Rather than helping “Elick’s” case, it appears to make it worse – if Mixson was a supplier, she could also have lied about “not” seeing any weapons or a blue raincoat / tarp.
I don’t know if you’ll be a gentleman or will vulgarly insult me just because you can as almost everyone else does; but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and invite you to think about it after reading my comment below which shows there is nothing “staggering” about paying a housekeeper/caregiver circa $10/hour which, over 11 years, add up to $278K.
First and foremost, this blue raincoat/tarp story makes no sense whatsoever.
If Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) wanted to dispose of the alleged murder weapons, why this grand-production number? (1) Conceal the weapons somewhere handy immediately after the murders; (2) go back a whole week later and pull them from wherever they were concealed and remained undiscovered; (3) wrap them in something, out of all colors, obvious blue; (4) take them to Almeda where at least two people could see them; (5) leave the wrapping fabric in an unlocked wardrobe in Almeda; (6) take the unwrapped weapons on a long journey to their final resting place.
How stupid is that? Specially if RAM had been planning those murders for a long time?
Why not just dispose of them the night of the murders? No wrapping, no intermediate steps, no anything.
Second, Barbara Mixson’s being an occasional supplier of pills to RAM does not make her an accomplice to the murders or to supposed concealment of the murder weapons. I totally buy her loving RAM as if he were one of her own sons; and I totally buy her being an occasional enabler of one whom she had seen unable to kick the habit. No different from a kid going to the store to buy cigarettes for his mother because she sent him there even though he wishes his mother would quit smoking. Sad but classic dynamics.
Third, and I challenge you to prove me wrong: if RAM were the killer, why return from Almeda that night at all? RAM would have slept that night in his father’s empty bed (RAM’s father was in hospital that night; and Maggie expected RAM to go to Almeda to sleep there and so texted her sister) and left the bodies of Paul and Maggie to be discovered in the morning by one of the Moselle workers.
Coming from three generations of prosecutors, RAM undoubtedly knew that whoever discovers the bodies becomes automatically the prime suspect.
There is also an interesting line in Malicious Mandy Matney’s book: an unnamed woman jumped off a bridge in that vicinity the night of the murders.
I think SLED’s belated dive-search is related to that woman and has nothing to do with any real belief that RAM dumped the murder weapons in the river.
Again, prove me wrong if you can; but please do it politely.
Jenn Wood, just when I was trying to respect you and take you “out of the circle” of Richard Alex Murdaugh’s (“RAM”) false accusers, which circle you entered by befriending a willing adult prostitute (somebody “Edwards”?) and claiming she was “sex-trafficked”), you do this.
You entered, and stayed in, RAM’s false accusers circle (after you dredged up that irrelevant prostitute and realized even the Prosecution found her fabrications not credible) by dredging up a “family annihilator” theory and literally giggling that “it fit [RAM] to a T.” Your STUPID basis for that supposed “fit to a T” is some study that claimed that 30% of family annihilators have financial problems.
If your husband is a rocket scientist, he should teach you BASIC arithmetic.
If he does not, I hereby try to.
Back then, I pointed out (but you ignored me) that even if your statistic were true, it means that 70%, THE CLEAR MAJORITY of “family annihilators,” do NOT have financial problems. That RULES OUT “financial problems” as motive for “family annihilation.”
Today, you compound your IGNORANCE OF ELEMENTARY ARITHMETIC by claiming that RAM paid Barabara Mixon “more than $278,000 over an eleven-year span — a staggering sum compared to what he paid other housekeepers who worked for the family (including the late Gloria Satterfield).”
Jenn, Jenn, Jenn! Let your “rocket scientist” husband confirm to you that $278,000 divided by 11 years is ONLY $25,272 PER YEAR, which is ONLY $2,160 PER MONTH of ONLY $445 or so PER WEEK.
Assuming Barbara Mixon worked a 40-hour week, that is ONLY $10 (ten dollars) per hour.
NOTHING “staggering” about that. Indeed, it is equal to, or less than, the $15 (fifteen dollars) per hour RAM was reportedly paying Gloria Satterfield.
ALSO, the blue jacket (NOT a “tarp”) did NOT belong to RAM but was several sizes too small for him.
Why do you do that, Jenn?
Are you stupid or do you think all your readers are?
Remember: you can’t fool all the people all the time. Not when the great Dr. Marie Faltas is still, thank God, among all the people anyway.
Guess who’s NOT sitting down for dinner.
Guess who dressed Scout up for church.
Yes, they are a movie and a novel; but they reflect the lack of gratitude for, or even recognition of the humanity of, the black household element who brings up white children but is ignored.
Isabelle Sanford, later of The Jeffersons success and fame, had her first break into the entertainment biz in the movie Guess who’s Coming to Dinner. The movie ends with the black bridegroom and his black parents, the white bride and her liberal white a-religious parents, the Irish(?) Catholic priest friend who likes to play golf and drink, all sitting down to an impromptu expanded dinner AND the black maid, played by Isabelle Sanford, standing and pouring the drinks.
No one asks her to join in the dinner she made for seven people on such short notice. No one even thinks to do so. Not the liberal Catholic priest, not the young lady Isabelle Sanford’s character brought up from infancy, and not even the black bridegroom’s working class parents.
It’s the hypocrisy of money which knows no color.
To Kill a Mockingbird, the movie, so minimized the role and humanity of the real mother-figure in Scout’s life it totally omitted one of the scenes I found most touching in To Kill a Mockingbird, the book. When Atticus Finch is out of town on business, the black maid who mothered Scout and her brother after their biological mother dies, is so excited to dress the children and take them to her black church and brag on them to her black co-parishioners. Perhaps the movie did not want to spend any wardrobe item for Scout’s character other than the play overalls in which Scout is stuffed from the beginning of the movie to its end.
At 75 now, with Libby and Handsome Murdaugh dead, and Paul and Maggie Murdaugh killed and Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) wrongly incarcerated for their death, who comforts Barbara Ann Mixson for the loss of the family to whom she devoted 40 years of her life?
Did she get invited to Buster’s and Brooklyn’s wedding?
Does she get to visit RAM in prison?
Does she have a caregiver if, God forbid, her own health fails?
I hope this non-partisan comment gets through and that Ms. Mixson gets to know that she is appreciated.
We shall, God willing, see.
Because I am still moved by Barbara Mixson’s lasting love and courage to say (in her single[?] post-testimony interview I saw) that Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) “did not do it,” and because I hope David Pascoe becomes South Carolina’s next, but ANTI-death penalty, attorney general, I paste here, too, what I just did on Will Folks’ guillotine-glorifying article from last month:
I hope Pope Leo XIV, Vice President JD Vance, and Mrs, Kirk, make it fashionable (or at least acceptable) within MAGA to be Catholic.
And while we are at at, I hope Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul II are not forgotten already.
I hope, too, that Usha Chilukuri makes it acceptable, even fashionable, within some circles who worship the Germanic beauty dreams of tall, blue-eyed, blond and big-breasted and big-footed (whether naturally or artificially), to be petite, natural-dark-haired with silver streaks of wisdom, with wise brown eyes un-weighted-down with artificial eyelashes and the allergenic glue it takes to apply them, AND frugal in fashion.
With that said, I know that Will Folks is not Catholic though I am unsure of which, if any, theology he brings his children up in. I know that Jenn Woods claims to be Catholic, and that, before the Citadel, David Pascoe went to a preparatory academy with a Catholic-sounding name.
Though I converted in later adulthood to Coptic Orthodoxy, my 100% childhood-into-early-adulthood Catholic education is indelible. And looking back at it, I marvel at how skilled the nuns were, in co-operation with the monks. in ingraining in us the JOYS of chastity, charity, and studiousness. The nuns took us to visit the sick and the poor while the monks taught us the basics of Catholic philosophy and that the purpose of life is to know God and to love Him.
The Coptic Orthodox phrasing of the purpose of life is to unite with God.
Since my conversion, the only thing I do differently is where and how I take Holy Communion where and when I can.
The Coptic Orthodox Church does not YET oppose the death penalty (how can it in majority-Moslem Egypt?) but the Catholic Church does and now requires the faithful to actively oppose it, too.
And come what may, I believe it hypocritical to oppose abortion without opposing the death penalty and/or to oppose the death penalty without opposing abortion.
So, insult me you self-anointed righteous right and lofty left all you want; but remember that God is love and God told us to choose life. Period. No age brackets.
So, today, remembering Revelation 3:20 English Standard Version
“Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me.”
and the Parable of the Sower Mark 4:1-20 New International Version
“1 Again Jesus began to teach by the lake. The crowd that gathered around him was so large that he got into a boat and sat in it out on the lake, while all the people were along the shore at the water’s edge. 2 He taught them many things by parables, and in his teaching said: 3 “Listen! A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4 As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5 Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6 But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7 Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants, so that they did not bear grain. 8 Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up, grew and produced a crop, some multiplying thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times.”
9 Then Jesus said, “Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear.”
I hope, God willing and FITS permitting, to show the political candidates that literal guillotine-glorification is unsound, unscientific, and unconstitutional.
Because Jenn Wood has now updated her photo and the caption thereunder on this article (and elsewhere on FITSNews?), I want to rescue her from three very dangerous and self-destructive ideas that FITS is promoting using Jenn, specially after Will Folks’ TERRIFYING personal fantasies of extreme AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL sadism in applying the death penalty:
1. “Justice” means harshness;
2. Harshness reduces crime; and
3. Hypocritical judges who now pander to “lawyer legislators” who elect them will not pander to the governor who appoints them or to the public at large who elects them or to the donors who finance their campaigns, or to the U.S. Senator who employs them in his/her office then elevates them to the federal bench, or to any other form of judicial selection.
I’ll take the second point first: slow hanging in the public square with tickets sold to witness actual death as entertainment.
Where, in today’s world, do executions take place in the public square but without “tickets sold”? In case you have not guessed it, look it up.
Has the cutting of hands of thieves reduced thefts in those places? No.
Has the public beheading of adulterers reduced adultery in those places? No.
Hs the public flogging of alleged blasphemers reduced internal doubts about religions which stifle such thoughts?
And let me ask those who claim to be Christian this: Has the public and cruel crucifixion of Jesus Christ stifle Christianity or cause it to spread?
Remember: Christianity was a crime in the “judgment” of the Pharisees and of the Roman Emperors.
But Simon, who witnesses Jesus Christ’s crucifixion from afar in Jerusalem, later became Saint Peter, who willingly gave himself to be crucified.
And Saul of Tarsus, who PARTICIPATED in the stoning of Saint Stephens later became Saint Paul, who was willing to be martyred for the same cause for which he had participated in the public stoning of Saint Stephens.
To the a-religious who still claim to be latter-day American patriots, I ask: Did the British’s literal “quartering” of captured revolutionaries defeat the American Revolution?
You will insult me by falsely claiming that I equate Christianity and/or the American Revolution with base child rapes or production of CSAM.
But you will be promoting the very hypocrisy I am trying to expose and reduce BECAUSE you know THAT IS NOT MY POINT.
My point is that public cruelty promotes private cruelty; and violence against (good or bad) ideas only promotes violence by those who espouse bad ideas and, for those espousing good ideas, willingness to be subjected to violence for the sake of good ideas.
You do NOT eliminate child rape or production/distribution of CSAM or drug use/distribution or even murder by public torturous executions.
You DO or CAN eliminate such evils by filling people’s hears with JOY from GOOD activities such as feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, healing the sick, sheltering the stranger, and visiting the prisoner.
You DO or CAN eliminate the DESIRE to look at CSAM by giving people great art to look at or great photos and videos of the wonders of nature to look at.
In Pharmacology, it is called “competitive inhibition.” In simple terms, it means a drug that binds to the receptor site of a different molecule prevents that molecule (good or bad) from acting. It does not break down that other molecule itself but prevents it from acting on the receptor by getting there first.
So, do not scare your children with public torturous hangings; get to them “first” by filling their time with learning, art, creativity, good sports, etc.
I shall, God willing and FITS permitting, get to points 1 and 3 later.
6 comments
Rather than helping “Elick’s” case, it appears to make it worse – if Mixson was a supplier, she could also have lied about “not” seeing any weapons or a blue raincoat / tarp.
I don’t know if you’ll be a gentleman or will vulgarly insult me just because you can as almost everyone else does; but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and invite you to think about it after reading my comment below which shows there is nothing “staggering” about paying a housekeeper/caregiver circa $10/hour which, over 11 years, add up to $278K.
First and foremost, this blue raincoat/tarp story makes no sense whatsoever.
If Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) wanted to dispose of the alleged murder weapons, why this grand-production number? (1) Conceal the weapons somewhere handy immediately after the murders; (2) go back a whole week later and pull them from wherever they were concealed and remained undiscovered; (3) wrap them in something, out of all colors, obvious blue; (4) take them to Almeda where at least two people could see them; (5) leave the wrapping fabric in an unlocked wardrobe in Almeda; (6) take the unwrapped weapons on a long journey to their final resting place.
How stupid is that? Specially if RAM had been planning those murders for a long time?
Why not just dispose of them the night of the murders? No wrapping, no intermediate steps, no anything.
Second, Barbara Mixson’s being an occasional supplier of pills to RAM does not make her an accomplice to the murders or to supposed concealment of the murder weapons. I totally buy her loving RAM as if he were one of her own sons; and I totally buy her being an occasional enabler of one whom she had seen unable to kick the habit. No different from a kid going to the store to buy cigarettes for his mother because she sent him there even though he wishes his mother would quit smoking. Sad but classic dynamics.
Third, and I challenge you to prove me wrong: if RAM were the killer, why return from Almeda that night at all? RAM would have slept that night in his father’s empty bed (RAM’s father was in hospital that night; and Maggie expected RAM to go to Almeda to sleep there and so texted her sister) and left the bodies of Paul and Maggie to be discovered in the morning by one of the Moselle workers.
Coming from three generations of prosecutors, RAM undoubtedly knew that whoever discovers the bodies becomes automatically the prime suspect.
There is also an interesting line in Malicious Mandy Matney’s book: an unnamed woman jumped off a bridge in that vicinity the night of the murders.
I think SLED’s belated dive-search is related to that woman and has nothing to do with any real belief that RAM dumped the murder weapons in the river.
Again, prove me wrong if you can; but please do it politely.
Jenn Wood, just when I was trying to respect you and take you “out of the circle” of Richard Alex Murdaugh’s (“RAM”) false accusers, which circle you entered by befriending a willing adult prostitute (somebody “Edwards”?) and claiming she was “sex-trafficked”), you do this.
You entered, and stayed in, RAM’s false accusers circle (after you dredged up that irrelevant prostitute and realized even the Prosecution found her fabrications not credible) by dredging up a “family annihilator” theory and literally giggling that “it fit [RAM] to a T.” Your STUPID basis for that supposed “fit to a T” is some study that claimed that 30% of family annihilators have financial problems.
If your husband is a rocket scientist, he should teach you BASIC arithmetic.
If he does not, I hereby try to.
Back then, I pointed out (but you ignored me) that even if your statistic were true, it means that 70%, THE CLEAR MAJORITY of “family annihilators,” do NOT have financial problems. That RULES OUT “financial problems” as motive for “family annihilation.”
Today, you compound your IGNORANCE OF ELEMENTARY ARITHMETIC by claiming that RAM paid Barabara Mixon “more than $278,000 over an eleven-year span — a staggering sum compared to what he paid other housekeepers who worked for the family (including the late Gloria Satterfield).”
Jenn, Jenn, Jenn! Let your “rocket scientist” husband confirm to you that $278,000 divided by 11 years is ONLY $25,272 PER YEAR, which is ONLY $2,160 PER MONTH of ONLY $445 or so PER WEEK.
Assuming Barbara Mixon worked a 40-hour week, that is ONLY $10 (ten dollars) per hour.
NOTHING “staggering” about that. Indeed, it is equal to, or less than, the $15 (fifteen dollars) per hour RAM was reportedly paying Gloria Satterfield.
ALSO, the blue jacket (NOT a “tarp”) did NOT belong to RAM but was several sizes too small for him.
Why do you do that, Jenn?
Are you stupid or do you think all your readers are?
Remember: you can’t fool all the people all the time. Not when the great Dr. Marie Faltas is still, thank God, among all the people anyway.
Guess who’s NOT sitting down for dinner.
Guess who dressed Scout up for church.
Yes, they are a movie and a novel; but they reflect the lack of gratitude for, or even recognition of the humanity of, the black household element who brings up white children but is ignored.
Isabelle Sanford, later of The Jeffersons success and fame, had her first break into the entertainment biz in the movie Guess who’s Coming to Dinner. The movie ends with the black bridegroom and his black parents, the white bride and her liberal white a-religious parents, the Irish(?) Catholic priest friend who likes to play golf and drink, all sitting down to an impromptu expanded dinner AND the black maid, played by Isabelle Sanford, standing and pouring the drinks.
No one asks her to join in the dinner she made for seven people on such short notice. No one even thinks to do so. Not the liberal Catholic priest, not the young lady Isabelle Sanford’s character brought up from infancy, and not even the black bridegroom’s working class parents.
It’s the hypocrisy of money which knows no color.
To Kill a Mockingbird, the movie, so minimized the role and humanity of the real mother-figure in Scout’s life it totally omitted one of the scenes I found most touching in To Kill a Mockingbird, the book. When Atticus Finch is out of town on business, the black maid who mothered Scout and her brother after their biological mother dies, is so excited to dress the children and take them to her black church and brag on them to her black co-parishioners. Perhaps the movie did not want to spend any wardrobe item for Scout’s character other than the play overalls in which Scout is stuffed from the beginning of the movie to its end.
At 75 now, with Libby and Handsome Murdaugh dead, and Paul and Maggie Murdaugh killed and Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) wrongly incarcerated for their death, who comforts Barbara Ann Mixson for the loss of the family to whom she devoted 40 years of her life?
Did she get invited to Buster’s and Brooklyn’s wedding?
Does she get to visit RAM in prison?
Does she have a caregiver if, God forbid, her own health fails?
I hope this non-partisan comment gets through and that Ms. Mixson gets to know that she is appreciated.
We shall, God willing, see.
Because I am still moved by Barbara Mixson’s lasting love and courage to say (in her single[?] post-testimony interview I saw) that Richard Alexander Murdaugh (“RAM”) “did not do it,” and because I hope David Pascoe becomes South Carolina’s next, but ANTI-death penalty, attorney general, I paste here, too, what I just did on Will Folks’ guillotine-glorifying article from last month:
I hope Pope Leo XIV, Vice President JD Vance, and Mrs, Kirk, make it fashionable (or at least acceptable) within MAGA to be Catholic.
And while we are at at, I hope Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul II are not forgotten already.
I hope, too, that Usha Chilukuri makes it acceptable, even fashionable, within some circles who worship the Germanic beauty dreams of tall, blue-eyed, blond and big-breasted and big-footed (whether naturally or artificially), to be petite, natural-dark-haired with silver streaks of wisdom, with wise brown eyes un-weighted-down with artificial eyelashes and the allergenic glue it takes to apply them, AND frugal in fashion.
With that said, I know that Will Folks is not Catholic though I am unsure of which, if any, theology he brings his children up in. I know that Jenn Woods claims to be Catholic, and that, before the Citadel, David Pascoe went to a preparatory academy with a Catholic-sounding name.
Though I converted in later adulthood to Coptic Orthodoxy, my 100% childhood-into-early-adulthood Catholic education is indelible. And looking back at it, I marvel at how skilled the nuns were, in co-operation with the monks. in ingraining in us the JOYS of chastity, charity, and studiousness. The nuns took us to visit the sick and the poor while the monks taught us the basics of Catholic philosophy and that the purpose of life is to know God and to love Him.
The Coptic Orthodox phrasing of the purpose of life is to unite with God.
Since my conversion, the only thing I do differently is where and how I take Holy Communion where and when I can.
The Coptic Orthodox Church does not YET oppose the death penalty (how can it in majority-Moslem Egypt?) but the Catholic Church does and now requires the faithful to actively oppose it, too.
And come what may, I believe it hypocritical to oppose abortion without opposing the death penalty and/or to oppose the death penalty without opposing abortion.
So, insult me you self-anointed righteous right and lofty left all you want; but remember that God is love and God told us to choose life. Period. No age brackets.
So, today, remembering Revelation 3:20 English Standard Version
“Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me.”
and the Parable of the Sower Mark 4:1-20 New International Version
“1 Again Jesus began to teach by the lake. The crowd that gathered around him was so large that he got into a boat and sat in it out on the lake, while all the people were along the shore at the water’s edge. 2 He taught them many things by parables, and in his teaching said: 3 “Listen! A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4 As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5 Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6 But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7 Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants, so that they did not bear grain. 8 Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up, grew and produced a crop, some multiplying thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times.”
9 Then Jesus said, “Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear.”
I hope, God willing and FITS permitting, to show the political candidates that literal guillotine-glorification is unsound, unscientific, and unconstitutional.
Because Jenn Wood has now updated her photo and the caption thereunder on this article (and elsewhere on FITSNews?), I want to rescue her from three very dangerous and self-destructive ideas that FITS is promoting using Jenn, specially after Will Folks’ TERRIFYING personal fantasies of extreme AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL sadism in applying the death penalty:
1. “Justice” means harshness;
2. Harshness reduces crime; and
3. Hypocritical judges who now pander to “lawyer legislators” who elect them will not pander to the governor who appoints them or to the public at large who elects them or to the donors who finance their campaigns, or to the U.S. Senator who employs them in his/her office then elevates them to the federal bench, or to any other form of judicial selection.
I’ll take the second point first: slow hanging in the public square with tickets sold to witness actual death as entertainment.
Where, in today’s world, do executions take place in the public square but without “tickets sold”? In case you have not guessed it, look it up.
Has the cutting of hands of thieves reduced thefts in those places? No.
Has the public beheading of adulterers reduced adultery in those places? No.
Hs the public flogging of alleged blasphemers reduced internal doubts about religions which stifle such thoughts?
And let me ask those who claim to be Christian this: Has the public and cruel crucifixion of Jesus Christ stifle Christianity or cause it to spread?
Remember: Christianity was a crime in the “judgment” of the Pharisees and of the Roman Emperors.
But Simon, who witnesses Jesus Christ’s crucifixion from afar in Jerusalem, later became Saint Peter, who willingly gave himself to be crucified.
And Saul of Tarsus, who PARTICIPATED in the stoning of Saint Stephens later became Saint Paul, who was willing to be martyred for the same cause for which he had participated in the public stoning of Saint Stephens.
To the a-religious who still claim to be latter-day American patriots, I ask: Did the British’s literal “quartering” of captured revolutionaries defeat the American Revolution?
You will insult me by falsely claiming that I equate Christianity and/or the American Revolution with base child rapes or production of CSAM.
But you will be promoting the very hypocrisy I am trying to expose and reduce BECAUSE you know THAT IS NOT MY POINT.
My point is that public cruelty promotes private cruelty; and violence against (good or bad) ideas only promotes violence by those who espouse bad ideas and, for those espousing good ideas, willingness to be subjected to violence for the sake of good ideas.
You do NOT eliminate child rape or production/distribution of CSAM or drug use/distribution or even murder by public torturous executions.
You DO or CAN eliminate such evils by filling people’s hears with JOY from GOOD activities such as feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, healing the sick, sheltering the stranger, and visiting the prisoner.
You DO or CAN eliminate the DESIRE to look at CSAM by giving people great art to look at or great photos and videos of the wonders of nature to look at.
In Pharmacology, it is called “competitive inhibition.” In simple terms, it means a drug that binds to the receptor site of a different molecule prevents that molecule (good or bad) from acting. It does not break down that other molecule itself but prevents it from acting on the receptor by getting there first.
So, do not scare your children with public torturous hangings; get to them “first” by filling their time with learning, art, creativity, good sports, etc.
I shall, God willing and FITS permitting, get to points 1 and 3 later.