TX TX - Loretta Norwood, abandoned Baby Boy, 6 - 12 months, on doorstep of paternal grandparents, 8400 block Winthrop Ln, Houston, 21 Mar 2024

[dulcinea]

His family knew the child well enough to identify him to the police.

They also knew the mother.

The father told LE he wasn’t ‘sure’ if he was the father.

So, he also is very well acquainted with the mother.

This is where I am confused, because initially they put out a picture asking people to identify the child. Did the father's family know the baby or not? TIA for anyone who can clarify this for me.

 

[PeregrineFalcon]

What kind of a moron leaves a baby on a doorstep at that time of night? No one is going to notice anything on a doorstep until sometime the next day. Same goes for a text at that time of night. Take the child during normal hours, talk to the possible grandparents, and hand the baby over. If they don't want anything to do with you (very real possibility) take to a hospital/fire station/etc. and they will find the appropriate parent/grandparent/foster care for the child. All of these options can be done under duress since clearly she was able to do this doorstep drop. People in this country have got to start having real consequences for their actions and stop getting slaps on the wrist with parenting classes, mental health eval., anger management, etc. This woman is out on bail!! Where was the baby when she was in jail and committing robbery?!! After watching huge amounts of hearings, trials, sentencing, repeat offenders, I think mandatory birth control while on parole/probation wouldn't be a bad idea to stop handing your problems down to future generations. Won't ever happen, but something has to stop this abuse/abandonment/neglect and horrible parenting that goes from generation to generation.

 

[MissMalowe]

March 21

12:10am
Loretta Norwood leaves 8.5 month old baby on Loretta Sam's doorstep.

12:50am
Norwood texts Ismael "Halo" Hailey that his son is outside his mom's house.

6:00am
Loretta Sam discovers baby on her doorstep. Calls 911/police.

8:00am
Time when "Halo" claims to have seen texts from Norwood.

Family identified baby & mother. Driver of white sedan has not been identified or identity not being released by police.
"Halo" claims he's unsure it is his baby. Family also claims 2 weeks prior, Norwood made bail on a robbery charge in Fort Bend County. Child is currently in CPS custody.
"Doctors inside observed the baby and stated that he was in overall good health however he was not exhibiting behavioral milestones of a child his age."

Who was driving the white sedan?

If claims that mother was jailed for robbery 2 weeks prior are true, who was caring for the baby during that time?

If baby is 8.5 months old, why had no DNA test been performed already if there were questions, either voluntarily or court-ordered?

Where is mom now? Is she safe?

 

[OrangeCash]

Sounds like a chaotic environment all round. Glad the baby is safe and hopefully he'll get some healthy stability in care, all being well
MOO

 

[caradana]

MOO: the interesting undercurrent here is that this case illustrates what it is when the bio dad has elected to be totally out of the picture, his parents don’t even recognize the baby, and the bio mom has hit the wall functionally. This case is an interesting and strikingly pure example of what many interpret as a societal illness, which is when bio dad decides he is game over and bio mom is similarly challenged but has hit the panic button. Again, MOO: I don’t think mom wanted this baby to die, by any stretch. MOO: I’m not sure what the motive of the guy in the white car was. But to indict this woman, who I hope we can all agree is challenged enough, who has at least one other child and who was hitting miles of hard road even without this situation, is not in the taxpayers of Texas’ best interest and I hope that she doesn’t become a political pawn in some optics game. Don’t get me wrong. MOO: I think Loretta will encounter future struggles no matter what happens with this case. I’m just not a fan of hitting a woman when she’s clearly down.

 

[caradana]

Is she in a relationship with the guy in the white sedan and he doesn't want some other dudes child around?

That would be the belief system of a woman who killed a child, that’s the Susan Smith scenario. Susan Smith didn’t drop the boys off at the in-laws. This is a woman who has tons of flaws (join the club, I say) who dropped a baby at her baby daddy’s parents’ house. There is no stench of psychosis here, as far as I can tell. Her misstep, and it is a big one, is that she didn’t call in to anyone with location right away and it was hours before baby was discovered, though it wasn’t freezing or boiling and it was probably generally reasonable to expect that all would be OK. Not OK, though, obviously, but not homicidal in intent. I’m a middle class girl from New Jersey who is summoning some compassion for Loretta here. Her life has probably sucked, her future is dunzo, her current state is awful, but she wasn’t trying to kill her kid. I can try to be kind in this one.

 

[asmi106082]

Baby daddy knows more than he’s saying. He should have been supportive and present so a DNA test could be administered. I’m willing to bet he’s been MIA since she was pregnant. MOO but I feel for her. Even the most well intentioned moms can’t do it all themselves.

 

[ConcernedVA]

It's gonna suck to be that kid to grow up knowing he was a hot potato on a doorstep that no one wanted to claim. Thankfully the neighbors noticed him. I hope he ends up with a person who values him and he has a great life.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

Agree. I hope the fact that this woman is being charged with a crime doesn’t lead other desperate parents to abandon their kids in places where they are less likely to ge found, or turning to more awful alternatives. I don’t expect she was aware of the Safe Haven laws that allow a person to drop off an infant without fear of punishment or judgement—apparently all 50 states of the U.S. have a Safe Haven-type law on their respective books. I see here that Texas’ version is called the “Baby Moses Law” (because OF COURSE it would be in Texas!) and it only applies to infants 60 days or younger, in good health/unharmed, and you ARE asked to provide medical and family history at drop-off…and I think it’s a scenario where you’re permanently forfeiting/terminating parental rights (as opposed to in other states, where a mother in crisis can drop off her young children to be safely cared for while she seeks help/tries to get to a state where she can provide a stable and healthy home for her children).
EDITED TO ADD: the Safe Haven/Baby Moses Law in TX wouldn’t have applied here because the baby was 8 months old. Not quite sure why TX thinks it is acceptable to give up a younger infant but if you can’t parent an infant who’s 61 days old or more, too bad (I know that very young infants are more frequently adopted than older infants and children, that’s probably why…but still, IMO, it’s an arbitrary cutoff and frankly unconscionable).

Explaining the Safe Haven law in Texas

If you have a newborn that you're unable to care for, you can bring your baby to a designated safe place with no questions asked.

abc13.com

In what states is giving up the baby not permanent?

 

[sunspun]

Did she think the (possible?) bio dad was IN the house at the time that she dropped off the baby there? Maybe she texted him that the baby was outside, thinking he was IN the house right then. Does he even live there, maybe only at times even? From the wording of her text, sounds to me like she assumed he was inside the house. She said "your son outside, better go get him" or words to that effect, without even mentioning outside WHERE.

Yes, that seems obvious to me now. She must have thought dad was in the house. To me, that makes a big difference, in her favor. Still, she should have known that even if he WERE in the house, that he might not have gotten the text right away, or even at all. Even if he were inside, he may have been asleep and not gotten the text til morning (which is what happened, but sounds like he was sleeping somewhere else.) Or was he? Maybe he actually WAS in the house, like it sounds like she thought! I don't know if we even know where he was when he got the text OR when she left the baby and sent the text. And he may have gotten the text right away and just said he didn't get it til morning to avoid dealing w/it all. Need to know where he normally sleeps/lives.

Also, I think it sounds like the guy she was with wasn't being all that nice to her at the time she left the baby. It's possible he was also being mean to the baby, or she may have worried that he might harm the baby, so she convinced him to drive her to that house so she could leave baby there, where he would probably be safe at least. I'm sure that wasn't her first choice of what to do with the baby; it may have been her last resort. But she may have felt it was a dangerous enough situation for the baby to be in that she went with this decision, knowing it wasn't a good one either, just better than keeping him in the car w/possibly dangerous man.

 

[mickey2942]

She is in big trouble, but I agree with @TDoc72 -- at least she left the little one with the father's family. May the itty-bitty be loved by his relatives and lead a good life.

Yes. Geez, she doesn't win award for great mother, but compared to many other parents on WS, at least the baby wasn't found in a dumpster.

 

[realanastasia]

@GoBuckeyes wrote: In what states is giving up the baby not permanent?
North Carolina, for one, provides a way that surrendering parents can attempt to “reclaim” surrendered infants, though it is not without consequences for that parent: NC DHHS: Safe Surrender (Surrender Newborns Safely)
“Do Surrendering Parents Have the Right to Reclaim a Surrendered Newborn?
A surrendering parent has the right to contact the county department of social services where the baby was surrendered and request the baby's return to his or her custody prior to the filing of a termination of parental rights petition. Social Services are required by law to treat a parent's request for the baby to be returned as a report of neglect and complete an assessment.”

 

[MissMalowe]

If we're going to extend sympathy & understanding to the DEFINITE mother of this baby for her actions regarding her baby and prior criminal activity, why are we not offering the same sympathy & understanding to the PRESUMED father for his lack of involvement?

Since she left the baby at his mother's house, I'm going to assume that he either IS the father or she at least presumes him to be, but the poor baby is nearly 9 months old and up to this point, NEITHER parties have placed much importance on establishing (or disproving?) paternity. She's too busy committing robberies, he's been too busy ducking & doing who knows what.

Meanwhile, that poor baby is stuck in the middle of it all and now in CPS custody/the foster system.