2010.06.28 - Kyron's Dad files for divorce and restraining order

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
just to clarify a couple things about the RO....remember the RO was done on an "ex-parte" basis...meaning the judge only heard from one side or one party to the complaint. TH was not present at the hearing/issuance of the RO. Normally the petitionin party (KH) would have filed an affidavit in support of the RO to be issued. And many times words or "threats" made in the heat of an argument are used to support the petitioner's request for an RO that may not exactly meet the burden if this was done with both parties present and within the context of a formal hearing. Such as someone could have said..."I'll kill you before I let you take my child away from me"...or "I'd kill myself if you leave"....both of those would be enough for a judge to issue a Temp RO until a more formal hearing is held.

It does not necessarily have to mean that TH was a threat to her child.
 
AbbieNormal said:
I would think very badly of any woman who would come forward at this point and say anything bad about Kaine, a man suffering the loss of a child.
Click to expand...

I hit the thanks button on a post once about Kaine being kinda creepy..I have to take that back. I look at him now and I see hurt in his eyes. He looks as if he has been hurt by TH in the past. BUT, the times I see a different man is when he is in a picture with little Kyron. His whole demeanor is different. His eyes sparkle and there is a smile on his face that makes him look like he is a completely different man. Kaine, you are in my prayers and I ask your forgiveness for judging you in the past!!
 
stmarysmead said:
I may have missed some pertinent info about the 911 call, but wasn't step mom taking her second polygraph that morning? That seems like the perfect time for Kaine to pack up the baby and move out.

Perhaps when stepmom came home and found them both gone...she made some calls to family or even to him..."threatening" her own life with a gun. Maybe THAT person called 911 and the police were dispatched.

That could be described as involving "child custody."
Click to expand...
I am referencing your quote, but I am not singling you out, if that makes sense, others have alluded to TH possibly threatening her or kaines or baby k's life.


Hi! I too am a first time poster and long time lurker. I just started reading about Kyron this week, so I have a lot of catching up to do! Please, if this has already been said delete it...

In my state there is a mandatory psych. hold (24hrs) for anyone that threatens suicide (if your family calls the cops or you do), does anyone know the Oregon law pertaining to this? And if TH had threatened her own life, if this is the case, wouldn't there be a paperwork trail (police reports, ect.).

Secondly, again, if she had threatened baby K's life or Kaine's wouldn't there be a police report about that as well? If the cops had heard it, or the police dispatcher (13 minute phone call) isn't that something that they would have to take note of? And, once again, if she threatened them wouldn't the cops have made one of them leave?

Thirdly, I believe that there is a huge difference between a domestic disturbance call and a domestic violence call-but again that could be mho. And that a threat (at least in my mind) would be considered domestic violence).

Can anyone else shed light on Oregon law pertaining to this, or am I just way way off base?
 
So biodad was able to take the afternoon off to work at home. Hmm, considering he knew the SF was that day, wondering why didn't he arrange to at least take half an hour out of his morning to visit the SF with his son.

Have police been able to confirm biodad was at his place of employ that morning? If biodad at work, who had baby girl while stepmom took K to school? Did stepmom take her cell phone with her that morning.

Did biobad go to work that morning or wait for stepmom's vehicle to show up at the school and wait for her to leave. Family says K would never go anywhere with stranger.

Maybe biodad knew this would speed up divorce proceedings?

Just MOO of course.
 
goatman said:
<respectfully snipped>

Can anyone else shed light on Oregon law pertaining to this, or am I just way way off base?
Click to expand...

Welcome!



§ 426.228¹

Custody

&#8226; authority of peace officers and other persons

&#8226; transporting to facility

&#8226; reports

&#8226; examination of person

(1) A peace officer may take into custody a person who the officer has probable cause to believe is dangerous to self or to any other person and is in need of immediate care, custody or treatment for mental illness. As directed by the community mental health program director, a peace officer shall remove a person taken into custody under this section to the nearest hospital or nonhospital facility approved by the Oregon Health Authority. The officer shall prepare a written report and deliver it to the treating physician.

The report shall state:
(a) The reason for custody;
(b) The date, time and place the person was taken into custody; and
(c) The name of the community mental health program director and a telephone number where the director may be reached at all times.

(2) A peace officer shall take a person into custody when the community mental health program director, pursuant to ORS 426.233 (Authority of community mental health and developmental disabilities program director and of other persons), notifies the peace officer that the director has probable cause to believe that the person is imminently dangerous to self or to any other person. As directed by the community mental health program director, the peace officer shall remove the person to a hospital or nonhospital facility approved by the authority. The community mental health program director shall prepare a written report that the peace officer shall deliver to the treating physician. The report shall state:

(a) The reason for custody;
(b) The date, time and place the person was taken into custody; and
(c) The name of the community mental health program director and a telephone number where the director may be reached at all times.

(3) If more than one hour will be required to transport the person to the hospital or nonhospital facility from the location where the person was taken into custody, the peace officer shall obtain, if possible, a certificate from a physician licensed by the Oregon Medical Board stating that the travel will not be detrimental to the person&#8217;s physical health and that the person is dangerous to self or to any other person and is in need of immediate care or treatment for mental illness. The physician shall have personally examined the allegedly mentally ill person within 24 hours prior to signing the certificate.

(4) When a peace officer or other authorized person, acting under this section, delivers a person to a hospital or nonhospital facility, a physician licensed by the Oregon Medical Board shall examine the person immediately. If the physician finds the person to be in need of emergency care or treatment for mental illness, the physician shall proceed under ORS 426.232 (Physician emergency admission), otherwise the person shall not be retained in custody. If the person is to be released from custody, the peace officer or the community mental health program director shall return the person to the place where the person was taken into custody unless the person declines that service.

(5) A peace officer may transfer a person in custody under this section to the custody of a person authorized by the county governing body under ORS 426.233 (Authority of community mental health and developmental disabilities program director and of other persons) (3). The peace officer may meet the authorized person at any location that is in accordance with ORS 426.140 (Place of confinement) to effect the transfer. When transferring a person in custody to an authorized person, the peace officer shall deliver the report required under subsections (1) and (2) of this section to the authorized person.

(6) A person authorized under ORS 426.233 (Authority of community mental health and developmental disabilities program director and of other persons) (3) shall take a person into custody when directed to do so by a peace officer or by a community mental health program director under ORS 426.233 (Authority of community mental health and developmental disabilities program director and of other persons).

(7) A person authorized under ORS 426.233 (Authority of community mental health and developmental disabilities program director and of other persons) (3) shall perform the duties of the peace officer or the community mental health program director required by this section and ORS 426.233 (Authority of community mental health and developmental disabilities program director and of other persons) if the peace officer or the director has not already done so.

(8) A person authorized under ORS 426.233 (Authority of community mental health and developmental disabilities program director and of other persons) (3) may transfer a person in custody under this section to the custody of another person authorized under ORS 426.233 (Authority of community mental health and developmental disabilities program director and of other persons) (3) or a peace officer. The authorized person transferring custody may meet another authorized person or a peace officer at any location that is in accordance with ORS 426.140 (Place of confinement) to effect the transfer.

(9)(a) When a peace officer takes a person into custody under this section, and the peace officer reasonably suspects that the person is a foreign national, the peace officer shall inform the person of the person&#8217;s right to communicate with an official from the consulate of the person&#8217;s country.
(b) A peace officer is not civilly or criminally liable for failure to provide the information required by this subsection. Failure to provide the information required by this subsection does not in itself constitute grounds for the exclusion of evidence that would otherwise be admissible in a proceeding.

https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/426.228



Definition:



(e) "Mentally ill person" means a person who, because of a mental disorder, is one or more of the following:

(A) Dangerous to self or others.

(B) Unable to provide for basic personal needs and is not receiving such care as is necessary for health or safety.

(C) A person:

(i) With a chronic mental illness, as defined in ORS 426.495 (Definitions for ORS 426.490 to 426.500);

(ii) Who, within the previous three years, has twice been placed in a hospital or approved inpatient facility by the authority under ORS 426.060 (Commitment to Department of Human Services);

(iii) Who is exhibiting symptoms or behavior substantially similar to those that preceded and led to one or more of the hospitalizations or inpatient placements referred to in sub-subparagraph (ii) of this subparagraph; and

(iv) Who, unless treated, will continue, to a reasonable medical probability, to physically or mentally deteriorate so that the person will become a person described under either subparagraph (A) or (B) of this paragraph or both.
 
roseofsharon said:
So biodad was able to take the afternoon off to work at home. Hmm, considering he knew the SF was that day, wondering why didn't he arrange to at least take half an hour out of his morning to visit the SF with his son.

Have police been able to confirm biodad was at his place of employ that morning? If biodad at work, who had baby girl while stepmom took K to school? Did stepmom take her cell phone with her that morning.

Did biobad go to work that morning or wait for stepmom's vehicle to show up at the school and wait for her to leave. Family says K would never go anywhere with stranger.

Maybe biodad knew this would speed up divorce proceedings?

Just MOO of course.
Click to expand...

I "assume" that this has all been done. I"d think the first thing they'd ask is to get alibis from everyone that day, and when questions came up they look into it more.

That said, I did hear from Kaine on the interview he was at work in the morning, came home in the afternoon to do work from home. This is not uncommon for his company to have flex schedules. We don't know why he didn't got to the SF, maybe he had a meeting and couldn't?

As far as the baby girl, nothing concrete that I know of, I have read/heard that she left the baby with a friend while she ran her "errands"
 
Calliope said:
(1) A peace officer may take into custody a person who the officer has probable cause to believe is dangerous to self or to any other person and is in need of immediate care, custody or treatment for mental illness.
Click to expand...

I don't post often, but wanted to comment on this. I’m from a different state, but the wording of our mental health laws are similar.

I know from personal experience, having had to involuntarily commit a family member, that you can’t just say,'that person is suicidal/homicidal' and have someone hauled off for a mental health evaluation. The officer must witness this behavior in order to have probable cause, or a mental health advocate must evaluate them and determine that there is probable cause. It then takes a court order from a judge in charge of mental health matters to actually have them taken into custody. Not all states are the same, but most are similar.

This is to protect us all from being falsely committed. This is a good thing IMO.
 
House Mouse said:
I don't post often, but wanted to comment on this. I&#8217;m from a different state, but the wording of our mental health laws are similar.

I know from personal experience, having had to involuntarily commit a family member, that you can&#8217;t just say,'that person is suicidal/homicidal' and have someone hauled off for a mental health evaluation. The officer must witness this behavior in order to have probable cause, or a mental health advocate must evaluate them and determine that there is probable cause. It then takes a court order from a judge in charge of mental health matters to actually have them taken into custody. Not all states are the same, but most are similar.

This is to protect us all from being falsely committed. This is a good thing IMO.
Click to expand...

bbm

That's true. A police officer has the absolute authority to take into immediate custody without a court order anyone he feels is a danger to himself or others (as per the statute above). I can't speak to all states (although I have no doubt they all have similar statutes) but I do know that to be the case where I have lived and worked over the years.

Once the person is in custody, then the ball starts rolling on determining if the person shall continue to be held and/or committed either voluntarily or involuntarily, outpatient or inpatient.

Not only may an officer take someone into custody based upon his own judgement and probable cause to believe the person is a danger to himself or others, but it can be done with a warrant issued by a magistrate or judge when evidence is given (through family, friends, healthcare providers, LE, or others).

But whether through a warrant or an officer's own determination of probable cause, the clock starts ticking once the person is in custody. They are taken for immediate evaluation, and if it's determined the person should be held, then there is a set time frame (48 hours here, if the law hasn't changed in the last several years) in which a hearing must be held. Depending upon the outcome, the person can be then held involuntarily or allowed to obtain voluntary treatment, either inpatient or outpatient, or of course simply released. The maximum involuntary commitment here is 180 days, btw.

I agree it's a good thing; a lot of safeguards are built into the process.
 
House Mouse said:
I don't post often, but wanted to comment on this. I’m from a different state, but the wording of our mental health laws are similar.

I know from personal experience, having had to involuntarily commit a family member, that you can’t just say,'that person is suicidal/homicidal' and have someone hauled off for a mental health evaluation. The officer must witness this behavior in order to have probable cause, or a mental health advocate must evaluate them and determine that there is probable cause. It then takes a court order from a judge in charge of mental health matters to actually have them taken into custody. Not all states are the same, but most are similar.

This is to protect us all from being falsely committed. This is a good thing IMO.
Click to expand...


House moon, I agree that hearsay should not be enough to get someone evaluated, I guess I was thinking along the lines of IF TH had made threatening comments then what laws would the cops who responded (if they heard them too) have to follow. I guess, what I was thinking is that this was a way we might get concrete information by eliminating possibilities for why the cops were there.

Here is my line of thinking: some are suggesting that she was threatening which is why the RO, but if that were truly the reason for the RO wouldn't there have HAD to been some type of action on the behalf of the cops when they were called or else be held accountable for their inaction?

I am leaning towards the idea that TH threatening anyone was not the basis for the RO- is all of this making sense?
 
I have a question re: the divorce petition and restraining order. I've always assumed Kaine had Baby K. It was reported that he left the family home with her. Now I'm wondering if he actually has custody or if perhaps she's in emergency foster care. These parents are at the end of their rope and it has to be a stressful situation for the baby.

How would we find out where Baby K is staying?
 
gliving said:
I have a question re: the divorce petition and restraining order. I've always assumed Kaine had Baby K. It was reported that he left the family home with her. Now I'm wondering if he actually has custody or if perhaps she's in emergency foster care. These parents are at the end of their rope and it has to be a stressful situation for the baby.

How would we find out where Baby K is staying?
Click to expand...

Doesn't make any sense to me that the baby would be in foster care. Kaine filed for divorce and a restraining order and explicitly seeks sole custody. Putting the child in foster care does not go in line with seeking sole custody. Also, you can't just put your child in foster care - they have to be taken from you, and that should be a matter of public record.
 
Where would I find this public record?

I'm not convinced Kaine has custody at this time.
 
gliving said:
Where would I find this public record?

I'm not convinced Kaine has custody at this time.
Click to expand...

By custody do you mean legal custody? Because for him not to have legal custody someone would have had to take the child from him - you can call the area CPS to see if that happened. But I doubt such a thing.

If you just mean you question whether the child is physically within his care versus staying with a family member or whoever while Kaine goes about his business ... that's possible. Clearly, the child must be with someone when the parents are doing press conferences, for example.
 
We are not sleuthing out juveniles. We are not sleuthing out family members. The news says that Kaine was given an emergency RO and that he took the child with him when he left. Beyond that any sleuthing that goes on violates TOS.
Thank You.
 
KOIN is among multiple media outlets seeking release of the restraining order documents because the disappearance of Kryon Horman is of high public interest. The public and media remain concerned about Kryon's whereabouts and about the public safety questions raised by his disappearance.

A judge has scheduled a hearing on the issue Friday at 2:30 p.m. at Multnomah Count Courthouse.

http://www.koinlocal6.com/mostpopul...ssage-with-hiring/Dz4uMChK60KCWjy3W5FG4Q.cspx

http://www.koinlocal6.com/media/lib...5e8a74f78f1e/Motion_for_immediate_hearing.pdf

PDF file of motion
 
People reported that there was a clear tension between the couple and described a moment when Terri Horman returned home and immediately went into another room without saying a word.

Kaine Horman described the situation as "a nightmare you're hoping you've dreamed."

http://www.kptv.com/news/24124386/detail.html
 
gliving said:
Where would I find this public record?

I'm not convinced Kaine has custody at this time.
Click to expand...

First of all, juvenile records are not available to the public.

Secondly, it was reported that Kaine filed for, and was granted, a temporary restraining order which listed at least two juveniles as protected parties.

Thirdly, it was also reported that Kaine Horman was told to leave the house with the baby by the police.
 
I thought it was presumed that Kyron was the other protected party? At least that is what came up originally...from here....:(
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 143 more.
Total: 390 (members: 144, guests: 246)

Online statistics

Members online
144
Guests online
246
Total visitors
390
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,537
Messages
18,255,325
Members
234,680
Latest member
Jayd_il
Back
Top