Murderer husband

gettingtheresometime

DandelionPatrol wrote: »

With nothing new to look at on this - the police have questioned Dave - they would not reopen the investigation

And UCOS is closing down as well......

BrassicWoman

Surely this should be in discussion time as it isn't a real person wanting real help?

FreddieFrugal

restless6 wrote: »

I would never choose a partner over my child , no matter what addictions And difficult behaviours they have .
Esther should have left her husband when he had the fight with her son and chose to help her son instead .

no one should have to put up with that from anyone, regardless of how they're related.

Why should she have to live alone with no one but an abusive thieving child around occasionally because she can't put anyone else before them?

I think it's unlikely that 'Dave' murdered her son, more likely that he did indeed just stand up to him and scared him off.

In the end, although I understand why the death of a child would be a horrible thing regardless of how far they'd gone off, the fact that he's out of her life is almost certainly a good thing for Esther.

The bad thing is the suspicion. I think it's natural that she'd blame Dave to some extent for what happened because he had a hand in keeping the boy away, who then ultimately died. So in some ways she could be viewing him as his indirect killer, rightly or wrongly.

I think her grief as a mother is causing her to have these feelings towards her partner.

But deep down she has feelings that she wouldn't/couldn't admit to or even understand, that life is better without her son being there. That's why she has stayed with her partner despite her sadness and worries

As I said though, I don't believe that her partner did anything more than scare the boy off. For that he should be applauded

DomRavioli

OP, time of death is fairly easy to ascertain, so they would have been able to pin it down even some considerable time ago. Secondly, your friend of a friend's relative has zero proof that their partner had any altercation (the partner had visible signs of violence, but no word on the deceased).

You seem one of those nosy neighbour types who likes to come in with half a story (not even half tbh, most of the info you're missing is in the public domain and very easily obtained) and ask for people's opinions based on almost nothing. What did the postmortem show? Does your "friend of a friend's relative" actually have any proof of anything alleged by herself?

Imagine being accused of potential involvement in your stepson's murder, and having it dragged up every time your "friend of a friend's relative" had a moody on her. They need therapy to get over it, as its pretty obvious that they can't, and blaming someone else is just another avoidance behaviour based on their own insecurities.

If all else fails, they can go on Jezza Kyle. They sound like they would fit in.

Pollycat

BrassicWoman wrote: »

Surely this should be in discussion time as it isn't a real person wanting real help?

Or is it MSE's 'dilemma of the week'?

I can't understand what the OP is trying to achieve here.

In this admittedly 5th hand account, someone has for 'many years' stayed with someone she believes may have killed her son.

What does it matter what anyone else would do?
She had done what she has done,
There's no going back, only forward.
She either continues to live with this man and her doubts/suspicions or she leaves him.
Her choice and her business.

And shouldn't the title of this thread be 'Allegedly Murderer Husband'?

Trek_girl

BrassicWoman wrote: »

Surely this should be in discussion time as it isn't a real person wanting real help?

Sorry, I did not realise there was such a thing – is that in the Moneysavers Arms?

Pollycat wrote: »

Or is it MSE's 'dilemma of the week'?

I can't understand what the OP is trying to achieve here.

In this admittedly 5th hand account, someone has for 'many years' stayed with someone she believes may have killed her son.

What does it matter what anyone else would do?
She had done what she has done,
There's no going back, only forward.
She either continues to live with this man and her doubts/suspicions or she leaves him.
Her choice and her business.

And shouldn't the title of this thread be 'Allegedly Murderer Husband'?

DomRavioli wrote: »

You seem one of those nosy neighbour types
.

I am never likely to speak to or interact with any of the people involved. I am actually rather surprised at the commenters who are saying that because it is not accurate/ your scenario you should not think about it.

What is a person allowed to think about? If there is an earthquake in another country should you switch channel because it has nothing to do with you and you know no one there? What about if someone is deciding if their child should learn piano? Should you not think about that because you don’t have a child/ like piano?
Relationships are fascinating things and sometimes things that seem set in stone can change completely in the blink of an eye.

Acknowledging the concept that there may be something about your partner that you would never be able to verify and the different potential ways to respond is fascinating to me.

Pollycat

Trek_girl wrote: »

I am never likely to speak to or interact with any of the people involved. I am actually rather surprised at the commenters who are saying that because it is not accurate/ your scenario you should not think about it.

What is a person allowed to think about? If there is an earthquake in another country should you switch channel because it has nothing to do with you and you know no one there? What about if someone is deciding if their child should learn piano? Should you not think about that because you don’t have a child/ like piano?
Relationships are fascinating things and sometimes things that seem set in stone can change completely in the blink of an eye.

Acknowledging the concept that there may be something about your partner that you would never be able to verify and the different potential ways to respond is fascinating to me.

One of the examples you mention above has nothing to do with the 'situation' you describe.
An earthquake reported on the news is real, it is factual.
Of course I would think about it, even if I didn't know anyone who may have been involved.

If someone wants their child to learn piano, what does it have to do with me or you? (unless they are expecting me or you to pay for the lessons or have specifically asked me or you for advice) Why would you or I need to even think about it?

I prefer to deal with the real world - where I don't get absorbed with 5th hand 'maybe he killed him, maybe he didn't' scenarios concerning people I've never met nor am I likely to meet.

And yes, the Discussion Time board is a sub-board of The Moneysaving Arms.

duchy

It sounds like the gossips around this lady are having a field day- and frustrated because the mother isn't sharing.

There will be a reason why they aren't in possession of all the facts-The mother has chosen not to discuss them with them. It must be very frustrating for the gossips.

DomRavioli

Trek_girl wrote: »

I am never likely to speak to or interact with any of the people involved. I am actually rather surprised at the commenters who are saying that because it is not accurate/ your scenario you should not think about it.

And we are right. Unless you want to know about this, and I mean getting dragged into it, keep your nose out. Its literally nothing to do with you let alone posting someone else's business on a public forum.

Just take it down, and maybe get a hobby.

bright_side

There have been at least 4 separate occasions in my life when I've been faced with horrible situations and 'what I thought I would do' in said situations went completely out of the window. I'm now a firm believer that nobody truly knows how they will react to anything.......unless it actually happens to them. We can all say 'I'd do this' and 'I'd do that', however that's very easy to do when we're only imagining it happening to us. When it's REAL, that's when you really find out!