CA - Hannah,16,Devonte,15,&Ciera Hart,12 (fnd deceased),Mendocino Cty,26 Mar 2018 #6

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Please be courteous and preview your posts before submitting them to make sure the quotes appear correct and are attributed to the right poster. Nothing worse than having Jane Smith's quotes attributed to John Brown, especially if they are on opposite sides of the fence on an issue.

Also, it is time-consuming for us to go back and fix broken quotes that get re-quoted. If you do not know how to quote properly, please PM a Mod or Admin and we will help.

:wave:
 
Wherever there are people, there will be opportumists. Going fishing in the desert does not work. So people with nefarious intentions go where people have their guard down,

It is disingenuous to say that there is not a lot of drug use at music events. Think of the Beatles, Jim Morrison, Kurt Cobain and on and on.Of course, I am a child of the 60”s where drug use was very very common.

I do not see what rhe status of festivals has to do with the murder by either one or both of those women.

The only thing I see is that their friendships were very shallow. It does not seem anyone really knew much about them except the show that they were presenting.

It seems everyone of their “friends” bought their exhibit except Alexandra.

I am on a FB group with people I graduated high school with in 1967. There were over 400 in my class.

It seems like everyone knows someone. Some funny ancedotes about classmates, teachers, events, etc. It is so strange to me that no one talks about the fun times they had or any anecdotes. Of course, as far as I know, there were no murderers in my class so I don’t know how people would respond.

Eek! Disingenuous is not a term anyone's used for me before, to my knowledge!

But I notice that in earlier posts you described "hippies" with what seemed to be disdain. Differentiating between them and other leftists in the sixties, but with a very negative attitude toward what you described as hippy types. .

I wonder if you have been to these events since the 60's?

Its just not a chaotic drug scene. Is there drug use? Yeah. Like you said, as there is at any music event. But the issue is whether these events are child-friendly or whether these are dangerous events such that no one should bring a kid to for fear of exposing them to wacked out druggies and lewdness, and cult stuff, etc. And thus just one more example of poor decisions made by these two women regarding their kids.

Again, I have seen horrific behavior at Disney. I've actually never seen horrific behavior at one of these "hippie" type festivals or events. No matter how many people were stoned out of their minds.

For context, I live a couple miles away from Disney and had year-round passes for several years. So I'm quite familiar.

The hippies in the 60's grew up. They had kids. Some of their kids also embraced a similar subculture. But it morphed a bit from one that began as mostly young adults focused on experimenting and breaking free from the super restrictive, conservative culture of their parents, to one involving multiple generations, tons of children and a focus on community and a shared experience that derived in part from the subculture of some of the parents of the people who attend.

I greatly dislike Jen and Sarah Hart. I think they were phony hypocrites who were cruel and abusive to the beautiful children in their care and who ultimately murdered them after a lifetime of exploitation.

But there are thousands of parents who take their kids to these events. Those parents aren't cruel or neglectful or even misguided. Go to a baseball game and you'll see people brawling in the parking lot, exposing themselves in a lewd manner, hitting their kids or mates. I have seen all of that at a ball game. I've never seen anything remotely close at events involving the contemporary hippy subculture.

For that reason their involvement at these events is not one of the things I criticize them for.

Its really just their overall motivation when it comes to the kids. That's what I criticize. It was all about them and what their kids couldn't represent and do for them. Terrible people.
 
Same thing happened to me when I was interviewed for our local paper about my then 6-year-old daughter’s juvenile rheumatoid athritis, now called juvenile idiopathic arthritis. It was an innocuous article that helped spread awareness of JIA, but when I read it, none of it sounded like what I thought I said. It was a weird feeling, and made me cautious of taking the news at face value. But the alternative is to not believe anything we read because it would be impossible to fact-check entire news reports. I am truly disheartened about the state of news journalism and not quite sure how to approach it anymore.

Both my husband and I have been misquoted by reporters, and this was about 40 years ago, so it’s nothing new IMO. But carelessness, laziness and being in a hurry among journalists has gotten worse. As in any profession, there are some dishonest bad apples. I’ve checked Snopes more than once on “out there” stories because they do the fact-checking for you, but they don’t do every story of course. I think the best practice is to read a variety of sources and expect errors.
JMO
 
<snip>



Have to be careful with articles. I had an interview with a reporter a few months ago about my recent heart transplant. The reporter made up some things that I NEVER said and embellished some things. Now I question things written by reporters. I don't know which things are true sometimes after having my own experience.

I just kinda figured that the reporter who interviewed me had to make the story more interesting. That may be the case with the Harts (and lots of other "news") as well.

It's both funny anf frustrating how things can be changed. A regional news program ran a story about me a few weeks ago. There were a few of my statements in which they changed the lead-in question during the airing of the program so it made me look like I was saying something I did.

Actual Scenario Example (not the real interview):
Them: How do you feel about frogs being given the right to vote?
Me: I think it's wonderful!

The way it went down when it was aired:
Them: How do you feel about all of these people who don't want frogs to have the right to vote?
Me: I think it's wonderful!

So yes, I try to take a lot of what I see on the news, or on television in general, with a grain of salt. When I was 21 I was interviewed by a newspaper and I managed to piss off my entire college department with what was written. The interviewer had asked me about my BA degree (Anthropology) and if that had been my original goal. I'd answered with, "I'd always wanted Anthropology but my dad thought it was a totally useless degree. It was only later that I realized that he thought that anthropology was the study of ants." What they printed was: "Mtnlites has a degree in Anthropology, a "totally useless degree", according to her.

Doh.
 
Eek! Disingenuous is not a term anyone's used for me before, to my knowledge!

But I notice that in earlier posts you described "hippies" with what seemed to be disdain. Differentiating between them and other leftists in the sixties, but with a very negative attitude toward what you described as hippy types. .

I wonder if you have been to these events since the 60's?

Its just not a chaotic drug scene. Is there drug use? Yeah. Like you said, as there is at any music event. But the issue is whether these events are child-friendly or whether these are dangerous events such that no one should bring a kid to for fear of exposing them to wacked out druggies and lewdness, and cult stuff, etc. And thus just one more example of poor decisions made by these two women regarding their kids.

Again, I have seen horrific behavior at Disney. I've actually never seen horrific behavior at one of these "hippie" type festivals or events. No matter how many people were stoned out of their minds.

For context, I live a couple miles away from Disney and had year-round passes for several years. So I'm quite familiar.

The hippies in the 60's grew up. They had kids. Some of their kids also embraced a similar subculture. But it morphed a bit from one that began as mostly young adults focused on experimenting and breaking free from the super restrictive, conservative culture of their parents, to one involving multiple generations, tons of children and a focus on community and a shared experience that derived in part from the subculture of some of the parents of the people who attend.

I greatly dislike Jen and Sarah Hart. I think they were phony hypocrites who were cruel and abusive to the beautiful children in their care and who ultimately murdered them after a lifetime of exploitation.

But there are thousands of parents who take their kids to these events. Those parents aren't cruel or neglectful or even misguided. Go to a baseball game and you'll see people brawling in the parking lot, exposing themselves in a lewd manner, hitting their kids or mates. I have seen all of that at a ball game. I've never seen anything remotely close at events involving the contemporary hippy subculture.

For that reason their involvement at these events is not one of the things I criticize them for.

Its really just their overall motivation when it comes to the kids. That's what I criticize. It was all about them and what their kids couldn't represent and do for them. Terrible people.

I feel like we've gone around and around in circles with these conversations regarding "hippies" (honestly hadn't heard anyone refer to us as that since I was a kid almost 40 years ago) and festivals. I mean, it's a festival. There's food, music, activities, sometimes things for sale, and people. Drug use? Of course. You can find that everywhere these days. There's a lot of GOOD stuff too.

What Jen and Sarah ultimately did to their kids certainly isn't reflective upon the other innocent people who were there, and fun festivals definitely didn't make them abuse ultimately kill their children. I am starting to feel like the other festival-goers, as well as those of us who attend and take our children, are now guilty by association. (Guilty of what, I do not know.)
 
http://m.cellreception.com/towers/towers.php?city=fort bragg&state_abr=ca

Hope this works. Its a cell tower map Fort Bragg/Cleone/Westport and appears to show Cleone tower was the last heading North so may indicate why no location for them after that. The map shows the next tower north of Westport being Rockport and they didn't make it to there unfortunately.

This map shows that area has weak cell phone reception at best. So they might not even have had reception at that point

Screen_shot_2018_04_23_at_12_27_16_AM.jpg

3G and 4G LTE Cell Coverage Map - OpenSignal
 
I feel like we've gone around and around in circles with these conversations regarding "hippies" (honestly hadn't heard anyone refer to us as that since I was a kid almost 40 years ago) and festivals. I mean, it's a festival. There's food, music, activities, sometimes things for sale, and people. Drug use? Of course. You can find that everywhere these days. There's a lot of GOOD stuff too.

What Jen and Sarah ultimately did to their kids certainly isn't reflective upon the other innocent people who were there, and fun festivals definitely didn't make them abuse ultimately kill their children. I am starting to feel like the other festival-goers, as well as those of us who attend and take our children, are now guilty by association. (Guilty of what, I do not know.)

I don't think anyone is saying festival goers are guilty by association. They are just expressing there opinions about drugs at festivals AFAICS and are entitled to their opinions.
I don't see the point of talking about the festivals, as they weren't at or near a festival when they died but in a State Park near Cleone on there last day IMO.
 
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/may/21/music-festivals-drugs

Here's an article about drugs at UK festivals. Some festivals are testing drugs for festival goers now here in the uk. I'm sure there are probably statistics about this regarding the US festivals too.

I'm honestly not sure why this is even a topic at this point. We've rehashed it a lot. I attend these festivals myself. I know what goes on there, as well as what doesn't.

They had apparently not been to one for a while before they died, nor had they been out much at all. (According to the neighbors who rarely saw them.)
 
I'm honestly not sure why this is even a topic at this point. We've rehashed it a lot. I attend these festivals myself. I know what goes on there, as well as what doesn't.

They had apparently not been to one for a while before they died, nor had they been out much at all. (According to the neighbors who rarely saw them.)

I agree. If people are discussing it is good to have some facts though. Unless someone goes to all festivals it is impossible to generalize. Different festivals, different drugs if judging by the UK info I just posted.
 

I am immediately turned off by the title of the latter: "Another Study Finds Same-Sex Parenting Isn&#8217;t Best For Kids". I don't think that's one that I will be reading, even though it claims to be a scientific study.

ETA: I tried reading it. I didn't get further than the first line: "Does a child need a mother and a father? A new study says they do, confirming what we already knew through human experience and common sense yet is being increasingly denied by people who insist on putting adult desires above the rights of children."

That is very disturbing.
 
I am immediately turned off by the title of the latter: "Another Study Finds Same-Sex Parenting Isn’t Best For Kids". I don't think that's one that I will be reading, even though it claims to be a scientific study.

It was just one that came up when I googled "child abuse in gay relationships". The other came up by googling "domestic abuse in lesbian couples".
Lots more came up including some actual cases. There's probably also articles that state the opposite of that study too.
 
....

I saw way more drugs on the campus of my suburban high school in the '70s, in the bathrooms and courtyard, than I've ever seen at a folk festival. My son saw way more drugs in his own high school a generation later. And there are way more strung-out people on public transit, way more drunks at the stadium during a major-league game – and far more likelihood of being physically/sexually assaulted at either. The festival scene is truly bucolic by comparison, even if the hippies do dress funny, and act blissed-out, and buy their kids animal costumes. As for the performers, they're working a pretty gruelling schedule, multiple performances each day, in conditions ranging from 90ºF+ in the daytime to maybe 45ºF at night, sometimes in full summer-thunderstorm mode, on top of hiking all over expansive festival grounds. Most of them aren't indulging in more than a cold energy drink or a cup of coffee either (or maybe a late-night Scotch) so long as they're on the outdoor-festival circuit.

Just my opinion, just my experience, just my POV.

Above RSBM, BBM.... is this a 'thing' at festivals, where attendees are prone to purchasing animal costumes for the kids they have in tow to wear? Just curious, cuz I had thought it was kind of bizarre that Devonte was wearing the animal costume during his interaction with Xavier.
 
Both my husband and I have been misquoted by reporters, and this was about 40 years ago, so it&#8217;s nothing new IMO. But carelessness, laziness and being in a hurry among journalists has gotten worse. As in any profession, there are some dishonest bad apples. I&#8217;ve checked Snopes more than once on &#8220;out there&#8221; stories because they do the fact-checking for you, but they don&#8217;t do every story of course. I think the best practice is to read a variety of sources and expect errors.
JMO
So true, however sometimes news outlets will be owned by one owner, and stories, or parts of them, will be shared.. and so same wrong-info can be quoted in several, giving credence to untruths.. when it's just a repeated quote, or repeated error, repeated incorrect-quote, etc. It's just disgusting. jmo.
 
I've got a "misrepresented by the media" story as well.
In the early 00's, the concept of blogging was still new, but I was really into it and I had a medium-sized regular reader base. At the same time, I was struggling to quit drinking, and for a few weeks, I was in an outpatient program. I'm a pretty open person who doesn't believe in burying uncomfortable truths, so I blogged about it. I felt like talking about my experience could only help others.

About a month later, I got a call from a reporter from a local radio station, one of the big all-news, all-talk ones. She'd seen my blog and wanted to do a story. I was excited and said "yes". She came out to our place and was extremely friendly; asked about my motivations etc and made recordings of me saying how I think that spreading awareness can be helpful.

But when the segment actually aired, it was a 20-second hatchet job, all about "Man these bloggers are such weirdos. Look at this looney tune. She has no boundaries at all and is telling everyone she's a DRUNK. Who does that?" Followed by a sound bite from edited to make me sound as crazy as possible.

That was my brush with fame with the media. It literally killed my passion for blogging. :(
 
I may not have read enough to base this on, but I feel like SH might be getting somewhat of a 'bum rap'..

Although SH was the one 'convicted' of child abuse, the child herself stated that the abuser was JH. Why would the child's statement of abuse be believed by authorities, but yet not the child's specified identification of her abuser? That doesn't make sense to me. JH and SH presented it as something different, and that's what authorities went with, presumably because there was an easy charge/conviction, someone was taking responsibility, etc.? I'm wondering if JH and SH calculated that in the event the reported incident forced a choice to be made, ie if CPS were to tell them they had to choose between the kids leaving the home and getting placed elsewhere, or the abuser leaving the home, they figured SH could more easily be the one to take the fall, and life could continue on. Just a thought.

JH attended all of the concerts while SH would miss them sometimes due to work, etc. SH was known to have forged ahead and lived on her own while seeking or establishing gainful employment to provide for the family. It would have been a calculated, manipulative thing for the women to claim that SH was the abuser if she wasn't, however it would have served their interests better if more consequences had been doled out. SH could have then just rented a small room close to her work until whatever hoops were jumped through until CPS allowed her to rejoin the family. Meanwhile, the kids would remain in the home, continue to be homeschooled, and etc... life would go on.

It was JH who was home 24/7 with the 6 homeschooled kids while SH went off to work outside of the home fulltime, seemingly the sole financial provider for the family. It was JH who was determined to have been in control of the vehicle when it went over the cliff. It was JH who had over the legal amount of alcohol in her system at autopsy. According to the Harts' first foster child, Lee, it was JH who was 'more moody', who Lee fought with more frequently (and about "petty" things), and who was said to have sulked for days, ignoring Lee after Lee's football had been signed and JH's had not. It was also JH who the neighbors said "wasn't friendly at all" in regard to having met a couple of times outside about 'sharing the driveway'. In videos, it seems it is JH who is front and center in leading the kids (Devonte) to perform (eg it is JH who Devonte runs to (for approval?) after hugging Xavier while SH is more in the background, etc.). I get the impression that JH seems to have been very much an 'in-your-face' type of personality, while SH seems to have been more subdued. I'm not sure if SH had a SM presence as well as JH, or if all of the online display was from JH?

From videos I've seen, I don't get the impression, as some others have mentioned, that SH gives a cold shoulder to kids wanting hugs, etc., jmo. Some people aren't as photogenic and don't like being filmed and getting their photos taken, perhaps especially 'posed' photos, and being splashed all over SM as much as other some other people. I feel like sometimes when people have a certain piece of knowledge, that piece becomes an unfair focus into *everything* that happens, everything the person does and says, etc., when perhaps much that occurs isn't related at all and is instead just typical/'normal'.. but everything gets attributed to that piece.

There has been discussion here about the lack of commentary in general from people from the parents' pasts. There seems to be at least *some* from JH's court, but I don't recall hearing *any* from SH's court? Wondering if she was simply an introverted 'follower' who took the heat on behalf of her partner and was otherwise possibly the subject of abuse herself from her partner?

Heartbreaking story all around, no matter how it all comes out in the end (if it ever comes out?).
 
Above RSBM, BBM.... is this a 'thing' at festivals, where attendees are prone to purchasing animal costumes for the kids they have in tow to wear? Just curious, cuz I had thought it was kind of bizarre that Devonte was wearing the animal costume during his interaction with Xavier.

Depends on the festival. At some, costumes in general are encouraged and people get really creative. I've been working on mine and my son's costumes for Burning Man since October.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
178
Guests online
1,230
Total visitors
1,408

Forum statistics

Threads
599,272
Messages
18,093,574
Members
230,836
Latest member
a_renee
Back
Top