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

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Did we ever find out where exactly in the house JA & AA sleep? Do they share the 2nd bedroom? Where in the house is the second bedroom located... back, front, side of house? I thought I remembered something about the grandmother saying JA's bed blocks the second door and the front door was the only entrance in and out. Sorry for asking things that have probably been talked about and cleared up. My minds a little foggy the last couple days.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
What each of us would or wouldn't do in our own personal lives is not relevant to what the people did in this case. They have their own reasons and motivations for doing the things they've done. In order to really know how and why this event happened, we need to try to understand their world not compare their world to ours.

Repeating over and over that we would never do the things they did ..... accomplishes what at this point?

:clap:
 
Joining the discussion to share this article from the Indiana University newspaper regarding KP not being known around Spencer. When this was posted on the IDS fb page, a commenter mentioned KP went to school in Ellettsville and grew up in Bloomington/Ellettsville. Still curious how he got connected with AA and this family.

http://www.idsnews.com/article/2016/03/spencer-residents-try-to-make-sense-of-rape-murder-of-toddler
I wonder if he met Justin at Ivy Tech Community College.
 
I appreciate your honest opinion then about *advertiser censored*. Maybe the difference is, like you said, is because KP had an "affinity" for *advertiser censored*, whatever that is, and because he watched child *advertiser censored*. I wasn't aware of that. Is there a link?

I have never had the desire to watch any type of *advertiser censored* and never have. But I am not naïve and know millions of people do watch *advertiser censored*, and I have read it is a 4+ BILLION dollar industry and pulls in that much money every year. It is one of the most lucrative businesses in the world today.:( So its obvious a whole lot of people are watching *advertiser censored*.

I read an article recently and it stated more women than ever before are buying and watching *advertiser censored*. With that many people from both genders watching *advertiser censored*, I don't think it is an indicator that people who do watch *advertiser censored* will then go on, and do violent acts of pedophilia or rape or molestation. It seems if that was truly an indicator then millions would become rapists, and pedophiles every year, and the crime stats don't support that to be the case thank goodness. Just like many millions of teens, and young adults play violent computer video games constantly yet only a small portion of them become killers.

I feel it is how each person absorbs what they see and how it affects them individually, whether they will turnout to be rapists or pedophiles.

Now anyone who watches kiddie *advertiser censored* has to have sickening disgusting deviate sexual tendencies toward helpless children. Imo, anyone wanting to watch children being raped isn't normal....not by a long shot. There is nothing sexual about it........that is horrendous brutality, and the highest form of evil, imo. I wish everyone who gravitates toward kiddie *advertiser censored* could be locked up. For the life of me I don't understand why anyone would want to see the pain, torture, and suffering of little children, but I also read kiddie *advertiser censored* is big business too.:( Even thinking about it makes me nauseated. While some will not act out their fantasies there are those who do. I remember during the Sandra Cantu murder case when Melissa Huckaby kidnapped, sexually assaulted, and murdered Sandra. Someone put up a link to a forum back then where women were chatting back and forth with each other about the vile sickening things they wanted to do to little children. It was one of the most disgusting, vile, and vulgar sites I have ever seen. I have never understood why sites like that are able to exist.

Imo
 
Who knows?

I think it's possible that KP was an Eddie Haskell type. (Hopefully most of you know the type?)

Given how she described him as cleaning up, helping out and rocking the baby AND how clean-cut he seemed to try to be, at least on his FB page, I can see him pulling off that nice boy image for some. And then letting his nasty side out around his friends -- with the alcohol and the *advertiser censored* and the lecherous fantasies. I highly doubt he ever let the true extent of his perversions out for anyone to see. So sure, maybe JA should have put two and two together, but he seems naive at best. And maybe grandma should have, but she may not have been seeing the whole picture.

Were there red flags? Probably. But the frog doesn't notice the water is boiling until it's too late, and neither did the Ammermans.

Thank you for your post. We have ALL known Eddie Haskell types in our lives. Some become quite obvious rather quickly, while others are SO good at deceiving unsuspecting people. Even the brightest can be fooled by the skilled deceiver.
 
I don't remember ever reading that the grandmother found KP alone with Shaylyn? Just that she came home and he was holding her. Her actual parent was likely there as well and grandma may have taken her lead from him.

For me a lot of the inconsistencies and hinki-ness with the family just comes down to a family who are maybe wary of how their parenting/lifestyle looks to the outside world. I've seen this a lot with people who have had interaction with police/child services and/or are just suspicious of authority.
 
I doubt if grandmother put any big emphasis on the behavior or background of Kyle no matter how many clues we can point out. From what I can glean out of this group is if they did know more about Kyle, I doubt if it would have come as a big shock or really be all that different than the history of their other friends or even the sons themselves. Grandma's current husband is not much older than her own sons and we don't know a lot about him either. The whole family lived a lifestyle that is probably not quite wholesome in the eyes of most of us. So a smudge here and there on someone's reputation would not be a reason in their world to find him unsuitable company.

These are not boy scouts. Grandma is not the cookie-making-apron-wearing-granny of our dreams. The whole crew can raise some eyebrows, if we are honest. This is not an 'Everyone Loves Raymond' episode.

I don't think the baby's mother is much different in terms of her lifestyle either. She was the dad's girlfriend when they split while she was still pregnant. She had him back in her home with the baby and her other two children after the baby was born because she said she needed his help. But then apparently kicked him out because she claimed he was too "rough" with the baby (whatever that means). Then pretty much later gave the baby back over to grandma full time so she could attend classes. Later they worked out an every other week arrangement even though she said she did not have a good relationship with GM.

Point is, even though she (and apparently her girlfriend) have pointed fingers in the media at the care given by the father's family, she willingly gave the baby to them to be responsible for her. Their standard of care must have been adequate in her eyes to have made that arrangement. it doesn't sound like her choices have always been well thought out either.

Then somewhere within this maze of relationships was also the ex girlfriend of one of the brothers (I can't keep it straight who was with who) that brought the newspaper into the house in the wee hours of the morning and whom also stayed at the house as a boarder of sorts, apparently. (I'm not sure where she slept). We don't know much about her and her lifestyle either as far as I can tell. I have heard very little of what she saw or didn't see that night when she came back in.


The circle of people most people surround themselves with are usually not all that different in background and morals and habits than they are.

I think a revolving door of people and relationships was not all that unusual for this household. I don't think backgrounds of relatives or acquaintances or their personal habits was all that big of a deal to the family because they had a lot in common. People didn't have to get up early to go to jobs or school so every night could be Saturday night. The baby probably just sort of adapted to this lack of structure and somewhat chaotic environment .


Does that mean they should have known this Kyle was a monster capable of the most horrible, unspeakable cruelty done to their baby? I don't think they had any clue that he was anywhere close to being that evil.

Did they know he wasn't a boy scout? I believe they did. Did they make questionable choices and put their own desires ahead of the needs and nurturing of this baby? It sounds like it. I think there is a lot of immaturity and lack of boundaries to go around. Grandma may well be more of a friend herself than an authority figure to her sons.
It also sounds like the daddy turned a lot of the care over to grandma. In hindsight maybe there was a lot of shared responsibility for this precious little one that led to a breakdown of who should be checking on her, who should call the shots as far as her care, needs and protection were concerned.

I think we can agree that these are people that did not make a lot of good decisions in their own lives, just as happens across this country every single day. I do believe the baby was not in the optimal situation, and I think the environment and care of the baby was not priority as it ideally should be.

But that being said, I think we need to refocus on the one person that committed these horrendous acts. He found a situation that allowed him easy access for his sick perversion. The family may have provided the weak link, but they did not do it knowingly IMO. The baby was in a vulnerable situation in the home and he seized upon it. It is a tragic lesson that probably will not be learned by those that need it most.
 
There is enough evidence to charge JA (or grandma, not sure who has custodial responsibility) with negligence if LE wants to. Discussing red flags till sunup won't bring Shaylyn back or change that.

http://www.in.gov/dcs/files/3.08_Statutory_Definition_of_CAN.pdf

Someone asked several pages back about the difference between rape and child rape and how rage or control comes into play vs. sexual gratification. Here is a somewhat scholarly, yet hopefully thorough answer:

Since rape involves sexual behavior, it was long believed to
be primarily motivated by sexual impulse...this confusion of context with motivation was clarified
mainly by the work of Nicholas Groth, who published a typology of rapists in the
1970’s. Groth labeled each type based on the principle motivation manifested by
the rapists in that group.
The two primary and numerically largest types identified by Groth were
the “power” rapist and the “anger” rapist. The power rapist was motivated by his
need to control and dominate his victim, and inversely, to avoid being controlled
by her. The anger rapist was motivated by resentment and a general hostility
towards women, and was more prone to inflicting gratuitous violence in the
course of a rape. Not surprisingly, these types were rarely found in pure form.
Most rapists were actually blends of power and anger motivations.
The third and (thankfully) numerically far smaller type was the sadistic
rapist. This rapist was motivated by the sexual gratification he experienced when
he inflicted pain on his victim. The sadistic rapist has become a staple of the
American media, but these, once again, extremely rare cases.
Groth’s identification of anger and power as the primary motivations
behind rape has endured, and has become the basis for attempts at defining more
refined taxonomies of rape. These efforts have largely yielded modest results, and
have focused on identifying blends of power and anger motivations, and on
distinguishing developmental antecedents for the various types. Not surprisingly,
among those developmental antecedents, one of the most prominent is a history
of childhood abuse. Sexual abuse, physical abuse and neglect are all significantly
more prevalent in the backgrounds of rapists than in the backgrounds of nonoffending
men. 1


Child sexual abusers are often characterized as exhibiting poor social skills, having feelings of inadequacy or loneliness, or being passive in relationships (Groth, 1979; Marshall, 1993). They differ from rapists with respect to thought processes and affect, and often describe their offending behaviors as uncontrollable, stable, and internal, whereas rapists attribute their offenses to external, unstable, and controllable causes (Garlick, Marshall, & Thorton, 1996). Child sexual abusers display deficits in information-processing skills and maintain cognitive distortions to deny the impact of their offenses (e.g., having sex with a child is normative; Hayashino, Wurtele, & Klebe, 1995).
In contrast, rapists display distorted perceptions of women and sex roles, and often blame the victim for their offense (Polaschek, Ward, & Hudson, 1997). With respect to affect, child sexual abusers assault to alleviate anxiety, loneliness, and depression. Rapists typically assault as a result of anger, hostility, and vindictiveness (Polaschek, Ward, & Hudson, 1997). Many of these characteristics have been incorporated into the typologies of rapists and child sexual abusers (Camilleri & Quinsey, 2008; Groth, 1979; Knight & Prentky, 1990). 2

1 http://www.middlebury.edu/media/view/240951/original/PredatoryNature.pdf
2 http://www.smart.gov/SOMAPI/sec1/ch3_typology.html

Another good article on Pedophiles:
http://neuroanthropology.net/2010/05/10/inside-the-mind-of-a-pedophile/
 
There is enough evidence to charge JA (or grandma, not sure who has custodial responsibility) with negligence if LE wants to. Discussing red flags till sunup won't bring Shaylyn back or change that.

http://www.in.gov/dcs/files/3.08_Statutory_Definition_of_CAN.pdf

Someone asked several pages back about the difference between rape and child rape and how rage or control comes into play vs. sexual gratification. Here is a somewhat scholarly, yet hopefully thorough answer:

Another good article on Pedophiles:
http://neuroanthropology.net/2010/05/10/inside-the-mind-of-a-pedophile/

*Snipped for brevity*

It was me who asked. Thank you. This was interesting albeit sad to read.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Just wondering if anyone has come across a link that states KP watched child *advertiser censored*? I read several references saying he did but I've never seen that said as fact. TIA
 
I have never had the desire to watch any type of *advertiser censored* and never have. But I am not naïve and know millions of people do watch *advertiser censored*, and I have read it is a 4+ BILLION dollar industry and pulls in that much money every year. It is one of the most lucrative businesses in the world today.:( So its obvious a whole lot of people are watching *advertiser censored*.

I read an article recently and it stated more women than ever before are buying and watching *advertiser censored*. With that many people from both genders watching *advertiser censored*, I don't think it is an indicator that people who do watch *advertiser censored* will then go on, and do violent acts of pedophilia or rape or molestation. It seems if that was truly an indicator then millions would become rapists, and pedophiles every year, and the crime stats don't support that to be the case thank goodness. Just like many millions of teens, and young adults play violent computer video games constantly yet only a small portion of them become killers.

I feel it is how each person absorbs what they see and how it affects them individually, whether they will turnout to be rapists or pedophiles.

Now anyone who watches kiddie *advertiser censored* has to have sickening disgusting deviate sexual tendencies toward helpless children. Imo, anyone wanting to watch children being raped isn't normal....not by a long shot. There is nothing sexual about it........that is horrendous brutality, and the highest form of evil, imo. I wish everyone who gravitates toward kiddie *advertiser censored* could be locked up. For the life of me I don't understand why anyone would want to see the pain, torture, and suffering of little children, but I also read kiddie *advertiser censored* is big business too.:( Even thinking about it makes me nauseated. While some will not act out their fantasies there are those who do. I remember during the Sandra Cantu murder case when Melissa Huckaby kidnapped, sexually assaulted, and murdered Sandra. Someone put up a link to a forum back then where women were chatting back and forth with each other about the vile sickening things they wanted to do to little children. It was one of the most disgusting, vile, and vulgar sites I have ever seen. I have never understood why sites like that are able to exist.

Imo

Agree. *advertiser censored* is *advertiser censored*. No person will watch it all night. They only watch snippets of clips until they find the one that is in the realm of what was on their mind during that watching session. Now some will watch it to have a vision while relieving themselves. And some watch it for a blueprint or ideas of a possible for upcoming tryst. And some watch it just because alot of the skits are actually hilarious (to those who are *advertiser censored* watchers).

But most watchers will throw up if they seen a child on there being molested.

So hopefully the feds will find out if his kiddie ideas was shared by others online and lock them all up.

Jmo.
 
Yeah it was said he liked spanking *advertiser censored*. That's what we know about him and *advertiser censored* . Thanks to some folks here, though, I now know I'm apparently a sexual deviant child endangerer, as I've seen *advertiser censored* (gasp!) and also held a baby after a drink. I can't believe I've entrusted myself with my kittens, let alone children!
 
I wonder if he met Justin at Ivy Tech Community College.

Met "Justin" there? What would make you consider that? Justin said he didn't even know KP's last name. Did Justin attend school there?
 
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

One thing that occurs to me is that AA may have deduced that what he saw was a foot after he suspected KP of taking the baby. So, (get my thinking here) I wonder if he looked like he was carrying something because it dangled --could have been the visual of a partial gallon of milk. the side of a bottle of bleach, or anything else until he realized the baby was gone and only then did he connect that it might have been a foot.

Example from my own life, on Easter morning my nine year old brought in what he called a chocolate covered almond, my husband (sleepy and confused) looked at it and let my son put it in his mouth. As the "chocolate almond" was entering his mouth, my husband thought my wonderful Easter Bunny got me one of my favorite candies...until he bit down and discovered he was eating a licorice egg, which he despises btw...... no way a chocolate covered almond and a tiny black jelly bean could even be confused if he was alert, bespectacled and had context. He now freely admits lesson learned.
 
Yeah it was said he liked spanking *advertiser censored*. That's what we know about him and *advertiser censored* . Thanks to some folks here, though, I now know I'm apparently a sexual deviant child endangerer, as I've seen *advertiser censored* (gasp!) and also held a baby after a drink. I can't believe I've entrusted myself with my kittens, let alone children!

That's really unfair. I haven't been paying attention to the *advertiser censored* discussion (or commenting on it) but no one here has said a person is a child endangerer for holding a baby after one drink. The family member used the word "drunk" in their description of the incident. Drunk as in too intoxicated to drive a car safely. Big difference.
 
That's really unfair. I haven't been paying attention to the *advertiser censored* discussion (or commenting on it) but no one here has said a person is a child endangerer for holding a baby after one drink. The family member used the word "drunk" in their description of the incident. Drunk as in too intoxicated to drive a car safely. Big difference.

I do believe the term "deviant *advertiser censored*" has been used a few times in this thread.
 
I do believe the term "deviant *advertiser censored*" has been used a few times in this thread.

My comment was only about having one drink vs. being drunk. I'm staying out of the *advertiser censored* discussion.
 
I do believe the term "deviant *advertiser censored*" has been used a few times in this thread.

Deviant *advertiser censored* and child *advertiser censored* are 2 totally different things. Now if KP was watching child *advertiser censored*; He probably would have watched it in someone else's house. Especially if he thought that they were too slow.

So if the fbi finds kiddie *advertiser censored* on the family computers; Then they will have to see if KP was there during that time.

But I doubt the family will remember. Especially since uncle seen a leg of his niece and never thought twice. Jmo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
82
Guests online
1,645
Total visitors
1,727

Forum statistics

Threads
605,927
Messages
18,195,058
Members
233,648
Latest member
Snoopysnoop
Back
Top