Some of Ronnie's ideas regarding fairness

General Discussion About the 1974 DeFeo Murders and related topics
Post Reply
scipio-USMC
Amityville Maniac
Posts: 1693

Some of Ronnie's ideas regarding fairness

Post by scipio-USMC » Sun Jul 21, 2013 12:27 pm

1) That his grandfather should pay him way more than is commensurate with his position at the dealership and the way he performed that position. Other than when he drove to work with his father he got there late and left early. He took long lunches and often claimed to be sick and thus did not go to work at all including the day before he killed his family. He was lucky to be given the job at all and to keep it given how badly he performed but in his eyes they owed him far more. They owed him a high paying job with little work attached. That is what would have been fair because they made money and should spread the wealth just because he was related.

2) Anytime money was spent on any DeFeo kid they should give him just as much. It doesn't matter what they used the money on. Braces, crutches, wheel cheer doesn't matter that these are medical necesseties, to him these were just optional indulgences and they wshould have been willing to spend at least as much if not more on his indulgences. SO if a child gets hurt and needs care the amount spent on them should be given to him to spend as he sees fit.


These are just 2 examples that illustrate how warped Ronnie was. He felt he was entitled to a high paying job for doing nothing (no work ethic) and shows how jealous of his siblings tha the was even jealous of money being spent on crutches and a wheel chair for Marc. if he was jealous even of that then you can be sure he was jealous of them in many other ways. That jealousy no doubt played a role in his decision to kill everyone.

This is the person who many rely on to suggest Ron Sr was abusive and that such abuse is a major reason for the murders. Anything coming from such a warped person living in an alternate reality is not very trustworthy.

litown
Amityville Member
Posts: 22

Re: Some of Ronnie's ideas regarding fairness

Post by litown » Fri Jul 26, 2013 7:54 am

I believe your examples fit quite nicely into the diagnosis of Antisocial Personality Disorder. I'm pretty sure at some point Defeo was diagnosed with this disorder by a physciatric professional.
Symptoms of Antisocial Personality Disorder from the Mayo Clinic:

Disregard for right and wrong
Persistent lying or deceit to exploit others
Using charm or wit to manipulate others for personal gain or for sheer personal pleasure
Intense egocentrism, sense of superiority and exhibitionism
Recurring difficulties with the law
Repeatedly violating the rights of others by the use of intimidation, dishonesty and misrepresentation
Child abuse or neglect
Hostility, significant irritability, agitation, impulsiveness, aggression or violence
Lack of empathy for others and lack of remorse about harming others
Unnecessary risk-taking or dangerous behaviors
Poor or abusive relationships
Irresponsible work behavior
Failure to learn from the negative consequences of behavior

None of which makes him less culpable, or responsible, for his actions.

scipio-USMC
Amityville Maniac
Posts: 1693

Re: Some of Ronnie's ideas regarding fairness

Post by scipio-USMC » Fri Jul 26, 2013 9:41 am

litown wrote:I believe your examples fit quite nicely into the diagnosis of Antisocial Personality Disorder. I'm pretty sure at some point Defeo was diagnosed with this disorder by a physciatric professional.
Symptoms of Antisocial Personality Disorder from the Mayo Clinic:

Disregard for right and wrong
Persistent lying or deceit to exploit others
Using charm or wit to manipulate others for personal gain or for sheer personal pleasure
Intense egocentrism, sense of superiority and exhibitionism
Recurring difficulties with the law
Repeatedly violating the rights of others by the use of intimidation, dishonesty and misrepresentation
Child abuse or neglect
Hostility, significant irritability, agitation, impulsiveness, aggression or violence
Lack of empathy for others and lack of remorse about harming others
Unnecessary risk-taking or dangerous behaviors
Poor or abusive relationships
Irresponsible work behavior
Failure to learn from the negative consequences of behavior

None of which makes him less culpable, or responsible, for his actions.
Yes at trial he claimed insanity but the prosecution witness established he had antisocial personality disorder and thus was legally responsible for his actions.

SInce so any are trying to blame his actions on abuse (and even claiming maybe he killed his siblings to put them out of their misery) it is necessary to point out some of his ludcrous ideas of fairness to show the problem rested squarely with him.

To begrudge spending money on crutches and the like and expecting the same amount to be spent on him for non-necessities shows just how ridiculous he was.

litown
Amityville Member
Posts: 22

Re: Some of Ronnie's ideas regarding fairness

Post by litown » Sat Jul 27, 2013 7:48 am

Agreed, he was clearly 100% responsible for his own actions. He knew full well the difference between right and wrong, yet still chose the path he did. The simple fact that he was convicted for his crimes supports this assertion. I believe he undertook the action he did because of some perceived value to him. That value may have been financial, some sort of revenge against a perceived slight, or some combination thereof. We will probably never know his true motivation because he will not speak the truth and somewhere in his bizarre sense of logic he probably thinks his actions were justified even though he knows it was wrong. In any case, one thing we do know is his guilt.

Frankly, I believe whatever level of abuse that did, or did not, exist in the household is irrelevant to the question of guilt. That being said, I have not seen any solid evidence to support a severely abusive household. Of course it is likely, based on time frame and culture, that corporal punishment was probably de riguer in the house. By today's standards some might consider any physical contact as abuse, however those of us who grew up in the era know that it was accepted practice and considered normal. In fact, many of us who have had experience with a Catholic School nun are likely to have direct exposure to corporal punishment via ruler and sore knuckles.

scipio-USMC
Amityville Maniac
Posts: 1693

Re: Some of Ronnie's ideas regarding fairness

Post by scipio-USMC » Sat Jul 27, 2013 11:10 am

litown wrote:Agreed, he was clearly 100% responsible for his own actions. He knew full well the difference between right and wrong, yet still chose the path he did. The simple fact that he was convicted for his crimes supports this assertion. I believe he undertook the action he did because of some perceived value to him. That value may have been financial, some sort of revenge against a perceived slight, or some combination thereof. We will probably never know his true motivation because he will not speak the truth and somewhere in his bizarre sense of logic he probably thinks his actions were justified even though he knows it was wrong. In any case, one thing we do know is his guilt.

Frankly, I believe whatever level of abuse that did, or did not, exist in the household is irrelevant to the question of guilt. That being said, I have not seen any solid evidence to support a severely abusive household. Of course it is likely, based on time frame and culture, that corporal punishment was probably de riguer in the house. By today's standards some might consider any physical contact as abuse, however those of us who grew up in the era know that it was accepted practice and considered normal. In fact, many of us who have had experience with a Catholic School nun are likely to have direct exposure to corporal punishment via ruler and sore knuckles.
It is definitely different today however some corporal punishment on occasion still is not the abuse people try to portray. They portray a patriarch with an iron fist who beat them all regularly and controlled their every action. Obviously that was not the case or Ron would not have been so out of control and clearly he was. Ron was given a car and much more despite flunking out of high school at 16 and living like a bum since. The garbage about him preventing any of the kids from leaving the house and keeping Ronnie from having a good job and forcing him to work at the dealership for peanuts is just outright absurd.

With respect to the abuse the Defense could only come up with 3 instances that they could get witnesses to recount and only 1 was even remotely recent. The defense went to lengths to try to portray abuse to try to get the jury to feel sorry for Ronnie but could not muster much at all. Ron was unable to lie and even make up large numbers of inidents.

As for the claim they wanted the kids to never leave the house that is beyond crazy. They told friends constantly how much trouble Ron was giving them. They would have loved him out of the house. He couldn't afford to live on his own though. He didn't have any good jobs as High Hopes detailed he was fired or walked off every job he had. The classic antisocial personality who could not conform to go to work daily like a normal person. His rampant absientism and tardiness alone got him fired from most not even his lousy attitude. He frequently did not even show up for work at the dealership including not going the day before the murders. Only 2 times in my life were I so sick I missed work. One was when I got my 4 wisdom teeth pulled, my mouth would not stop bleeding so I was unable to talk (if I dared open my mouth blood dripped out despite the mouth full of gauze) and I was so dizzy it was unbelievable. I missed 2 days of work and was upset at the loss of pay so forced myself to go to work despite still being rather dizzy and I was 17 at the time not in my 20s. The other time was recent. About 2 years ago we got the worst case of the flu ever. My family never was hit like that before. All colds and other illnesses besides these I worked through and did not miss time for. Ronnie missed more time in a year than I did my lifetime.

A very telling thing is the whole lie about Dawn and Florida. The claim is that they would not let Dawn move out either and that she wanted to move to Florida. This lie is the whole reason why she supposedly took part in the murders. However, the Billy Davidge affidavit was a big fat lie. Billy Davidge allegedly signed an affidavit that claimed he was living in Florida in 1974, that Ron paid for him to fly back to attend Dawn's Sr. prom with her, that she used Ron for money, and that she wanted to move to Florida to live with him but that her family would not allow it and instead forced her to go to school on Long Island.

Billy Davidge was not living in Florida in 1974 he graduated from Amityville High School in 1975. He didn't move to Florida until after Ron was convicted. That means the claims in the affidavid were all lies. Whether Billy Davidge signed it, Frank Davidge signed it or someone else did is an open question. Billy Davidge has neither confrimed nor denied signing it. Frank Davidge though admitted in court though that he lied in his own affidavit. We know that other friends admitted they lied and recanted their stories including 1 saying he didn't even get it notorized rather Geraldine got it notorized illegally. We don't have any way to know if Billy's was likewise notorized in his absence illegally. The fact it was notorized in Suffolk is suspicious since at the time he was living in Florida. I reached out to Frank and Billy but both refuse to comment at all on the issue. The last comment publicly made by Frnak was his admission to lying to try to help Ron.

So we have an affidvait that Billy refuses to go on record as supporting and moreover that we know for a fact contains numerous lies. It is a fact he graduated from Memorial High in June of 1975. It is a fact his mother moved to Florida in December 1975, her obituary recounts it. SO it is impossible for Ron to have paid for Billy to travel to NY to attend a prom, he was already living in NY at the time. It likewise is impossible Dawn could have been pestering her parents to move to Florida to visit Billy since Billy did not move until more than a year after the murders.

These various lies are all tied together. To paint a false portrait of overbearing parents who refused to let the children live their own lives and controlled their every action and abused them. This lie was used to falsely claim Danw was the instigator and main perp and tha the simply had a secondary role. This was his way of mitigating his actions. His friends were not willing to lie in 1975 at his trial. So he couldn't try any of this crap at the time. Indeed it would be easy to determine at the time that the Davidges were still living on Long Island. In fact Frank Davidge did testify and was from Long Island. He likewise didn't move to Florida ill later. He didn't mention his younger brother being involved with Dawn. He reocunted how his frined pulled a gun on him one times too many and he decided not to visit the house ever again. I seems unlikely he would let his younger brother go there regularly when he refused to do so. In fact, it would be easy to figure out Billy was not romantically linked to Dawn at all. These lies were made up many years later when it would be harder to locate witnesses and records to refute the BS. Made up after they actually did move and hail from Florida.

Post Reply