I write this column (using “he” throughout, for simplicity purposes) to suggest some useful ideas for vetting a prospective provider who does not come recommended through a reliable source (or through Donna Anderson’s growing new LoveFraud referral base).
How can you begin to assess a relatively unknown provider for his competence to address your experiences with a suspected sociopath specifically, exploiter in general, or otherwise personality-disturbed individual?
Let me start by suggesting that a provider who claims to be educated about sociopathy really isn’t if he lacks an equally fluent understanding of narcissistic and borderline personality disorder.
The reason I say this is that, under certain circumstances, all three disorders can look very much alike; but more importantly, if you are involved with someone who has any one of these disorders, you are at heightened risk of being personally violated and abused.
So, while they are distinct from each other (although common elements of narcissism and sociopathy remain intriguing), I’m suggesting that all three disorders greatly increase the probable, if not certain, occurrence of interpersonal violation.
In the course of this discussion, I’m going to assume that you may be involved with someone (or have been involved with someone) whom you suspect (or know) to be, for instance, sociopathic and/or abusive? Otherwise you wouldn’t be seeking assurances that a particular provider has knowledge and/or expertise of the disorder(s) in question.
I also make the assumption that LoveFraud members or visitors wanting to find a knowledgeable resource on sociopathy (who do not find assistance through Donna’s new referral resource) come with a nice advantage—by virtue of their involvement with LoveFraud, they are already extra knowledgeable on the subject. This equips them to be astute evaluators of a prospective resource.
So let’s get down to business.
You will need, no surprise, to ask questions; questions that can gauge the provider’s competency to appreciate the gravity of a situation in which a sociopathic (or some other exploitative dynamic) is, or has been, present.
And you will want good, expressive answers to your questions, not dismissive ones.
The first, vital task is to assess the provider’s receptivity to your interest in his clinical experience. This point needs emphasis: You are entitled to evaluate the provider’s clinical experience and expertise as it pertains to your circumstances.
I stress: You are completely, utterly entitled to assess the provider’s professional experience, skills, and interest on matters relevant to your personal circumstances and self-interest.
Remember, this is not about protecting the provider; it’s about protecting yourself.
As such, this speaks to a bigger issue: You are setting yourself up if you do not protect yourself, and so you protect yourself by owning your right to a completely respectful, receptive invitation to evaluate the provider’s scope of interest and competence with a given client population, or in a particular clinical area. Anything less than a genuine, undefensive invitation from the provider to proceed with your questions should immediately disqualify him from consideration.
So for instance, you might begin with something like, “You know, it’s very important to me, given my circumstances, to be working with someone I can feel confident has a really good knowledge of _________. Would you mind if I asked you several questions along those lines, for my own personal comfort?” (There are many ways to break the ice, this is just one example.)
Remember: A provider who fails, at this point, to invite you to proceed, undefensively, has disqualified himself. Thus, if he responds impatiently, arrogantly, angrily, curtly, condescendingly, as if offended or put-off, or in any other way inadequately, he is wrong for you. You must move on, because you deserve better.
Assuming you’ve gotten the proper encouragement to proceed, I offer below a list of questions (hardly comprehensive) which, depending on your circumstances, can elicit meaningful information. The idea (quite obviously) isn’t to ask all of these questions, but to pursue several that are most applicable to your situation.
This list is by no means complete; rather, it’s at best a starting point, if only to get your own wheels rolling to come up with even better questions! Note that some of the questions probe for knowledge, others for personal views and biases, and others for experience. The asterisked questions can sometimes elicit responses that will enable you to quickly eliminate potential resources.
· How familiar are you with sociopathy?
· How familiar are you with psychopathy?
· Do you distinguish sociopathy and psychopathy, or are we using these terms to mean the same thing?
· Do you distinguish antisocial personality disorder from sociopathy or psychopathy?
· How many cases have you worked involving sociopathy?
· Can I ask how you came to work with these individuals?
· What is your treatment philosophy regarding sociopathically disturbed individuals?
· I’m curious how you view sociopathy? I know that many people have different ideas about sociopaths. Can you tell me your view of what characterizes the sociopath?
· How do you distinguish, if at all, the sociopath from the narcissistic personality?
· What’s been your experience working with borderline personality disturbance?
· In your experience, what are similarities and differences between borderline, narcissistic and sociopathically disordered individuals?
· How much experience have you had working with abusive individuals?
· Can you tell me a little about the history of your interest, and experience working, with abusive personalities?
· *How effective and appropriate, in your experience, are anger management referrals for abusive personalities?
· How much interest, and experience, have you had working with victims of abuse?
· What is your view of what constitutes abuse in a relationship?
· What are your goals in working with someone who is in, or has been damaged by, an abusive relationship?
· *Are there circumstances where someone might be driven, legitimately, to abuse someone else?
· Do you mind if I ask you whose work or writings on abusive relationships and abusive personalities has most influenced your views?
· Do you mind if I ask you whose work on the subject of psychopathy (or sociopathy) has most influenced your ideas?
· *Are you familiar with Robert Hare’s work?
· *Have you successfully treated sociopaths?
· My partner, if you meet him, will tell you that I’m a sociopath”¦how will you know which of us, if either, is the sociopath?
· Are you familiar with any psychological instruments that assess for psychopathy, and if so, do you use them?
· *Under what conditions, if any, would you be hesitant to do couples therapy?
· What goals do you have, generally, when working with a borderline personality?
· What goals do you have, generally, when working with a narcissistic personality?
· What is your understanding of the central feature(s) of sociopathy?
· What is your understanding of the central feature(s) of the narcissist?
· Would you be willing to read something I’d give you if I felt it could help you understand the precidament/situation/personality I’m dealing with?
· When you believe you are dealing clinically with a sociopathic individual, what is your clinical goal?
The answers to your questions
As I’ve strongly suggested, the provider’s responses, first of all, should convey interest in, and respect for, your questions. Your first assessment, then, is less of the provider’s expertise and knowledge, than his or her attitude to your questions.
As a matter of fact, a primary purpose of your questions is to assess the attitude of the provider. In other words, if the provider isn’t temperamentally suited to appreciate the complexity of your concerns, he or she can have all the knowledge in the world and be pretty much worthless.
You’ll want honest answers. Genuine answers. Not pretenses to expertise where there isn’t any. You’ll want a provider who is willing to say, “That’s an interesting question. I might even need to think about that a bit more.”
I offer randomly some rough examples (from countless possibilities) of what might be deemed encouraging responses to some of these questions:
“To be honest, no”¦I haven’t worked with what I’d call a high volume of ________; but I do feel comfortable with my understanding of this clinical issue, and I’d like to be of help to you.”
“I consider myself to be clinically literate on this subject, but I’m happy to become even more enlightened and would welcome anything you have to share with me to get me up to speed.”
“I wouldn’t say that I have a particular interest working with _______, but I do like working with and helping those who have been victimized by ________(s).”
“I suppose I’d regard ______as a very central feature of _______. Also ______.”
“I don’t really make a distinction between antisocial personality and the sociopath? As a matter of fact, I wasn’t even aware of such a distinction? But I’m curious about that? Am I missing something?”
“I’ve worked a great deal with victims of abuse and enjoy working with this client population.”
“I’m not familiar with that issue, to be honest” (depending on the circumstances, this doesn’t necessarily have to be a disqualification).
“I can’t say that I’ve had great success working with narcissistic personalities”¦but I’ll work with anyone who voluntarily seeks my help genuinely.”
“I’m not sure if I satisfied you with my response?”
These hypothetical replies have in common a thoughtful, humble, curious quality. The confident provider will feel relaxed, undefensive, and unpressured to produce brilliant, comprehensive answers beyond his or her scope of expertise.
At the same time, you are looking for evidence of expertise that will leave you feeling comfortable that this is someone who can effectively, sensitively advocate for your interests.
Some responses, as noted, can quickly reveal a provider’s serious limitations.
For instance, the response to the question, Have you successfully treated any sociopaths?, “Yes”¦I’ve worked with many sociopaths and treated several very successfully,” is a great time-saver. You just say, “Thanks very much, I’ve really appreciated your time,” and then have a good laugh on your way out.
That’s because true sociopathy, as the LoveFraud community well knows, is a refractory
condition, unamenable to meaningful modification.
Regarding the Hare question: in cases where a provider claims to be experienced with the subject of sociopathy, I might find it dubious (although not necessarily instantly disqualifying) that he or she would have no knowledge of Robert Hare, who is such a notable figure in psychopathy research.
Similarly, the response to the question, Under what conditions would you be hesitant to do couples therapy?, “Umm”¦.I can’t really think of any?,” would suggest a potentially serious defect in the provider’s clinical knowledge and/or judgement. That’s because couples therapy is ill-advised under several circumstances, among them when serious abuse is occuring in a relationship, or when one or both partners is sociopathically oriented. (And naturally, non-genuine motivation to work on the relationship would be another contraindication.)
Further, a provider who suggests that, yes, a referral for anger management is probably the best intervention you can offer an abusive personality betrays a likely ignorance of the dynamics of the abuser, who has much more than merely an anger problem.
And it’s self-evident that a provider who can find a basis to justify abuse under any circumstance is probably confusing abuse with, perhaps, self-defense—a failure of understanding that ought to send you running for the hills.
Bear in mind there is no one right way to answer many of these questions; in many cases, there are multiple good (and good-enough) answers which also allow for differences in clinical approaches and orientations.
I offer below additional examples (also random, hypothetical) of the kinds of responses that might reflect a reassuring level of clinical expertise:
“What do I see as the central feature of sociopathy? I see the sociopath as someone who is extremely, chronically manipulative and deceptive. Someone who lacks empathy in a very gross way for the victims of his or her exploitation.”
“I see what you mean”¦.you can have a borderline personality disorder doing something, say, really vengeful that might look very sociopathic, but the motive for the aggression would be different. The borderline personality might be motivated by rage, panic, or desperation over, say, abandonment issues, whereas the sociopath? He or she may be movitated by”¦the impulse?”¦pure greed”¦or even the fun of it?”
“If I have good reason to believe I’m dealing with a sociopath, my main goal becomes evaluating his or her risk to others”¦depending, of course, on the circumstances of the referral and case.”
“If I’m working with someone with borderline personality, I’m looking to help that individual, among other things, learn how to better regulate his or her emotions, which may be very dysregulated and for that reason a source of much distress.”
“If I’m working with a narcissistic personality disorder, I’m looking, over time, to help that individual, if possible, examine his demands and expectations of others—his inflated sense of entitlement—more thoughtfully; and also examine the ways that he routinely handles, or mishandles, his disappointment in others.”
“When I’m working with abusive individuals my goal is to confront their excuses and rationalizations for their violating behaviors.”
“When I’m working with victims of abuse I may have several goals, including safety concerns; also exploring how the client finds herself in an abusive relationship, and the factors that make it difficult for her (or him) to leave that relationship.”
“How will I know which of you is the sociopath? I think in any clinical situation, you rely on a number of factors in formulating possible diagnoses, including your instincts, your experience of the individuals, the client’s history (as furnished by the client and others), other relevant, available, supporting documentation; and any adjunctive testing and evaluations that can narrow down, if necessary, a suspected diagnosis more accurately? And so there’s no guarantee that I’ll get it right, but I’m pretty confident of my chances.”
In sum, you’ll want assurances that the provider, at a minimum, can recognize the central aspects of sociopathy (or the disorder in question); he or she should appreciate the futility of pursuing treatment with the sociopath, especially in a private practice setting; but most importantly, the provider should be able to convey a good clinical grasp of, and history of work with, abusive personalities and their victims.
You will know, intuitively, whether the provider’s responses indicate an adequate level of thoughtfulness and knowledge.
And remember, your initial assessment doesn’t end when you choose to begin a working relationship with a particular provider, anymore than you cease evaluating the individual with whom you enter a personal relationship. Your evaluation should be ongoing, and your continued investment in the relationship, whether with a professional resource, or intimate partner, should be based on a continuing evaluation of him or her as worthy of your time and trust.
You can say at any point along the way, This person is not right for me. Just because I sized this person/provider up initially (with necessarily incomplete information) as worth my initial investment, doesn’t mean I can’t modify my assessment of him or her at any time, thanks to my making good use of additional, more complete information!
I hope this offers some guidance for conceptualizing an approach to the evaluation of a relatively unknown prospective provider. I am glad to continue this discussion based on feedback.
(This article is copyrighted (c) 2009 by Steve Becker, LCSW.)
Well said, Libelle! Your story is great. Your sister, who was experienced with Ps, was the one who could see it and label it.
And like you, I also FIRST went to my therapist talking about my shortcomings in the relationship. I was insecure, I was paranoid, I was sensitive. I think people like us who get into relationships are less likely than most, to externalize blame. So we walk into the therapist’s office wanting to figure out what is wrong with us, and our life, and our relationship, and the therapist also looks at us, as the problem. At first.
And yes, by the time we are equipped to go into a therapist’s office and tell them what is wrong – we are halfway through the journey. And likely then we would get much better help and would be much better able to pick a good therapists.
But if one of us walks into a therapist’s office in the beginning stages of “recovery” or still in the relationship, most therapist’s wouldn’t recognize what was happening – and we wouldn’t be able to explain it to them. We would be too confused and lost. Someone like your sister, however, who has been through it, can see.
I know I have sounded a little bitter in past posts about clinician’s “not getting it.” And it’s not their fault, and not that they don’t care, or aren’t very bright, or well-trained, but it’s just that unless we can walk in and say “I’m in an abusive relationship” or “I think my partner has antiosocial personality disorder” it’s going to take a very long time before we get the help we need. Unless a therapist has been through it, or has experience with a lot of us, specifically, he/she is not going to be able to tell us we are in a relationship with someone with antisocial personality until we tell them. And even then they will hold back, partially, on embracing this hypothesis, until they gather enough evidence that they are convinced.
Grant: “Just a relationship that didn’t work out”. Give me a break with this stupidity. I’m in my 50s. Bottom line, we aren’t teenagers or even in our twenties … if a relationship just doesn’t work out … means, one of the partners is an anti-social personality.
I’m sorry folks with this Bullschit in society and what you wrote about your therapist friend’s opinions. As an adult, … you either have it together by your mid-20s or you don’t. If you don’t, most likely you will never have it together.
What are your therapist friends thinking … unless they don’t have it together either?
Peace.
There isn’t enough education about survivors of relationships with sociopaths.
I agree but I would also say that the survivors are diverse. My experiences seem to be quite different than many on here simply because of the nature of the website (my mother was a psychopath). Quite a few sexual offenders are psychopaths and so quite a few sexual assaut victims are as well. Same thing applies to domestic violence and all forms of abuse.
How many victims of (insert abuse form here) start treatment yet they are not understanding of what happened or is happening to them? I know quite a few that do. Some are victims of psychopaths and some are not yet they can present in the same way.
In an article I was reading again I saw this quote that seems to speak to that:
But the problem is that “psychopathic behavior—”egocentricity, for example, or lack of realistic long-term goals—is present in far more than one per cent of the adult male population. This blurriness in the psychopathic profile can make it possible to see psychopaths everywhere or nowhere.
How do you tell the difference, at least initially, between someone who is suffering domestic violence and someone who is suffering domestic violence at the hands of a psychopath?
What about other victims/survivors of psychopaths that were not the relationship LF type? People who were raised by one or grew up with one as a sibiling or as one of their own children? These are just a few examples.
Grant, yes, right on. Most relationships end. Even they didn’t we’d all be married to our high school sweetheart. The vast majority of romantic relationships end, and the vast majority of time neither party in and S or an N. Statisically speaking, that is obvious.
So, yes – you already said what i’ve been saying. Unless you can state, clearly, or even semi-clearly, that your relationship was abusive, your therapist would think otherwise. Chances are that it wasn’t. Certainly those seeking treatment the statistics would be different – but even with people walking into a therapist’s off with problems with their partners – the vast majority do not involve S’s and N’s.
And I agree with you – I think most good therapists, and certainly trauma therapists could help you recover once the issue is clear to both of you. But I’d take a survivor therapist any day. I think the difference would be highly significant, no matter how good the therapist is.
Healing Heart and Blogger T, I think you make the points I’ve beenl trying to make.
Healing Heart, when you say, “I think the problem is not specifically the therapist’s ability to work with traumatized patients, but rather the therapist’s ability to recognize that a relationship with a sociopath is just that – a relationship with a sociopath. And that it was traumatic, ” this is salient.
RUNE, where, by the way (can I ask?) have I said in any of my posts that victims of exploitation should “analyze” their way out of their pain as the principal source of their recovery? You are referring, I suspect, to several of my posts that have stressed the importance of seeing, and heeding, many red flags earlier-on, which many of us can become better at? That is very different from my imputing blame to the exploited and/or suggesting that the exploited ought to just logically get everything out of their system? I’ve never written that, and don’t work with clients from that perspective.
BLOGGER T, I hope I don’t misrepresent you, but I like the notion you suggest that it is dangerous for victims of exploitation/abuse to create a culture and self-status as special victims of trauma. It is obviously true that different traumas will leave people with differently traumatic experiences and different tasks along their recoveries; it also fully the prerogative of anyone to insist and believe that only one who has suffered his or her precise trauma is qualified to help and/or re-empower him or her.
However, I continue, one last time, to balk at the idea that, for instance, in the realm of abuse and sociopathy, only someone who has been personally victimized profoundly by, say, a sociopath, is qualified to grasp sociopathy on a clinically and interpersonally meaningful level; I think this really borders on a kind of proprietary arrogance. I work often and intensively with victims of abuse…victims of all sorts of abusers, and I’ve worked with their perpetrators and I know how their perpetrators operate. My aim, among other things, is to support the process of my client’s healing, and re-empowerment; and also (yes, Rune) to help them, if possible, increase their chances of avoiding a repeat relationship (with another exploiter). I am no miracle worker, to be sure, and I don’t help everyone I see as much as I (and they) might like….but I can assure you that experience with populations of sufferers, and experience with populations of exploiters, counts for a great deal….alone, the experience means nothing….but in the context of a relationship with someone where shared, comfortable chemistry has been established, the experience (clinical and professional) means a lot.
To another of Rune’s point: Obviously to be duped by a conman is a different sort of trauma than to survive a plane crash. Yes, it is true that no one will blame the plane crash survivor for exposing herself to that trauma, whereas there may be implicit or, worse, explicit, blame layed on the conned party. But as Healing Heart noted, in such a case you would need a therapist, or any human being, who understands that difference, in order to feel safe with that person, and unjudged.
Returning a last time to Matt’s earlier point, your work, Matt, and goal, as a defense attorney, puts you in a paradoxically very narrow position to understand the very schemers and sociopaths you represent, as your job is to help them evade accountability (assuming they’re guilty); whereas therapists and researchers who work with this population, and its victims, have the very opposite agenda–to hold them psychologically and criminally accountable, and to protect, as best as possible, their victims. And so it took your own personal victimization to understand much about this that your work, in a million years, couldn’t have taught you. But that is your work, Matt.
In the final analysis, it comes down, most importantly I think, to the individual client (or help-seeker) and the individual provider. I think it’s foolish to forget this and to make irresponsible generalizations.
In the end, it is the aim of help-seekers to find someone with whom they can feel comfortable, by whom they feel understood in a satisfying way, and with whom they can safely pursue their unique healing agenda.
I fully accept, by the way, that some of you did not find the suggestions I made for making a preliminary assessment of an unknown provider helpful. Bear in mind, however, that I stressed in the post that one’s evaluation of a provider should be ongoing.
I made this point very clearly: at any point that you feel that a particular therapist is failing to sufficiently grasp your circumstances–whether that therapist is the most or least credentialed in your city or town; whether that therapist has personally shared your traumatic experiences or not–this is occasion to question whether the therapist is for you; and, if you can’t resolve your reservations with him or her, it’s a good idea to move-on.
Thank you, Steve. This is well-articulated.
Sometimes I regret the things I post, and wish I could go back an edit them (can you? I’m not the most cyber-savvy person?). I am a clinician, and I am a surivivor, so I am able to comment on things with a unique and helpful perspective. HOWEVER, I am also still in the journey of recovery, I’m currently still somewhat traumatized, my feelings fluctuate day to day, and sometimes they are exaggerated. I should be more careful about what I post. I don’t think I’ve posted anything “wrong,” but I write free-flow, and sometimes things come out too strongly stated or in sweeping generalizations. I should be more careful – particularly when I declare myself as quite informed.
Sorry for this. Long and short of it is that I really like what Steve wrote above. Very well-said. Thank you, Steve.
As a final note – I do think that therapists who have been victimized (and thoughtfully gone through the recovery process) are probably most qualified. Unless they are still traumatized and not yet through the experience. But informed and sensitive therapists – with whom you have a chemistry, could be quite helpful. And, even if the clinician IS a survivor, they may not want to share it. Because that might not be good for the client. In most clinicians might opt NOT to identify themselves as former victims. In most conditions its best for the therapist to be a neutral, though empathetic and understanding caretaker. Once the clinician’s issues come into the room the therapy boundaries get a little blurry, and the treatment less effective.
Just take care people, that you don’t stay in a therapeutic relationship where you feel you are being “blamed” or pathologized. If it feels like you are being a victim over again – get out. Keep looking. Try to find a therapist who is experienced in dealing with victims of abusive relationships. Even with all of this – it will still be a bumpy process. Therapy is not a quick fix – it can be essentiall, but it also can involve a fair amount of blood, sweat, and tears. (Not literally, of course)
Steve Becker, LCSW: I take offense to the blame part of being victimized. One, I was focused on keeping my head above water with my mangers, their cronies and some of my co-workers who jumped on the bandwagon to destroy my career. This took six years that the powers that oversaw my bosses allowed me to endure. Meanwhile, I never saw anything out of the ordinary with my fiance … and the strange events that did occur, were explained away as my bosses trying to make me go insane or commit suicide or just drop my lawsuit and go away. Under the circumstances, my situation is different than the average blogger here. I could understand ignoring the RED flags and taking the blame for my part … if it were just my EX and I. I did not have the luxury of it just being my EX and I. I was under EXTREME stress with what my bosses were doing to me on a daily/weekly/yearly basis that lasted over 6 years.
Anything that was out of the ordinary could easily be blamed on my bosses and their cronies trying to make me come unglued. It wasn’t until 2 years after I retired (November of 2006) that I viewed paperwork on the truth versus the lies my EX told me. As we (my sister and friends) put the paperwork in chronological order could I see how my Ex either took advantage of what my bosses did to me or that all of them were in collusion together to do me under. That goes with my attorney I hired to represent me against my bosses and the attorney I hired for the foreclosure on my retirement home. Also, my EX supposedly room mate (aka other fiancee’) was in co-hoots with all of this too. Not that she was involved with my bosses but she did know that I was engaged to my fiance.
Selfishness and GREED at it’s ultimate. Coincidence. I don’t believe so … but it could be. I know that my big boss set other co-workers up to sleep with their bosses so she could have something on them. How do I know that she didn’t plan for my EX to come into my life. She started working on me slowly before the end of the summer of 1998. I met my EX around Halloween 1998.
My EX is smart enough to have played all this to his advantage … but I know what my managers did to me and how, hand in hand … all of what I experienced was by a well oiled machine … all the parts/players fit together …
Peace.
“Returning a last time to Matt’s earlier point, your work, Matt, and goal, as a defense attorney, puts you in a paradoxically very narrow position to understand the very schemers and sociopaths you represent, as your job is to help them evade accountability (assuming they’re guilty)”
Evade accountability?
I thought the job of a defense attorney was to see to it that his client’s rights are protected and that his client receives a fair trial. Our justice system entitles the accused to representation.
I also thought courts often appoint defense attorneys to represent individuals for these reasons and not because the courts want to encourage or support evading accountability!
Thank you Steve for your last post.
Wini – it may just me being tired but I did not see anyone blaming someone for missing red flags or being victimized. I saw them say learn to try to avoid them in the future.
Eye – Just like every profession there are good, bad, and so/so and the same applies with the legal system. But here is something to consider, it was a press release in Aug 2008 with the headline:
Child Abuse Experts Seek To Protect Abused Children from Defense Attorneys
It in part says this:
Testimony by children is the cornerstone of prosecution efforts against child abusers. Yet, defendants often intentionally re-victimize child witnesses for strategic gain according to a national coalition of child abuse experts.
These abusive practices were highlighted recently by the comments of Massachusetts State Representative and criminal defense attorney James Fagan. During a recent House debate on a legislative proposal to create mandatory punishments for certain child rapists, Fagan argued that if the bill passed as a defense attorney it would be his duty to destroy any child who testifies. “I’m gonna rip them apart,” Fagan said. “I ‘ m going to make sure that the rest of their life is ruined, that when they’re 8 years old, they throw up; when they’re 12 years old, they won’t sleep; when they’re 19 years old, they’ll have nightmares and they’ll never have a relationship with anybody.”
EyeoftheStorm: Ohhhhhhhhhh, the illusions of the court system. Biggest narcissists in the world are those surrounding the court buildings USA.
And you wonder why our country is down the tubes? Look at that poor guy that’s been locked up since his early 20’s called the “Lip stick killer”. Innocent of the crimes … yet, the guy still isn’t out of prison yet. Lost his entire life to the big egos surrounding his case. 50 years later, most of those big egos are deceased … but you’d think the big egos in the court system has set the guy free!
Peace.