"Fatal Family Feud"


Both families in this case were immature and aggressive and played innocent about it. I think this is the first time where not just one person is painted as the villain. I really do believe that both parties were the aggressors in this case. And it all started over a girl not like a guy? I'm not sure if I really believe that part but whatever but it definitely went way further than it should have.

"I'd rather lose for what I am than win for what I ain't"

Kacey Musgraves "Pageant Material"

reply

Agreed!

If they both just acted like adults and sat the children down and had a conversation, this could have been avoided. Instead, they both acted like children and dug their heels in believing their kid was the innocent one.

I think both of the kids probably messing with each other in some way. Kids are kids and we all know (or at least we should) they are very different when they get around their friends and/or are outside of their parent's watch. They also lie, as no kid wants to get in trouble. I can't believe the way their parents handled the whole situation.

Also, I'm not buying some of the stories on both sides. I don't believe the mother threw her son down to start the fight. She may have had her hands up in her face and I think she just lost it and maybe shoved her not intending to knock the baby down.

It is just so sad how this could have been avoided through talking things out and working together to resolve the conflict between the kids, instead of taking it to a whole other level.

reply

I agree. It's usually clear right off the bat who the 'good guys' and 'bad guys' are, but in this case it was fuzzy. I felt for both mothers, and thought they were pretty sincere--allowing, of course, for each one to put their own twist on how things happened. But I just didn't feel that either one was being outrageously deceptive; it was more like they were telling the story the way they really believed it unfolded.

I don't think the 'girl spurned the boy' thing made sense as far as explaining the outrageous way things developed. I get the feeling there's something else, something no one told us, but I don't know have any idea what that might be. I just know that kids at that age aren't necessarily interested in the opposite sex yet, so it wasn't at all unusual that Diamond would've spurned the neighbor boy, considering he should've/would've KNOWN that she was a tomboy, more interested in doing tomboy things than having a quasi-romantic relationship with a boy.

As for the moms...good grief. Two pitiful examples of how NOT to be a parent.


--

http://www.CaliforniaDreamsPhotography.com

reply

I agree. It's usually clear right off the bat who the 'good guys' and 'bad guys' are, but in this case it was fuzzy. I felt for both mothers, and thought they were pretty sincere--allowing, of course, for each one to put their own twist on how things happened. But I just didn't feel that either one was being outrageously deceptive;


I tended to believe Christina more throughout the whole thing. Obviously neither of them was telling the whole truth, but there seemed to be more things that made sense with her stories.

Like that situation where Ashley told her son to tell Christina to come over. Christina went over to talk, and it makes sense that if Ashley didn't answer the door and her husband was in the yard, that Christina would talk to the husband. Then Ashley admits she came out and yelled at her for talking to her husband. It makes no sense for someone holding a baby to start a physical fight with 2 people. But with Ashley admitting she came out of the house angry, it makes sense that she'd be the one to escalate things. It makes even more sense when you look back on it knowing that she's the one that went inside her house, grabbed a knife, and went back outside to stab someone.

Also, Ashley's story about the kids at the end didn't make any sense either. She said Christina's nephews were at the bus stop waiting for all of them, and then they walked home threatening to beat her son up all the way. If these kids are waiting to beat him up, they would've beat him up. 5 kids walking down the street with 2-4 of them telling the 5th "we're going to beat you up" just doesn't seem realistic at all. In her 911 call, she even says the cousins jumped her son, when her own story is that they followed him all the way home threatening to attack him but never actually did.

Then there's the cause of the fight at the end. Christina's family was at the house because of Diamond's birthday party. I don't remember any explanation of why Ashley's family was there. It seemed like she called them deliberately to start something with her neighbors.

From the beginning I kept thinking that Jackson was going to get killed somehow, and that's why Diamond was the only one of the kids on the show, and Ashley still seemed like the main aggressor to me. Even from her own version of events. You can't use the "I was worried about my unborn baby" argument when you're safely in your house away from a weaponless fight and deliberately bring a weapon outside and join it.

reply

I sort of believe the bus stop thing, sure it was exaggerated but I sort of believed it. I would have liked to hear from the son in the other family but on that side we only got the mother's point of view. Now I'm not sure if she called them deliberately to cause trouble but with this feud that has been getting violent from time to time going on, I really don't blame her calling them just in cause stuff jumped off which it did. Like Ashley sort of said people tend to say if it was me I wouldn't have done this or that, but when you are in a situation in the heat of the moment, you think differently and it's easy to say that on the outside looking in. Not saying I would have pulled out a knife but it's hard to say what you would have and what you wouldn't have done.

"I'd rather lose for what I am than win for what I ain't"

Kacey Musgraves "Pageant Material"

reply

[deleted]