Since Matthew Barnett‘s mother went public on Thursday to defend her son, and insist that indeed he is the real victim, the internet has gone on to vehemently respond otherwise.
Perhaps it goes without saying that Shirley Barnett‘s take on her son’s involvement in the sexual abuse of Daisy Coleman at her son’s hands goes a long way in telling about attitudes that over time may have facilitated a predisposition that made it permissible for her son to transgress another human being.
Told the frazzled mother:
‘The more you dig, you will get closer to the truth. It is not on the surface, you’re going to have to dig for it, unfortunately we can’t help with that because that is not our personality.
‘I teach school and I teach people in my class, you treat people the way you want to be treated.’
Can’t help because it is not our personality? What is one to make of that and one wonders what Shirley Barnett means when she tells that there is more to the surface?
Is there something the public has missed?
A 17 then year old boy came by and picked up a 14 year old girl and her friend and drove them home to his home to feed them alcohol in the presence of four other boys.
After being fed alcohol and entering a state of severe disrepair, Matthew Barnett took it upon himself to sexually solicit himself against a 14 year old child without her consent. One can not possibly offer their consent when they are incapacitated or beyond disrepair and one ought to never assume it is the victim’s fault upon becoming incapacitate that they therefore deserve anything untoward that from that moment happens to them. That Mrs Barnett is shifting responsibility of vile behavior from your son to that of the victim, an abused child that the town of Maryville, Missouri went on to abuse and harass once you found out that your son was ‘erroneously’ singled out for vile behavior.
And then there is the fact that Daisy Coleman was dropped off lack a sack of potatoes, half naked (of course one can not imagine a rational, non drunk individual to agree in trotting the landscape in a half t shirt or being dumped unconscious on a snow field) in freezing weather.
After being left for dead, Daisy Coleman was discovered by her mother and then taken to ER where it was determined she had indeed been raped.
The point of contention is did Daisy Coleman consent to the rough sex that left her torn vaginal walls? A question that Mrs Barnett ought to take the time to consider had she had a fourteen year old daughter who went on to experience similar physical and emotional trauma.
But it sadly gets better. Went on to tell Shirley Barnett:
‘Is Matthew OK? How can you go through this and be OK, you can’t go through this experience and be OK.’
‘You can’t have your picture plastered all over the world news and be portrayed as something when you known in your heart what happened and be OK. How can anybody in our family be OK over this’.
Mrs Barnett, did you ever think to ask if Daisy Coleman was ok? The Coleman family have not told of receiving a letter of contemplation from you or your son or an expression of concern. Is that because Daisy is a slut and she simply got what she deserved? Is that what Matthew Barnett was reared to believe by his female role model?
As an interesting aside, Shirley Coleman has yet to receive the apology she has demanded from the Coleman family. Can anyone guess why?
Either way, we will all have to wait for a court of law to decide (finally) what really happened (Matthew Barnett is indeed innocent until proven otherwise in a court of law) and as tempting it is for the public to decide what happens here, one ought to leave that to the legal system, which for a moment had gone on to fail Daisy Coleman and her family when it went on to disregard her need for justice as is promised to one when they live in the United States. Supposedly at least…
Contemplated others on the web:
Let me get this straight. You claim there is evidence to prove your son is innocent, but you’re not going to provide that evidence, you’re going to make other people dig for it. You can prove your son innocent but you won’t because “it’s not your personality.”
You are a deluded human being. I love my mother and I know she would defend me from a lot of things, but if I was being accused of raping a 14-year-old girl and she knew of evidence that would prove I was innocent, I don’t think she would withhold it.
Then again, I wasn’t a football star with a powerful politician grandfather when I was 17.
Edited to add: Also, my mother taught me right from wrong. There was never an issue about whether or not I might rape someone because I WAS TAUGHT NOT TO RAPE. You, dear mother of a rapist, are a failure.
There was testimony that she was incoherent and her blood alcohol level was twice the illegal level 7 hours after the incident when she was finally tested. Thus she was not able to give consent so ANYONE who had sex with her committed a crime of rape. That is how the law works. There were numerous witnesses that sex occurred, including the medical exam after the fact. Again, pretty incontrovertible evidence that a rape occurred by someone. Throw in the witness testimony and confession and we know who committed the rape. Thus, even before you get into he-said she- said, a rape occurred and that Barnett was the perpetrator.
The fact that he is not in jail is at the core of why this thread and all these articles still exist. That is the question everyone is asking. You seem to be suggesting that because he is not in jail, he must not be guilty of anything. Frankly, I can’t believe that that kind of naivety still exists in the world.
That “nice boy” had some major issues long before he “allegedly” raped that girl, including the notion that you can get consent for intercourse from someone who had blacked out. It’s called “privilege”, and that’s what’s wrong with so many people who think they can take whatever they want.
I’ll bet the Barnett female is the unidentified parent who jubilantly proclaimed, when felony charges were initally dropped , that the only thing that hadn’t happened YET was an apology made to her son , for the charges having been made in the first place. Whether she meant an apology from the police or the victim is ambiguous…But I hope it’s her , so her bewildered pain at the recent turn of events will be all the worse. Entitled *&^%$#@.
“I am here to talk about the people of this town that have been threatened, that do not feel safe to come to their jobs, they don’t feel safe to go to school, there’s campuses across the state where students are having to be walked to class and having to be escorted because of their safety,” Shirley Barnett said. “That needs to stop. It’s not fair to those people. They have no relationship whatsoever to this case; they have no knowledge of the case, but because they’re from a small town, they’re being threatened, and that needs to stop.”
Did you see what she did there? I emphasized it just in case you missed it. Yes, she is saying that it is okay to threaten and intimidate those who DO have a relationship with this case whom aren’t her son, ie the victims.
I can’t even…
Her son dumped an unconscious fourteen year old girl in a yard in freezing weather, and she wants sympathy for him? Sorry, honey. You raised the pig…deal with the consequences.
Your son should be in prison for rape Ms Barnett. Instead of you boo hooing for him in public, you should be visiting him in a place where you’re separated by thick plated glass and your only means of communication is a telephone.
Your son got off easy and you’re bitching? Trying living with being raped by someone who was never held accountable for their crime for the rest of your life.
WOW … by the way did she explain why her then 17 year old son was out after midnight drinking, driving and raping little girls in the first place?
He deserves whatever happens to him and his mother should be glad that he will face real justice that his family connections to the States GOP power structure will not get him out of … then she can take satisfaction that as a registered sex offender there will always be police watching him and people will get to know where he is and the places he should not be… she can consider it to be a form of police protection for him AND the community.
Lady, I get you don’t want to believe it, but your son is a rapist. By defending him, you’re perpetuating rape culture. Have you ever in his life made your son actually handle the consequences of his actions, or has he always been coddled and protected? Somehow, I doubt he’s ever dealt with anything real.