CO CO - Kelsey Berreth, 29, Woodland Park, Teller County, 22 Nov 2018 - #22 *ARREST*

[gitana1]

I’m also interested in why the child immediately went to CB. I am shocked that any of this has been public and I wonder if there will be some roll back on it. It shouldn’t be public. As for the termination of parental rights just for incarceration, we don’t don’t see it that much, except when the child is the victim. But we are a long long ways from when that would be even considered.

So what typically happens in a case where the parent is incarcerated indefinitely in dependency cases? Whether trial is just dragging or whether they've been convicted or sentenced to years. Are they able to preserve parental rights and be determined to be "reunified" with child even if they aren't likely to live with the child again?

TIA!

 

[SandyQLS]

The state MUST take custody in this instance. Neither grandparent has any legal authority.

Yes, but I understand the posters who are questioning since the baby clearly had been cared for at SF's home, had baby items there, baby was accustomed to being there - yet DHS immediately placed the baby with CB, who was likely staying in a hotel, with no baby items on hand. I have no dog in this fight, but it is a legal curiosity going on.

 

[PrairieWind]

So what typically happens in a case where the parent is incarcerated indefinitely in dependency cases? Whether trial is just dragging or whether they've been convicted or sentenced to years. Are they able to preserve parental rights and be determined to be "reunified" with child even if they aren't likely to live with the child again?

TIA!

They try to preserve those rights as much as possible and practicable. I represent a guy serving ten years. He gets monthly 15 min video conferences with his kids. As long as the child isn’t the victim, I don’t see the rights being terminated.

 

[gitana1]

And, it appeared TO ME that CB had worked with her lawyer & was immediately prepared to take custody of her granddaughter. Had she not, idk that the child would have been removed from Mrs. F.

MOO

Trudie there's no connection between anything she did and the decision to take the baby into protective custody. The timing and circumstances of this happening directly after dad was arrested for murdering mom, indicate that as does the lack of any case having been filed by the maternal grandma.

There's nothing a lawyer can do to really get ahead of a dependency court case and orchestrate removal OR the emergency placement of the child in one party's care after a case has commenced.

It's just not how that works.

 

[PrairieWind]

Yes, but I understand the posters who are questioning since the baby clearly had been cared for at SF's home, had baby items there, baby was accustomed to being there - yet DHS immediately placed the baby with CB, who was likely staying in a hotel, with no baby items on hand. I have no dog in this fight, but it is a legal curiosity going on.

But child services couldn’t have based that upon anything related to the criminal case since that is sealed.

 

[Charlot123]

I think in county lock up they might be in the “do over” stage. Wishing for a “do over”. Maybe not do the crime, maybe do it dif’, etc.
I’ve followed crime for too many years, read thousands of true crime books, etc. of course I was addicted to Lock Up, lol. It seems to me these guys go to prison & simply adapt to a somewhat military lifestyle. Obviously, they have to adapt. I think prison is not as bad as what we envision.
It also occurs to me after time, they give no thought to their crime. Or, the grief of losing their freedom is similar to someone mourning a death. It gets easier or at least monopolizes less of our mind, over time. Is life in prison a fraternity of sorts? I think so. My sister is a case manager at a large male prison. She’s always astounded at how quickly a new inmate acclimatizes to his situation.



moo

Interesting. From SP, we get nothing. As far as I understand, he even planned to kill AF, to shut her up.

CW after arrest felt guilt, but not for what he had done. He felt remorse for spoiling the life of NK. Understanding he was going down, he tried to protect the one for whom he had done this horrible thing. At least living his imaginary world, still. And trying to reach out for the only person he respected in his family, his dad. (He also might have missed the footsteps of his kids, and this fact genuinely surprised him - MOO).

It will be interesting to see how PF eventually treats this IN, whether he'd try to put some blame on her or protect her as well.

PF is described as "a recluse" by the neighbors. It is sometimes hard to understand how these people think because it is very difficult for them to express their feelings in words. However, what interests me is whether PF initially got to his plan on his own, or whether the idea was born out of someone's words. It does not exculpate him in any way, but he could hear, "if only she did not live so close, you could..." and having a single-track mind, he'd start working at it.

 

[gitana1]

I can’t find any definitive info regarding timeline for terminating parental rights.

One year in CO. http://www.cocaf.org/sites/default/files/BC_DA_termination_sum3_19.doc

 

[playthe361]

I don't believe there is ever a motive or reason that can be considered justifiable or understandable in a case such as this, involving people that are capable of doing the things that seem to have been done here. After reading through all the recent articles and sifting through all the recent video, to catch up after the holidays, I am leaning towards the idea that this case involves a once in a generation, narcissistic, sociopath type who is incapable of understanding what feelings are. Watching PFs behavior in the court video from the other day, I saw a guy who was not phased, even a little bit, by what was going on around him. It was almost like he didn't really get that everything being discussed had anything to do with him. I didn't see anxiety, worry, fear, sadness, anything. I would bet we will learn that this guy was able make everyone believe he was a salt of the earth, great man. At the core of that man was something that made him capable of planning a terrible crime and then carrying that crime out against the mother of his child. And, he truly believed he would walk away untouched. I think it takes a truly sick individual to do what was likely done in this case. He wanted to do whatever he did. That's it. That was the reasoning and that was the motive. I don't believe it will go much further than that.

 

[Trudie]

The state MUST take custody in this instance. Neither grandparent has any legal authority.

I considered CB sought immediate counsel upon arriving in CO, to get the ball rolling on the physical custody aspect.
I would have.
It sickens me P gets to go to the custody hearings & have input. But, I understand, he’s the dad.
Tysm PW

 

[Mom24]

Trudie there's no connection between anything she did and the decision to take the baby into protective custody. The timing and circumstances of this happening directly after dad was arrested for murdering mom, indicate that as does the lack of any case having been filed by the maternal grandma.

There's nothing a lawyer can do to really get ahead of a dependency court case and orchestrate removal OR the emergency placement of the child in one party's care after a case has commenced.

It's just not how that works.

Just to jump off and add, the original placement with CB is what's called an emergency placement. Mom is dead, Dad is arrested, the child becomes a ward of the state of Colorado. Not a ward of the F family or the B family, but a ward of the state. Doesn't matter that there is grandparents nearby or far away, in ill health or even in better financial situation because the child isn't a ward of the family, she's a ward of the state. Be thankful she was placed back with a relative because she could have been placed in a foster home. The child doesn't belong to one family because they've babysat her more or because they live closer, or even if they spend more time with her, it's about a variety of issues. And in all the determinations made, the state of colorado decided it was in the best interest of the child to be with her maternal grandmother until they could reach a final decision on custody. Personally, I'm happy she's with the B family for a number of reasons, she's out of the media limelight, she's not in a foster home with complete strangers and she can be shielded from what's going on by being in another state.

 

[Trudie]

Yes, but I understand the posters who are questioning since the baby clearly had been cared for at SF's home, had baby items there, baby was accustomed to being there - yet DHS immediately placed the baby with CB, who was likely staying in a hotel, with no baby items on hand. I have no dog in this fight, but it is a legal curiosity going on.

hopefully CB was able to retrieve things from K’s home.
I really doubt Mrs. F turned things over. Since she wants custody. Moo

 

[gitana1]

@gitana1 - I don't want to quote your long post... The same judge is currently covering both the child placement case and PF's criminal case per media articles. So that judge has had access to the sealed probable cause AW and perhaps other sealed evidence. Now today she ruled to continue the child placement case until the sealed evidence is revealed. Does this not speak some message from the judge about what is likely about to happen to some F family members? PF is innocent until proven guilty even if he is unable to care for the baby in his position. So why is the judge concerned about the sealed evidence in the criminal case as it relates to other F family member custody or visitation?

Interesting! Thank you.

 

[Trudie]

Thanks Gitana!

So, had P not been arrested for a year or so, he would have retained custody? If the baby was declared healthy, etc?

 

[gitana1]

I know I would. But I don’t think the way murderers think.

Yup. It's weird how they adapt so easily.

 

[Trudie]

Just to jump off and add, the original placement with CB is what's called an emergency placement. Mom is dead, Dad is arrested, the child becomes a ward of the state of Colorado. Not a ward of the F family or the B family, but a ward of the state. Doesn't matter that there is grandparents nearby or far away, in ill health or even in better financial situation because the child isn't a ward of the family, she's a ward of the state. Be thankful she was placed back with a relative because she could have been placed in a foster home. The child doesn't belong to one family because they've babysat her more or because they live closer, or even if they spend more time with her, it's about a variety of issues. And in all the determinations made, the state of colorado decided it was in the best interest of the child to be with her maternal grandmother until they could reach a final decision on custody. Personally, I'm happy she's with the B family for a number of reasons, she's out of the media limelight, she's not in a foster home with complete strangers and she can be shielded from what's going on by being in another state.

Oh, foster care would have been a horrible choice. Thankfully, the State had options.

 

[Trudie]

They try to preserve those rights as much as possible and practicable. I represent a guy serving ten years. He gets monthly 15 min video conferences with his kids. As long as the child isn’t the victim, I don’t see the rights being terminated.

Wonder in LWOP if rights are preserved.

 

[Niner]

Friday, January 4th:
*Motions Hearing (expected to last 4 hours) (@ 1:30pm MT) - CO – Kelsey Berreth (29) (last seen Nov. 22, 2018, Woodland Park; phone pinged 800 miles away in Gooding, Idaho on 11/25/18 @ 5:13pm, reported missing Dec. 2, 2018) – Patrick Michael Frazee (32) “fiancé” arrested (12/21/18) & charged (12/31/18) with 1st degree murder & 3 counts of solicitation to commit 1st degree murder & 1st degree felony murder (death during attempted robbery). Held without bond.
Was a suspect as of 12/15/18. Search warrant executed 12/14/18. Search & arrest warrants are sealed. The little girl, who had been staying with her dad up until his arrest, is now in protective custody & will be reunited with Berreth’s family. 12/27/18: The court continued the temporary custody of the minor child with maternal grandparents, but the Teller County Dept. of Human Services will retain legal custody.
12/21/18 Hearing on Advisement; first appearance hearing set for 12/31/18.
12/24/18: Defense has filed a motion to limit the release of information about the case before it goes to trial. His attorneys cite “massive pre-indictment and pretrial negative publicity.” Prosecutors are fighting to have the motion denied without a hearing. Motion has been denied re a request to limit pretrial publicity. Request Denied.
Other motions filed:
P-4 People’s Response to Defendant’s Notice of Invocation of all Statutory, Case Law, and Constitutional Privileges
P-3 People’s Response to Defendant’s Motion for Preservation of Physical Evidence
P-2 People’s Response to Defendant’s Notice of Representation and Demand for Notice of any Pre-Trial Nontestimonial Identification Procedure Sought Pursuant to Crim. P.41.1
P-1 People’s Response to Defendant’s Motion for Preservation and Production of Law Enforcement Notes, Recordings, and Other Evidence
D-004 Notice of Invocation of all Statutory, Case Law, and Constitutional Privileges
D-002 Notice of Representation and Demand for Notice of any Nontestimonial Identification Procedure Sought Pursuant to Crim. P.41.1
CTO-02 Decorum Order
12/27/18 Update: The court continued the temporary custody of the minor child with maternal grandparents, but the Teller County Dept. of Human Services will retain legal custody. Paternal grandmother file a motion to intervene. The
parties agreed to reserve for later hearing paternal grandmother’s motion to intervene & placement request. The case is continued for a pre-trial conference on January 3, 2019.
12/31/18: Charged with 1st degree murder, 3 counts of solicitation to commit 1st degree murder & 1st degree felony murder. Defense motions to preserve law enforcement communication (emails & texts) and to limit pre-trial publicity (prevent press conferences, tweets & interviews) were both denied. No plea entered. No bond. DA asks for “consumptive testing” on unspecified evidence. Motion hearing on DNA testing & unsealing arrest affidavit scheduled for 1/4. A Preliminary hearing on 1/29.
12/31/18: Monday a 32-year-old nurse was a person of interest in the case & believed to have possibly disposed of Berreth's phone in Idaho in the days after she was last seen alive. She & Frazee had been in a romantic relationship for months (early 2016). The woman, whose identity is not being revealed as she has not yet been charged with a crime, could also be the person who had been plotting with Frazee about killing Berreth should the investigation prove she did in fact dispose of the cell. The nurse was in Colorado around Thanksgiving.
1/3/18 Update: PF's sister has now asked to intervene in the custody case too. Waiting for discovery in the criminal case before proceeding further with the custody case. The baby stays with the Berreth's for the time being. Trial conference hearing set for 2/7/19 re child custody.

 

[GordianKnot]

I cannot find a motive for PF that really seems to stick for me. I guess we will some day get more info.

Money works for me.

PF is a self-absorbed narcissist. IMO.
He forms no real attachment to any of the women with whom he has "relationships." IMO.
The only thing that really matters to him is his own precious hide. IMO.
If this is at all about child custody, it will only be inasmuch as custody issues affect his financial situation. IMO.

Yep. Money works for me.

 

[gitana1]

They try to preserve those rights as much as possible and practicable. I represent a guy serving ten years. He gets monthly 15 min video conferences with his kids. As long as the child isn’t the victim, I don’t see the rights being terminated.

It's confusing. So did the dependency court case get closed in your case? And was a guardianship case commenced? Who is caring for the child? For example, I've seen cases where the orders are that the case will be closed, with the understanding that a parent or guardian will immediately file a case in another court so that there will be a permanent custody decision somehow. So they determine that as long as that happens they don't need to have a permanency plan hearing.

 

[Lhughessk]

Mountains to catch up on today!

Grateful K is with CB and fam. I just have a bad feeling re the alternative.

Frustrated by the concern with PF not having his arrest docs yet. I guess the simple answer is, don’t kill people.

Yes, yes, I know. I’m grateful for my constitutional rights.

Yeah, it’s not like police and the prosecution ever get it wrong. Since they’re always right 100% of the time, we should assume the defendant is guilty unless and until he can PROVE himself innocent. And we should hope PF is railroaded throughout this process because who cares? He must have done it or else he wouldn’t be in this position. And while we know next to nothing about his family, they must be toxic and dysfunctional. If they were a good family, this wouldn’t have happened to them. The product of a good home would never do something like this or if they do, it’s somebody else’s family, not mine. This sort of thing is never going to happen to me or mine because we were raised better. Constitution, schmonstitution. You don’t need to assert your rights if you’re a law-abiding citizen!

Right? Does that sound good? Not to me, it doesn’t. (In case anyone missed it, the above was sarcasm.). JMO