GUILTY GA - Antonio Santiago, 13 mos, Brunswick, 21 March 2013 - #3

[always reading]

IMO, it takes A LOT to take a child from its mother. A LOT. Not feeding the baby is not enough unless that baby is starving due to hard core, stubborn neglect.

Parents are given tons of chances to get their kids back.

Of course that doesn't mean the mom here isn't a victim. Formerly bad parents can change and bad parent's kids can be harmed through no fault of the parent.

Yes it really does take a lot. I have 2 family members that were drug addicts and got their kids taken. One had used condoms and drug paraphernalia all over the house and the kids showed severe neglect. They gave both of these women opportunities to get their kids back. The only reason they didn't get them is that they were too busy chasing drugs to care. All they had to do was get counseling and take parenting classes, both paid for by the state. Sadly they both went on to have more kids.

 

[momrids6]

Starving a child is both mental and physical abuse and neglect. The one person in the world who is supposed to love, provide for, and protect the child lets them go hungry and become physically/mentally emaciated. Have any idea what happens to a body and mind that is being starved? It had to be horrific if this is the reason AG was taken from her mother. I suspect there was even more, but I don't have the report.

Who knows whether or not AG had an agenda, maybe she just didn't want her mother to raise more children that could end up dead from a knife, bullet, or starvation. Given these tragic children's lives and deaths, her daughter's observations don't really seem all that diabolical. IMO

Hungry kids due to poverty is not considered legal neglect. Agree to disagree. Irrelevant, imo- as the mother was cleared by police; reminds me of rape victim blaming because victim was dressed scantily, or drunk. I live 10 minutes from where this went down.

 

[momrids6]

Judge Stephen Kelley ruled on a prosecution motion that had halted testimony Tuesday evening. He blocked the attorneys from questioning West about any alleged drug use, sex for drugs or mistreatment of her older children a decade ago.

Kelley concluded those allegations were not recent enough or similar enough to the baby's death for defense attorneys to bring up as ways to show someone else shot Antonio.

"The reason the court has to have these rules is boundaries," he said.

http://savannahnow.com/news/2013-08-28/mother-toddler-slain-during-robbery-testifies#.Uh6EHtJomKk

 

[gitana1]

Hungry kids due to poverty is not considered legal neglect. Agree to disagree. Irrelevant, imo- as the mother was cleared by police; reminds me of rape victim blaming because victim was dressed scantily, or drunk. I live 10 minutes from where this went down.

That's right. And the courts do not take children away from their parents permanently due to poverty. They are provided with resources to make sure their kids have food (food stamps, WIC and in cases of child custody, support when that is available).

So this lady didn't lose custody because of poverty.

As far as living 10 minutes away, do you have any firsthand info about the case?

And yes, it appears this woman was cleared by the police. She is not on trial. Those two teens are. And I tend to trust the police. Their agenda is to catch the bad guys, not to frame innocent people.

But I am seeing there are some questions in this case:

1. The GSR on dad's hands.
2. The mom's identification of a totally different suspect at first.
3. The mom's inability to recall whether she was shot first or her son.
4. The mom asking about life insurance proceeds on, what was it, the very day her small baby's head was blown off? She's not in the hospital being sedated, she's asking about money?
5. The fact that her daughter was taken away from her and never returned.
6. The strangeness of the story. Why did they let the only witness to the crime go? Why did they aim for her leg but aimed for the baby's head? Since the baby wasn't a viable witness to the robbery, why shoot him at all?

I can't say any of this means these two are not guilty or that the parents are in any way involved but I can certainly see why there are questions. The innocence project proves that sometimes well-meaning police get the wrong suspects and sometimes well-meaning prosecutors help convict the wrong defendants.

It happens. I just want to know more about this case.

 

[vlpate]

Antonio was cremated, IIRC, cremation costs about 1/2 of what a funeral costs. SW asked her daughter about the check the night Antonio died and was then on the phone when the insurance Co. opened the next day, according to reports. I can see a family member doing the calling when a baby has been brutally murdered, but not the mother, I'm sorry, it is strange to think a mother would have that much presence of mine. Just my opinion.

My husband had a prepaid funeral. If he had not had one, I would have had to been on the phone with the insurance company myself the next day trying to get up enough money to bury him. They are the one's who contacted me within a couple of days saying they were going to cut a check for X amount and that if need be, most mortuary's would work with me on the expenses as long as long as they knew I would eventually have enough. I didn't have to call them.

Both my parents were paying on their burials when they passed away. Nothing was deemed vulgar or off about my dad writing a check two days before my mother died and had me hand deliver it to them. She was cremated, so while I was there to pay them the balance, I sat down with one of the clerks and wrote out her obit, too.

My dad bought all three of us kids burial policies when we were born. That was over 50 years ago. Does that mean he intended to kill us?


It's just seems to me she was trying to see if she was going to get money enough to be able to afford a casket, etc., for her child when his body was released. I didn't see anything wrong with then and don't now.

 

[momrids6]

That's right. And the courts do not take children away from their parents permanently due to poverty. They are provided with resources to make sure their kids have food (food stamps, WIC and in cases of child custody, support when that is available).

So this lady didn't lose custody because of poverty.
<RSBM>
But I am seeing there are some questions in this case:

<RSBM>
As I stated earlier- looks like she lost custody to the father. DCFS was involved.

As you are an attorney- and I am not- I have doubts I can summarize the trial testimony, MSM articles, and previous posts sufficiently to answer your questions. I do know the infomation concerning your questions is online via MSM- and quoted by other posters upthread. I know the judge, and the defendant's attorney in a professional manner.

 

[momrids6]

For the first time, the jury saw the .22-caliber revolver prosecutors say Elkins used to murder Antonio Santiago. And testimony from Elkins' friends and relatives didn't help his case.

Family friend Danielle Williams testified that Elkins came to her apartment the day of the shooting, hoping to hide his weapon.

She said, "He asked can he put his weapon under my couch."

Later that day, she said Elkins' mom, Karimah, and his sister, Sabrina, came to pick it up.

Cousin Ronald Elkins said he unloaded the gun.

District Attorney Jackie Johnson asked him, "What did you do with the bullets?"

Ronald Elkins said, "I gave it to Karimah."

"And what did you do with the gun?" asked Johnson.

Ronald Elkins said again, "I gave it to Karimah."

The jury also heard from a friend who said he drove Karimah and Sabrina to a fishing hole, the same place where prosectors say the murder weapon was found.

Willie Merrell said he never saw a gun, but he might have heard them talking about one. He said, "I heard a splash. But that's all. I didn't see anything."

The testimony painted an ugly picture for the mother and son, who are on trial together. Karimah Elkins is accused of lying to cover up her son's crime.

http://www.fox30jax.com/content/top...-the-Elkins-trial/IxEEiM8oh0KK2HriMTdqOw.cspx

 

[momrids6]

"Elkins was placed in a holding cell before I issued a warrant for his arrest," Nohilly testified. "I turned the warrant over to officer Cody Blades as we were standing in an interview room, and Blades served the warrant.

"As we were walking out of the station, in the hall that leads to the parking lot, Elkins looked over at us and he said, 'Ya'll ain't got no **** on me. Ya'll ain't got no gun; ya'll ain't got no prints; all ya'll got is a ****ing acquittal,'" Nohilly testified.

He continued: "We didn't respond. Another investigator smiled and he [Elkins] said, 'Oh, ya'll got a gun?'"
---------------
Peppers said that when a gun is fired it forms microscopic entities, or particles, when it plumes from the barrel of a gun. The residue from shooting a gun is considered primary transfer and can fall on anything, she said.
Secondary transfer takes place when someone picks up an item on which primary residue has been deposited.
Pepper said it was "possible" that Santiago's positive results came from his contact with West immediately after she was shot.


http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/08/26/60567.htm

 

[Minette]

Well, here's the thing: if Antonio had died due to neglect/malnutrition, that would be one thing. But I truly, honestly do not see similarity of events in having a baby SHOT IN THE FACE and having a (surviving, I will point out) child removed by CPS for neglect. Granted, no one will deem Sherry West mother of the year, and it was horrible and tragic that her older son was stabbed to death, but you can't punish her for that by blaming her for Antonio's death when he was SHOT IN THE FACE by a robbing .

As for the adult daughter, we had this conversation months ago, and I stated that as an adult daughter of a mentally ill mother (and I probably SHOULD have been taken away, but things were different back then) I don't know that I could have resisted taking out my hurt and frustration in a public forum. I *hope* that my innate sense of fairness would have guided me not to say something just to hurt my mother when the facts didn't really support her involvement in a later incident involving one of her children, but I don't know that I could have been so mature at that age.

Anyway, my mother was by any of today's standards a complete failure as a parent (and hey, let's not forget my father, who just threw up his hands and left his four children to the 'care' of an unmedicated schizophrenic) but at the same time she would have died rather than hurt any of us deliberately.

And here at this distance of many years and after her death I have gained perspective and a sense of understanding and I understand that she was ill and did the best she could. I don't necessarily 'forgive' 100%, but at the same time I would never, ever pillory her in a public forum to get my revenge.

It's possible to both be an inadequate mother AND to have horrible, violent things happen to your children through none of your own fault. I say that from my own experience. I don't know, others may have different experiences, that's mine.

 

[momrids6]

Wow. Bless her heart, she probably had more pain meds on board than a Walgreens tractor trailer truck. Agreed that she should have been in the hospital longer. She's probably on Medicaid, but even that medical care is not so bad that they would throw you out of the hospital that fast.

BBM: We had a huge flu problem when this happened. SEGMC, the hospital that treated her, was over run with it. They were moving people out of there ASAP...

 

[vlpate]

Quick notes from the video that is taking over an hour to upload from my phone:

Things SW said - anything verbatim is in quotes:

• Her older son
• When asked if SG grew up with her she said he went to live with his dad after the divorce in 2001 - she said SG and AG have two different dads that they both lived with
• She starts by telling about her older son's "murder". She said her older son was going to be a cop once he graduated high school
• She said her older son loved women, he loved his mama
• She said he went to confront the guy that killed him about a girl SG felt needed to be in the hospital
• She said the guy had a knife that her son and his friends did not see it (not true, SG had the knife)
  
• She said she went to the post office to make copies to send off for her food stamps
• She took the same route home as she took to the post office
• Her rent is partially paid by Brunswick Housing Authority
• She is also on disability from injuries
• Spinal injury from two car wrecks
• Mentions her paranoia a couple of times
• Talks about her psychiatrist of two years and her diagnosis (I didn't catch all of them) Paranoia, Bi-polar, PTSD, Borderline Personality
  
• Although she says she knows little about guns, she thinks the gun might be a German Luger
• She maintains the baby slept through the entire incident
• Elkins, the "tall one" tried to grab her after shooting the baby but ran off because she was screaming
• No problems with depression at all
• When the detectives asked her if she shot her baby she got very angry and said she did not. She told them the kid that shot her baby was a delinquent and his mother was a crack *advertiser censored* who didn't feed her kids and a father that wasn't there
• Calls the detective "sweetheart" during one small rant
• When answering why she thinks this happened. She said she thinks God took Antonio because he wants to get all the good people off the earth, he didn't want Antonio on the earth.

• She thought about grabbing "the tall one's" silver necklace in order to get the gun.
  
• She thought it really strange that the tall one was in such "good condition"
• She said he had a mother and it was her money. (?)
• She said she walks that road a lot that Antonio was killed on

After a while the detective asks what her baby's name was and for the first time I heard SW say Antonio's name..I've never even heard her refer to him by name in interviews.

Antonio

• He was a "pretty decent baby"
• She entered Antonio in a baby photo contest on kids.com She mentioned that she used a neighbor's computer to enter him
• She wonders where Antonio's bottle went that he had with him in the stroller when he was shot. She said it was nowhere to be found after the shooting and that he had been drinking it on the way home.
• When told there was an autopsy performed, West commented that they will probably find he died of asphyxiation
• She thinks he died instantly
• The detectives asked SW if she had a medical background because she was using a lot of medical terminology - she told them she took psychology in college for three years
• Several times she described the boy with Elkins as appearing to be five years old. She gestured his size and IMO, she was indication someone 4'5" tall or so.
• SW said she has written a book - not published (about her life from what I could gather) She said she gave the manuscript to her daughter so she would know how bad other people had it in their lives

She told detectives that she told the "tall one" she didn't have any money because she has expenses. Not sure why Elkins, a teenager, would care about that. If she were paying back a loan, her statement would make sense....having expenses would be an excuse for not having the money.

She said the baby was sleeping as he usually did for his morning nap (?)

Luis Santiago

• Has hepatitis C and was dying when she decided to get pregnant
• He is OCD
• He was impossible for her to live with
• She asked the Governor for help with his bills through govt. programs
• She gave the statute for one of the laws that applied to a program she was having trouble getting for Luis (501-section E-11)
• Luis has applied for disability but hasn't heard yet and can't pay her anything until he gets that
• She kicked him out because he watched too much TV and it ran up her electric bill
• She went on a long time about helping Luis get housing through the Governor

Ashley G
AG graduated dean's list and passed the exam to enter college but had to go back and get her GED (?)

She says she was the wrong one for him (Elkins) to ask money from (laughs loudly), "cuz he didn't get nothing".

 

[katydid23]

IMO, it takes A LOT to take a child from its mother. A LOT. Not feeding the baby is not enough unless that baby is starving due to hard core, stubborn neglect.

Parents are given tons of chances to get their kids back.

Of course that doesn't mean the mom here isn't a victim. Formerly bad parents can change and bad parent's kids can be harmed through no fault of the parent.

I don't think she was taken away by CPS. The father got custody and took the child to live with him and his parents. Mom has mental health issues.

The kid sitting there in the defendants chair is the killer of this child. All of this other stuff is deflection engineered by the defense.

This mom has been diagnosed with paranoia, PTSD, bipolar manic depression jjust to name a few. So of course she comes off as 'odd.' But that does not make the kid with the gun, innocent.

 

[momrids6]

Dr Drew is discussing this case. Her ( SW's) brother does not agree with anything AG has to say. AG is not a credible witness- incarcerated on now on 2 separate charges, 2 different counties. bad blood.My niece at this time, is not in her correct mind.

I lived with my sister for numerous years- with kids- what she is saying is not true. They were fed well. Father & grandmother had more to give treats, etc. Losing sight, mother, now father- off track.


All paraphrased...from show.

 

[katydid23]

Well, here's the thing: if Antonio had died due to neglect/malnutrition, that would be one thing. But I truly, honestly do not see similarity of events in having a baby SHOT IN THE FACE and having a (surviving, I will point out) child removed by CPS for neglect. Granted, no one will deem Sherry West mother of the year, and it was horrible and tragic that her older son was stabbed to death, but you can't punish her for that by blaming her for Antonio's death when he was SHOT IN THE FACE by a robbing .

As for the adult daughter, we had this conversation months ago, and I stated that as an adult daughter of a mentally ill mother (and I probably SHOULD have been taken away, but things were different back then) I don't know that I could have resisted taking out my hurt and frustration in a public forum. I *hope* that my innate sense of fairness would have guided me not to say something just to hurt my mother when the facts didn't really support her involvement in a later incident involving one of her children, but I don't know that I could have been so mature at that age.

Anyway, my mother was by any of today's standards a complete failure as a parent (and hey, let's not forget my father, who just threw up his hands and left his four children to the 'care' of an unmedicated schizophrenic) but at the same time she would have died rather than hurt any of us deliberately.

And here at this distance of many years and after her death I have gained perspective and a sense of understanding and I understand that she was ill and did the best she could. I don't necessarily 'forgive' 100%, but at the same time I would never, ever pillory her in a public forum to get my revenge.

It's possible to both be an inadequate mother AND to have horrible, violent things happen to your children through none of your own fault. I say that from my own experience. I don't know, others may have different experiences, that's mine.

THANK YOU for the beautiful and thoughtful post.

I am sad for this troubled grieving woman because of all the mudslinging this defense team is doing. None of it makes their violent client innocent. But it does muddy the waters.

This whole thing is heartbreaking. These violent teens killed that baby. It does not matter if this woman was estranged from her daughter or fighting with her boyfriend or had a troubled past or suffers from bi-polar disorder. None of that matters because she is not on trial, although you'd never know it.

ELKINS IS THE SHOOTER. There is plenty of evidence of that given the gun he asked friends to help him dispose of. And the witnesses who testified he was on scene and hidden in the back seat of the car that drove him away from the crime scene. And his past history of armed robbery.

This woman is THE VICTIM. She has led a troubled, shifty life. But she is the victim in this incident. And it is so frustrating to see her being attacked over symptoms of her mental health issues. JMO

 

[vlpate]

For the first time, the jury saw the .22-caliber revolver prosecutors say Elkins used to murder Antonio Santiago. And testimony from Elkins' friends and relatives didn't help his case.

Family friend Danielle Williams testified that Elkins came to her apartment the day of the shooting, hoping to hide his weapon.

She said, "He asked can he put his weapon under my couch."

Later that day, she said Elkins' mom, Karimah, and his sister, Sabrina, came to pick it up.

Cousin Ronald Elkins said he unloaded the gun.

District Attorney Jackie Johnson asked him, "What did you do with the bullets?"

Ronald Elkins said, "I gave it to Karimah."

"And what did you do with the gun?" asked Johnson.

Ronald Elkins said again, "I gave it to Karimah."

The jury also heard from a friend who said he drove Karimah and Sabrina to a fishing hole, the same place where prosectors say the murder weapon was found.

Willie Merrell said he never saw a gun, but he might have heard them talking about one. He said, "I heard a splash. But that's all. I didn't see anything."

The testimony painted an ugly picture for the mother and son, who are on trial together. Karimah Elkins is accused of lying to cover up her son's crime.

http://www.fox30jax.com/content/top...-the-Elkins-trial/IxEEiM8oh0KK2HriMTdqOw.cspx

This is another thing that confounds me - why would the kid tell his mother about the shooting? Why wouldn't he just get rid of the gun himself? He was brave enough to stand on a street in broad daylight and do the deed, why not brave enough to get rid of the gun? He's suddenly a little kid again who needs his momma to take care of everything. I don't buy it - IMO, the mother knew where he was headed that morning and what he was going to do. According to testimony Elkins shot another man 11 days before he shot Antonio - why didn't he give the gun to his mom then to throw in the pond or dispose of?

Seems like Karimah Elkins might have been complicit even before the crime was committed. JMO

 

[Cherry]

Hope there isn't a juror like me, I a, still on the fence about this mom.

 

[momrids6]

I don't buy it - IMO, the mother knew where he was headed that morning and what he was going to do. According to testimony Elkins shot another man 11 days before he shot Antonio - why didn't he give the gun to his mom then to throw in the pond or dispose of?

Seems like Karimah Elkins might have been complicit even before the crime was committed. JMO

Google is your friend...

 

[vlpate]

Google is your friend...

Since we are all sleuthing and I don't profess to know everything about this case, by a long shot, what would I find if I googled as regards the quoted text? At least point me in the right direction :scared:

 

[lowens1975]

Antonio was cremated, IIRC, cremation costs about 1/2 of what a funeral costs. SW asked her daughter about the check the night Antonio died and was then on the phone when the insurance Co. opened the next day, according to reports. I can see a family member doing the calling when a baby has been brutally murdered, but not the mother, I'm sorry, it is strange to think a mother would have that much presence of mine. Just my opinion.

From all indications, she lived alone. I havent heard if her parents are still alive, but she reached out to her daughter and got her hand bit for her effort. I don't think there was anyone else to do it but her.

 

[jjenny]

It's obvious this woman has a whole bunch of issues. But people with issues can become victims of crimes. Seriously, one would think this mother was on trial, despite not a shred of evidence presented she was in any way involved. She had minimal amount of insurance on this child, the smallest one can get.