Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh believe me, I know all about "Stockholm Syndrome." I also know many people, experts in the area of psychology do not believe in it. The "syndrome" everyone is jumping on the bandwagon with Patty Hearst shows how people IDENTIFY with and have COMPASSION for their captor's. That is one thing. Saying, "They treated me good." Or, "I don't wish them any harm," is one thing.
It is totally another thing for someone to actually pick up an AK47, walk into a bank, and rob it. It is totally another thing for the captive to fire rounds in a totally separate robbery.
Most people don't even realize and/or understand the "syndrome." The amount of misleading information of the original incident is astounding.
Everyone here says, "I read her book." Yes, HER book. HER ONE SIDED story of the events. A JURY, who heard the entire story, including her testimony in the court room (where the poor, traumatized little girl, took the 5th on several occasions) CONVICTED HER. And her defense was "Stockholm Syndrome."
Everyone here is saying what a sweet, innocent, little girl she was when captured and a "sheltered girl" such as her, would be easy to turn. That is all BS. Patty Hearst was far from some "sheltered little rich white girl." She was living in an apartment, with her boyfriend, in Berkeley when kidnapped. Do you know what the streets of Berkeley was like then? She was a frequent drug user and was very sexually active as a young girl/woman.
Patty Hearst was a rich spoiled girl. She took this opportunity to "run amok." To stand up to her father and the establishment, which was fairly normal back then. Then when caught, its "Mommy. Daddy. Help me." She used her money, power, and influence to get that pardon. If the same situation happened to you or me, do you think we would have been pardoned? Hell no.
Patty Hearst DID NOT suffer from any "Stockholm Syndrome."
Oh believe me, I know all about "Stockholm Syndrome." I also know many people, experts in the area of psychology do not believe in it. The "syndrome" everyone is jumping on the bandwagon with Patty Hearst shows how people IDENTIFY with and have COMPASSION for their captor's. That is one thing. Saying, "They treated me good." Or, "I don't wish them any harm," is one thing.
It is totally another thing for someone to actually pick up an AK47, walk into a bank, and rob it. It is totally another thing for the captive to fire rounds in a totally separate robbery.
Most people don't even realize and/or understand the "syndrome." The amount of misleading information of the original incident is astounding.
Everyone here says, "I read her book." Yes, HER book. HER ONE SIDED story of the events. A JURY, who heard the entire story, including her testimony in the court room (where the poor, traumatized little girl, took the 5th on several occasions) CONVICTED HER. And her defense was "Stockholm Syndrome."
Everyone here is saying what a sweet, innocent, little girl she was when captured and a "sheltered girl" such as her, would be easy to turn. That is all BS. Patty Hearst was far from some "sheltered little rich white girl." She was living in an apartment, with her boyfriend, in Berkeley when kidnapped. Do you know what the streets of Berkeley was like then? She was a frequent drug user and was very sexually active as a young girl/woman.
Patty Hearst was a rich spoiled girl. She took this opportunity to "run amok." To stand up to her father and the establishment, which was fairly normal back then. Then when caught, its "Mommy. Daddy. Help me." She used her money, power, and influence to get that pardon. If the same situation happened to you or me, do you think we would have been pardoned? Hell no.
Patty Hearst DID NOT suffer from any "Stockholm Syndrome."
F. Lee Bailey acknowledged as much during his defense of Patty Hearst during her trial. Bailey was in the tough situation of trying to explain how someone who was kidnapped could undergo the mental transformation that Patty Hearst did. Bailey argued that in the beginning Patty's acts were the result of "duress" or force. That became more and more difficult as Patty took more of a role on behalf of the group. The argument was that she was "brainwashed" into doing what she did. Bailey couldn't successfully sell the jury on that and Patty was convicted.
I don't intend to judge Patty. Part of her captivity included being held for long periods in a closet. Periodically, one of the abductors would enter the closet and rape her. This went on for some weeks. Patty was rewarded by being let out of the closet when she cooperated and punished by being left in it for long periods when there was a perception she was not cooperating. Patty was all of 19 when she was kidnapped. This makes her an adult, but not by much.
Patty saw the awful television video of the house in Los Angeles burning up with many of the people in the SLA. I don't think it would have taken much to convince someone in that situation that the authorities would never allow her to be taken alive. I suspect this experience did much into making her think that--for better or worse--her fate was tied to the remaining members of the SLA. That, I think, explains much of her cooperation, even when she wasn't being guarded or supervised.
I think the question though that everyone should ask is this: Would Patty have ever joined the group and participated in bank robbery or fired a gun if she hadn't been kidnapped in the first place?
The answer is no.
President Gerald Ford implicitly realized this when he gave her a presidential pardon. Should anyone think she got away "scot free", I'd remind them that Patty Hearst served a couple of years in jail. Some things in life just aren't clear cut. This case is one of the best illustrations of that that I've ever seen.
F. Lee Bailey acknowledged as much during his defense of Patty Hearst during her trial. Bailey was in the tough situation of trying to explain how someone who was kidnapped could undergo the mental transformation that Patty Hearst did. Bailey argued that in the beginning Patty's acts were the result of "duress" or force. That became more and more difficult as Patty took more of a role on behalf of the group. The argument was that she was "brainwashed" into doing what she did. Bailey couldn't successfully sell the jury on that and Patty was convicted.
I don't intend to judge Patty. Part of her captivity included being held for long periods in a closet. Periodically, one of the abductors would enter the closet and rape her. This went on for some weeks. Patty was rewarded by being let out of the closet when she cooperated and punished by being left in it for long periods when there was a perception she was not cooperating. Patty was all of 19 when she was kidnapped. This makes her an adult, but not by much.
Patty saw the awful television video of the house in Los Angeles burning up with many of the people in the SLA. I don't think it would have taken much to convince someone in that situation that the authorities would never allow her to be taken alive. I suspect this experience did much into making her think that--for better or worse--her fate was tied to the remaining members of the SLA. That, I think, explains much of her cooperation, even when she wasn't being guarded or supervised.
I think the question though that everyone should ask is this: Would Patty have ever joined the group and participated in bank robbery or fired a gun if she hadn't been kidnapped in the first place?
The answer is no.
President Gerald Ford implicitly realized this when he gave her a presidential pardon. Should anyone think she got away "scot free", I'd remind them that Patty Hearst served a couple of years in jail. Some things in life just aren't clear cut. This case is one of the best illustrations of that that I've ever seen.
Mark this isn't the issue and you know it. You are "spin doctoring" things to make it fit your agenda. The issue of this thread is Patty Hearst and The Stockholm Syndrome. The general public can drone on about how she suffered from it, from a position of pure ignorance. SHE DID NOT. She had no signs, symptoms, etc of The Stockholm Syndrome.
PEOPLE just don't know what it is they are talking about. You defend a woman, who willfully, under her own wants and desires, to get back at "Mommy and daddy," walked into a bank and robbed it. Carrying an AK47 in the process. Have you checked into the backgrounds of the victims of THAT bank robbery? Have you wondered what happened to the persons there, who suffered, lost their jobs, became alcoholics/drug addicts, and their families torn apart by Patty Hearst's actions? Which you REFUSE to judge? Nope. You don't care about them (or the other robbery she committed after and fired shots from her beloved weapon), because you don't see them on the national news. Just a spoiled rich kid, who used her money and parents influence, to get herself out of a bad situation.
Patty Hearst is garbage, a liar, and a fraud. She didn't get away "Scot Free?" SERIOUSLY???? You truly believe this BS? Had I have committed that bank robbery, as a BLACK man, I'd still be in Folsom State Prison as we speak. Ford pardoned her because of political favors. Hearst promised him and the democratic party large sums of money for a pardon.
How is it fair, Patty Hearst, who committed two armed robberies can walk into a gun store, NOW, TODAY, and buy any weapon she wants. Even the hated, dreaded, liberal "assault weapon." Yet a man or woman, who in 1962 sold an ounce of marijuana cannot even get a job, due to a background check, let alone buy a firearm. This is fair and just to your warped sense? Really???? Her presidential pardon wiped out, CLEANSED any conviction. It is as if she never committed a crime at all. And, again, the JURY who heard it all, CONVICTED HER. But of course, they are fools and idiots and know nothing.
Mark this isn't the issue and you know it. You are "spin doctoring" things to make it fit your agenda. The issue of this thread is Patty Hearst and The Stockholm Syndrome. The general public can drone on about how she suffered from it, from a position of pure ignorance. SHE DID NOT. She had no signs, symptoms, etc of The Stockholm Syndrome.
PEOPLE just don't know what it is they are talking about. You defend a woman, who willfully, under her own wants and desires, to get back at "Mommy and daddy," walked into a bank and robbed it. Carrying an AK47 in the process. Have you checked into the backgrounds of the victims of THAT bank robbery? Have you wondered what happened to the persons there, who suffered, lost their jobs, became alcoholics/drug addicts, and their families torn apart by Patty Hearst's actions? Which you REFUSE to judge? Nope. You don't care about them (or the other robbery she committed after and fired shots from her beloved weapon), because you don't see them on the national news. Just a spoiled rich kid, who used her money and parents influence, to get herself out of a bad situation.
Patty Hearst is garbage, a liar, and a fraud. She didn't get away "Scot Free?" SERIOUSLY???? You truly believe this BS? Had I have committed that bank robbery, as a BLACK man, I'd still be in Folsom State Prison as we speak. Ford pardoned her because of political favors. Hearst promised him and the democratic party large sums of money for a pardon.
How is it fair, Patty Hearst, who committed two armed robberies can walk into a gun store, NOW, TODAY, and buy any weapon she wants. Even the hated, dreaded, liberal "assault weapon." Yet a man or woman, who in 1962 sold an ounce of marijuana cannot even get a job, due to a background check, let alone buy a firearm. This is fair and just to your warped sense? Really???? Her presidential pardon wiped out, CLEANSED any conviction. It is as if she never committed a crime at all. And, again, the JURY who heard it all, CONVICTED HER. But of course, they are fools and idiots and know nothing.
Phil, I have no agenda here other than to discuss the Patty Hearst case. If you believe that I have some other agenda, I'd like to know what you think it is.
You have to admit the following about this case don't you? Its pretty unique. How many cases as a police officer did you investigate where someone was kidnapped, held hostage, and than ended up joining their captors to commit crimes? If the answer is other than zero, I'm going to be surprised. The closest parallel I can find for what happened to Patty Hearst goes back to the days of pirates. Sometimes, pirates would capture a ship and give crew members a choice. They could either join the band of pirates or be thrown overboard into the ocean. Most chose to join the pirates. There are records of cases where pirates were acquitted of "piracy" based on the fact that they were kidnapped and forced into it in the fashion I've just described.
Truly, I have no idea how many innocent people may have been affected by the two bank robberies that Patty Hearst was involved in. The whole story of the SLA is a shocking one. I was about fourteen when it happened and I remember following the story closely.
I think race has nothing to do with this at all. If a black man had been kidnapped and put through what Patty Hearst was put through--or its equivalent--I think I'd feel the same way about the case. Some actually argue that Patty's status as a wealthy debutante hurt her. I have heard any number of people argue if she had not been wealthy, her arguments would have been more readily accepted as a defense. I do know this occurred at the same time the Watergate Scandal was taking place and there was a widespread perception in this country that wealthy people escaped criminal justice (President Nixon) while the poor and middle class felt the full rigors of the system when they got into trouble.
Not that it matters, but I think the last think Patty Hearst wants to do right now is own a gun. She can afford as many people (with guns) to guard her as she wants.
I don't intend to judge Patty. Part of her captivity included being held for long periods in a closet. Periodically, one of the abductors would enter the closet and rape her. This went on for some weeks. Patty was rewarded by being let out of the closet when she cooperated and punished by being left in it for long periods when there was a perception she was not cooperating. Patty was all of 19 when she was kidnapped. This makes her an adult but not by much.
A friend of mine from college went to high school with Patty Hearst. She said that Hearst was an extremely protected, naive young woman. I can believe that she was thoroughly brainwashed by her abductors.
In some respect, I believe her family's money worked against her. If Elizabeth Smart or Jaycee Dugard had been involved in crimes during their captivity, I sincerely doubt any charges would have been filed against them. And the age difference between 14 and 19,is not that much...
I see Patty Heart as a victim, I sincerely doubt she would have been involved in a bank robbery if she had not been kidnapped.
F. Lee Bailey said if Jonestown happened before the Hearst case he would have gotten her off.
If an average joe did the same and was represented by a public defender, I think they would have gotten the max. This does not mean Hearst was not a victim, just the way our system works. I read Every Secret Thing and if only a third was true, she was a victim.
If I recall, wasn't there talk of Patty herself setting this situation up herself to get back at her parents? She was an impressionable college student smack dab in the middle of the anti-establishment movement, rebelling against "the establishment" (hit when one reached the "ripe old age of 30"), of which her parents were a major part of. I was a year younger than she was but didn't follow the case all that much as I was too busy working so I could move from the projects to a better "established" life.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
