MovieChat Forums > Ant1238
Ant1238 (908)
Posts
Deportation
Ending
Mina and Lucy
Anyone seen yet?
Boston/New Haven
Movie - Girl Pretending to be Drunk on Date
Lol 6.9 rating
Children
"My father was last seen with Nadja Roth."
Killer's Morals (obv spoilers)
View all posts >
Replies
Lol "the first 2 films are MILES better."
Kung Fu Panda: 9/10
Kung Fu Panda 4: 8.5/10
MILES, I TELL YOU
Yes
I guess you could also presume that Ashley would suspect Halley would be taken away simply due to the DCF's presence there.
I'm in the western part of MA, and I love the snow, but not a flake yet this year, nor even predicted in the next few weeks...yay global warming?
I don't think there's much she could say to get her back honestly. She'd probably still try.
Correct, anyone could have turned her in, we don't know it was Ashley. And maybe age/region do have something to do with the difference of opinion--I'm a millennial in Massachusetts, and I just don't see her being arrested for nonviolent (besides beating up Ashley, which unlike you I don't think the cops knew about) crimes after having her daughter taken away.
You do understand that DCF is not the police and they cannot arrest you, correct? They are only concerned with child welfare and whether or not a child should be with a particular adult.
You obviously don't have to answer this, and please don't take it as judgmental, but I'm just curious, how old are you?
My point here is that you're dealing with a boatload of hypotheticals regarding a fictional circumstance that we don't see the outcome of and will never know. Sure, it's possible that she will be arrested after the movie ends. But we don't see it, so we will never know. Personally, I don't think that they would bother going after this woman after they already took her child away. You seem to think that they will. But since she is not arrested in the movie (which was all I said in my original statement, btw), as far as we know, she was not arrested. You seem to think she will be, and it's certainly a potential outcome for her, but I don't think so. I'm definitely interested in a third opinion though.
They say "fuck" a lot.
Ok, to answer your two questions:
1. Yes, the men were caught on tape entering the premises. Having a grainy photo from a security camera can hardly identify the men though, and it's not like she got their real names I would imagine.
2. Already answered this--because of the child. You said earlier that they weren't in the same room--sure, the kid was stuffed in a bathroom while her mom sucked a guy's cock a few feet away. Not much difference there. Christ, the guy even went into the bathroom and saw her in the tub! She is in "trouble" because she's an unfit parent.
And I have to reiterate that just because you think she's going to be arrested means nothing. She wasn't arrested in the movie; maybe charges will be brought against her, but I don't think so. The only concerns at the moment were the welfare of the child. Someone else feel free to chime in if you're reading this!
I did not need all that explanation, I just watched the film and understand everything. What you don't understand is that she was not arrested. You giving me reasons WHY she should be arrested does not mean she was actually arrested. Child protective services was investigating her because for all the reasons you mentioned above and more, they did not feel that she was capable of raising her daughter safely. CPS does not arrest you. They were there to take away her daughter, and only that. There are two police officers present in case something goes awry; the only thing they do is briefly restrain her when she starts causing a scene and then run off when the daughter runs away. SHE. WAS. NOT. ARRESTED.
Because again, no one is getting arrested. She is just getting her kid taken away for this plus a number of other reasons (drug use, assaulting another tenant, stealing, etc.)
View all replies >