SALT LAKE CITY -- Elizabeth Smart told jurors Tuesday how a Salt Lake City police detective tried to see behind her veil but backed down when the man accused of kidnapping her said her face was hidden for religious reasons.
So we have an officer of the law who backs down, is he in the right job? Elizabeth was a runaway and still enjoying her freedom...had she been held against her will, all she had to do was tell the officer, 'I am Elizabeth, I am raped daily and shackled to a tree'...even the weakest of officers would have helped. Elizabeth CHOSE to remain silent...no one made her it was her choice.
"I was mad at myself, that I didn't say anything," she said on her second day of testimony in the federal trial of Brian David Mitchell. "I felt terrible that the detective hadn't pushed harder and had just walked away."
Then it was the officers fault for not trying harder ? Was Elizabeth being held at gun point or knife point when she can get her story straight. No, she was standing in the street ,all she had to do was shout to the officer and he would have returned. Elizabeth ,not Mitchell, chose not to speak.
Elizabeth Smart leaves the Frank E. Moss Federal Courthouse Monday, Nov. 8, 2010, in Salt Lake City. Elizabeth Smart took the stand after her mother and younger sister testified. Opening arguments in the Brian David Mitchell trial relating to the kidnapping of Elizabeth Smart in 2002 resumed in Salt Lake City's U.S. District Court Monday after a three-judge panel of the Federal Appeals Court stopped the trial last Thursday in a motion to have it moved out of Utah.
- Steve C. Wilson /AP Photo
Lois Smart, right, and her husband Ed leave the Frank E. Moss Federal Courthouse Monday, Nov. 8, 2010, in Salt Lake City. Lois took the stand after opening arguments in the Brian David Mitchell trial relating to the kidnapping of Elizabeth Smart in 2002 resumed in Salt Lake City's U.S. District Court Monday after a three-judge panel of the Federal Appeals Court stopped the trial last Thursday in a motion to have it moved out of Utah.
- Steve C. Wilson /AP Photo
Mitchell, 57, faces life in prison if he is convicted of kidnapping and unlawful transportation of a minor across state lines with the intent to engage in criminal sexual activity.
Of course he will be convicted how can he not ,the jury before this went to trial all agree he abducted Elizabeth and raped her four times a day even though there is not a shred of evidence...Mitchell and Barzee are just meat for the American unjustice system' there lives have no value
The close call happened months after her abduction.
The detective had approached a robed Smart sitting at a library table and asked if he could look under the veil she wore across her face.
Smart was sitting at a table, not tethered to a tree then...and how many times this day had she been raped , was it by Mitchell or Barzee.?..The very sad part is the day Elizabeth returned home, her hair in braids, I would imange it was Wanda who did this for her , a jesture of kindness and Elizabeth has spat in her face.
"He said he was looking for Elizabeth Smart," Smart said.
Under the table, Mitchell's wife at the time, Wanda Eileen Barzee, squeezed Smart's leg - a sign, Smart said, that she should remain quiet.
I see ,Wanda squeezes her leg so she must remain quite...this was a public place..it would have taken seconds for this runaway to be taken back home and given a good spanking for causing so much trouble...but no Elizabeth did not want to go home she was having too much fun. It was Elizabeth who chose to remain silent.
Mitchell stood between Smart and the detective.
"He said that it was not allowed in our religion and that only my husband would ever see my face." she said.
The detective pressed.
"He asked if he could be a part of our religion for a day, just so he could see my face, just so he could go back (to the police station) and say, 'no it wasn't Elizabeth Smart'," she said.
Mitchell remained cool and calm, stating again firmly that it would not be allowed. The detective gave up and left, Smart said.
Afterward, Mitchell sped up plans to move the trio away from Utah, so Smart would not be discovered, she told jurors.
The encounter came in early fall, weeks after Mitchell and Barzee first brought Smart with them into the city - essentially hiding her in plain sight but keeping her under his control with threats on her life.
Yes, I see 'hiding her in plain sight'...Good title for a book, in fact did'nt Uncle Tom call his book just that?
"He told me that I needed to stay next to him at all times and that if I tried to run away, I would be killed," Smart said, describing her first venture into the city.
If she ran away screaming in the street..I am 'Elizabeth' she was by this time so well known the town would have gathered. Elizabeth uses the threat of death as an excuse as to why she remained.
Smart said Mitchell took her to a noisy, "rave-type" party he was invited to by a grocery store employee he had befriended.
Yes there were photographs of Elizabeth at this party clearly enjoying herself, once again a perfect opportunity to tell someone of her ordeal...how many times this day had she been raped I wonder....????? All photographs of Elizabeth at this party removed from the internet...photographs of a rape victim having a good time at a party with her rapist would not go down well at the trial.
"There was a lot of drinking and drugs," she said, adding that she could smell cigarettes and marijuana burning.
Drink and drugs and smoking marijuana, is this not the template for an American party these days ? nothing unusul there.
Smart said Mitchell was also forced to drink a liquid laced with the hallucinogenic absinthe.
Elizabeth was a kid and Mitchell and Barzee were clearly looking out for her....had Elizabeth truly been abducted and raped on a daily basis there is no way Mitchell would have taken the risk of placing her in public, a true victim would have screamed for her life...It is Elizabeth who chose not to call out...a true rape victim would not miss such an opportunity and if Mitchell had done all the things Elizabeth claims he would have kept her locked away ....'out of 'plain sight'
There are two Swedish women at the moment lying about rape..I have no affection for Julian Assange but I despise a liar especially a woman who pretends she has been raped to take her revenge, or in this case Elizabeth is taking the revenge for her father...his reputation is at stake if the truth should ever become public.
Mitchell also became very territorial when the grocery clerk, Daniel Trotta, tried to talk to her, Smart said.
"He said this is my daughter and she can't talk to you," she said.
The trip was the first of many - Mitchell essentially hiding a white-robed Smart, whose face was hidden behind the veil, in plain sight, keeping her quiet with threats.
It also came within weeks of Mitchell's July 24 unsuccessful attempt to kidnap one of Smart's cousin, Olivia Wright, from another part of Salt Lake City.
Yes Olivia, what has happened to Olivia ? and may I be so bold to ask when is this trial taking place and once again dare I ask if there is any proof it was Mitchell.? oh I am sorry, evidence is not required when it comes to Ed Smart...his word is good enough..America the Superpower, has no integrity and certainly when in the States lying under Oath is a habit and accepted by the Elite.
"He decided it was time to go and kidnap another girl to be another wife," Smart said.
Smart said she watched Mitchell pack a bag with the same dark clothing, stocking cap and knife that he has used the night he had taken her from her home.
The knife...so if it was a knife why did the FBI spend so much time looking for a gun? the knife came into play when forensics realised the window was slashed from inside...don't tell me Mitchell did it.. ABD this would be the same window that Elizabeth left open I presume?
The kidnapping attempt was thwarted when Mitchell tried to get through a window of Wright's home but pushed over some knickknacks from the windowsill and awakened the sleeping household.
And yet we are to believe Mitchell broke into the Smarts house, slashed a window, walked up the stairs into Elizabeth and Katherines room , woke Elizabeth up with a gun/knife...(when they get their stories straight)...then went to the bathroom where Elizabeth was told not to put her slippers but tennis shoes on, went down the stairs and out through the house...Mitchell in one attempt so clumsy he does not get to first base and yet in the Smarts house he walks on air?....does anyone truly believe this farce?I know you are mormons but come on guys, think...
The following day, Mitchell forced Smart to metaphorically sever any remaining ties with her family by burning the red pajamas she had been wearing on the night she was taken.
Is she for real?
Smart said she dropped the pajamas into a campfire and watched them burn. Afterward, she found in the ashes a safety pin that she had used to keep the neck of the pajamas closed. She fastened it to a small piece of rubber from her tennis shoes - which Mitchell had thrown out - and hid it.
"I didn't want to let go of my family, of my life," she said.
Maybe Mormons have no interest in the 'real world' or what goes beyond their church and its beliefs but hearing and reading about the two young women in Sweden and listening to their story of rape smacks of the 'Smarts' tale.....All three too ludicrous for words.....If this case were to have happened today Ed Smart would not have got away with it, there are too many intelligent people on the Internet to have swallowed such a load of bull.
Whose idea was it for Elizabeth to attend each day in court looking like a harlot, plastered with make-up and bleached hair wearing tight skirts Marilyn Monroe would have trouble walking in?
As Uncle Tom Smart has said 'It was agreat story'....and it was, all of them have become very rich beyond their wildest dreams just for telling lies about a couple of drifters whose lives have no value. A truly , truly sad state of affairs .