justice's posterous

"It was a crime scene that changed a 10-year-old boy's life..." http://www.myfoxhouston.com/dpp/news/local/111024-nearing-finale-for-son-conv...

Father's rights groups readily blamed the mother and "parental alienation". In 2004, media widely reported the ignorant pollyanna spew from neighbors, co-workers, and casual acquaintances about whataniceguy Lohstroh was. The decision from the Court of Appeals, overturning that conviction, told a very different story. http://www.thelizlibrary.org/therapeutic-jurisprudence/lohstroh.pdf The media, still hyperventilating for the sensational, did not adequately bring out that this boy got and accepted his juvenile parole offer only because he should have been acquitted in the first place on the grounds of self-defense -- and the D.A. knew it. Copping to a plea saved his family the cost and misery of another trial. It's "sad" that he got a gun? What is "sad" is that this child's only choice was between another decade of being abused or ending it. There is no good damn reason that when he said he was scared, when he said he and his brother were being physically and sexually abused, when he said he did not want to go with his joint custody father, that he wasn't believed, and that the judicial and police power of the state would not allow him to have a peaceful childhood, that his fathers' ego wants and demands were considered more credible and more important. For what. They are not. See Myths and Facts about Fatherhood at thelizlibrary.org