Things hoped for...Things not Seen

Perhaps many would agree that kids say the darndest things. But they’re not the only ones. It seems that everybody connected with the Likens murder case said the darndest things too. Sure, some of them were children. However, many were adults. So I thought it might be interesting to look at some of the bizarre things said by people in this case. I reach, sometimes, some conclusions to the overall picture as I see it now. However, as I will make clear shortly…do not believe everything you read! Especially postings such as this one. Perhaps an introductory quote would be useful:

“My dear friends, don’t believe everything you hear. Carefully weigh and examine what people tell you.”

By “tell,” I would include “read” as well. I’m sure that if, or when, my words are weighed and examined, I won’t believe them either. Still, I can't resist examining another article. This one involves...Pseudo-Judy Duke. She was supposedly interviewed in an article called “Bumps in the Night." How seriously this can be taken is clear just from the title, which may be a play on the following:

“From ghoulies and ghosties / And long-leggedy beasties / And things that go bump in the night, / Good Lord, deliver us!”

So if you believe in ghoulies, ghosties, and long-leggedy beasties, then you may well choose to believe this article. But I quote:

“The last time she ever saw Sylvia she recalled how ‘that naked girl’ was seated in a chair in the front room of that house. Judy was shocked at the spectacle before her. A group of children were dancing around the chair, each violently kicking Sylvia as they passed, with Gertrude Baniszewski acting as a grizzly choreographer. In shock Judy inched her way towards the door as Gertrude roughly grabbed her, forcing her into the revolving circle and demanding that Judy kick the poor girl. Judy refused participation and Gertrude grabbed Judy’s leg and forced one awkward glancing blow on the crying captive girl’s shin. Judy managed to exit the circle and head for home. Sylvia Likens was dead within days.”

Now I have to say that the writing is very good. It’s exceptionally vivid and striking. Here we have a diabolical “Ring around the Rosie.” And there stands Gertrude, and I must confess that I like “grizzly choreographer.” It’s quite good. Nonsense, but quite good. She directs the children. She shows them how. What the author is doing is utilizing a theme that I find running through the trial testimony; i.e. that of “games.” Jenny does this as well:

Q. And who was present?
A. Me and Sylvia, Paula, Gertrude, Stephanie was one time, Johnny, Randy Lepper, Coy Hubbard and I can't remember if Ricky was or not.
Q. Which steps are you referring to?
A. The basement steps.
Q. And what happened, what did you see and hear?
A. Well, I did not see her fall down the steps. I was in the kitchen and heard someone say they were going to trip her. Gertrude said, "Here is how to do it.” Sylvia said, "I don't want to" and she threw her down.

This is rather similar to the devilish “Ring around the Rosie.” Gertrude is teaching the children how to abuse Sylvia. They don’t know how to do it right without her evil influence. Judy doesn’t want to play. But she’s there! Too late! You have to get in one good kick!

Now, there are a few more comments that can be made. First, I can’t say for sure whether the real Judy Duke is behind what is probably the most ridiculous piece of written material I’ve seen so far (though I’m sure that will change when I read the next one). This is pure polemic that serves one overriding purpose. But, there are a few problems to say the least.

The article describes Sylvia with “her teeth knocked out.” This is wrong. Sylvia was missing a tooth because, as a child, she ran into her brother. Jenny mentions two chipped teeth. The Likens child whose teeth were knocked out was Danny, and this was cited by Betty as the reason he quit school.
The article states that Judy only saw Sylvia in the Baniszewski house three times. In her testimony, she said this:

Q. In the course of time you were in the house, Miss Duke, did you ever have occasion to quarrel with Sylvia Likens? Did you fight with her any time?
A. No, I never did fight with her.
Q. But you testified over the course of time you saw many acts of cruelty by one person or another as against Sylvia?
A. Yes.

Not surprising:

Q. How many times all told, do you suppose you visited the Baniszewski household and saw acts of cruelty toward Sylvia?
A. I don't know how many times.
Q. Two or twenty or fifty, as close as you can say?
A. I go over there quite a while.
Q. You were a frequent visitor?
A. Yes, all the time I go over. I mostly go on Fridays.

To quote one of the greatest movie characters of all time- “That’s all I have to say about that.” The article also describes Judy as a close friend of Jenny, indeed one who protects her. Yet in Jenny’s testimony, she refers to Judy only once. But then:

Q. Now, who was your best friend in that neighborhood, boy or girl? Was it one of the Monroes or MacGuires?
A. I have known the MacGuires about five years.
Q. Who was the best friend you had in that neighborhood?
A. I say Darlene MacGuire.

Uh-oh! Jenny likes Darlene better. Oh well. But if the demented child’s game in the front room were not enough, the birthday scene in the kitchen is good too. They are having cake in the kitchen. It’s…well, the article doesn’t happen to say whose birthday it is, and I don’t think any of the trial testimony refers to a birthday party. Then, a toothless Sylvia jumps out of the basement and steals Judy’s piece of cake! Rude, to be sure. But don’t forget! One of the witnesses suggested in the trial testimony that the source of the Sylvia-Paula feud was a fight over who got an extra Popsicle!

Now there is one commonalty…and I try to be as unobjectionable as I can be. In no way am I belittling the real Sylvia. But I am belittling this piece of fiction. That commonalty- nakedness. The author describes all three of the incidents in the article with the principal character being unclad. The author even refers to the principal character as ‘that naked girl,’ which I find extremely offensive. Now in the trial testimony, there is nothing to approximate this image, except in a couple of places, where, however, modesty is suddenly restored. But this idea of running around unclad is nonsense. There is a touch of commonalty, however, with Judy’s testimony:

Q. Did Sylvia have any clothes on then?
A. Half on and half not.
Q. Did they do anything to her clothes?
A. They ripped them.
Q. Who ripped them?
A. Gertrude did two times and Paula did it one or two times.

But she said something similar in her October 29th statement (I omit two details, not necessary to repeat here):

"I was at Gertrude Wright's home when I saw Gertrude knock Sylvia Likens, down the stair steps, Sylvia Likens, had then in the upstairs bedroom, and Gertrude pulled all of Sylvia's clothes off of her…. At this time Gertrude Wright, told Sylvia Likens that she was going to kill her, that she was fed up with her, because she was ruining her life. Sylvia Likens, then went back upstairs, to put some jeans and a blouse on. Gertrude said to her daughter Paula, to go upstairs, that it was her turn to knock Sylvia, down the stair step, and to pull Sylvia's clothes off."

The re-occurrence of this theme is odd. But! The principal point of the article now becomes clear, and is pure polemic. Judy said this about telling her mother what she saw befalling Sylvia:

Q. In the course of time you were in the house, Miss Duke, did you ever have occasion to quarrel with Sylvia Likens? Did you fight with her any time?
A. No, I never did fight with her.
Q. But you testified over the course of time you saw many acts of cruelty by one person or another as against Sylvia?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you ever discuss with your parents, after you saw these things?
A. I tried to tell mother. She was doing the dishes then. I said - I would go up to her and I said, "Mommy, they were over there beating and whipping her and fighting with her". She said - well she thought I meant she was getting a whipping for doing something bad.
Q. Did you ever mention it to any person other than your mother?
A. No, just my mother.

So Judy tells her mother, who misunderstands what Judy is describing to her. Judy does not fault her in this story. But faulting the mother is exactly what the article is all about:

On the evil birthday party- “Judy left that day and told her mother about the incident and in particular that there was a ‘naked girl’ in the Baniszewski house. Her 12-year old mind could not understand why this would not raise an alarm.”

The bath scene- “She quickly left and went home to tell her mother of what she had just witnessed and again her revelation was met with adult indifference.”

So the mother doesn’t just ignore child abuse. She ignores something no mother would be able to: a young girl wandering around someone else’s home unclad. But the character of Judy in the article has done the right thing. And more than once! She kicked Sylvia, but only as a result of the fictional Gertrude actually grabbing Judy’s leg and forcing her to kick Sylvia. Compare this:

Q. You kicked her, didn't you?
A. I tried to.
Q. Did you kick her on the leg?
A. No, I tried to. I don't know if I did or not. I turned around and kicked my foot backwards. I don't know if I kicked her.

And:

A. Yes, about three weeks ago I was over at Gertrude Wright's, 3850 East New York Street, I slapped Sylvia Likens, on the arm, and kicked her on the leg, because Gertrude Wright, had told me that Sylvia Likens, had called me a (bitch).

So she was not quite so reluctant. Of course, this testimony utilizes another them to be found in this case; i.e. Sylvia calling another female something objectionable: Paula (prostitute); Stephanie (prostitute); Gertrude (wh---). Anna said this:

A. Because Gertrude Wright and I don't remember who else said that she said something about my mother - they said Sylvia said something about her.
Q. Did you hear Sylvia say anything about your mother?
A. Not exactly, ma'am. I heard her talking one day. I did not hear exactly what she said. I thought she said what I was told she said about my mother.

I wondered how “bit--“ managed to get left out. Thanks to Judy, it wasn’t. Not-so-subtle cattiness exhausting itself. So the theme of Sylvia calling other females objectionable things is endemic, although I think it is fictional, and intended to lead to the tattoo story, and explain why the tattooing was done. But I digress.

Now for the coup de grace!

“She remains saddened and puzzled by the inaction of her mother, whom she warned several times of the events unfolding in that house. She recalled how her mother had taken her to Sylvia Likens’ grave at Oak Hill Cemetery in Lebanon, Indiana and cried by the gravesite at the realization that if she had only listened to her daughter, Sylvia might be alive.”

Excellent polemic! And beautifully written! Finally, the mother who failed so terribly, who allowed a young girl to be tortured, denigrated, and murdered, makes a sacred pilgrimage. At the grave of the one who lies there as a result of her refusal to act, she seeks redemption! She cries…she mourns..she bewails her own catastrophic failure. And, of course, if she had only listened to her daughter, who tried time and again to save the tragic character, then all would have come out differently. So in the end, when mother and daughter are compared and contrasted, one stands triumphant, and the other is brought low beneath the weight of her own sin. It some ways it seems to me that this article, and I doubt the veracity of any part of it, makes interesting literature. It is an unpleasant thing to believe that much of what we are told, hear, and read is not the truth. But I think that it is true, nonetheless. That said, I make no claims to infallibility on anything said here, and anyone unlucky enough to have read this posting through to its most boring conclusion would do well indeed to follow the advice in the quote provided at the beginning of this posting. One might follow the advice of Jimmy Stewart, who once said “Don’t believe everything you hear and only half of what you see.” Being a confirmed sceptic, I think that he was perhaps being a little too trusting. However, I end this dreary posting on a positive note…perhaps one that could not be any more edifying and uplifting. I believe that we must have faith that the things we hope for will be realized, that the things not seen will, eventually, be seen by all. So if I were standing in Oak Hill Cemetery when Mrs. Duke finally faced her greatest failing, I would tell her to believe in the things hoped for, for the things not seen. I might also quote a poem so often quoted at times such as these:

“Do not stand at my grave and weep; I am not there; I do not sleep…Do not stand at my grave and cry; I am not there; I did not die.”