WACKER - What? Another Crazy Kooky Entertaining Read

[mwcarolina]

Originally Posted by James T

there is zero evidence Dorothy was ever hit on the head.

Except the fact that they had to call the police and she had to be driven to the hospital!!! I don’t know where you got your information, but if she didn’t have an injury then 911 wouldnt be called

[XCalibur]

Originally Posted by mwcarolina

Except the fact that they had to call the police and she had to be driven to the hospital!!! I don’t know where you got your information, but if she didn’t have an injury then 911 wouldnt be called

I don't claim to be an expert on head injuries, but I am pretty sure there are some that can be internal without any outward signs. The confusing thing is the UM episode said Dorothy had skull lacerations, but apparently there is no such injury. Some people think they may have meant scalp lacerations. But I do know for a fact concussions do not always show outward bruising or anything.

However I will say that if she was hit hard enough to be knocked out, there should have at least been a knot on her head you'd think.

But the bottom line remains there is simply nothing in Dorothy's history to indicate she was mentally ill enough to go to these lengths for attention, or whatever they think the motive was.

[mwcarolina]

Originally Posted by XCalibur

But the bottom line remains there is simply nothing in Dorothy's history to indicate she was mentally ill enough to go to these lengths for attention, or whatever they think the motive was.

And that bottom line is good for me

[James T]

Originally Posted by XCalibur

Sorry this is mostly trash. There is no evidence Dorothy had any history of mental illness.

True, but it makes more sense than her stories.

[James T]

Originally Posted by mwcarolina

Except the fact that they had to call the police and she had to be driven to the hospital!!! I don’t know where you got your information, but if she didn’t have an injury then 911 wouldnt be called

Those facts are not in dispute-but that is all it was an alleged attack & being driven to the hospital to be looked at-neither of these are odd if somebody has reported being assaulted, especially somebody of her age with heart issues.

The information comes from the recent thread here where somebody actually got hold of the police files & wrote a long, detailed account-you had the last post on that thread in late May. Nothing Dorothy said about her 1985 attack added up & neither did it in 1993 for the second alleged attack.

https://grantharwood.substack.com/p/cheaper-but-will-do

[James T]

Originally Posted by XCalibur

I don't claim to be an expert on head injuries, but I am pretty sure there are some that can be internal without any outward signs. The confusing thing is the UM episode said Dorothy had skull lacerations, but apparently there is no such injury. Some people think they may have meant scalp lacerations. But I do know for a fact concussions do not always show outward bruising or anything.

However I will say that if she was hit hard enough to be knocked out, there should have at least been a knot on her head you'd think.

But the bottom line remains there is simply nothing in Dorothy's history to indicate she was mentally ill enough to go to these lengths for attention, or whatever they think the motive was.

Scalp Lacerations nearly always produce blood, no blood was visible on her head or clothing, or when they forensically tested them. No injury of any kind was observed by the officer who filled out his form to say so & it seems nothing was found by the hospital staff.

We don't know Dorothy's medical history-other than she had heart surgery prior to the alleged 1985 attack, the person has the police records, not her medical ones.

What we do know is she told two totally different timeline stories for the 1985 attack & refused to be examined, which is very odd for a not young woman recovering from heart surgery, who had supposedly been hit on the head & spent some time on the floor with her hands restricted which would have cut off blood flow.

Eight years later she is again supposedly struck from behind, but no evidence of any injury or blood. All that was observed was she had some dirt on part of her clothing-indicating she had been on the ground, yet her dog which barked at the cop like crazy when he went to the house made zero noise while she was supposedly attacked by a stranger & on the ground. Indicating she simply laid down on the ground & got the dirt on herself, while concocting this nonsensical story.

There was certainly something going on with Dorothy-either a total hatred of her husband & along with family members who also didn't like him wanting to torture him for the best part of a decade &/or something like the conditions I described, which her behaviour matches very closely.

[XCalibur]

Originally Posted by James T

Scalp Lacerations nearly always produce blood, no blood was visible on her head or clothing, or when they forensically tested them. No injury of any kind was observed by the officer who filled out his form to say so & it seems nothing was found by the hospital staff.

We don't know Dorothy's medical history-other than she had heart surgery prior to the alleged 1985 attack, the person has the police records, not her medical ones.

What we do know is she told two totally different timeline stories for the 1985 attack & refused to be examined, which is very odd for a not young woman recovering from heart surgery, who had supposedly been hit on the head & spent some time on the floor with her hands restricted which would have cut off blood flow.

Eight years later she is again supposedly struck from behind, but no evidence of any injury or blood. All that was observed was she had some dirt on part of her clothing-indicating she had been on the ground, yet her dog which barked at the cop like crazy when he went to the house made zero noise while she was supposedly attacked by a stranger & on the ground. Indicating she simply laid down on the ground & got the dirt on herself, while concocting this nonsensical story.

There was certainly something going on with Dorothy-either a total hatred of her husband & along with family members who also didn't like him wanting to torture him for the best part of a decade &/or something like the conditions I described, which her behaviour matches very closely.

How do we know the dog didn't bark? It could very well have barked and no one paid attention because dogs bark at a lot of things. Its not even clear where Bill was when this happened, but as far as I know he was home. The fact that the dog barked at the officer probably indicates that it barked a lot and maybe no one paid attention because it wasn't unusual.

The dog was also small, so even if someone attacked Dorothy it could not have done much to the intruder but nip at his heels so it probably would have been just a matter of kicking at him then making his escape.

Supposedly Dorothy was taking the dog out to go to the bathroom. So if she was going to fabricate an attack then why bother taking the dog out? Did she just take him out to go to the bathroom then decide hmmm maybe it would be cool to just fake an attack? Possible yes. Likely? Doesn't square with me.

Also as far as seeing no injuries on the part of the cop, if she went to the hospital someone there had to examine her. So did they report the same thing no injuries? Police officers aren't doctors so its hardly that infeasible they could have missed something.

As to Dorothy hating Bill, that's another thing there is simply no evidence for.

It just doesn't add up to me the Wackers had the kind of issues that would lead to them doing years and years of fabricating incidents. It just doesn't. Not saying its impossible but it just doesn't add up to me, I may be wrong.

[James T]

Originally Posted by XCalibur

How do we know the dog didn't bark? It could very well have barked and no one paid attention because dogs bark at a lot of things. Its not even clear where Bill was when this happened, but as far as I know he was home. The fact that the dog barked at the officer probably indicates that it barked a lot and maybe no one paid attention because it wasn't unusual.

The dog was also small, so even if someone attacked Dorothy it could not have done much to the intruder but nip at his heels so it probably would have been just a matter of kicking at him then making his escape.

Supposedly Dorothy was taking the dog out to go to the bathroom. So if she was going to fabricate an attack then why bother taking the dog out? Did she just take him out to go to the bathroom then decide hmmm maybe it would be cool to just fake an attack? Possible yes. Likely? Doesn't square with me.

Also as far as seeing no injuries on the part of the cop, if she went to the hospital someone there had to examine her. So did they report the same thing no injuries? Police officers aren't doctors so its hardly that infeasible they could have missed something.

As to Dorothy hating Bill, that's another thing there is simply no evidence for.

It just doesn't add up to me the Wackers had the kind of issues that would lead to them doing years and years of fabricating incidents. It just doesn't. Not saying its impossible but it just doesn't add up to me, I may be wrong.

We know because the cop asked Dorothy why her dog didn't bark as per her & Bill's initial statement-after he had gone to the house & it went nuts at him, she made a lame excuse.

It would not matter the dogs size-this was a loud dog that would have barked at his mistress being attacked, regardless of whether it intervened or not. It barks at a guy walking up the path, but not a guy attacking his owner-yeah, sure.

The same Dorothy who in 1985 after burglaries & recovering from heart surgery lets a total stranger into her house while alone, turns her back on him & who tells two different stories when the cops arrive-nothing about her/the goings on in that house from 1984-1994 makes any logical sense.

There is no detail-but there is no evidence they found anything either, she didn't appear to be treated for any injuries & was out pretty quickly. Police officers aren't doctors-but I think they would notice head wounds & blood. The forensic examination of her clothing found no blood, only some dirt.

There is no direct evidence of her hating Bill, but it certainly does appear to be a concerted effort from her & family members who would have had to have assisted her (we know from the police record some family members later diverted the investigation on purpose to throw suspicion elsewhere) to drive him insane. She was the one attacked twice, never him.

I suspect in the late 1980's when things calmed down certain family members had either moved away for work, or things were more settled between him & Dorothy/them & they picked up again when they moved back/things went south again.

From the show I don't see Bill as being an easy guy to live with & for people from that era divorce was something shameful. I think at some point he knew, at least heavily suspected who it was & likely went to UM hoping the publicity would end it, Which it pretty much did.

After the show aired I believe there was just one final incident three months after the segment aired as per that article-a pathetic attempt at coming through the front door, when it could have easily been forced-whether that was the last hurrah of one of the family, or just a whacko who had seen the segment & is like those ghouls who turn up at murder houses to be nuisance who knows. After that it is pretty much just one of the Wackers daughters trying to throw the investigators off with talk of psychics having visions & blaming neighbours in 1995/early 1996.

[bigted12]

this thread is a classic example of the ol' "if i believe it then it's true, if it's not part of my theory then "theres no proof"