Note: Day 14’s posts might be boring. I think I might have dwelt too long on Mrs Todd, so you will have to excuse me. You might want to leave it, and skip to Day 15 (tomorrow), when I will probably sum up what I say in today’s posts in one paragraph.
I’m not sure why I’ve started some of my posts with ‘Good morning!’ So I’ll start this one with a more neutral ‘Hello!’
Today, I have to think about what I write. Since the Amanda Todd story started, so many people have jumped on the bandwagon with stories like ‘She was my friend’ that it is difficult to know who’s who and what’s what. There are so many conflicting bits of information out there, it makes getting to the facts really strenuous, but usually some quick research shows that the data is false.
However – there’s a twist. Before now, I have left comments with people, pointing out and proving certain errors – usually to do with dates and anomalies. But this has worked against me. I go back to the article, and any obvious error that I have brought to their attention has disappeared, thus weakening my claims that these articles are false and uninformed. But luckily, a lot of these articles remain intact – proof that most of the information is baloney.
In today’s posts, I might not quote my sources too closely. To a certain extent, you’ll just have to take my word for it. So let’s continue with the investigation of Carol Todd.
First things first. The terrible urge by Mrs Todd to turn her daughter into a brand. It’s appalling, really. And a word of warning to all gullible people out there: a lot of funds set up by parents and close relatives end up covering the family’s ‘expenses’. People donate to charities, unaware that vast amounts go towards the wages of the people involved. Maybe I’m too cynical. I will leave it there.
On a personal level, I find the ‘Princess Snowflake’ brand rather sickening. It’s just too sweet and sickly. We all know she was no princess. This urge to sweeten her memory – to make it look like she was a pristine princess is just farcical. I daren’t fully express my opinion – it’s too full of vitriol, and would make this look like a rant. And I don’t think it’s a desire by mom to keep her daughter’s memory sacrosanct – it’s a deliberate and manipulative ploy to cover up the true story and turn her daughter into something to be exploited. Enough!
First thing to note at the beginning is: what planet was Mrs Todd on? Even if we assume that she knew nothing about her daughter’s activity in October, 2012, it would have quickly become evident. The anti-Amanda comments emerged quite soon after the event. YouTube videos followed. Huge amounts of criticism were hurled at her daughter. Even if you were to dismiss all of this as some sort of hate-filled hysteria, and somehow convince yourself that, for some reason, there were multitudes of people out there ready to throw stones for no reason, it would have been impossible to have ignored the publication of the flashing video and pictures. But somehow, none of this filtered through to Mrs Todd. It was only later, when she couldn’t avoid it, that she appeared to admit that, yes, her daughter had been on BlogTV.
So on with some random quotes from Carol Todd.
‘My heart goes out to the family of Jessica Laney…..but I, as a mother who has recently lost my own daughter to a similar tragedy’ errr..no. Not similar at all, really.
‘I do recall…I had so many people contacting me with their messages..I wondered how they got my contact information.’ ummm..because you plastered your details all over the place?
‘I personally stayed away from the majority of requests because I wanted the privacy.’ Yeah, right.
‘The highlight of the day was finding out that Amanda Todd was the 8th most trended topic on Google. When Googling her name, she was in the top 3. Whitney Houston and Kate Middleton were in first and second spots..Then to have her so darn popular out there in the e-tech world. Really now… my Princess Snowflake did all that!!!’ Come on people! Are you seriously telling me that it’s a big thrill for a mother whose daughter has tragically died to find she was so Googled? And wasn’t she aware that most searches would have been for salacious gossip?
We have an ordinary quote. Out of context, it looks harmless. But bear in mind that Mrs Todd – for three years from 2009 to 2012 – was not at home with Amanda: ‘What I wouldn’t do to be able to sit and watch a movie with both my children’. Well, it was a rarity, even when Amanda was alive!
Now – the first evidence of lying: ‘This past summer, Amanda attempted to self harm herself. She didn’t succeed because she called me and she got the help she needed in time.’ In the video, we see a picture of cutting, and we are encouraged to believe it was constant. Not so, it would seem. Unless mother is lying. Who knows?
But things get confusing. ‘Weekends were spent at home so that she wouldn’t be alone and feeling abandoned.’ Yet we have pictures of her out and about, looking quite happy, in July 2012, and we have information that says she had plenty of friends.
‘September was another month that took lots of energy. The going back and forth to the hospital.’ This is odd. Not the going back and forth to hospital part, but it was around this time that she made her video. I have a great feeling that someone, somewhere, encouraged her and helped her to make the video, and I think it was possibly seen as part of therapy. But seriously, any responsible adult, had they known the full story, would have taken the video down. Things just don’t fit in.
‘I will never forget Amanda. It is hoped that the world won’t forget Amanda Todd and what she reminds us of. Be Strong. Be kinder. Help others. Don’t bully others. Learn from our mistakes. Forgive. Have fun. Follow your dreams. Be Someone and Care. Those are all words to live by.’ Well – no. Amanda has passed into legend as the kid who flashed and killed herself. She certainly didn’t learn from her mistakes, and she spent too much time following her dreams – dreams that led to BlogTV and online nudity. And she’s gone down in history for this – if you really want attention, do a video, tell a pack of lies, and kill yourself. One way ticket to Heaven and adoration. That’s what has really come out of this story.
Now – confusing information again: ‘..that tonight is the 2 year anniversary date of the night that the RCMP arrived at my door to tell me that pictures had been posted on the internet by the online predator.’ What Mrs Todd leaves out is the fact that the RCMP must have let her know AFTER the 4am visit. In 2010, Amanda was living with father. And we get the first reference to the ‘online predator’. But wait a minute – something’s not right here, either.
In a later interview, Carol Todd says she knew all about Amanda’s online activity, so the visit from the police would have come as no shock. In December, 2010, Amanda was at the peak of her online celebrity. Now, once again, I ask you to stop and think for a minute.
We are led to believe – in the media, and from comments made after the event – that EVERY teen has flashed. That it is not uncommon, and has almost become accepted. So why would the police go so over the top for ONE picture that had been circulated? Why would they turn up as if it was a major crime? If the picture HAD been circulated to all of Amanda’s friends and family, why was it that the police had to come round and tell her – how come nobody had contacted Mrs Todd already? It is hard to believe.
And why the reference to ‘online predator’? If the spreading of the photo was such a shock, why wasn’t it attributed to someone unknown? Anyone could have distributed it – one of Amanda’s friends, one of her enemies, kids at school. Why the rapid assumption that it was a predator? Unless, of course, the police and family were already well aware of what was going on. Remember: at this time we can assume that Amanda hasn’t had time to explain where the photo has come from. No – there’s a lot more to this.
Then we get this dreadful comment: ‘I was so surprised to read that Amanda made it as the 2nd Top Newsmakers of 2012. I think it was in Canada by just reading the content. She beat out the NHL hockey strike as a news item and that was going on way before 10/10/12. That’s my Princess Snowflake!!’ Just why does Carol Todd find so much glee in the fact that her child is, to a certain extent, so notorious? I find it bizarre!
At this point, do I really need to continue with the oddities of Carol Todd’s accounts? Maybe I do – as they highlight the fact that this story looks so fake. Rather than make this post so long, I will continue in the next one.