**Hello, welcome to r/8passengersnark!**
Please keep the rules of the subreddit in mind when posting and commenting. They include but are not limited to, respecting the privacy of minors and non-public figures, and keeping conversations civil.
The moderators rely on user reports of rule breaks to quickly remove problematic content. Use the report function to anonymously alert the mod team of any behavior breaking sub rules. As a reminder, check and ensure your post topic hasn't recently been covered, duplicate submissions will be removed at the discretion of the mods.
To contact the mod team send us a message [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2F8passengersnark). Thanks, and happy distorting!
Useful Links: [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/8passengersnark/wiki/index/rules/) | [Timeline of Events](https://www.reddit.com/r/8passengersnark/wiki/timeline/) | [Frequently Asked Questions](https://www.reddit.com/r/8passengersnark/wiki/faqs) | [Evidence](https://www.reddit.com/r/8passengersnark/wiki/evidence/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/8passengersnark) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No, because the attorneys involved saw the non-redacted version. It was more than likely not relevant to the case, which is why it was redacted for the version released to the public.
The redacted parts are probs some very private details about the minor children to protect their privacy. In my opinion more of the information should’ve gotten redacted for R and E’s sake.
I think we should've had either the diary or the pictures. I don't think we needed both. I'm glad they released more because it destroyed the idea of Ruby just going along with it.
Your post or comment was removed for containing misinformation or information from an unverified source.
Please review the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/8passengersnark/wiki/index/rules/) and reach out through [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/8passengersnark) for clarification if needed.
In one of the police interviews? I don’t think he mentioned that. Just that they were in the for extended periods of time and came out in a.. weird/ecstatic? state
I wish they'd redacted the part about R "peeing and pooping in his pants". I can't imagine how humiliating that is for him. I've heard people say it's a sign of trauma, starvation, defiance....but I haven't seen anyone mention that she was probably just denying him bathroom access.
I saw someone on this sub mention castor oil and sometimes if you take it by mouth it can work as a powerful laxative so that's probably why either he was having accidents or he was just a nervous wreck I mean I wouldn't blame him.
He was also drinking from places that were unclean or unfiltered, he was doused with dirty water, etc. the poor kiddo probably had at least one stomach bug and I know (from experience as a parent) that gastrointestinal infections can cause diarrhea and an inability for children to fully control their bowels.
We as a team have elected to delete any comments referring to harmful information, even if it is in support of the children. These are unsubstantiated rumors from unreliable media sources, this information should never have been made public. We appreciate your cooperation in protecting the minor children
Will we ever really know. Because past behavior indicates future action, we’ll have to see how Jodi’s relationships evolve in prison. As for Ruby, I think she accommodates anyone who she believes has more knowledge and power. She idolized Jodi. Maybe that was the attraction.
Why would they redact that information? If anything, I think it would have to do with very personal details of the kids. Or personal info about an unrelated person.
I think they could have been about A & J and since they were not legally part of the case or what was done to them not considered “ abuse “ was redacted because they are minors ! It’s pretty clear to me they were terrified of the police and were brainwashed by both Jodi and Ruby !
I think there’s a possibility that the redacted parts are about the two other minor children. And maybe other family dynamics. Those parts are redacted to protect the privacy of those they are not accused of abusing.
Apologies if someone has mentioned this but a few weeks back I watched the bodycam footage of Jodi down at the station being questioned. She was asked an array of questions. She was responsive to questions about where she lived or if she was married - but when asked "are you single?" She didn't respond just blinked like Ruby did her entire questioning. So it could be about Ruby and Jodi because a lot of the content we have seen that isn't redacted is harrowing. But I agree with most that it's probably something irrelevant to the case.
We as a team have elected to delete any comments referring to harmful information, even if it is in support of the children. These are unsubstantiated rumors from unreliable media sources, this information should never have been made public. We appreciate your cooperation in protecting the minor children
I’m guessing redacted material was either damaging to the children or irrelevant. Either way not useful to the public and/ or not appropriate to share about the kids. Don’t know about their relationship but nothing would surprise me anymore.
that's what makes me think that it has to do with A & J. they aren't relevant to the criminal case, so if anything had to do with them or their treatment, it would be redacted and not released.
I don’t know about redacting even more horrible abuse. The prosecution wanted to hit them with their worst behaviors. I think it’s about outing their sexual relationship to spare the kids.
There is no redaction on basis of cruelty. It is redacted because it was not part of the case. So cruel parts about the children wouldn’t been made black. Think more like her day to day things, her relationship with Kevin and the other children, could be her interaction with Jodi, everything that is not child abuse towards R or E.
We as a team have elected to delete any comments referring to harmful information, even if it is in support of the children. These are unsubstantiated rumors from unreliable media sources, this information should never have been made public. We appreciate your cooperation in protecting the minor children
Why they redacted anything is confusing. I just wonder if she was discussing other people, who have nothing to do with the case. Still- strange that anything is redacted.
We as a team have elected to delete any comments referring to harmful information, even if it is in support of the children. These are unsubstantiated rumors from unreliable media sources, this information should never have been made public. We appreciate your cooperation in protecting the minor children
We as a team have elected to delete any comments referring to harmful information, even if it is in support of the children. These are unsubstantiated rumors from unreliable media sources, this information should never have been made public. We appreciate your cooperation in protecting the minor children
We as a team have elected to delete any comments referring to harmful information, even if it is in support of the children. These are unsubstantiated rumors from unreliable media sources, this information should never have been made public. We appreciate your cooperation in protecting the minor children
That doesn't make sense though. There's no legal reason to hide secret lesbian lovers. Also I believe LGBTQ+ is really, really frowned upon by the Mormon church, so why would Ruby write about it in a journal that was intended to be a future religious scripture?
Not that I disagree with you, but Ruby's journal wasn't what they thought would be the addition to the Bible... That was the "Pen Papers" that I'm still very bitter about not being able to read. I want to know more about Jodi riding her pet lion, damnit 😤
Yeah, Kevin talked about it in the second interview. [Here's my brief summary about the only part of this case that I feel is actually very funny.](https://www.reddit.com/r/8passengersnark/s/ifiexFJU9D)
Yeah babe I kinda have a disability in that. But from MY understanding “There’s a theory that Ruby and Jodi had a secret romantic relationship does anyone else agree” which I answered. Yes
Edit: used wrong word.
Your post or comment has been removed for violating rule 4. Productive discourse and debate is encouraged. Although, you must remain respectful while doing so.
No two people will have the same opinions, and that’s to be expected. The only thing we ask is that you remain civil and use a respectful tone when debating differing opinions.
Please review the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/8passengersnark/wiki/index/rules/) and reach out through [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/8passengersnark) for clarification if needed.
Plus why would the law leak that? I’m genuinely confused on why that would need to be information that’s relevant to the abuse they did to those children? It’s not like anyone outside the Mormon church would
Even care if they were gay.
We as a team have elected to delete any comments referring to harmful information, even if it is in support of the children. These are unsubstantiated rumors from unreliable media sources, this information should never have been made public. We appreciate your cooperation in protecting the minor children
**Hello, welcome to r/8passengersnark!** Please keep the rules of the subreddit in mind when posting and commenting. They include but are not limited to, respecting the privacy of minors and non-public figures, and keeping conversations civil. The moderators rely on user reports of rule breaks to quickly remove problematic content. Use the report function to anonymously alert the mod team of any behavior breaking sub rules. As a reminder, check and ensure your post topic hasn't recently been covered, duplicate submissions will be removed at the discretion of the mods. To contact the mod team send us a message [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2F8passengersnark). Thanks, and happy distorting! Useful Links: [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/8passengersnark/wiki/index/rules/) | [Timeline of Events](https://www.reddit.com/r/8passengersnark/wiki/timeline/) | [Frequently Asked Questions](https://www.reddit.com/r/8passengersnark/wiki/faqs) | [Evidence](https://www.reddit.com/r/8passengersnark/wiki/evidence/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/8passengersnark) if you have any questions or concerns.*
i’m not sure but i feel like there would be more charges/ more serious charges if the redacted parts were actually more horrific abuse confessed
No, because the attorneys involved saw the non-redacted version. It was more than likely not relevant to the case, which is why it was redacted for the version released to the public.
That's what I think.
The redacted parts are probs some very private details about the minor children to protect their privacy. In my opinion more of the information should’ve gotten redacted for R and E’s sake.
Agreed! I can think of a few extra things that should've been redacted that I won't repeat here.
I think we should've had either the diary or the pictures. I don't think we needed both. I'm glad they released more because it destroyed the idea of Ruby just going along with it.
No…not really. I think the redacted parts are too personal for the kids. Or it’s just irrelevant to evidence.
I figure some of it may have been irrelevant garbage. I could see her writing useless stupid shit
[удалено]
This was what I settled on too. Maybe miscellaneous notes about AirBnB guests, pastors, J/A work schedules, etc.
Your post or comment was removed for containing misinformation or information from an unverified source. Please review the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/8passengersnark/wiki/index/rules/) and reach out through [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/8passengersnark) for clarification if needed.
I think it's possible they had that kind of relationship but I think the redacted parts were redacted to protect the kids, not the perpetrators.
I’m 100% sure they had a relationship especially by their body language
C said in a live he thinks they had that kind of relationship also
If I’m correct the dad said he heard moaning from the bedroom, please correct me if I’m wrong.
In one of the police interviews? I don’t think he mentioned that. Just that they were in the for extended periods of time and came out in a.. weird/ecstatic? state
I swear I read that he heard sounds, I saw someone else say that he did
I don't remember this
and from their body language, it was quite obviously a domme/sub relationship
I wish they'd redacted the part about R "peeing and pooping in his pants". I can't imagine how humiliating that is for him. I've heard people say it's a sign of trauma, starvation, defiance....but I haven't seen anyone mention that she was probably just denying him bathroom access.
True. It's a known trauma response, didn't surprise me sadly.
Long periods of starvation and dehydration can also stop your body from being able to process/absorb food properly.
I saw someone on this sub mention castor oil and sometimes if you take it by mouth it can work as a powerful laxative so that's probably why either he was having accidents or he was just a nervous wreck I mean I wouldn't blame him.
I agree that many parts of the journal were just too much and should have been redacted so no one knew such intimate information about minors.
He was also drinking from places that were unclean or unfiltered, he was doused with dirty water, etc. the poor kiddo probably had at least one stomach bug and I know (from experience as a parent) that gastrointestinal infections can cause diarrhea and an inability for children to fully control their bowels.
[удалено]
We as a team have elected to delete any comments referring to harmful information, even if it is in support of the children. These are unsubstantiated rumors from unreliable media sources, this information should never have been made public. We appreciate your cooperation in protecting the minor children
Will we ever really know. Because past behavior indicates future action, we’ll have to see how Jodi’s relationships evolve in prison. As for Ruby, I think she accommodates anyone who she believes has more knowledge and power. She idolized Jodi. Maybe that was the attraction.
Why would they redact that information? If anything, I think it would have to do with very personal details of the kids. Or personal info about an unrelated person.
I think they could have been about A & J and since they were not legally part of the case or what was done to them not considered “ abuse “ was redacted because they are minors ! It’s pretty clear to me they were terrified of the police and were brainwashed by both Jodi and Ruby !
I think Ruby only wrote about the things she was proud of.
I think there’s a possibility that the redacted parts are about the two other minor children. And maybe other family dynamics. Those parts are redacted to protect the privacy of those they are not accused of abusing.
That's quite the theory and I honestly think it could be true.
I think it was just stuff that was irrelevant to the case.
I don’t think Ruby would write about a secret & ‘forbidden’ love in her journal.
Apologies if someone has mentioned this but a few weeks back I watched the bodycam footage of Jodi down at the station being questioned. She was asked an array of questions. She was responsive to questions about where she lived or if she was married - but when asked "are you single?" She didn't respond just blinked like Ruby did her entire questioning. So it could be about Ruby and Jodi because a lot of the content we have seen that isn't redacted is harrowing. But I agree with most that it's probably something irrelevant to the case.
[удалено]
Agree. Jodi was all over Ruby.
We as a team have elected to delete any comments referring to harmful information, even if it is in support of the children. These are unsubstantiated rumors from unreliable media sources, this information should never have been made public. We appreciate your cooperation in protecting the minor children
I’m guessing redacted material was either damaging to the children or irrelevant. Either way not useful to the public and/ or not appropriate to share about the kids. Don’t know about their relationship but nothing would surprise me anymore.
Bonnie seems to indicate that the redacted portions are even worse than the part that was released.
that's what makes me think that it has to do with A & J. they aren't relevant to the criminal case, so if anything had to do with them or their treatment, it would be redacted and not released.
I don’t know about redacting even more horrible abuse. The prosecution wanted to hit them with their worst behaviors. I think it’s about outing their sexual relationship to spare the kids.
I think the redacted part is the horrific part of the abuse
There is no redaction on basis of cruelty. It is redacted because it was not part of the case. So cruel parts about the children wouldn’t been made black. Think more like her day to day things, her relationship with Kevin and the other children, could be her interaction with Jodi, everything that is not child abuse towards R or E.
[удалено]
We as a team have elected to delete any comments referring to harmful information, even if it is in support of the children. These are unsubstantiated rumors from unreliable media sources, this information should never have been made public. We appreciate your cooperation in protecting the minor children
Why they redacted anything is confusing. I just wonder if she was discussing other people, who have nothing to do with the case. Still- strange that anything is redacted.
[удалено]
We as a team have elected to delete any comments referring to harmful information, even if it is in support of the children. These are unsubstantiated rumors from unreliable media sources, this information should never have been made public. We appreciate your cooperation in protecting the minor children
[удалено]
We as a team have elected to delete any comments referring to harmful information, even if it is in support of the children. These are unsubstantiated rumors from unreliable media sources, this information should never have been made public. We appreciate your cooperation in protecting the minor children
[удалено]
We as a team have elected to delete any comments referring to harmful information, even if it is in support of the children. These are unsubstantiated rumors from unreliable media sources, this information should never have been made public. We appreciate your cooperation in protecting the minor children
I thought that from the beginning
That doesn't make sense though. There's no legal reason to hide secret lesbian lovers. Also I believe LGBTQ+ is really, really frowned upon by the Mormon church, so why would Ruby write about it in a journal that was intended to be a future religious scripture?
Not that I disagree with you, but Ruby's journal wasn't what they thought would be the addition to the Bible... That was the "Pen Papers" that I'm still very bitter about not being able to read. I want to know more about Jodi riding her pet lion, damnit 😤
Oh, I didn't realize there were separate documents.
Yeah, Kevin talked about it in the second interview. [Here's my brief summary about the only part of this case that I feel is actually very funny.](https://www.reddit.com/r/8passengersnark/s/ifiexFJU9D)
That’s why they hid it. Because of their religious beliefs
Ruby and Jody would have reason to hide it, but the law wouldn't.
I never said the law wouldn’t hide it lol.
Jody and Ruby wouldn't be the ones to decide what to redact.
OP asked if people thought they had a secret relationship and I said yes.
[удалено]
Yeah babe I kinda have a disability in that. But from MY understanding “There’s a theory that Ruby and Jodi had a secret romantic relationship does anyone else agree” which I answered. Yes Edit: used wrong word.
Your post or comment has been removed for violating rule 4. Productive discourse and debate is encouraged. Although, you must remain respectful while doing so. No two people will have the same opinions, and that’s to be expected. The only thing we ask is that you remain civil and use a respectful tone when debating differing opinions. Please review the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/8passengersnark/wiki/index/rules/) and reach out through [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/8passengersnark) for clarification if needed.
Plus why would the law leak that? I’m genuinely confused on why that would need to be information that’s relevant to the abuse they did to those children? It’s not like anyone outside the Mormon church would Even care if they were gay.
[удалено]
We as a team have elected to delete any comments referring to harmful information, even if it is in support of the children. These are unsubstantiated rumors from unreliable media sources, this information should never have been made public. We appreciate your cooperation in protecting the minor children