Just a guy who writes in various venues.
Twinkletoes - as you have done on every forum (as crytears), you have set about to destroy this discussion too. Your posts are not only repetitive (restating over and over what you just said in your previous post and on every other forum you have ruined), but you are full of a strange malicious anger yourself making unsubstantiated accusations and condemnations. You spew out far more venom and animosity than we ever have seen from any Strong City representative. Like all the other forums on this subject where you have participated, this thread will most likely be closed as a result of your efforts (beyond90seconds.com couldn't keep up and closed his discussion threads out of frustration in dealing with you and your numerous posting id's). Once the Crytears (the name you use elsewhere) postings begin, it signals the end of a fair, balanced conversation. What a shame to see yet another discussion bite the dust from your postings.
I posted a follow-up comment about this article on my alibi.com blog. Perhaps it was too long for this thread.
You can go there to read it (and comment here).
Maybe it will be helpful to consider some relevant information in order to be able to determine whether there was a sexual climate going on there or one for healing. Here are the facts. (Names were redacted which relate to minor children or their parents).
And you think this was about healing? Whatever.
In the first post (titled Clarification) of these comments, I found it amusing that in her attempt at setting "the record straight," Bethabara didn't bother to check the record.
In my previous post (scroll up), I showed that on the stand, the victim, "Healed" (L.S), testified that he (Bent) was indeed naked. And the following is what "Healed" also said on the stand (under oath) about her intention to lay naked together with Bent:
L.S.: I shared with him this desire that had been building up in me to lie naked with him and I wanted it skin to skin.
I am surprised at how (there are many examples) this story is continuously distorted with newly created, less incriminating versions. If you compare that first post from Bethabara in with the two quotes which I provided from one of the victim's own trial testimony, you come to the opinion that there seems to be little respect for the truth in communications from the Strong City folk. It was obviously Healed's intent for them to lay naked together and Bent was naked in her presence and, of course, Bethabara (having been there through all of the 'skin-to-skin" communications), could not be unaware of that. "Just the facts... Ma'am, just the facts.", as Joe Friday used to say.
I read the trial transcript. You can read it here: Visit Page In the transcript, "Healed," (one of the victims), is called L.S and the prosecuting attorney is named Emilio Chavez:
Emilio Chavez: At that point did you take your clothes off? L.S.: Yes. Emilio Chavez: Ok. What was Michael wearing at the time? L.S.: Nothing. I don’t think. Yeah, he was not wearing anything. Emilio Chavez: Ok, did you crawl into bed with Michael? L.S.: Yes.
Emilio Chavez: At that point did you take your clothes off?
Emilio Chavez: Ok. What was Michael wearing at the time?
L.S.: Nothing. I don’t think. Yeah, he was not wearing anything.
Emilio Chavez: Ok, did you crawl into bed with Michael?
That should straighten up that misunderstanding.
One additional standard for responsible publication is that the newspaper does simple fact-checking (before publication, not after it runs). Being simply outraged at the faults and deceptiveness of a possibly unscrupulous writer isn't sufficient. The newspaper bears equal (if not more) responsibility to have followed through on the very easy task of picking up a phone and asking anyone mentioned in an article, who was quoted, for a simple verification. I have been quoted, relative to my work, in newspaper and magazine articles (not in the Alibi) and fact checkers (either the editors or sometimes junior staffers) called me each time to see if the quotes matched the articles.
I notice that Ms Demarco wasn't as harsh on herself as she was on the hapless writer, whose rebuttal wasn't even quoted. I would like to hear his side... perhaps, the woman in the article gave him that made-up story and he was the victim of deception (it has happened many times by people wanting to please a reporter). What about a followup with Montoya, instead of just slandering his reputation?
I think most of us assumed that some fact checking goes on. Could the paper issue a statement regarding a change in policy to prevent this sort of thing happening again?
I once made myself something like that loaf as a diet idea. I wanted to lose ten pounds in a hurry, so this way I controlled exactly what I ate (that's all I ate and in exact quantities everyday). It worked to enable me to control my caloric intake exactly and I lost the weight I wanted right on schedule. But, what was interesting is that since I was in a state of deprivation... after about two days, I really looked forward to it; it actually became quite tasty.
I wonder if that loaf recipe actually has enough protein (I included some protein powder in my concoction). Getting the proper balance of all the required amino acids can be quite a challenge. But, at least, they won't starve with that combination and after a while I am sure they are back on a diet with something more substantial.