Tuesday, December 14, 2010

More pieces of the puzzle...people just chatting

Tuesday, December 14, 2010


Some more comments for and against

Elizabeth Smart, who is getting ready to go on a mission for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, took the stand today to testify against her abductor, Brian David Mitchell. Few people will forget the hooplah that surrounded Elizabeth when someone spotted her on the street, nine months after she disappeared, and called police.
I admire Smart for taking the stand, but I question her decision to go on a mission for the Church founded by a man who had sex with a girl who was pretty much the same age as her. Not only that, but he already had a wife when he married young Helen Mar Kimball. She was 14-years-old. And God told him to do it.
Sounds a little similar, huh?

a
26 Responses to “Elizabeth Smart testifies against Brian David Mitchell”

  1. Mindy Says:
    Off the topic of this blog, but I wondered of you had seen this web site, and the article about DNA. http://www.mormontimes.com/studies_doctrine/research_discoveries/?id=10756
    I’ve been “pondering in my mind” all of the things I never knew about the LDS Church. Keep getting that….”Stupor of thought”. LoL I was raised in a large LDS family, my parents, well my dad was as you describe your dad, tyrannical, though he has calmed over the years, my mom is his apologist.
    Seems there are so many things that I would question, and then like everyone else just say, oh well it doesn’t matter. I remember that I was confused when I would teach primary and the age of JS was older than I remember learning when I was of primary age…hmmm I just ended up blowing it off.
    I never even knew that black men were not allowed to have the priesthood, until the day a friend called me. and informed that “the blacks can have the priesthood now!!!” My response was…WHAT?? I never even knew they didn’t, was that an over sight by my parents, an embarrassment, or just that they didn’t agree with it? Curious….. Seems that as I have been searching and researching I learn things that spark so many “ah-ha” memories which bring back the doubts and concerns of my youth and young married life.

  2. I should have known….well maybe I have know since I was 5 or 6 years old. I had asked my mom if I could go to catechism with a friend. I didn’t know what catechism was, I just wanted to go with my girl friend. My mom’s response, after explaining that catechism was where people learn in the “Catholic” church, was, “No, but she is welcome to come to Primary any time.” That was confusing for a little girl. That was my first experience with church prejudice. That one experience has always been a guide for my life. When I was an active member, I would always be sure to include every one, I taught lessons as if there were people that were non members or less active, not assuming that every one was well versed in the religion (I know….that was then..LoL). I would be sure that scout meetings were as NON Mormon as possible. I wanted the boys to feel included, not excluded for not being “active” or “non-member”. I wanted their parents to see that they could trust me not to bring religion into their boys life’s. They could be at scouts and not at church.

  3. OK I’ve blabbered enough…I’m new at this. Thank you for your blog, I have been reading several blogs, and when I find references I read them. Not that blogs are all fact (except yours, of course) but I do find people’s experiences to be interesting and comforting. Knowing that there are others that feel as I do some how makes it easier for me. Maybe that’s a cop out. I don’t want to be an angry ex Mormon, as I have seen on some sites, I just don’t think I want to be a Mormon. Live and let live….and be at peace, finally.
    (I’ve used my spell check, and proofread it twice….LoL….hope there are non of this embarrassing mistakes..)
  4. azteclady Says:
    Does E. Smart even know that about Smith?
    Given how the story erm… the revelations change with every new prophet, I wouldn’t be surprised if she didn’t have a clue
  5. Rick Says:
    Natalie, that was exactly what I thought when I heard her father Ed say tearfully (paraphrasing) “it is disgusting what a man would do to a young girl in the name of God!”
    I guess he doesn’t know his church founder’s history?! I doubt Brian Mitchell had to use the “if we don’t do this, there will be this flaming sword issue…” card.
    ~Rick
  6. Margie Says:
    Question here; Has anyone seen pictures of Elizabeth Smart that were taken around the time immediately prior to her abduction? Why were the only pictures presented to the world, ones that were two or three years old at the time?

  7. I know, believe me I know that I am treading on dangerous ground here – but I’m going to say it anyway. My daughter was a good friend of the family, and Elizabeth Smart was not the “innocent, na├»ve” girl presented through pictures and family interviews. She still has scars from tattoo removal body piercing that she began at a young age. She was a disturbed child at the time. Surely nobody is suggesting that she deserved what she got. But the world would be shocked to really find out about the family issues that led up to the kidnapping. For example – what in the hell was the father doing hiring homeless people off the street to work on his family home? It is a practice that he had engaged in for years. What was all the pornography doing on Mr. Smart’s home and business computers?
    I’m just a little mad at the family for coming across as this sweet little innocent Mormon family, when in reality – the family has been very dysfunctional for years.

  1. K*tty Says:
    Mindy, I enjoyed your comments and empathize with your struggles. You sound like a darling person and way too liberal and open minded to stay a Mormon. Good for you for questioning. Thanks for sharing.
    Margie, you could make some serious money with a book about the goods on Elizabeth Smart. I am surprised that info has escaped the press. The case has always had some severely, disturbing, twisted turns.
  2. Natalie Says:
    It didn’t really ESCAPE the press. It just couldn’t be proved. Elizabeth was very “goth,” very dark, and as Margie says, very disturbed. I hesitate to say too much (and I know a lot of what Margie knows) just because I don’t feel like Elizabeth Smart deserves it. She was young and messed up. But I have long held that she was NOT kidnapped, and rather ran away and somehow met up with Mitchell and Barzee. But I can’t prove it.
  3. IRONSIDE Says:
    I have very serious doubts about this case. I posted a link where we are discussing this case. Thank you so much for the insight.
    Have any of you followed the Mccann case very similar, lots of things do not add up. Guess what Mccann is a buddy of Smart. You are more than welcome to join the discussion on link provided.
  4. IRONSIDE Says:
    Margie, there was a forensic report that said the slashed mesh on the window looked staged and was slashed from inside out. No chance you have a link to this report I have searched for days and it seems to be missing. Thanks.
  5. Sideon Says:
    I’m not surprised one bit about E. Smart going on a mission. If she’s Mormon, she does what is expected of her. I doubt her capacity to see the irony of her own situation parallel to that of good ole horny Joe.
  6. hendoo Says:
    Okay if Elizabeth Smart did run away… Why would she want to be with these guys? They guy looks like Osama Bin Laden! And the cops found proof that there was an intruder. I’m not saying she was a perfect girl or that this family is perfect. But if she was going to run away wouldnt she be doing something more fun than dressing like that and hanging out with crazy people. She was also 14, I’m sure this man threatened to kill her family and brainwashed her. Any little girl would do the same thing.
  7. Tombone Says:
    Hendoo is right. Even a ratted-out 14 year old is NOT going to hang with some lower life specimen like Mitchell. Margie, you are such a cunt.
  8. Michelle Says:
    Uh, Natalie, I take back the nice comment I made about your blog on your prop8/Dalin Oaks thread.
    You are one fucked up bitch for saying shit like this about a child rape victim. I can’t stand the Mormon church, but it could never cloud my judgement enough to sink that low. Let’s just hope Elizabeth never googles her own name and finds the heartless things you said about her. If you can’t prove it, then shut your fucking hole. Even if you could, a decent person would question why you’d want to. The kid doesn’t need any more than what she’s gone through.
    You and your buddy Margie sound like every gossipy, two-faced, weird Relief Society bitch I ever knew. If either of you think that a “goth” kid with tats is a sign of a troubled child, I really don’t know why you don’t go join the LDS sisters who are just as shallow as you assholes.
  9. Bree Says:
    Wow, now I feel bad for saying something nice about Michelle!
  10. Rick Says:
    Hmm, are these the same “Michelle’s?”
  11. Margie Says:
    Michele,
    Wow! And you cosider us bitches.
    You just lost any credibility. The story about what happened to Elizabeth Smart is tragic, sad, and demonic – and a whole list of other bad adjectives that could fill more than the space provided here. Emotions always redline when this topic surfaces. Through your words, I no longer trust or respect anything that you might say.
    However, through all the evidence in the case, it’s not difficult or beyond reason to deduce that the Smart family is a troubled family. And, the abduction was not a simple kidnapping of an innocent little girl who was sleeping in her bed at night. Even according to earlier police records and prior interviews with her family, little Elizabeth began running away from home for extended periods of time before her 10th birthday. Every picture that was shown to the public during the time of the kidnapping depicted Elizabeth as a much younger girl. Part of the reason for public animosity is the deception. Sadly, there are many, many children kidnapped each year with worse end results. So much publicity, funding and public support were garnished from the PR spin that was placed on this story, people feel that the public was deceived. The image portrayed by the family, (specifically the father), the press as well as the media firm that was hired by the family to garner funding and public support were tools that were representing a certain image of a child that was deceptive.
    Certainly one might argue that the only issue that mattered was the abduction of a child. I lean towards this view. However, I can certainly understand how others might be just a little pissed off at the way the Smart family manipulated the media through the entire event.
    This piss you off Michelle? Good! Now wash you mouth out, and learn to express yourself like an adult.
    Margie
  12. Alethea Marina Nova Says:
    Margie, you are not treading on “dangerous ground” you are an awake human being. I do not believe Elizabeth’s story. I base this on personal experience. I suffered death threats with a knife to my throat and repeated rape and isolation for years. Elizabeth Smart does not display ONE sign of having suffered trauma. Please read my articles on this matter at:http://ordinaryevil.wordpress.com/
  13. Alethea Marina Nova Says:
    “Michelle” sounds like she could be Elizabeth Smart. Maybe Elizabeth DID Google her own name and is showing her true side on this website, disguised as “Michelle.” Personally, I hope E. Smart does Google her own name and hope that she reads my blogsite articles about the case.
    Remember Michelle, E. Smart is accusing two people of heinous crimes. She can be scrutinized.
    Michelle wrote, “If you can’t prove it, then shut your fucking hole.” E. Smart is the one with the burden of proof.
  14. Lacee Says:
    Margie, give us a link to where you found that info about Elizabeth supposedly running away from home starting at age 10. You can’t possibly have access to police reports because they’d be sealed due to Elizabeth being a minor at the time. If members of the Smart family had said in interviews that she ran away from home I’m pretty sure that those interviews would have been reported in the news media & I’ve never found anything. Also, the FBI & the SLPD are still calling her a kidnap victm today. They have no reason to lie over one kid. The reason all the pictures of Elizabeth given to police were of her when she was 13 is because the Smarts could not find any recent pictures. It’s not as though they’d prepared for their daughter being kidnapped. What evidence do you have that the Smarts are a troubled family? There has never been any evidence to support that allegation. The Smarts did not “manipulate” the media. They used the media to find their kidnapped kid. Any parent would do that. Ed Smart’s brother Tom was/is a newspaper photographer. Also, if Elizabeth had started running away at age 10 the SLPD would not have called her a kidnap victim in 2002, they would have referred to her as an endangered runaway. Not to mention that if she’d run away for “extended periods of time” starting at age 10 then I guarantee that we would have heard of her long before her kidnapping on June 5, 2002.
  15. Alethea Marina Nova Says:
    Lacee, Margie said that her daughter was a good friend of the family. She does not need police reports to know that the Smart family had issues, or that Elizabeth ran away before. Margie obviously lives in the neighborhood or her daughter knows Elizabeth personally.
  16. Ironside Says: Lacee, I thought you said that there was a gag on this story. Therefore how can Margie send you a link. Katie Couric said herself that she was warned off by the Smarts and not to question Elizabeth. Why, Elizabeth was just fine. No trauma not upset, just getting on with her life. I have a vision of you stamping your little foot because no one will believe the Smart story. You are on every blog banging the drum for the Smarts…My question is why? Why is it so important to you that we believe.
  17. Ironside Says:
    http://attorneygeneral.utah.gov/AMBERsummary.html
    This is interesting…Utah adopted the Amber Plan on 2nd A pril 2002…The first issued (Rachael) Amber Alert was for Elizabeth Smart June 5th 2002….
    No Amber Alerts are to be issued for Runaways….
    If Smart had said before April 2nd 2002 his daughter had runaway he knew as young as she was there was nothing that could be done…Maybe look for her for a couple of days and wait for the rebel Elizabeth, to return home.. If this was on going and the police knew. Smart was helpless. Elizabeth ,disappeared maybe once again and now Smart had a weapon a powerful weapon…Amber Alert… he phoned the police and this time reported an Abduction…The very first Amber Alert in Utah was for Elizabeth Smart on June 5th 2002..not yet two months since this was granted. The rest is history.
  18. Goose Says:
    It may be late for this but anyway to answer Margie there’s an interview with Capt Corey Lyman SLCPD who lead the investigation and who clearly states that Elizabeth Smart had a below rating as a victim profile, that she wasn’t hanging out with the boyfriend or had issues at home to make her run away. Also FBI agent Fennerty clearly states that it was a sex crime. Now maybe the family had its problems like all families do but the cops didn’t consider her a run away at all. You can see their interviews yourself at:
    http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6u5st_the-kidnapping-of-elizabeth-smart_shortfilms
    Now who should I believe? Capt Lyman, SAgent Fennerty and Tom Smart(who isn’t a member anymore) or you and the rumor & hearsay you present here??
    Also even if she was ‘gothic’ or odd or if it is true that she ‘ran away’ well that also should not ever justify rape -women especially have spent decades overcoming that myth.
  19. goose Says:
    Margie “Question here; Has anyone seen pictures of Elizabeth Smart that were taken around the time immediately prior to her abduction?”
    Yes; there is one from just hours before the kidnapping. Elizabeth had an awards night at her junior high and won an award for sports I think , or maybe music, and the picture was taken as she left the stage and published in Tom Smart’s book “In Plain sight”
    A scaned copy of it is at
    http://elizabethsmart.piczo.com/photosbeforejune5th2002?cr=5&linkvar=000044
    about halfway down the page (in white top, black skirt walking just past the microphone with an black women just behind her). The award award was reported extensively back in 02.
    The reason for that photo was probably to show that she was just a pre-teen at most and to compare it to March 03 photos showing that she was only just starting to ‘develop’ , so that was probably the reason why she never became pregnant (plus the stress involved etc)
  20. Picture of elizabeth smart at home - Home smart - Home smart Says:
    […] Trapped by the Mormons » Blog Archive » Elizabeth Smart testifies 1 Oct 2009. Question here; Has anyone seen pictures of Elizabeth Smart that were taken. What was all the pornography doing on Mr. Smart’s home and. - Trapped by the Mormons » Blog Archive » Elizabeth Smart testifies […]
  21. Juan El Pavo Real Says:
    Elizabeth Smart has been lying the whole time, I’m a detective with a level of intuition matched only by my respect observation and scientific method. There is something extremely artificial, very mechanical, and utterly devoid in her eyes. And I am sorry, but you don’t willingly otur downtown Salt Lake City, even if you’re only 14 and frightened, especially after your captor has brutalized you repeatedly. That is unless you don’t want to be found. You don’t want to be found because you fill going home is a worse prospect…
    I am sorry naysayers, and everyone who responds with vapid sentiment, but there is much, much more going on here. Stockholm’s syndrome may answer many questions, but it also puts into question whether Elizabeth was ever even kidnapped. And the truth about the officer’s testimony today, only confirms what Margie and myself can sense. You don’t repeatedly tell an officer, for over 30 minutes, that you are not Elizabeth Smart. Even worse, you don’t make a Freudian slip, and state to a police officer, “You think I ran away don’t you?”
    If Margie’s rumors bear any merit, I stand mostly convinced that Elizabeth intentionally ran away, and later met up Mitchell, because there far worse things waiting for her at home. And if she had a track record of running away frequently when she was young, then I would’ve been putting as much pressure on her father as possible the entire investigation. And while I can’t give my gut the benefit of the doubt without physical proof, I can still hear it screaming at me that there’s something far far more bizarre, and twisted going on in the Smart home.
  22. nataliewrites Says:
    Who is Margie? Further, who are you?
    I agree that there is more to the story, and i have some “firsthand” knowledge but NOTHING changes the fact that Elizabeth Smart was nothing but a teen when she met up with Brian David Mitchell. Therefore, I believe she should be protected.
    Like you, I know more about the inside details of the story than most. However, I will stay silent. Because I don’t care if she walked up to him and said ” TAKE ME.” Or something worse. Because she was STILL JUST A CHILD. And adults know better. The End.