O'Reilly - "Abducted child "liked ... his circumstances,

[Hypathia]

I provided a link on the previous page; everyone can view it for themselves.

[forrestkc]

The boy was not forced to stay. He was not tied up while his captor went to work and out on a regular basis. He personally went to the police station and reported his bicycle stolen to the police, using his "captor's last name." At another point, he was caught riding his bicycle after dark and was stopped by the police. When the police asked him his name, he used the last name of his "captor". He sent 2-3 emails to his father's web site, using his 'captor's" last name. He had ample opportunity to leave at will. He chose to stay with his captor.

You don't think that these predators brain wash the kids they prey on? You don't think they do things like threaten to kill their families or convince the children they prey on that they deserve it?

[Guest LadyC]

sometimes fear and intimidation is far more binding than ropes. kids at that age (or any age) can be so easily intimidated by someone in power... you leave, your family dies. you tell, your family dies. it happens. that's how predators maintain control.

anyone remember elizabeth smart? would anyone assume that she enjoyed having been taken from her home in the middle of the night, forced to live as a second wife to an old man? how many times did she have opportunities to tell.. to run... to talk to police, which she did, and still denied who she was.

why? out of fear. unless you believe that 14 year old girl enjoyed being raped and sodomized by some dirty old geazer.

[forrestkc]

I provided a link on the previous page; everyone can view it for themselves.

Thanks for doing so. I don't see how anyone can watch the segment and not think that O'Reilly's insinuations were not absolutely abhorrent.

[forrestkc]

I remember the elizabeth smart case, and it really cannot compare with this one. elizabeth smart, unlike this boy, was held against her will, and moved around frequently. And unlike the elizabeth smart case, the boy had another companion with him that had been living with the abuctor. This boy, while fear does play a part, had ample opportunity to leave, but didn't. There is much more to this case than we will probably ever know.

I don't think you realize how much people can be brainwashed. These predators convince kids they deserve it. I mean you are making these insinuations, but the boy was abducted at age 11, we don't what was done to him or what was done to brainwash him.

[Axxman]

Stockholm syndrome is not some big mysterious psycological trick. Abused women demonstrate it ALL the time when they repeatedly defend a man who beats them. Elizabeth Smart's case may actually NOT be a case of Stockholm syndrome since she kept a journal during her ordeal and wrote that she hated her abductors. Persons experiencing stockholm syndrome usual don't harbor hard feelings towards their abuser, and often view them as a victim while becoming emotionally attached.

If nothing else...Bill O'Reilly is 100% correct that this is something we should talk to our kids about. Kids need to be aware that kidnappers will say and do anything (including make death threats) to keep them in line. Kids should be ready and be aware that its okay to get away if they can...irregardless of what the "bad guy" says.

[Guest LadyC]

elizabeth smart was approached once by a police officer. if i remember correctly, the officer even ASKED her if she was elizabeth smart. her abductors were not hovering over her shoulder and she still told the officer she was not who he thought she was.

they were always nearby, but they did not keep her locked up. she was out in public frequently and at any time could have told someone, anyone, who she was and ask for help.

so yes, her case DOES compare to this one. both children were bound to their captors by intimidation.

[Guest LadyC]

by the way, anyone remember the other case many years ago? the steven staynor case? he spent YEARS with his captor. he had the freedom to come and go as he pleased, yet he didn't go find a cop to get help until his abductor came home with a new victim.

that one compares too.... same story, different name. anyone here think he preferred life with his kidnapper to a life with a loving family? that little boy was so messed up from his ordeal he ended up committing suicide. his brother was messed up by the ordeal too... hard to adjust to the return of his sibling... he turned into a murderer.

[nebula]

Again - whether his analysis is right or wrong, he did bring out one good point:

"But to just chalk this up to brainwashing and walk away is turning away from the true danger of child molesters and abductors. All American children must be taught survival skills, must be prepared to face crisis situations. That is the lesson of the Shawn Hornbeck story."

I'm not convinced O'Reilly is out to crucify the victim. This statement, at least to me, indicates that he isn't satisfied with conventional psychology, and he believes that getting to the bottom of why this kid wouldn't leave his kidnapper will better enable us to train children how to defend themselves.

[Hypathia]

I do believe in Stockholm syndrome. This kid may have been able to escape later on and didn't but we don't know what that pedophile did to him the first year of his captivity. Patty Hearst was kept in a closet and not let out for the first two whole months after she was kidnapped and was repeatedly raped by several men. She even had to "use the bathroom" in that filthy dark closet and we see how she went "nuts" for a while.

Women allow men to abuse them mentally and physically and lie to cover up for the guy.

We all like to say, "I'd have done this, or I'd have done that" but NONE of us really know what we would do because we've never been in that situation.

I do think we should add "what to do if you're kidnapped" to the training we give our children. The concentration so far has been on how not to get kidnapped in the first place; we need to expand that.

O'Reilly is an a**h***, pure and simple. I watched the show and I've provided the link (couldn't find a link for it at FOX..imagine that.) all I could find there is the video of his reaction to the fall-out after his comments. Naturally he's saying he didn't really say what he said and didn't mean what he meant. Typical O'Reilly.

BTW- I can't stand Rosie O'Donnell either. What is up? Why are all these abrasive loud-mouths getting so many viewers and listeners. I can't stand Rosie, Rush, Bill or Shawn. But to each his own, the far-right likes their big mouths and the far-left likes theirs. Wow, has this country ever been more divided?

Edited January 22, 2007 by Hypathia