Members KLN Posted January 19, 2007 Members Share Posted January 19, 2007 Bill O'Reilly: You know the Stockholm syndrome thing, I don't buy it, I never bought it, I don't think It happened in the Patty Hearst Case. I don't think it happened here... Greta van Susteren: Woah, Can I just say something? Bill O'Reilly: Yeah go ahead and jump in. GVS: First of all we don't know all the facts, Don't forget that Elizabeth Smart likewise had an opportunity to leave and she did not. She was on the public street for some reason when young people are picked up and taken under the influence of adults they are very receptive of what adults do. So I would not dismiss the Stockholm syndrome -- BOR: The difference in the Smart case, and correct me if I am wrong, was this guy was always around the little girl and she wasn't gone for the long period of time as this guy was. Now what we have learned -- and this is why I don't believe in Stockholm -- this guy Shawn Hornbeck gone four years from 11-15. Authorities actually say that he taunted his own parents on his website. He's got these piercing this is a troubled kid in my opinion. Even if the guy threatens you this and that, you're riding your bike around, you got friends -- the kid didn't go to school. There's all kinds of stuff, if you can get away, you get away. If you're 11 -- GVS: Bill, it seems bizarre to me, I agree it seems bizarre. Why not run, why not yell, why not scream? But the thing I keep going back to is, what was Patti Hearst's story... BOR: I didn't buy that Patti Hearst story for a second. GVS: Why was she so willing to sign up with her kidnappers and like wise Elizabeth Smart, she had opportunity -- nice kid, nice family, why was she unwilling to run...? BOR: Let me answer your question. This is what I believe in the Hearst case and in this case. The situation that Hearst found herself in was exciting. She had a boring life, child of privilege. All of a sudden she's in with a bunch of charismatic thugs and she enjoyed it. The situation here with this kid is looks to me to be a lot more fun then when he had under his own parents. He didn't have to go to school, He could run around and do what he wanted. GVS: Some kids like school -- BOR: Well I don't believe this kid did. And I think when it all comes down what's going to happen is there was an element here that this kid liked about his circumstances... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mateo22 Posted January 19, 2007 Members Share Posted January 19, 2007 Don't even get me started on this guy...I can't stand O'Reily....but of course, my father just worships the man.... I heard about this on another board, and wanted to throw up. He has no class, and yes, he has a right to his opinion, it's his show...yada, yada, yada....but still, I mean c'mon, the kid was just that a KID....and as GVS pointed, none of us were there, and none of us know all the facts. This BS about he had piercings and whatnot is just ridiculous....and this is supposed to be an UNbiased news network.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members KLN Posted January 19, 2007 Author Members Share Posted January 19, 2007 What if he's onto something, though? Yes, Shawn was kidnapped. And for that, his kidnapper should go to prison. That said, who's to say that he didn't decide to stay? He was out riding his bike, he had opportunity after opportunity to get away. He had internet access, phone access, television access. He was allowed to go outside without his captor anywhere near. It's hard to say that someone is being "held captive" when the kidnapper has told the kid that he's FREE TO GO. The kidnapper told Shawn that he was free to come and go as he pleases... hence him being outside riding his bike and talking to friends and such. True, he might've been threatened, but still, he wasn't being held CAPTIVE. He was allowed to come and go as he pleases. And I do think it's entirely likely that the kid was just having a good time. Not having to go to school, able to come and go as he pleases, do whatever he wants, play videogames all day long, full access to the internet and whatever... that's hardly the life of someone held held CAPTIVE. I think it's entirely possible that he didn't WANT his parents to find him, because he thought his parents were too strict or something... and so he didn't want to be found. And now that he HAS been found, he's feeling pretty damn SCREWED that he can't explain why he never ran, etc. hence his silence. He can't very well come right out and say, "Hey, mom and dad... I didn't want you to find me. I stayed gone on purpose." I'm sure that the kidnapper was probably a sick man and a pedophile. And if Shawn decided to stay willingly, I'm not even blaming him for that... he was too young to know how to make a good decisions and by the time he came to his senses, he was afraid he'd be in trouble with is parents for purposely staying gone. Who knows. This is all just very weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mateo22 Posted January 19, 2007 Members Share Posted January 19, 2007 I see where you are coming from, I really do. And going through some of the [!@#$%^&*] that I did growing up, don't think for one second that I didn't consider I guess what could be considered 'similar' scenarios. So ya, maybe he was kidnapped in the beginning and then as time went on, realized that he 'felt' better there than at home. I just didn't like the way O'Reily made it seem so impersonal and he always comes off like his word is THE word or something...i don't know. but you did a good job at doing what I think O'Reily may have been trying to get at. like you said, this whole story is just crazy!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ms. Walsh Posted January 19, 2007 Members Share Posted January 19, 2007 Bill O'Reilly is going to be on the Colbert Report tonight. This is either going to be absolutely hilarious or a disaster! I think O'Reilly knows that Colbert's show is a spoof on his own, but hopefully he won't be a jackass about it. But then again, maybe he thinks Colbert is serious when he says he supports Bush. Remember when the White House let him host the correspondents' dinner? OMG, that was just genius! I can't believe he got away with all the stuff he said! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members KLN Posted January 19, 2007 Author Members Share Posted January 19, 2007 LOVE LOVE LOVE Colbert! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bree Posted January 19, 2007 Members Share Posted January 19, 2007 We'll probably never know the whole truth. But we DO know a man took a child away from his parents for a number of years and probably sexually assaulted him. For that alone he should be sent to prison. I think the Stockholm Syndome does exist. There's a well-known case of a young girl who was kidnapped by a married couple and became the husband's sex slave. She stayed with them for seven years until she and the wife plotted her escape. She was allowed outside and even went to see her family with the husband. She had opportunities to let people know she was kidnapped, but didn't. During the trial, she displayed no sign of outrage or real anger towards what had happened to her. Maybe it could have been her personality, or after seven years she was just worn out, but I think she bonded with this couple, especially if the wife helped her leave. Oh, and memo to Bill: Having piercings does not make you a troubled kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kwing42 Posted January 19, 2007 Members Share Posted January 19, 2007 Bill O'Reilly merely brought up points that everyone was talking about. I too wondered why he did not leave if he had so much free time. I wondered all the things that Bill said. Do any of you watch his show and see what he said in its entirety? He made sense. He was in no way blaming the kid, and in no way made light of the sitaution. And yes, it is obvious that Colbert respects and somewhat admires O'Rielly and rightfully so. Whether you agree or not with him, he says what he feels and its show, he should! As Bill said this is a complicated story and many are angry and upset by it. True? yes. I too wondered why he did not leave. He did not bemoan the boy for NOT doing it, he asked the question. He was merely looking at all sides of the story, which any good reporter would do and he admitted himself that had he interviewed Shawn, he would not front him with these questions. People really need to start cutting people slack. The investigators are looking into exactly what Bill was talking about anyway. Its no secret that he was left alone, and why he did not leave needs to be investigated. And God forbid that he said children need to learn about and discuss these kind of events with their parnets. yea, that is horrible He speaks his mind, probably too freely for others. But it is his show, and he did no harm to anyone. He merely stated the obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Marilyn_M Posted January 19, 2007 Members Share Posted January 19, 2007 What is so weird about the situation? What is so hard to believe that he did not run? People are trying to make it sound so damn simple when its not. It just not a case of running when you get the chance. I wish everyone would get off this kids back and let him live the rest of his life. He has a long way to go. Bill O'Reilly is a flipping idiot and he just went and furthered my point. Just stop wondering and pondering about a situation that is frankly none of our business. I feel as if people are being judgemental towards this boy and that is just not right. I want people to stop picking on him and just let him be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mateo22 Posted January 19, 2007 Members Share Posted January 19, 2007 Bravo, Bravo! This is definitely still how I feel, even though I may be able to see where other peeps think they are coming from, it still just doesn't seem right that people are trying to make this boy less of a victim that he reall was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Marilyn_M Posted January 19, 2007 Members Share Posted January 19, 2007 Maybe its just the up and coming child psychologist in me but whenever I see a case like this and people like O'Reilly try to give their "opinion" I seriously want to go and tell him to STFU because he doesn't have a clue as to what he is talking about. The last time I checked you talked out of your ass on Fox News and not any type of medical or psychological professional. It is people like that who really tick me off. He is talking but yet he isn't saying much at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.