Nougat

@Nougat@kbin.social

I am trying to focus on posting source documents, as opposed to someone else's reporting on source documents.

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

Nougat,

Probably still imaginary.

Nougat, (edited )

I'm all about true crime podcasts, and you're not wrong.

However, the giveaway here is "they had to cut the brace off," especially with "they got out quickly" following quickly behind.

If such a thing required cutting off - a process that would be much more dangerous to the child than disassembling it - it would have had to be designed to be permanently installed without cutting. That means welded or padlocked as opposed to bolted or latched. Besides which, building such a thing in that way requires a serious amount of effort and planning. Not to mention this is right on the heels of having had repercussions for doing that exact thing. The steel and fabric one would have had to be designed and built before normal visitation was resumed.

All that indicates an incredibly sick perpetrator, who also lied to a judge when he said he'd learned his lesson - because the thought and design and construction of the second one had to have already been going on. I find it unlikely that, in 2016, in Florida, someone who so grossly abuses a nine year old, and who is found out by their neighbor, a police officer, when said nine year old shows up at the door with the thing needing to be cut off, would be quickly released on bail.

Edit: @Speculater rightly points out that a brace, worn for such a short amount of time, could not dislocate a shoulder.

Rage-inducing stories on reddit are famously fake, and this is one of them.

Nougat,

Oh let's talk about that.

It is amazingly uncommon for custody to be shared in that way. Moving house every week, back and forth, is incredibly stressful and disruptive for a child.

And then in the update, it's referring to how that "visitation" schedule was reinstated after the first incident. One, that's not visitation, that's true joint custody - a thing which is also rare in custody cases. Normally, you have one parent who has custody, and the other has visitation. Visitation usually means something like "every other weekend," so the non-custodial parent gets the child two days out of every fourteen. If it was true joint custody, the switchovers would be more like "every other weekend, and all summer," especially with an elementary school aged child.

That's not even addressing the fact that, in the story, the court just went back to that ridiculous arrangement after one parent was shown to have abused the child.

Nougat, (edited )

@holycrap - I absolutely apologize; I intended no mockery of you personally, but I can totally see how my response could have been received that way. It's all too easy to forget that I'm interacting with real human people sometimes, even if I try really hard to remember.

Thank you, @Shelena, for bringing this to my attention. Your responses have been necessarily corrective and gently condsiderate at the same time.

Nougat,

Everyone has easy access to everything they need.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • localhost
  • All magazines
    •
    Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #