GUILTY IN - Shaylyn Ammerman, 14 mos, Spencer, 23 March 2016 #2

[courtneyb]

This scenario doesn't say you allowed someone who had been drinking hold your child. I picture a gathering at home where you are the hostess. You know, the kinds of gathering most families/friends have on a regular basis. Auntie Mary picks up your child and sits down to rock him while you're hostessing?

Then again, good for you if such a situation NEVER happened!

I'd much rather not know if me being super cautious about who is allowed in my home with my child has prevented her from being raped, strangled, suffocated, doused with bleach, and thrown in the woods like trash, than to know that my lack of cautiousness did nothing to prevent it from happening.

That's all the context I need.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ILOKAL]

Not sure if you're including me in the 3 or not but if so, you've got it wrong My point is simply this: whether one drinks or not, or has friends that drink or not, there are plenty of parents that would never think it okay for a drunk friend of the family to be picking up their kid, and would never allow it. OR have drunks around their kids to do it in the first place.

What we DON'T know is how grandma responded when she allegedly found a drunk KP rocking Shaylyn to sleep. Maybe she cussed him out? Maybe she shrugged and went in the other room. We have no idea because it hasn't been stated in MSM how that really went over - nor was it ever even mentioned until after she'd already mentioned what a helpful person he was.

Clearly, this family has a completely different set of standards than a lot of others and that's likely the reason so many find it so bizarre.

Well, thanks so much for your reply.

But, my question was so simple (I thought) and never included what one would "allow". Grandma didn't "allow" KP to rock Shaylyn. And, apparently, the rocking incident didn't cause her to have any obvious red flags (as there were other very positive incidents) and, in reality, it doesn't seem as though it should have, IMO.

I think I got enough of what I was looking for anyway, so thanks to everyone for the discussion.

 

[ILOKAL]

I'd much rather not know if me being super cautious about who is allowed in my home with my child has prevented her from being raped, strangled, suffocated, doused with bleach, and thrown in the woods like trash, than to know that my lack of cautiousness did nothing to prevent it from happening.

That's all the context I need.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I DO understand, because they don't get ANY more cautious than myself, BUT, (sigh . . . . ) my question/scenario does not include what one would "allow". But that's okay and I appreciate your response.

 

[Hippie Heart]

Well, thanks so much for your reply.

But, my question was so simple (I thought) and never included what one would "allow". Grandma didn't "allow" KP to rock Shaylyn. And, apparently, the rocking incident didn't cause her to have any obvious red flags (as there were other very positive incidents) and, in reality, it doesn't seem as though it should have, IMO.

I think I got enough of what I was looking for anyway, so thanks to everyone for the discussion.

Whoa. The incident where Grandma found a drunk KP rocking her granddaughter should not have raised red flags?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[J4cknsal1y]

In the beginning, the Dad said he was a good friend of the family, and later he said he knew nothing about the guy, didn't really know him at all.

Right, & I think that he claimed to not even know kyle's last name is a moot point (whether his claim is true or not), just because he could not even spell Shaylyn's-HIS DAUGHTER- name correctly. I think he/his family might be somewhat simple & attention to details (i.e. Last name, spelling of name, times certain things happened, etc) is either not a strong point, or more than likely -IMO- just not all that important to them.

All IMO

 

[courtneyb]

I DO understand, because they don't get ANY more cautious than myself, BUT, (sigh . . . . ) my question/scenario does not include what one would "allow". But that's okay and I appreciate your response.

If KP, as a person not well known to her, had not been "allowed" in her home to be in a position to be able to rock Shaylyn, then the question would be a moot point.

I understood your question. You did not understand my response.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LaborDayRN]

http://on.aol.com/video/watch-remembering-baby-shaylyn-ammerman-56fc3ef6e4b018d23f8cfc0a

The viewing and memorial. Family asks people wear pink or purple as those were Shaylyn's favorite color. Shaylyn is wearing a white dress and purple jacket. :tears: :rose:

 

[ILOKAL]

Whoa. The incident where Grandma found a drunk KP rocking her granddaughter should not have raised red flags?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Remember how gentle and helpful and tidy he had been and had played with the baby? Those were also some of the behaviors the grandma had observed. I'm simply trying to figure out, in all honesty, how the behaviors she observed should have caused red flags indicating the monster that he is?

 

[MsMarple]

Prevent Child Abuse-Indiana would not comment on the specifics in the Shaylyn Ammerman case.

However, spokesperson Sandy Runkle stresses the fact that people need to think seriously about who they allow to be around their children, especially very young children.
...
The responsibility is on the parents to make sure -- whether it be a friend, family member, boyfriend, girlfriend, neighbor -- whoever that you vet those people before they have access to your children.

According to court documents, suspect Kyle Parker had a history of drinking.

Prevent Child Abuse-Indiana says we must be especially vigilant if someone appears to have been drinking or using drugs.

http://www.theindychannel.com/news/local-news/shaylyn-ammerman-case-can-shine-light-on-child-abuse

It really isn't rocket science.

 

[LaborDayRN]

The funeral home where Ammerman's visitation and funeral will take place is offering their services free of charge, along with the company that built the casket.

http://www.wbiw.com/local/archive/2016/03/shaylyn-ammerman-to-be-laid-to-rest-today.php

Bless them.

 

[ILOKAL]

If KP, as a person not well known to her, had not been "allowed" in her home to be in a position to be able to rock Shaylyn, then the question would be a moot point.

I understood your question. You did not understand my response.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I believe I understood your response. Then in response to THIS post, what reason did she have to not "allow" him in her home before even knowing he would get "drunk" and then rock the baby?

 

[Hippie Heart]

Remember how gentle and helpful and tidy he had been and had played with the baby? Those were also some of the behaviors the grandma had observed. I'm simply trying to figure out, in all honesty, how the behaviors she observed should have caused red flags indicating the monster that he is?

Do you have a link to her saying those things? My impression was when she recounted the event where she walked in on him rocking the baby, it was not done to condone his behavior like oh isn't that sweet he's rocking the baby. My impression was she was saying that it alarmed her. I could be wrong though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[courtneyb]

I don't believe any person not known well should be allowed to be in my home, around my children. Giving a stranger an opportunity to raise red flags when it involves children is a dangerously poor choice.

Also, Grandma seems to know enough scary details about KP to have warranted her not allowing him in her home. That's two chances she had to make a safe choice... 1. Don't let strange men around this baby. 2. You've witnessed him drinking and you have knowledge of his affinity for *advertiser censored*, and you've seen him holding your grandchild. I understand about hindsight, but these are things that a baby shouldn't have to be tortured and murdered for your lightbulb go off and make you go, "ooh, yeah... That was weird."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[courtneyb]

I believe I understood your response. Then in response to THIS post, what reason did she have to not "allow" him in her home before even knowing he would get "drunk" and then rock the baby?

He is a virtual stranger and she had a baby to keep safe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hippie Heart]

I believe I understood your response. Then in response to THIS post, what reason did she have to not "allow" him in her home before even knowing he would get "drunk" and then rock the baby?

Do we know for sure the rocking event is the first time she saw him drinking and/or drunk while at her house?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Irisha]

Yeah - given what we've read and what they've said, I think they're pretty familiar with alcohol. IMO it might not be a stretch to say they drink frequently. Not stating that as fact but that's my gut. I'm sure if they said the guy was drunk, he was probably falling down drunk. Not just tipsy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He is an alcoholic, he is now in a lifetime of forced rehab. A lifetime of sober reality of the horror he inflicted, another reason why he is suicidal.:moo:

 

[ILOKAL]

Prevent Child Abuse-Indiana would not comment on the specifics in the Shaylyn Ammerman case.

However, spokesperson Sandy Runkle stresses the fact that people need to think seriously about who they allow to be around their children, especially very young children.
...
The responsibility is on the parents to make sure -- whether it be a friend, family member, boyfriend, girlfriend, neighbor -- whoever that you vet those people before they have access to your children.

According to court documents, suspect Kyle Parker had a history of drinking.

Prevent Child Abuse-Indiana says we must be especially vigilant if someone appears to have been drinking or using drugs.

http://www.theindychannel.com/news/local-news/shaylyn-ammerman-case-can-shine-light-on-child-abuse

It really isn't rocket science.

No, it certainly is not rocket science. ID's and background checks for everyone, including Auntie Mary, teachers, priests, doctors, and even your OWN kids! Because, in reality, you really can't trust anyone as the various cases on WS prove over and over again

And, there's that single glass of wine or can of beer.

 

[*JMO*]

Interesting. That detail of the story seems so weird. The one thing though is that she was wearing a white sleeper. So maybe if KP was wearing a dark shirt and her foot was dangling down and he wasn't terribly far from the window that AA saw him from,could it have been visible because of it being white?

ETA: I guess we don't know for sure if it was a footed sleeper or if she was wearing socks? I'm assuming her feet were covered because of the time of year and the temperature I assume it would be in Indiana. We're still wearing socks here in California most of the time.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BBM
Early reports when she was first missing said she was wearing a white zip-up sleeper decorated with owls. I would assume from that description that it would have been a footed sleeper as that is the most common kind.

 

[Hippie Heart]

I don't believe any person not known well should be allowed to be in my home, around my children. Giving a stranger an opportunity to raise red flags when it involves children is a dangerously poor choice.

Also, Grandma seems to know enough scary details about KP to have warranted her not allowing him in her home. That's two chances she had to make a safe choice... 1. Don't let strange men around this baby. 2. You've witnessed him drinking and you have knowledge of his affinity for *advertiser censored*, and you've seen him holding your grandchild. I understand about hindsight, but these are things that a baby shouldn't have to be tortured and murdered for your lightbulb go off and make you go, "ooh, yeah... That was weird."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes to all of this. You know somebody less than a year and know they like to get drunk and watch deviant *advertiser censored* and you have them over late on a weeknight to drink whiskey and never think maybe you should walk them to the front door and lock up after them? Or at least take the baby to bed with you since there was an acquaintance who was "iffy" in your house? I mean gosh, if nothing else, I would think you would want to make sure the baby wasn't awakened by people walking through the living room. Unless of course 2 am whiskey drinking is a regular occurrence. SMH and rolling my eyes.

I mean me personally, as the grandma, I would have told my knuckleheaded sons that it may not have been the best idea and refused to let that man come over given what they knew about him. Seems a little ridiculous that you should have to instruct a grown man who's the father of a child that this may not be a good idea but apparently no one did, so here we are.

So in terms of endangerment, I believe it's fair to say that all the adults in the house endangered little Shaylyn.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[J4cknsal1y]

This article (http://www.11alive.com/mb/news/119-7-indiana-toddlers-father-im-just-devastated/102625762 ) was posted 5 days ago.

The man arrested in the death of an Indiana toddler once rocked her back to sleep, the girl's grandmother said.
Kyle Parker was in the living room of their Spencer, Ind., home when Shaylyn Ammerman awoke in her crib, so he picked her up, and lulled her into a slumber, Tamera Morgan said.
...
Adam Ammerman described Parker as a "friend of a friend" but Morgan said he had visited her house about a dozen times.
...
"He talked so kindly," said Morgan. "He played with Shaylyn."

The following comes from the people magazine article (yesterday)
(http://www.people.com/article/grandmother-discusses-murder-of-shaylyn-ammerman)

"If you were ever around Kyle, you would not have thought him capable of something like this," Morgan explains. "There were no signs, no nothing. He was polite. At least he was always a very polite gentleman around me. But you never saw or heard anything ill or mean from him. Nothing. It just wasn't there. This makes no sense whatsoever."

this article from today:

Shaylyn's grandmother, Tamera Morgan (pictured, with Shaylyn), says that Parker had visited the home around a dozen times, and that he 'talked kindly' and played with the toddler.

- See more at: http://www.detroitnewstime.com/regi...-raped-and-murdered.html#sthash.2LjdhmTj.dpuf

^there's more at this link but my phone is not cooperating with their website to copy/paste any more