Kyron Horman's mom's civil suit against Terri Horman

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'll add something to the title so people see there's a new development.
 
Spicher appeared before a Multnomah County grand jury in July 2010 in response to a subpoena, her lawyer Chad Stavley confirmed then.

At the time, Stavley disputed allegations raised by Kyron's parents that Spicher was impeding their missing son's investigation by not cooperating and advising others not to talk to law enforcement.

"Well, the fact of the matter is she has been cooperating," Stavley, Spicher's lawyer, said in 2010. "She met with detectives in the case for three-and-a-half hours, and has had several follow-up conversations with detectives. She's cooperated fully. And frankly, the suggestion that she has urged others not to cooperate is absolutely false."

Stavley was present with Spicher during her deposition in the Young lawsuit, which lasted from 9:34 a.m. to 10:56 a.m. on Oct. 5.

Spicher said she was asserting her Fifth Amendment rights at the advice of her attorney.

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/...ns_friend_dede_spic.html#incart_river_default
Click to expand...
If she answered questions in 2010, fully cooperated. Why is she invoking her 5th amendment right two years later? IIRC, this was the Attorney, her Daddy got for her.

I hope she can be compelled to answer. Although the argument that she is protecting another person seems to be a catch 22 in my book. If she does not protect Terri, she will give her own role in Kyron's disappearance away.

Hope the judge rules on this quickly.
 
Wow! It's been so quiet here that I wondered when or if there would be even a hint about who was being deposed and what, if any, progress was being made in the civil case. Given that DS appeared to be one of the key players early in the investigation into Kyron's disappearance and pleading the 5th at this time is very significant. :moo:
 
My husband is reading the transcript of the depo to me. We cannot believe that her answer was "no" to if she gave her phone records to the police or any investigative agencies, same with email. WOW. Did any police agency ask her permission to look at her computer or any other electronic device that could have communicated email, "no". WOW. And, she took the fifth on some odd stuff too.
 
Rather than asking permission, LE probably obtained a warrant to search her home and take her electronic equipment. She never gave permission if that happened. When LE is serious, they get warrants to keep legal matters clean.
 
Do we know for sure that LE did obtain her records? Would they have had probable cause to do so?
 
Spicher also declined to answer questions about where she was on June 4, 2010.

"Are you aware that Kyron Horman has disappeared?" asked Young's lawyer, Elden Rosenthal.

"I'm asserting my Fifth Amendment right," Spicher replied, according to a transcript filed in Multnomah County Circuit Court.

Spicher even declined to identify a photo of Terri Horman, or whether she knew Terri Horman's husband, Kaine Horman, Young, or had ever met Kyron.
Click to expand...


How the heck would saying she knows Kyron is missing or identifying a photo of Terri Horman incriminate DS? FGS, even I could probably identify a photo of Terri Horman and I have an airtight alibi for Kyron's disappearance. And she could hardly be unaware of Kyron's disappearance since she's been interviewed about it and is now being deposed about it.

Strange and stranger.
 
Maybe she thought she'd better invoke the fifth randomly to innocent questions to disguise the questions she really didn't want to answer?
 
Interesting, since this is a civil case, that it appears that guilt can be inferred from invoking the 5th:

bbm

Refusal to testify in a civil case

While defendants are entitled to assert that right, there are consequences to the assertion of the Fifth Amendment in a civil action.

The Supreme Court has held that “the Fifth Amendment does not forbid adverse inferences against parties to civil actions when they refuse to testify in response to probative evidence offered against them.” Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308, 318 (1976). “[A]s Mr. Justice Brandeis declared, speaking for a unanimous court in the Tod case, ‘Silence is often evidence of the most persuasive character.’” Id. at 319 (quoting United States ex rel. Bilokumsky v. Tod, 263 U.S. 149, 153-154 (1923)). “‘Failure to contest an assertion...is considered evidence of acquiescence...if it would have been natural under the circumstances to object to the assertion in question.’” Id. (quoting United States v. Hale, 422 U.S. 171, 176 (1975)).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Click to expand...
 
Has Desiree (or Kaine) commented publicly on DS' deposition? I hope locals will post links if either of Kyron's parents make statements about DS' testimony in the civil suit. Thanks!
 
belimom said:
Interesting, since this is a civil case, that it appears that guilt can be inferred from invoking the 5th:

bbm
Click to expand...

Maybe a verified lawyer can weigh in here but I got the impression earlier that Oregon civil courts are a bit different from some other courts in that they don't allow the inference of guilt from invoking the 5th. It was discussed in this earlier response.
"In federal courts the trier of fact may draw an adverse inference from the civil defendant's invocation of the 5th amendment. No such inference can be drawn in Oregon court."

But I'm not sure how it applies here since DS is not the defendant.

http://images.bimedia.net/documents...otion+to+Abate+-+Response+and+Decl+8-2-12.pdf

I'm not sure how it works as Dede is not the defendant
 
Wondergirl said:
That makes me feel sick. What does that woman know, and where is her conscience?
Click to expand...

I don't think she just "knows". I think she "did". Covering her own self in the process... :twocents:

:banghead:

Poor Kyron.
 
belimom said:
I don't think she just "knows". I think she "did". Covering her own self in the process... :twocents:

:banghead:

Poor Kyron.
Click to expand...

It's been a while and I don't recall every detail of the investigation, but was the property where DeDe was doing landscaping on the day that Kyron "disappeared" ever searched?
 
What I don't understand here is, what is the point of not answering questions that she's already answered back when she was first interviewed? Like where she was that day and how she knows Terri etc. Her answers are on record.

At least, I am assuming she answered some questions back then, since her attorney insisted that she cooperated fully.
 
Knox said:
If she answered questions in 2010, fully cooperated. Why is she invoking her 5th amendment right two years later? IIRC, this was the Attorney, her Daddy got for her.

I hope she can be compelled to answer. Although the argument that she is protecting another person seems to be a catch 22 in my book. If she does not protect Terri, she will give her own role in Kyron's disappearance away.

Hope the judge rules on this quickly.
Click to expand...

Not knowing the answer of course, my guess is that once you answer 1 question, about where you were (she won't even say IF she had lunch on June 4th, 2010), but if she did say, "yes I had lunch", that that opens her up to countless other questions about that day in question.

Not sure, but I think that's how it may work.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 179 more.
Total: 2,371 (members: 180, guests: 2,191)

Online statistics

Members online
180
Guests online
2,191
Total visitors
2,371
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,360
Messages
18,107,123
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top