Yesterday, in this blog’s original
post, I linked to this article in the Tampa Bay Times. As it turned out, later
that day Susan Stanton began posting in that article’s comments section. And
you might say that she had two faces just within that section, since she
originally pretended to be someone else -- but later, after being called out by
yours truly when her screen name clued me in to who she really was, she had to
admit her identity and start referring to herself as “I.”
However, the main thing about
Susan Stanton’s two-facedness is the way she wears one face in public and
another in private. Needless to say, they are polar opposites and the one she
wears in public is the nice one she wants the world to believe is true.
In one part of the comments
section, while posing as a disinterested onlooker, she wrote: “Susan only wants
a small portion of the money taken from their company during their marriage.”
In another part, once her real identity was exposed, she wrote: “I only want a
small portion of money earned during our marriage and what I am entitled to.”
Obviously, what she puts out in
public is what she wants the public to see. And when it comes to how she wants
the public to perceive her, this whole thing about “only” wanting “a small
portion” speaks for itself.
Then there is the private face.
In electronic messages she sent to my wife last week, she wrote that she is “entitled”
to 27.5 million dollars -- not assets,
mind you, but dollars, cold hard
cash. She said this is “half” of what my father earned during their marriage,
which I highly doubt, but even if it is true, “half” is hardly “a small
portion.”
And more importantly, in those
same messages, Susan Stanton falsely alleged that we have lied in family and
federal court and are therefore going to jail. She typed the following: “when I
am through with you it won’t be so funny!! Jail time for the Stanton ’s!!”
She made a more specific threat
against us in those messages, but I will not get into it here because her
vindictiveness is obvious enough.
