GUILTY LA - Levi Cole Ellerbe, 6 mos, kidnapped, burned to death, Natchitoches, 17 Jul 2018 *arrests*

[borndem]

When I first saw this my heart was in my throat. She looks *exactly* like my oldest daughter in this pic. I doubt this was staged. I think drug addiction turned her into someone no one recognized. Likely, not even herself.

moo

bbm
Agreed -- but not an excuse or any form of mitigation, IMO. But yes, she could have been so far gone that she couldn't distinguish what was real and what wasn't. When she picked up the pipe (I guess a pipe) and got high, she had to know that she might not have control over what might happen. I guess she just didn't care. IMO.

Not knowing much about meth murders, I googled around and saw this article. Apparently a defense was made that the meth user was operating under "meth psychosis," and "he was not himself." Well, that may be so, but we don't usually let a drunk driver off with a verdict of NG because he was too drunk to know what he was doing.
Anyway, the article presents some angles that a defense attorney might use... but his client was found guilty.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emery County man found guilty of murder says ‘meth psychosis’ led him to believe the family members he killed were demons

The man was found guilty of aggravated murder and manslaughter in the slayings of his mother and brother.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emery County man found guilty of murder says ‘meth psychosis’ led him to believe the family members he killed were demons

 

[MsMarple]

bbm
Agreed -- but not an excuse or any form of mitigation, IMO. But yes, she could have been so far gone that she couldn't distinguish what was real and what wasn't. When she picked up the pipe (I guess a pipe) and got high, she had to know that she might not have control over what might happen. I guess she just didn't care. IMO.

Not knowing much about meth murders, I googled around and saw this article. Apparently a defense was made that the meth user was operating under "meth psychosis," and "he was not himself." Well, that may be so, but we don't usually let a drunk driver off with a verdict of NG because he was too drunk to know what he was doing.
Anyway, the article presents some angles that a defense attorney might use... but his client was found guilty.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emery County man found guilty of murder says ‘meth psychosis’ led him to believe the family members he killed were demons

The man was found guilty of aggravated murder and manslaughter in the slayings of his mother and brother.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emery County man found guilty of murder says ‘meth psychosis’ led him to believe the family members he killed were demons

Hi borndem! So far nothing in msm has indicated that either woman was so drugged out that they were experiencing any kind of psychosis, drug or otherwise. In fact the mother was able to call 911 and tell her fairy story while Smith was able to do what she did to Levi then go off to work. To me both women knew what they were doing and certainly were not hallucinating about demons, God, fairies or UFO's.

As mind-boggling as it is though, many states allow voluntary intoxication as an affirmative defense - meaning the defense has the burden to prove that the defendant either was too intoxicated to form intent (premeditate) which is more usual or too intoxicated to be mentally able to distinguish right from wrong, like an insanity defense. The laws vary from state to state.

The good news is that in most states it's a very narrow defense so someone can't just say they were so drunk/high that they didn't know what they were doing. But it is used in murder cases where defense counsel claims the defense in order to downgrade murder charges to manslaughter. That's what the defense attorney plans to argue in the appeal for the man in the case you linked.

As an FYI, in Louisiana the law says:
La. R.S. 14:15 provides the law relative to intoxication as a defense to a crime in Louisiana. That article states:
La. R.S. 14:15. Intoxication
The fact of an intoxicated or drugged condition of the offender at the time of the commission of the crime is immaterial, except as follows:
(1) Where the production of the intoxicated or drugged condition has been involuntary, and the circumstances indicate this condition is the direct cause of the commission of the crime, the offender is exempt from criminal responsibility.
(2) Where the circumstances indicate that an intoxicated or drugged condition has precluded the presence of a specific criminal intent or of special knowledge required in a particular crime, this fact constitutes a defense to a prosecution for that crime.

As for the death penalty, Louisiana has it but hasn't executed anyone for years for several reasons. One is the controversy over the drugs used but also because the endless appeals drag on to the point where those on death row basically live out their lives there. Costs are staggering too. I'm for the DP but more and more I think it's faster, cheaper and easier to just give 'em LWOP and be done with it. MOO.

 

[Niner]

So not court dates yet for these two? Last one for the "mother" was 7/30. Can't recall off hand the other one's date....

 

[ThatBlueMermaid]

As an FYI, in Louisiana the law says:
La. R.S. 14:15 provides the law relative to intoxication as a defense to a crime in Louisiana. That article states:
La. R.S. 14:15. Intoxication
The fact of an intoxicated or drugged condition of the offender at the time of the commission of the crime is immaterial, except as follows:
(1) Where the production of the intoxicated or drugged condition has been involuntary, and the circumstances indicate this condition is the direct cause of the commission of the crime, the offender is exempt from criminal responsibility.
(2) Where the circumstances indicate that an intoxicated or drugged condition has precluded the presence of a specific criminal intent or of special knowledge required in a particular crime, this fact constitutes a defense to a prosecution for that crime.

I found this: "The Louisiana Criminal Code provides that criminal intent may be either general or specific and defines specific criminal intent as "that state of mind which exists when the circumstances indicate that the offender actively desired the proscribed criminal consequences to follow his act or failure to act." 5 The crime of murder requires "a specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm."6 Thus, drunkenness, 7 if it exists to such an extent as to preclude the existence of a specific intent to kill or seriously injure, will constitute a defense8 To state broadly that extreme voluntary intoxication is a defense as the statute implies, however, is inaccurate, for the person who has become voluntarily intoxicated is generally held to the same criminal responsibility as the sober man.9 Rather it should be said that an extreme degree of intoxication may be found to preclude the existence of an element of the crime, i.e., the specific intent which must accompany the proscribed act." Here: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2702&context=lalrev

It's very old, but if I am reading it right, it states that intoxication must accompany the act. I read on, and even though the legaleese confuses me, I am reading it to say something more along the lines of if a defendant is out of sound mind due to intoxication when the crime is committed or planned and then immediately committed, the charge of manslaughter would come into play. The fact that she went to work and performed her duties there would completely knock that out IMHO. It's likely that I am reading it wrong because as a person who lives in LA, I so badly want these to to experience the same death little Levi did. I don't want these two to get off easy.

 

[MsMarple]

I found this: "The Louisiana Criminal Code provides that criminal intent may be either general or specific and defines specific criminal intent as "that state of mind which exists when the circumstances indicate that the offender actively desired the proscribed criminal consequences to follow his act or failure to act." 5 The crime of murder requires "a specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm."6 Thus, drunkenness, 7 if it exists to such an extent as to preclude the existence of a specific intent to kill or seriously injure, will constitute a defense8 To state broadly that extreme voluntary intoxication is a defense as the statute implies, however, is inaccurate, for the person who has become voluntarily intoxicated is generally held to the same criminal responsibility as the sober man.9 Rather it should be said that an extreme degree of intoxication may be found to preclude the existence of an element of the crime, i.e., the specific intent which must accompany the proscribed act." Here: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2702&context=lalrev

It's very old, but if I am reading it right, it states that intoxication must accompany the act. I read on, and even though the legaleese confuses me, I am reading it to say something more along the lines of if a defendant is out of sound mind due to intoxication when the crime is committed or planned and then immediately committed, the charge of manslaughter would come into play. The fact that she went to work and performed her duties there would completely knock that out IMHO. It's likely that I am reading it wrong because as a person who lives in LA, I so badly want these to to experience the same death little Levi did. I don't want these two to get off easy.

Yes, it's going to be hard for either of them to prove that they were so blitzed that they couldn't form intent. Since it's an affirmative defense the burden rests entirely on them and their defense attorneys and not the state.

And we still haven't seen anything in msm that says one or both were high at the time.

 

[cvaldez1975]

To know that she set him on fire before 10 and the call didn’t go into 911 until 10:25? And he was still alive at that point...to suffer for that long...I have to stop myself from imagining it as it just makes me too ill and too angry.

if mercy exists, he was unconscious.

 

[cybervampira]

Mother of burned baby to seek bond in Friday hearing

The mother of a baby who died after being found in a fire is seeking to have bond set, according to court documents.

Hanna Nicole Barker is scheduled to be in a Natchitoches Parish courtroom Friday morning for multiple motions, including one to set bond. The motions were filed recently by Shreveport attorney J. Dhu Thompson, a former prosecutor now in private practice.

Both Barker and Smith have had prior charges in Natchitoches Parish, both for drug-related offenses.

But whereas Barker was accepted into drug court within days of her 2016 arrest on meth and drug paraphernalia possession charges, Smith missed numerous court appearances and spent time behind bars.

After Levi's birth, Barker had at least two more dates in the district's drug court, the last on June 13, according to clerk records. There are no minutes reflecting what happened during those appearances.

 

[Niner]

Friday, Sept. 21st:
*Motions Hearing (@ ) – LA – Levi Cole Ellerbe (6 mos) (July 17, 2018; died July 18, 2018; kidnapped & burned to death) – only for *Hanna Nicole Barker (22) “mom” arrested & charged (7/25/18) with principle to first-degree murder, meaning the “actual perpetrator of the crime” & 1 count of criminal conspiracy. Held without bond.
72 hour court hearing, could be 7/27/18; moved to Monday, 7/30.
7/28/18 Update: DA charges Barker with criminal conspiracy.
9/21/18 Update: Motions hearing set for 9/21. One motions is to set bond.
*Felicia Marie-Nicole Smith (25) arrested & charged (7/21/18) & indicted (8/30/18) with 1 count of 1st degree murder. Held without bond.
7/25/18 Update: Additional charges are expected for Smith.
7/28/18 Update: DA charges Smith with criminal conspiracy. No new dates available.
No updates on court hearings as of 9/21.

 

[cybervampira]

What a psychopath!

Woman burns baby boy to death because mom asked her to, official says

During Friday's preliminary examination hearing, the state laid out its evidence against the mother, who will turn 23 on Sept. 25.

The two women had an "intimate, sexual relationship," testified Swisher, although he said Barker related in an interview that she was only using Smith for attention and money.

He testified Smith told investigators Barker came to meet her at IHOP earlier on the day Levi was taken. Barker asked Smith if she loved her and if she would do anything for her, even if it meant going to jail, Swisher said.

He said Smith said Barker asked her to kill the baby, and Smith initially refused. But she agreed shortly after to do it.

Barker told Smith to shoot the infant, who was only days away from turning 7 months old, Swisher testified. Smith said she couldn't because her gun was jammed. Swisher said they found a gun — jammed because someone loaded a bullet backwards — at Smith's home.

Barker then told Smith she wanted the baby burned "until he was bones," Swisher testified. Barker told her that would get rid of evidence, he said.

 

[cybervampira]

Video at link.

Spoiler: Off topic

It answered my question how Natchitoches is pronounced!

Mother of Natchitoches burned baby remains in jail without bond

During Barker's bond hearing on Friday, a judge decided to keep her in jail based on presented evidence.

 

[2Hope4]

I have never in my life, and I hope to never again! How the hell you going to burn a baby alive to show you love someone?!?!?! WTH kind of thinking is that?!?!

 

[2Hope4]

What a psychopath!

Woman burns baby boy to death because mom asked her to, official says




View attachment 148138

Too bad a gun can't fire backwards and kill the person trying to kill a baby!

 

[FlossyMay]

Oh, my Lord! Evil!

 

[Niner]

Anyone see a next court date?

TIA!

 

[Charliegizmo49]

I was going to reply to this the other day - and then I forgot which thread it was in!

Not to get too much off topic -

so - no court date yet??

Hope you had a nice birthday. Sorry I’m late.

 

[MicheleT]

Anyone see a next court date?

TIA!

Prior to the start of the preliminary examination, another judge set an Oct. 6 hearing to consider revocation of Barker’s probation. Barker was sentenced to 5 years’ probation in 2016 as part of her plea to two drug charges.

From one of the articles

 

[JerseyGirl]

Baby found on fire, mother held in jail without bond

 

[MsMarple]

What a psychopath!

Woman burns baby boy to death because mom asked her to, official says




View attachment 148138

OMG! Well, that explains Barker's charge of principal to first-degree murder. But to read that Levi's mother wanted him gone and didn't care how much pain he would feel is nearly impossible to process.

I know it's Smith's story for now but I do believe it and I also feel this was a revenge murder concocted by a mother who didn't want her child and hated his father. So win-win for her. Or so she thought. Two more stupid criminals.

Shooting him would have left evidence too so it makes no sense that her wanting to burn Levi "until he was bones" was only to cover up evidence. IOW, there was more to it than just getting rid of evidence. IMO Barker was so angry at his dad that she wanted to hurt him as much as possible and to hell with the pain Levi would suffer. I bet he was severely abused before his murder too. MOO.

And how could Smith do this to a living, breathing baby? I see no possibility of rehabilitation for either of these witches. It doesn't matter anyway, they're both gonna "burn" for their horrendous crime.

 

[MsMarple]

From JerseyGirl's link:

Felicia Smith, Barker's girlfriend, told investigators that it was Barker who asked her to help get rid of Levi. She said there is video evidence of the two meeting at IHOP, including phone recordings and text messages that support her claims.
Baby found on fire, mother held in jail without bond

So video, phone recordings and texts - seems like Smith didn't trust Barker all that much.

 

[ThatBlueMermaid]

I know it's Smith's story for now but I do believe it and I also feel this was a revenge murder concocted by a mother who didn't want her child and hated his father.

THIS. I called this when I read she was arrested and dug into their social media accounts. IMO, I think she was angry Levi's dad moved on and had another baby on the way. She was no longer getting that attention from him. Sought it out in someone else, even by her own admissions. At that point, Levi was just baggage to her. IMO