that’s personal. Lacey might be naive’ but at least she has a drive to stand up for her beliefs, which is a lot less than I can say for most Americans.
That was my dark irony. She has an agenda and I dont trust people with agendas. Ive tried being nice to people and they just insult you back, so I dont put up with narcissism anymore. She can, but probably wont watch September Clues.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6407548186293238834#
What’s wrong with Loose Change? My computer speakers are broken so I can’t watch September Clues. Does it go into the eyewitness accounts of explosions at the base of the towers, and does it show the interviews with engineers and scientists who say it is impossible for the planes to have brought the towers down? Does it show all the evidence refuting the Pentagon plane evidence? Does it show all the evidence that the men blamed for 9/11 couldn’t even fly a plane with such precision? Does it show the ridiculous story of how one of the “hijacker’s” passport was ‘miraculously’ found on the street outside the Twin Towers?and does it show the reports of the Israelis who were seen dancing and laughing and filming the towers burning, and that they were taken away by the FBI only to be released months later back to Israel? Does September Clues show how Bush continued to read to the children after being told the country was under attack?
Lacee, you can rent Loose Change on Netflix.
Because all these videos stop short of proving that Jets did not fly into the towers. Simon Shack also goes onto say, 3000 people didnt die, it was more like 250, if that. That most of those “missing” posters were checked, and most were faked. That is the length the mossad went to pull this illusion off. I have early video footage and all the witnesses said they saw/heard an “explosion” with NO mention of jets. My opinion they were cruise missiles or some other device. the people who said they saw a jets, think because they saw an explosion, turned on the radio and were told it was a jet, “think they saw a jet” I have one friend who was across the river, he said he saw NO jet and just an explosion. One friend said she saw a “small plane” as were the early reports. I say, I dont care what they think they saw, what Im seeing on TV is CGI. Thats your proof of complicity, right there to commit our troops to the endless mid east for Israels never ending war on Arabs and Muslims. During the end of WWII not even Patton believed there was no mass extermination of Jews. They killed him in a “car crash” soon after that. He thot we were fighting on the wrong side, and he was right.
Well, like I said earlier, you’re free to believe whatever you want. But don’t expect me to believe it. Those jets in the videos did not look anything like CGI, & I’ve seen CGI. I really don’t believe that every bad thing that happens in the world is a ruse to hide “the elite’s” lust for children. I’m sorry, but it all sounds like paranoia to me. If any substantial proof ever shows up, or if someone in a position of power ever admits to-& proves- that what you’re saying is true, then I’ll believe it. But it just doesn’t sound very rational to me.
One more thing Lacee. It is the human denial system like yours –that refuses to see anything other than what is acceptable to the brain- that allows those in power to continue their crimes.
Like I said, prove that these things are real.
We have been trying to point you in the direction of evidence, but all you do is fold your arms across your chest and say, “prove it.” If you really have a need for truth, then seek it by educating yourself with books, articles, documentaries, and with researchable facts that are available on line. If you don’t want to know the truth, then stick with what you have been informing yourself with. That way, you will remain blind and ignorant to your own satisfaction.
I don’t have any agenda Andre & I’m not a narcissist. I just think conspiracy theories are ridiculous, that’s all.
Hi Lacee. We will have to cut this a bit short, we are running out of room to post because there are so many comments. That’s why it’s all getting squished to the side.
You have to realize that conspiracies have existed throughout history, so remove the word “theory” from many historical conspiracies. Just because we live in modern times, and because the current conspiracies seem impossible or hard to believe, does not mean that one day, and maybe in our lifetime, the truth will be not be known by historians and all of the world –even by those who denied it at one time. History is usually written by the very men who conspire.
Well, until someone presents some hard, honest, undoctorable proof that the moon landing was faked or that 9-11 was an inside job, or until the astronauts & those in power admit they faked it all, I’m going to believe that man landed on the moon in 1969, that Israel deserves to exist & is our friend, & that Islamic terrorists attacked us on 9-11. Because conspiracies hold no weight with me & they never will unless they can all be proven beyond a reasonable doubt or unless the people involved admit to conspiring.
I don’t know anything about the moon landing. I know many people don’t believe it but I don’t have time to research that one. I do know about 9/11 and Israel though. There IS plenty of evidence that 9/11 was an inside job, you just don’t want to know about it or hear it.
As far as Israel goes, you have a lot to learn about Israel. They appear to be ‘our friend’ but our alliance with them has done nothing but cause our country grief, money, and to be hated by much of the world. You ought to educate yourself on the genocide that Israel has been committing on the Palestinians for decades. Israel is no victim, and if it suits them, they will stab us in the back in a blink of an eye. They have also driven us into war, and many U.S. soldiers have lost their lives for the ends of Israel. Just because YOU don’t want to believe something and because YOU don’t educate yourself further than mainstream media, does not mean that Israel is our friend or that 9/11 was not an inside job. There are highly educated people around the world who know it was. I think you live in a bubble of sheltered American ignorance –unwilling to see truths that don’t follow the accepted norms, or that put ‘nice’ people in a very bad light.
You don’t believe it because you don’t WANT to believe it.
You have to understand basic physics. The proof is in the videos and photographs, ironically. Keep these things in mind when watching the 911 video footage of jets going into the towers and you do stop motion, there are many anomalies. 1) jet wings are aluminum and cannot go into steel reinforced buildings without resistance, like a “ghost” in other words they would would bend back and break off. 2) Aluminum nose cones dont come out the otherside “intact” 3) early live footage shows explosions with no jet. I have friends who also witnessed explosions, with no jet. Its far easier to attack with precision cruise missiles, do an overlay of CGI, than risk human failure. There are too many reports of ‘explosions” with no report of jets. There was no jet crash wreckage in PA, there was no jet wreckage at the pentagon, no jet hit building 7 and it dropped like a rock at the end of the day. And the video footage of the jet going into WTC 1 + 2 do not look like the hijacked jets they claimed them to be. A large group of “somebodies” worked in consort, with pre-manufactured evidence to pull this off, and main stream media is complicit. The Moon footage is so obviously faked, its old news. There is plenty of analysis on the net. The surface temperatures on the moon reach 300 degrees F. The radiation of outer space will kill you. You also have to understand how Freemasonry works, as they are sworn under penalty of death, if they reveal secrets. Its works like a charm. I actually feel bad for the astronauts to have to carry these secrets to their graves. That is one of the dark ugly realities of life, Lacee. This is why I am incredulous of what is being told and written about Elizabeth Smart, it just sounds like another cover up. Thats all.
What makes her different from me? You call it an agenda, but she just has strong beliefs about the Elizabeth Smart case. I do too. My “agenda” is to stand up for children and survivors of abuse who feel as I do about Elizabeth Smart, and to question things in the case that do not make sense. Lacee’s only “agenda” seems to be to defend Elizabeth Smart. You say you don’t trust people with agendas. I don’t trust anyone except God, my husband, and my close friends; I especially don’t trust strangers on the Internet.
Lacee the reason why certain groups of people go to lengths to lie and commit conspiracy, is because they are lying murdering thieves with a heavy does of sexual deviancy towards women and children and anybody else they can F . If the worlds ruling elite can work in consort and keep humanity off balance with war, iatrogenocide, theft thru courts and governments, it hides their sexual blood lust and predaliction for children. Its so dark and disgusting. The elite know what they are doing is satanic, most people cant get their minds around the fact these ghouls exist if they can keep spinning their bullshit to the ignorant masses with sports beer drugs violence crime and porn as misdirection.
watch the whole thing Simon Shack is a genius – http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6407548186293238834#
Sorry I called you a “smarmy, insensitive creepy jerk” It was inappropriate and inconsiderate, Im just very frustrated when I see we have a very serious national problem, and nobody seems to be listening. Its not just with pedophilia, but with many other things too.
I sincerely apologize.
Andre’
This rings something like Jon Benet Ramsey. Where girls are born into sex slavery, with sophisticated organization with church members, cops, government, media along with other persons and mechanisms of intrigue keeping it all covered up.
Those things do exist.
The pedophiles in the elite main stream media are parading this beautiful young girl in front of everybody to say, “You see, we can repeatedly rape beautiful blue eye blond girls and and it barely effects them” And the public goes, “She is a strong woman” while my guess is, this girl has been raped so many times growing up, that she is completely indifferent to it thru complete and total acceptance, indifference and disassociation. As for one woman who I suspect was repeatedly raped growing up, has sex as if it means nothing to her, esp if she is getting paid for it. No emotion is involved in the sex act, it means nothing to her to bond with anyone. Thats bond of trust was shattered years ago. The Smart case has so cleverly inculcated the masses to accept pedophilia. There is something far larger going on behind the scenes. Especially if you have mormons, freemasons, cops, politicans and media working in concert to cover up this intrigue. This I do know, is, nobody here on this board were there to witness first hand what happened to Elizabeth Smart. Regardless how they marionette her in front of everybody with manufactured news and magazine articles. Im highly suspect of everything and everybody. Even that alleged detective.
The only thing that proves is that you are a conspiracy theorist with wild ideas that are not based in reality.
Lacee, I have had enough personal and research experience that these things true. You also come off naive and ignorant. Anybody who takes mainstream media as gospel truth, is a fool. Its a fact TV/media lies ALL the time and in a big way. TV is not my God.
Lacee, you ought to educate yourself on things other than the mainstream apple-pie version of life.
Read Cathy O’brien’s book, “Trance Formation of America” and be enlightened on who sexually abuses children and how deep the cover-up can go.
Althea, I’m aware that priests, police officers, military officers, government agents, etc. have been imprisoned for sexually abusing children. Anyone can be a sex offender. I know this. I’m not a total moron. I just think that the idea of the media & the entire US government covering up for sex abusers(or lying about the moon landing)is ludicrous. I know that the government & the media can lie. But about everything & everyone, all the time? Everyone in the government is not a sex offender or a liar, & everyone in the government & in the media is not engaged in a cover-up over everything. You said that your dad was a police officer. Does that mean that every police officer is a sex offender or covering up for sex offenders? Of course not. There ARE good, honest people in the government, the media & in the world in general.
“I just think that the idea of the media & the entire US government covering up for sex abusers(or lying about the moon landing)is ludicrous.”
Read Cathy O’brien’s books, especially “Access Denied for Reasons of National Security.” Then tell me the Govt. isn’t capable of harboring and protecting a large number of child sexual abusers. As for the media, you need to do a lot of background research on who owns and controls it, and what their agenda is. The U.S. media is not of the people or for the people.
We never said that everyone in the government is a sex offender, but be aware that those who are, use death threats and blackmail those who aren’t.
My father having been a police officer does not mean that every police officer is a sex offender or covering up for sex offenders. But there are certain towns where police forces do cover things up. Read Cathy O’brien’s books. She has well-documented her accusations.
Yes, I am aware there are good people. I never said there were not.
“The Smart case has so cleverly inculcated the masses to accept pedophilia.”
That has to be the most stupidest comment made all year!
why ? Disney was a pedophile as was Mr Rogers. They parade it right in front of your face. Disney has so many sexual references in their children’s cartoons/films. Almost all the Disney Mousketeers/girls have serious mental problems. You just are not that smart to see it. You would rather go down rabbit holes from mainstream media rhetoric.
“–that she was annoyed with the officer and asked what would happen to her captors”
True, and its included in the documentary on the Smart case by UK TV.
“with many other things about the case that do not put Elizabeth (and thus, the Mormon Church) in a good light.”
Nothing to do with the church. they are fading details but those who read up on the case, followed it with things like the book her uncle wrote, remember all these details -which are many. They aren’t included in the trial though because it doesn’t help the prosecution, again nothing to do with the LDS church.
“I have to wonder; if Elizabeth Smart had been a misfit teen, who came from a lower class neighborhood, with non-religious parents……..would the American public, and the U.S. media, have been so believing of her story?”
If she was a misfit teen, chances are that she’d have kicked Mitchell in the groin sometime during that first night, or would have yelled out when waking up and seeing the guy there in her room. Its only the vulnerable, like Smart, who are targeted successfully by a criminal like Mitchell. Chances are that as a misfit teen she would’ve been a much more street wise kid than the overly sheltered and shy harp player she actually was.
But no, the media wouldn’t have done as much , I agree with you there.
– ‘Scott Carrier’ is simply wrong with too many details to be credible. I commented there as ‘darkmatter20’ and pointed out some of his inaccuracies -which he corrected once- but then ignored the others. And he claims that Stockholm syndrome could be a factor when it simply wasn’t because there was never a voluntary attachment nor defense of Mitchell by Smart. She believed that speaking out would get her family -and especially her younger sister- killed. That’s why she only ran off once, was quickly caught, and didn’t try it again. Leaving, for her mind at the time, could mean Mitchell breaking in again, as he already did and got away with, and taking her then 9 year old sister who didn’t know about sex. Remember that Smart at 14 or 15 would not have known about all the legalities and options available apart from a basic knowledge of ‘you’re going to jail’
So Mitchell basically used the protective love Smart felt for her younger sister to control her, turned it against her and got her to do whatever he wanted her to do. Characteristics of a master manipulator and sexual predator. I don’t think its about traumatic bonding either nor that it explains her behaviour. Now (since you probably don’t believe me) take a look at what professional counselors say about the Smart case:
[http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=293&sid=13215440 | Elizabeth Smart’s behavior fit pattern, experts say] Although I disagree with his belief of Stockholm Synd by the way.
We can say that her case is unusual, as is the Duggard case (which I know you disagree with) but it isn’t illogical or unexpected for a girl in her situation to react exactly the same way, until they find a way out which sometimes takes years and years. Remember the austrian girl Natasha who, sure, was kidnapped at a younger age but only managed to run off at 18, not 16 or 15 like Elizabeth was.
You wrote as “Darkmatter” that Smart sometimes stared into nothing when telling details of the abuse. Sounds liike dissociation to me. If so, it will affect her later in life.
You said that she “became emotional during the final part of her testimony when saying that god wouldn’t tell someone to kidnap a girl and rape her etc….”
Sounds like she had believed at one time that he was a Prophet of God. Her emotional reaction might have been because she was angry at being fooled by him, and angry at herself for having believed him. The only time she would have fell for a belief that he was a prophet would have to have been before being taken from her bed.
“She believed that speaking out would get her family -and especially her younger sister- killed. That’s why she only ran off once, was quickly caught, and didn’t try it again. Leaving, for her mind at the time, could mean Mitchell breaking in again, as he already did and got away with, and taking her then 9 year old sister who didn’t know about sex….”
Oh come on. First of all, when the detective confronted her in the libarary, her family was no longer in danger. Secondly, soon after her “rescue,” she stated that she didn’t fear them getting out of jail and coming after her. The two don’t mesh.
“until they find a way out which sometimes takes years and years.”
Elizabeth had MANY chances to get out.
“Sounds like she had believed at one time that he was a Prophet of God.”
ah? how? I’d say her emotional reaction was more likely to be a result of waiting some 8 years to tell people what Mitchell actually is and how he was fooling the shrinks into thinking he wasn’t competent when he was just plain evil. I think your off track there.
“that Smart sometimes stared into nothing when telling details of the abuse. Sounds like dissociation to me. If so, it will affect her later in life.”
yes, maybe, that could be the case. I’m not sure. Could also be that she was just tired of testifying, which lasted 3 days and after a 3 day delay. But other journalists did say that her voice would become softer during the difficult times for her. So maybe it is dissociation, time will tell.
“First of all, when the detective confronted her in the library, her family was no longer in danger”
That’s true from our perspective but not from her’s. She didn’t know if people, Mitchel’s people where checking the house or if it was Mitchell himself who would go back and kill people after he got out of jail. Remember she was 14 at the time. she spoke about this too in the Oprah interview which I think is still online.
I think your error (now) is that you are seeing things from the outside: “Elizabeth had MANY chances to get out” which is factually true however victims don’t always respond that way. They vary and they have their own beliefs about what is going on. Maybe you should try analyzing this case as a criminal profiler would ie put yourself in both Mitchell’s shoes and in Elizabeth’s shoes but as they were at the time: Mitchell had already successfully ‘abused’ his step daughter during some 4 years; and Elizabeth as an extremely sheltered, shy and obedient pre-pubescent girl who used a safety pin to button up her pj’s cause her brothers were around. And remember that in her neighbourhood a bad crime wave was when 3 lawnmowers were stolen from garages!
“She didn’t know if people, Mitchel’s people where checking the house…”
I have never read that she claimed he had other people keeping an eye on her family, or that were a threat to her family.
“…or if it was Mitchell himself who would go back and kill people after he got out of jail.”
A girl, who is being raped and tortured daily, and who has a police detective standing in front of her asking her to remove her veil so he can save her, isn’t going to think this way. That I do know.
“Remember she was 14 at the time.”
Fourteen is not so much a child anymore.
Very young children will shield the truth about a family member, but I don’t know of any case of a kidnapped teenager denying a police officer’s help in a public place, and getting annoyed with another officer, trying to save him or her in a public place. Do you?
“I have never read that she claimed he had other people keeping an eye on her family, or that were a threat to her family.”
Its in the Oprah interview when she answers the questions about the detectives and why she didn’t run off earlier etc. I can send you the video too.
“…her veil so he can save her, isn’t going to think this way. That I do know”
Again, victims react differently in different situations. She may have also simply lost the will to be free, until the Sandy cops separated her from the other two.
“Fourteen is not so much a child anymore. ”
Technically true, however you had here a still prepubescent girl, very shy, who lived an extremely sheltered life, didn’t use the internet, didn’t go and hang out at the mall etc. She was described as 14 going on 12 by family.
“Do you?”
again, respectfully, I think you are mixing ‘incest’ with this stranger abduction. They are different fields and need to be studied separately.
Elizabeth Smart was not an incest victim nor a victim of rape by a cousin or friend. Problem was also that Mitchell was never charged with attempted murder or intimidation when he should have been, at very least, with stalking and intimidation as we call it. Then the centrality of the Smart case could have been the intimidation and threats of death to both her and her family instead of the kidnapping and rapes. But society likes what is worthy of gossip, ie , the rapes and the sexual abuse.
How do you know she wasnt a rape/incest victim ?
Yes, please send me the link to the Oprah interview where she answers the questions about the detectives and why she didn’t run off earlier.
You didn’t answer my question. No, I AM NOT mixing incest with stranger abduction. I specifically asked if you know of any case of a kidnapped teenager denying a police officer’s help in a public place, and getting annoyed with another officer, trying to save him or her in a public place.
Didn’t Shawn Hornbeck have a run in with a cop over a stolen bicycle during his 5-years- long captivity? He could have told the cop who he was & his ordeal would have been over instantly. Not exactly the same thing, but still…
I don’t know of other publicly known victims reacting exactly the same way except for well known cases like P.Hearst, the Manson followers and to an extent the Shawn Hornbeck case, each having some general similarities. I’ll upload that part of the video tonight, again to metcafe since they deleted the second and third parts.
(still not getting that follow-up via email, but do on another blog I follow)
From what I understand, Patty Hearst willingly joined that group and was no longer a victim. The Manson followers were by no means victims.
I forgot this:
“she stated that she didn’t fear them getting out of jail and coming after her. The two don’t mesh”
When she said that it was some 5 years later and people had convinced her that they wouldn’t get out while they were deemed incompetent (and then after they were declared competent, she’d have to testify to keep them locked up for life, situation which empowers any victim)
If anything her words to Oprah that ‘she didn’t fear them getting out’ is a flag showing her full recovery for this traumatic 9 months -only 9 months away from home.
I thought I recalled her saying it a very short time after going home, but you may be right.
However, I still have serious issues with the night she returned home…….her climbing into the same bed she was kidnapped from -at knife point- and saying to her parents not to worry, that she would be there in the morning, and that she wasn’t afraid.
One minute she is terrified of being killed or her family being killed, and a few hours later she is just fine, and not afraid? This does not fall in line with true trauma and terror.
yeah, well I’d see that ‘her climbing into the same bed’ as a sign that the bond and/or link between her and her kidnappers was finally completely broken.
Fear doesn’t work that way. Fear is not a thought, it is a serious psychological state that changes the very cells of the human brain. Those cells can be healed back to normal, but NOT in one day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don’t agree. Fear based on a single event or a ‘nine month’ event could change quickly once the links are broken.
Fear based on a ‘nine month’ event could change quickly once the links are broken.
Do you have any research to back this up?
Read the trial transcripts in the Salt Lake Tribune archive. You can find it online. & that Steel Magnolia is a liar who got few-if any-of her facts straight. She sounds like she’s jealous of the media attention the Smarts got. All she does is bash the Smarts. No constructive criticism, just bashing. The proof that Elizabeth was kidnapped was presented at the trial, & Mitchell’s own lawyers stated at the trial that they did not deny that he kidnapped Elizabeth, they just claimed that he was insane at the time & therefore not responsible for his actions.
Don’t assume that just because someone doesn’t like Elizabeth Smart, or brings up questions and criticizes her comments or her family’s comments, that they are jealous of the media attention she receives. That is just ignorant, and placing a personal conclusion on someone –just as you have accused myself and Steel Magnolia of doing.
Try not to be a hypocrite Lacee.
I dont how anyone can “not like Elizabeth” the poor thing is a hollow shell, she has no personality or emotions. If nobody feels any empathy for her, there us something wrong with them, she is a robot who has no volition over her actions. Everybody involved with her case, is a satanist OR highly incompetent. One thing I do know about TV/main steam media, is they blatantly lie all the time. Just like telling people jets flew into the towers on 911 (they didnt it was CGI) or we landed on the Moon (complete and total hoax). Its all total bullshit.
Oh PLEASE! You’re crazy if you think the government faked 9-11! There were too many witnesses on the ground who saw the planes! & I’d like you to prove that the moon landing was a hoax. THAT sounds like bullshit. & if everyone in the Smart case was a satanist or incompetent Mitchell would not be in jail now. I really hope you’re being sarcastic. Cripes.
Lacee, I dont know you but you are a typical American fool. The Moon landing was a hoax and 911 was a hoax. Im not going to sit here and try to prove myself to you. there is PLENTY of actual evidence to prove otherwise. Alethea, are you close personal friends with Lacee?
Andre’ I have NO IDEA why you would think I am friends with Lacee. She doesn’t like my opinions AT ALL and has been very angry with me about this case. She is just a reader. I don’t know her.
Everyone can find or manufacture “evidence” of anything if they want to form or “prove” a conspiracy theory. There were too many live witnesses to 9-11 that saw the planes crash into the towers & the Pentagon. & the moon landing was videotaped & watched on tv by millions back in 1969, & last time I checked the ability to doctor videos did not exist at that time. The only fools I see are the ones who insist on believing the conspiracy theories. Until the government actually publicly admits that they made up that stuff, I’m going to continue to believe the truth.
Watch the film, Loose Change 9/11 An American Coup. Do research on the documented and admitted mind control programs, and intentional poisoning of American citizens and American military experiments by the U.S. Govt. Please educate yourself Lacee.
Lacee, your failure to inform yourself does not make those who do, “crazy.”
I’m sorry, but you live in apple-pie LaLa Land.
Just want to make sure before I read her or him the riot act. “They” dont know what they are talking about.
Even if she was a friend of mine, don’t allow personal relationships to stop you from speaking the truth to someone.
“if nobody feels any empathy for her, there us something wrong with them,”
If she has been 100% truthful, then I do have empathy about what she went through, but I do not have empathy for someone who pretends to be fine, or allows her family to portray her as being fine, and then tells other abuse survivors that they too can be fine if they just ‘move on, don’t allow it to define your life.’ THAT I do take issue with. No matter what she went through, I do not like that aspect of her or her family. Having suffered trauma and rape does not give a person the right to make blanket statements to other survivors of trauma and rape –statements that can cause them harm.
My point is, she is so broken, she cant be truthful, she has no volition over her emotions, she is being played like a sock puppet. We cannot expect Elizabeth to be rational and on task. She is an automaton. I CAN forgive her. she is still too young to digest all she has been thru.
Forgive her for what? What did she do to you?
This isn’t about forgiveness. I forgive my parents, it doesn’t mean I don’t have a right to criticize their actions. I don’t need to forgive her for anything, that would be intellectually superficial.
Althea, I didn’t accuse YOU of being jealous.
You did, about a year ago when I began to post about E. Smart.
Lacee,
In answer to your question about Shawn Hornbeck:
Shawn was not asked if he was Shawn Hornbeck by that cop. The incident was about a stolen bike, nothing more.
On the day of his rescue, when asked, Shawn told police who he was right away. Yet Shawn was much younger than E. Smart when he was taken (he was eleven), and he was with his captor for many years.
Shawn was not only threatened with death on a constant basis, but Devlin (his kidnapper/rapist) literally tried to kill him. Shawn begged his way out of it.
Hornbeck also had the added incentive to ‘save’ the other recently kidnapped kid, similar case to Steven Stayner.
Also keep in mind that the detective testified that he never specifically asked her ‘are you Elizabeth Smart’ at all, he only said to both her and Wanda that he was “investigating a kidnapping” and then spoke to Mitchell for about 15min, who managed to convince him that Smart wasn’t Elizabeth but Mitchel’s 18 year old daughter! The transcripts of both, Smart and the detective, is very informative and shows why the detective failed -he didn’t separate Smart from her kidnappers and therefore never got through to her, something the Sandy cops managed to do a few months later when they did separate her from the other two.
Remember also that she did admit to the Sandy cops that she was Elizabeth Smart and it was only when she did that they took her, in handcuffs, to the station for processing.
Had she continued to insist that she wasn’t Smart then the cops Sandy cops would also have had to walk away. But she did admit her true identity after about 25min of questioning on the sidewalk in Sandy and once she probably felt safe to do so, and was about 15m away from both the kidnappers.
If you’d actually read all the books & articles about the Elizabeth Smart case that have been published over the years, you’d have your answers to most of your questions. Fear is the reason she didn’t reach out for help. Fear can be a great motivator but it can also be a great inhibitor, & in Elizabeth’s case it was certainly the latter. She was a very young sheltered 14 year old who was a homebody & had not yet developed any interest in boys. She had no experience with scum-of-the-earth people. She was very shy by nature & did not know how to assert herself or fight. Her father admitted on Oprah a while ago that he had raised his daughters to be submissive. I blame her parents for not instilling street smarts in her.
Yes, and its one of the main reasons why they work now with radkids.
also in the dateline interview which is still online, ed talks about a time just after she came home when she was confronted by a journalist in the bathroom of her church and she just froze there too, didn’t move away from the corner she was in and her then 10 year old sister took her by the arm and forced her out of the bathroom. Her personality was just this overly submissive and obedient girl. It wasn’t until after all that RadKids training that she became the young women who cut of Nancy Grace.
Well Miss Lacee, since you seem to have the time and money to read all the books and articles about the case, then why don’t you start your own Blog and enlighten us?
Don’t talk to me about intense fear Lacey, I have experienced it first hand.
She was “Shy by nature”: I don’t buy it for one second.
hey you replied to me, i’m not Miss Lacee.???
why don’t you by this ‘shy by nature’??
“Don’t talk to me about intense fear Lacey, I have experienced it first hand.”
I’m sure you have, or rather I believe your words that you have done so. What i think is different is people. some react one way to fear others react differently and we don’t know why. if we did everyone would be a hero!
No, that was to Lacee, the comment just fell in the wrong place.
Of course everyone is different. I know that very well. But Elizabeth was not just molested one time by a babysitter or touched inappropriately in a public bathroom. She was kidnapped at knife point, tied to a tree, isolated, terrorized, forced to watch sex acts being done right in front of her, and raped FOUR times a day. This is serious trauma. The mind cannot handle this kind of trauma without either checking out, or causing the person to go through some pretty heavy after-effects.
You don’t buy(the fact that she was shy by nature)for one second? Why not? Do you know her personally? Have you ever met her? Do you live in Utah? If not, then you cannot know her better than her own family & friends do. FYI Elizabeth also experienced intense fear firsthand. Look, your experiences were different from hers. According to your past blog entries, you were abused from age 3 or 4 to age 12 by your father. & your mother abused you too & continued to abuse you after he died. It’s been a while since I read your blogs so feel free to correct me. It seems to me then that abuse was all you knew as a child. You were “used to it”, for lack of a better term(my apologies if that offends you. I don’t mean it to). But Elizabeth had clearly never been in a situation like that before she was kidnapped, & she obviously had no idea what to do. That’s what happens when people raise their kids to be submissive & raise them without street smarts. Heck I can relate to that because I was a similar way when I was 14. I didn’t even acknowledge boys as humans back then, let alone have any interest in them, I thought sex was gross & scary, I watched cartoons, played with dolls & still believed in Santa Clause at 14. I was completely sheltered & wasn’t street smart in any sense of the word. I was so clueless about life & the world at that age that if Mitchell had done to me what he did to Elizabeth, I would have believed everything he said. Not all kids are raised alike. You & Elizabeth are 2 completely different people with 2 completely different perceptions of life, & her ordeal did not last as long as yours. Even if by some miracle she did run away with that butt-ugly psycho Mitchell 1)she was underage(the age of consent in Utah in 2002 was 16, not 14)& Mitchell was old enough to know better, 2)the statute of limitations has run out on the ability to charge her as a runaway, & 3)even if she had run off with him, Mitchell would still have been put in prison regardless for a)sex with a minor/statutory rape, which carries a penalty of at least 10 years, b)harboring a runaway, which carries a penalty of at least 2 years, c)contributing to the delinquency of a minor, which I think is 2 or 3 years, interfering with parental custody, theft, breaking & entering, contempt of court charges for all the times he deliberately acted out in court in order to postpone the trial as long as possible, & other charges. I will have to look up exactly what the penalty is for each of those charges. But he would be looking at a bare minimum of 10 years in prison regardless. That’s if he isn’t given credit for time served, of course. Those are the state charges. The Federal ones would still have him in prison for taking her across state lines for the purpose of sex, which is punishable for up to 25 years if I remember correctly. As for Elizabeth, if she’d committed perjury & was caught she’d be looking at 5 years of prison time. The fact is, the Salt Lake police found physical evidence that proved Mitchell had kidnapped Smart. That evidence was presented at the trial, along with a host of witnesses who testified about Mitchell’s behavior & actions during the time he held Smart captive. & Mitchell’s own attorneys stated at the trial that they were not contesting the charges against Mitchell, they just said that he was insane at the time & therefore not responsible for his actions. Now since his own lawyers practically said he did it, it should be obvious that Mitchell is not innocent in any sense of the word. & given everything I’ve read about him, including interviews with his own family, & given that many people have described him as abusive & manipulative, I will believe Elizabeth before I ever believe Mitchell. Because Mitchell has acted guilty as sin since 2003.
No need to apologize Lacee, unlike some people, I am not so easily offended. In fact, I know who I am and don’t get offended. Please don’t mistake my strength and willingness to stand up to people as being offended.
I’m not going to engage with you much here because you have your opinion, and I have mine. I am not trying to convince you of anything, nor are you willing to be convinced.
I never said that Mitchell did not commit a crime and should not be in prison.
Alethea
Lacee you predicate your long winded posts on HEARSAY of mainstream media and you try to sound like you know what you are talking about. Nobody here knows what has happened to Elizabeth from her earliest days, all we can do is speculate.
I go by the physical evidence, the eyewitnesses & the fact that Mitchell has acted guilty as sin ever since he was arrested on March 12, 2003.
Lacee, there is NO physical evidence of a Moon landing, just a bunch of masons saying we went. Its a lie. Oh because you saw it on TV ? And a million other fools believed it ? As a video editor and photographer, the imagery on TV was faked for the Moon landing and 911. You’re just not that intelligent to see it.
You DO know that the astronauts brought back rocks from the moon, right? & there were hundreds of eyewitnesses that saw the planes crash into the buildings on 9-11. Look, you are perfectly entitled to believe whatever you want. But the only way I’ll ever believe that the moon landing & 9-11 are hoaxes is if the US government publicly admits it, & that’s final. Because there is absolutely no reason whatsoever for the government to have faked the moon landing, & I can’t think of any reason why our own government would kill 3,000 of its own citizens.
It’s for the reasons you can’t think of that they did it. Reasons too frightening for most people to handle –too monstrous for the human mind to comprehend.
Okay, so what are the reasons?
Althea, your site is screwing up somehow. Just to let you know. Or maybe it’s my computer.
Is everything on your end getting squashed into the side?
Yes, Lacee, I have Moon rocks too. Now prove they are moon rocks. You dont understand how much we are being lied to. Dont watch Loose Change watch September Clues
Why would the government lie about man landing on the moon? That makes no sense whatsoever. So if they lied about it in 1969, then when DID man land on the moon? Because they certainly did land on the moon at some point. Man has been going into space for years. Don’t tell me man has never been to the moon.