MO - Elizabeth Olten, 9, St Martin's, 21 Oct 2009 #14

[Bibliophile]

I'm going to point out: we don't actually have a video tape or audio recording of her saying this.

You're correct. As far as I know, nothing of this nature has been released.

The quote came from a police officer, who said when asked about a possible motive something to the effect of "she basically said she wanted to know what it felt like." This is not a direct quote, but more the officers summary of what she said. Big difference.

I think as events unfold, you will find that "basically" was just a figure of speech. It is my understanding that AB, accompanied by her guardian, was brought in for questioning, so we may find this interview was recorded and/or witnessed by several officers.

That said, the Federal Rules of Evidence, along with state rules of evidence, allow for inflammatory marks to be inadmissible, when their sole purpose is to prejudice the jury.

It speaks directly to motive, therefore its probative value may trump any inflammatory value. I'd place bets on it.

 

[Bibliophile]

in any criminal case and trial there are many things that the media and therefore you and I are not privy to and those things are usually of such importance that they can turn a case one way or another

This is without a doubt true.

I understand what the laws are concerning her being tried as an adult all I am suggesting is that those laws are wrong, barbaric, archiac and backasswards.

And believe it or not, Missouri is one of the more "progressive" states. There are 22 states that allow children as young as seven to be tried as adult.

You may find this report interesting. Its long, but worth a read.
http://www.utexas.edu/lbj/news/images/file/From Time Out to Hard Time-revised final.pdf

 

[PAXIMUS]

A child? :waitasec: Elizabeth was a child. She was 9 years old. Alyssa was 15 years old- no, she wasn't an adult, but she was by far more than capable of understanding the concept that by killing another person, no matter how or why, that it was ending a life, it was wrong, and there were VERY ADULT consequences to her actions. My cousin who died recently had Williams Syndrome. While hers was not a severe case, it was moderate, which means at 25 she functioned on a 12 year olds mentally level at best. She was more than capable of understanding death and the finality of it, and she was more than capable of understanding concepts like why one should not take anothers life, what would happen if one broke that law, what consequences would occur for breaking the law, what jail was, why people go to jail, etc. I find it VERY hard to believe that my 25 yr old cousin functioning at a 12 yr olds mental level could understand the consequences of actions but a 15 year old with I am sure a higher functioning level could not.

We cannot even say for sure that Alyssa HAS or DOESN'T HAVE a mental illness. Even IF she does, there is no cure for mental illness. There is treatment, and that is not always a guarentee that treatment will work. To say something such as "where she should serve at least five more years in the care of medical professionals who can help her overcome her mental illness and learn to understand what within her made her commit this henious crime"... For me, that is a slap in the face. I live every day with Bipolar Disorder. There is no cure for me, there is no 'overcoming' it. There is living with it moment to moment. I cannot always control my actions or my words, but I do know that I have to deal with the ramifications of them after the fact. With 10 years of proper treatment and therapy, I only just begun to learn to deal with my illness. To me, it almost sounds like you are saying that this is something she will 'outgrow' or 'get over' with time and counseling. I WISH it was that easy. I had been treated for depression since 9 years old. At 23, even with 14 years of medications and regular counseling, I still decided to take my own life. I paid the price for my actions, for the pain and anguish that my actions caused those around me. I still pay for them every day. But with a proper diagnosis and treatment, i have learned.

Pardon the digression, but as a former mental health Nurse and someone living with Bipolar, the lack of understanding and in some cases the overthinking of understanding what mental illness is and what it does to someone makes me want to shake someone and yell "Can't you understand it just doesn't go away!" to the top of my lungs.

I guess my :twocents: on it is, at 15 years old, barring mental illness, she was more than capable of knowing that her actions were final, illegal, and had consequences that she would have to deal with. She chose to take a childs life. She has to face the consequences- whether it be juvie til 18 or 21 then jail til parole/death or whatever the jurors decide to give her. Giving a perverbial pass because 'she is just a kid' is a dangerous and costly idea.

PS, my mother is the adult child of a very violent Bipolar alcoholic. Yes, there was a lot of physical abuse as a child. Yes she has LOTS of issues, but she is quite capable of undertanding that breaking the law means consequences, including jail, and was able to at a VERY young age.

I know plenty about mental health issues and I am aware they dont go away but that doesnt mean we should lock everyone with bipolar disorder up because they commonly do and say irrational things and are sometimes a danger to themselves and others, it can be treated and controlled to a certain extent and I do believe AB should have the opportunity to recieve that treatment as opposed to being locked away in prison.

I feel just as badly as the rest of you about what happened to EO but why kid ourselves, this thread is not and has never been about her, it is about AB and will continue to be about AB.

Also I have not seen anyone suggest AB should get a pass, I have seen two sides, those who want her punished in cruel and unusual ways and a few others who see her as a child, perhaps even something of a victim herself who no doubt needs to be locked up from society for a long time but not in a prison but rather a medical facility where she can get the help she needs.

 

[PAXIMUS]

This is without a doubt true.

And believe it or not, Missouri is one of the more "progressive" states. There are 22 states that allow children as young as seven to be tried as adult.

You may find this report interesting. Its long, but worth a read.
http://www.utexas.edu/lbj/news/images/file/From Time Out to Hard Time-revised final.pdf

Yes I am aware many states allow it and I have spent a good part of my legal career fighting against it.

Also, no way her statement about wanting to kill to see what it feels like, gets introduced at trial, a first year law student could write the motion to get that tossed, as I said before it is inflammatory and prejudicial. As for placing bets we can place one, whoever loses has to use a sig line for 6 months picked by the winner...so if I win I may have your sig read "biblio is pax's *****" LOL:crazy:

Also, great link, thanks for sharing, are you an attorney by chance, AE and myself both do criminal defense work. You do seem to be more informed than most and although we disagree on some fundamentals I do appreciate that you have kept it civil, disagreement should lead to good healthy discussion and not personal attacks and bickering.

 

[AndresEscobar]

I disagree. You cannot come close to predicting that with any certainty. The Revel case I posted about demonstrates that the heinousness of the crime has little to do w/ the determination. We already know that AB can function in society (she attended and was successful in school, etc..) It is highly probable she would at least be granted a conditional release in the first five years.

United States Supreme Court in Foucha v. Louisiana, 504 U.S. 71 (1992) The Supreme Court held in Foucha that an insanity acquittee could be held only so long as he is both mentally ill and dangerous, and no longer. It also held that future dangerousness, without mental illness, is not a proper basis for continued confinement of an insanity acquittee and that the continued confinement of an insanity acquittee, in the absence of present mental illness, constitutes punishment.

I know I probably sound like a broken record, but in order to make any intelligent judgments on this case, we must consider the jurisdiction. Missouri only allows what Missouri allows.



Justice?? If she is acquitted on the grounds of mental disease or defect it is no longer about justice or punishment - it is about treatment. Its entirely possible she would be released much sooner than any of us would ever dream of.



I understand - but in many ways, Missouri law runs counter to what you believe might be best.

I'd like to reiterate that I'm not advocating for acquittal. I'm just telling you what I know from my experience.

Btw, I just shepardized that Surpreme court case you cited, and its not really good law anymore, having been distinguished 56 times.

(for those who don't know, "Shepardizing" is a legal cite check that basically checks to see whether the case law in a certain case is current, or whether its been overturned or distinguished. It's used to determine whether an attorney citing a case is citing "good" law.)

 

[AndresEscobar]

You're correct. As far as I know, nothing of this nature has been released.



I think as events unfold, you will find that "basically" was just a figure of speech. It is my understanding that AB, accompanied by her guardian, was brought in for questioning, so we may find this interview was recorded and/or witnessed by several officers.



It speaks directly to motive, therefore its probative value may trump any inflammatory value. I'd place bets on it.

I don't really think so. And, until I have a transcript in front of me, I'm going to take his "basically" as a summation of what AB said, and not a direct quote.

And, unless its a direct quote, its probative value is nothing. Her statements themselves will be the evidence the prosecution will use. Regarding Motive, law and order and nancy grace place way to high of value on motive in criminal law. Motive is not necessary to get a conviction. All you need is actus reus and mens rea. "Motive" can be brought in to help back up the mens rea, and can be evidence in a case, but you can convict someone of a crime in which they had no motive. And you can acquit someone of a crime in which they did have a motive.

So, if you're a betting person, I'd steer clear of putting any money down until we know what she actually said.

 

[AndresEscobar]

This is without a doubt true.

And believe it or not, Missouri is one of the more "progressive" states. There are 22 states that allow children as young as seven to be tried as adult.

You may find this report interesting. Its long, but worth a read.
http://www.utexas.edu/lbj/news/images/file/From Time Out to Hard Time-revised final.pdf

It might interest you that children being tried as adults is very, very controversial right now. There was a big article about 7 year olds being tried as adults in a recent ABA magazine, and also how i found this case.

I'd expect the Supreme court to take up a lot of these cases soon.

 

[kkmiami]

I was a follower of this case up until Alyssa's court date. I couldn't read anymore once her grandparents began to be attacked. Up until that point, the only information we and the media had about Alyssa's parents were court documents. Alyssa's mom was caught with a small amount of pot this summer while on the river (we assume it was a boating check point). She also had a DUI the previous year. She was sentenced to two years probation with a stipulation of not being around alcohol. There is no mention of habitual drug offenses or abuse. I've seen media take this one conviction and blow it up to imply a serious drug addiction without anything behind this statement (I apologize in advance if the courts have released more information as to her background).

I applaud Alyssa's grandparents in their proactive actions to gaining custody of MB's children. IMO - they moved from California so that MB and the children could still maintain a relationship. The grandmother provided a yearly status update to the courts to determine if there should be any changes in the guardianship. They appear to have tried everything and relied on professionals for her treatment plan. If MB had been the primary parent, we'd be chastizing other family members now for not stepping in.

What you consider attacking the grandparents has some valid points. Firstly she was allowed out at night without supervision. Why was no television monitor security device installed in their home? If I had a child who was cutting and had attempted suicide, you can believe I would be watching them very closely. She was allowed time alone with her younger brothers. She posted online a film of herself and her brothers touching an electric fence and there was also a video posted of her "play" stabbing another child. She posted online that her hobbies were cutting and killing. Obviously they didn't monitor her online activities,when her grandfather is an IT professional. They could have installed a spyware keystroker on her computer to monitor her online activity. Obviously they did not. Why after her suicide attempt was she not in an inpatient treatment facility? Why was she not enrolled in some kind of in house counselling facility?

I feel they could have taken a more proactive role in her counselling. She was given money to spend on goth clothing and wore a hatchet charm around her neck. When she had shown a history of getting very involved with gothic behavior and was receiving counselling for it, she and her brothers were allowed to wear this clothing. In fact, I hope her brothers have not been so influenced by Alyssa that they too may have developed a dark side.

 

[Kateyes]

The more I read here the more I see the validity of both sides of the debate concerning AB's punishment. I agree that she is severly in need of mental health treatment - I cannot seem to find the clarity I need to feel comfortable in what her punishment should be. I cannot say that the deviousness of the way AB committed this crime raises a red flag in my mind, and IMHO only, that she may kill again - with or without mental health treatment. The deviousness I am speaking of is the grave being prepared prior to the crime, and the planning that AB put into Elizabeth's murder, if what has been reported in the media is indeed true. I ache for ELizabeth's lost life, and for her family. I also ache for AB and the family who care about her. And I realize that the law does not hold for punishment for possible future crimes (ie keep the person in prison so no future crimes are ever committed). Yet, I admit the way AB planned and execute the murder of Elizabeth does make me wonder if what drove her to kill was simply the urge to kill - and if so, what mental health intervention can inhibit that urge? I have no clue, and admittedly am conflicted. And, I totally agree with AndresEscobar that the grandparents should have monitored her with much more scrutiny in light of her mental status.

 

[Bibliophile]

Btw, I just shepardized that Surpreme court case you cited, and its not really good law anymore, having been distinguished 56 times.

I didn't mention it as a legal argument or brief, so I was unconcerned with it being "good law." That said, it is my understanding that being distinguished by Shepard means only that the citing case differs from the cited case in either fact situation or legal issue. Shepard's signals or notations can be misleading. There's only one, good old fashioned way to determine the precedential value of a case and my guess is few people on this discussion board have that time. If anyone is really interested they can have a go at Jones v. United States, 463 U. S. 354 (1983); Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U. S. 346 (1997) or Kansas v. Crane, 534 U.S. 407 (2002).

I cited Foucha because it was the first time the Supreme Court addressed the situation of those individuals that were committed after being found not guilty by reason of insanity and were later found not to be mentally ill and because of the later significance of O'Conner's concurrence.

In a nutshell, Hendricks established "dangerous beyond their control" predicate giving states the right to continue commitment based on that concept. The problem is - its not well defined. The Court attempted to further define that in Crane but merely concluded, "it is enough to say that there must be proof of serious difficulty in controlling behavior." While these decisions give states more power, they're too ambiguous to say that AB would be locked away for decades.

Finally, in addition and perhaps more importantly than the aforementioned, there is the problem of conditional release should AB be acquitted by reason of mental defect. This raises the possibility that AB could be out and about in the community in a very short time with minimal supervision. It happens much too often and ss we saw with the Revels case (the guy who beat 3 people to death with a pipe wrench), he was conditionally released a mere one year after he was found NGRI.

 

[Bibliophile]

I don't really think so. And, until I have a transcript in front of me, I'm going to take his "basically" as a summation of what AB said, and not a direct quote.

That's certainly your choice to make but I stand by my position. And believe it or not, I'd stand by that position without knowing her friend reported AB mused about what it might be like to kill someone.

And, unless its a direct quote, its probative value is nothing. Her statements themselves will be the evidence the prosecution will use.

Hmm ... with no Miranda, privilege or voluntary problems, imagine that she did make this statement or one very close to it. For example, after being asked why she did it, she replied, "I just wanted to know what it was like."

Her statement would corroborate other relevant evidence and I doubt that it would change the course of the trial given the other evidence including her confession.

Motive is not necessary to get a conviction.

I am aware of this. I watch Law and Order.

 

[Bibliophile]

IMO Most posters who see AB as a child, and who would like AB to get a fair trial and possibly some treatment have all stated that AB also needs to be punished and out of society for a long time (not 5 years or even one decade)-

I am not sure why we keep having to defending this idea-

I suspect because the inexorable reality and the ideal are so far apart.

In general, if you are advocating AB be sent to a mental hospital and not a prison, you are advocating for her to be found not guilty by reason of mental defect. In Missouri, that's the only way she will go to a mental hospital.

 

[raisincharlie]

Also I have not seen anyone suggest AB should get a pass, I have seen two sides, those who want her punished in cruel and unusual ways and a few others who see her as a child, perhaps even something of a victim herself who no doubt needs to be locked up from society for a long time but not in a prison but rather a medical facility where she can get the help she needs.

The problem with AB is she WAS getting help and it did nothing but escalate her actions from attempting to kill herself, to encouraging her brothers to do something which would hurt them, to killing someone else. What's next - serial killing for her ? Since none of us know what her actual problem is, the possibility exists that she has a problem which cannot be corrected by pills and warm fuzzy talks with a shrink in a medical facility which will teach her nothing more than how to hone her manipulative abilities while swallowing her daily allowances of pills. Reality is what this "child" needs.

I do know one thing - I am quite tired of excuses for criminals, I am tired of them being returned to society only to re-offend, I am tired of dim witted judges who continue to release people with blood on their hands. I am tired of the free passes which come at the expense of an innocent or innocents. Criminals come in all ages unfortunately. AB is a criminal, any exposure of her to society is both a risk and an invitation. This "child" was quite capable of deceiving so many on so many different levels.

 

[W8nC]

What you consider attacking the grandparents has some valid points. Firstly she was allowed out at night without supervision. Why was no television monitor security device installed in their home? If I had a child who was cutting and had attempted suicide, you can believe I would be watching them very closely. She was allowed time alone with her younger brothers. She posted online a film of herself and her brothers touching an electric fence and there was also a video posted of her "play" stabbing another child. She posted online that her hobbies were cutting and killing. Obviously they didn't monitor her online activities,when her grandfather is an IT professional. They could have installed a spyware keystroker on her computer to monitor her online activity. Obviously they did not. Why after her suicide attempt was she not in an inpatient treatment facility? Why was she not enrolled in some kind of in house counselling facility?

I feel they could have taken a more proactive role in her counselling. She was given money to spend on goth clothing and wore a hatchet charm around her neck. When she had shown a history of getting very involved with gothic behavior and was receiving counselling for it, she and her brothers were allowed to wear this clothing. In fact, I hope her brothers have not been so influenced by Alyssa that they too may have developed a dark side.

kkmiami, I am not disagreeing that perhaps the grandparents could have done more, but would like to point out a few things they did right. After all, her grandmother, and STEP-grandfather, no blood relationship, left a nice life in CA to move to MO, in order to take custody of, care of, financial liability for, FOUR children. These are not old, retired grandparents, but younger, working age people, who at the time they moved, were still raising one of grandma's own children....so they were responsible for a house with FIVE kids in it.

"She was allowed out at night without supervision"......not allowed, she SNUCK out without supervison.

"no television monitor installed in the house".....that we know of. Plus that would require constant monitoring, and these people had jobs, plus other kids to raise.

"she was allowed time alone with her younger brothers".....no one had suggested, up to the point of Elizabeth's murder, that Alyssa was a danger to anyone except herself. What would be the basis for not allowing her to be in the company of her siblings?

"She posted online a film of herself and her brothers touching an electric fence and there was also a video posted of her "play" stabbing another child".....the video of the electric fence, to people who have ever lived around one, is normal behavior for kids, not at all unusual. The play-stabbing was a photogrash, not a video, and even though we "know" because of the scars on the wrist that is is Alyssa, we see only her forearm and hand in the photo. Others may not have looked closely at it or known it was her.

"they didn't monitor her online activities,when her grandfather is an IT professional".....maybe they did monitor. We know she was punished when she was caught doing wrong (ex. loss of cell phone). Or maybe they didn't know how. Her gf may have been a mainframe database expert, for example. All IT professionals don't know everything about everything there is to know regarding computers.....yes, I are an IT professional and I are dumb about a LOT of computer stuff.

"Why after her suicide attempt was she not in an inpatient treatment facility? Why was she not enrolled in some kind of in house counselling facility?".......after her suicide attempt, she WAS in an inpatient facility, some say for a couple weeks, some indicate longer. At the adult competency hearing, it was reported that she received almost daily counselling, at least some of it at her home. It was reported that her grandparents took a very active role in her treatment.

"She was given money to spend on goth clothing and wore a hatchet charm around her neck".......Just about all the kids her age around here were wearing "goth" clothing a year or so ago. It's what was in style, what was available in the stores. They read the Twilight books, about vampires, and watched Adam whats-his-name on AmIdol, who wore black and eye-liner, etc. There was not specific "goth" behavior, just black clothes with skulls on them. When the trend changed, so did her fashion/style. The hatchet charm was in a picture taken ON Halloween. The charm may or may not have been Alyssa's.

kkmiami, I am not saying you're wrong, just that the gp's DID try, IMO. As a grandmother who had custody of a grandchild for awhile, I'm impressed with their efforts, myself. If I'd been the step-gf, after knowing what all gm had gone through with her own two children, I'm not sure I'd have been brave enough to take on those 4 grandkids. I don't know if gf has any kids or his own or not, but this just seems like a heroic undertaking on his part. I have met the man once, briefly, and he seemed really nice, and really tired...guess we know why, huh.



Merry Christmas Everyone!!!

 

[LogicalMinds]

I know plenty about mental health issues and I am aware they dont go away but that doesnt mean we should lock everyone with bipolar disorder up because they commonly do and say irrational things and are sometimes a danger to themselves and others, it can be treated and controlled to a certain extent and I do believe AB should have the opportunity to recieve that treatment as opposed to being locked away in prison.

I feel just as badly as the rest of you about what happened to EO but why kid ourselves, this thread is not and has never been about her, it is about AB and will continue to be about AB.

Also I have not seen anyone suggest AB should get a pass, I have seen two sides, those who want her punished in cruel and unusual ways and a few others who see her as a child, perhaps even something of a victim herself who no doubt needs to be locked up from society for a long time but not in a prison but rather a medical facility where she can get the help she needs.

Sorry but I have really not seen anyone here saying that...you keep bringing it up...maybe in the first few days some heated posts were made, but I have not said that I want her punished in "cruel and unusual ways"...nor are any of us advocating the death penalty for her, you also say that a lot

We do want her treated as an adult...because IF they treat her as a child, she would get out at 21 with NO RECORD

and IF she was found "not guilty by reason of insanity" she could get out even sooner

that is the way the law is written now in her state....we can't change the law and try her by a new law....she will be under the laws that existed at the time she killed Elizabeth

So many of us feel the best thing is to try her and get her put away for years, hopefully to get mental "help" in prison where she can't hurt others

Let's not forget she will be 16 in January...but Elizabeth won't have another birthday

Elizabeth would have gotten presents, her "girly" fun stuff, dressed up her pets for Christmas....bright red bows or maybe those little "antlers"....enjoyed a big Christmas dinner

Allyssa probably had turkey and stuffing in the jail yesterday....Elizabeth didn't and never will

Yes, I think Allyssa should go to prison...to keep others safe from her , and to serve time as justice for the life she took so senselessly

But PLEASE let's get it straight...I am not advocating anything cruel and unusual here

 

[LogicalMinds]

Oh...and JMO>>> all this talk of mental health help and care...I do think the "brothers" and the young sister need help

also any of the kids who were involved with Allyssa...I would hope that the community sets up some sort of counselors/therapists for them...not just a crisis team

are there other "dark" kids in her circle who might emulate her or try to "avenge" her?

how about her own siblings?? what is this doing to them?

It might also be a good idea for "experts" to help the families to monitor the internet on their kids....maybe get software/classes for them...I worry that Allyssa seems to have these sick little people who support her

 

[AndresEscobar]

I didn't mention it as a legal argument or brief, so I was unconcerned with it being "good law." That said, it is my understanding that being distinguished by Shepard means only that the citing case differs from the cited case in either fact situation or legal issue. Shepard's signals or notations can be misleading. There's only one, good old fashioned way to determine the precedential value of a case and my guess is few people on this discussion board have that time. If anyone is really interested they can have a go at Jones v. United States, 463 U. S. 354 (1983); Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U. S. 346 (1997) or Kansas v. Crane, 534 U.S. 407 (2002).

I cited Foucha because it was the first time the Supreme Court addressed the situation of those individuals that were committed after being found not guilty by reason of insanity and were later found not to be mentally ill and because of the later significance of O'Conner's concurrence.

In a nutshell, Hendricks established "dangerous beyond their control" predicate giving states the right to continue commitment based on that concept. The problem is - its not well defined. The Court attempted to further define that in Crane but merely concluded, "it is enough to say that there must be proof of serious difficulty in controlling behavior." While these decisions give states more power, they're too ambiguous to say that AB would be locked away for decades.

Finally, in addition and perhaps more importantly than the aforementioned, there is the problem of conditional release should AB be acquitted by reason of mental defect. This raises the possibility that AB could be out and about in the community in a very short time with minimal supervision. It happens much too often and ss we saw with the Revels case (the guy who beat 3 people to death with a pipe wrench), he was conditionally released a mere one year after he was found NGRI.

Trust me. I read the case. If i were going into court, I would never rely heavily on a case that old.

You did mention it as a legal argument. You quoted part of it as if it were the law. You also left out that the court held that the state had the burden of proof to show the defendant still needed to be institutionalized and failed. That's a simple due process issue.

Crane and Kendricks both have significant negative history, and the cases are distinguishable because they deal with "Sexually dangerous" individuals.

Jones held that "when a criminal defendant established by a preponderance of the evidence that he was not guilty of a crime by reason of insanity, the due process clause permitted the Government, on the basis of the insanity judgment, to confine him to a mental institution until such time as he had regained his sanity or was no longer a danger to himself or society, and he could be confined to a mental hospital for a period longer than he could have been incarcerated had he been convicted."

Again, this is shouldn't surprise anyone. If you're found not guilty by reason of insanity, they can't hold you after you can prove you're not insane. These are basic constitutional principles.

The thing we're debating here, though, is pretty unlikely. Missouri has a very high bar for insanity. And, this case may not even go to trial. Furthermore, I think you're overstating the likelihood that she be out in a shorter period of time in the event that she somehow wins a not guilty by reason of insanity verdict.

 

[AndresEscobar]

Hmm ... with no Miranda, privilege or voluntary problems, imagine that she did make this statement or one very close to it. For example, after being asked why she did it, she replied, "I just wanted to know what it was like."

Her statement would corroborate other relevant evidence and I doubt that it would change the course of the trial given the other evidence including her confession.

Yeah, sure, but we don't know that that happened. Since we don't know what she said, we're debating hypotheticals. So, until we have facts . . .

Also, since you're doing a very impressive job debating law (thanks, btw, this is the best discussion i've had in this thread), you should know that judicial deference will be given to the accused on evidentiary matters. While you can make arguments as to the inclusion of the statement (and they are valid), the ultimate decision is what the judge is going to allow in. A judge is not going to want to be reversed, and he/she knows what inflammatory and prejudicial statements look like. No matter how you wrap this one up, it's still one. So, the DA will have to show that this is somehow paramount to their case (and it shouldn't be, what with all the DNA evidence, murder weapon, "writing", etc).

BTW, I'm going out of town for the rest of the weekend, so I will be away from the computer. Don't take my absence as "wussing out" on the argument, though, you should know by now I'd never do that.

 

[kkmiami]

kkmiami, I am not disagreeing that perhaps the grandparents could have done more, but would like to point out a few things they did right. After all, her grandmother, and STEP-grandfather, no blood relationship, left a nice life in CA to move to MO, in order to take custody of, care of, financial liability for, FOUR children. These are not old, retired grandparents, but younger, working age people, who at the time they moved, were still raising one of grandma's own children....so they were responsible for a house with FIVE kids in it.

"She was allowed out at night without supervision"......not allowed, she SNUCK out without supervison.

"no television monitor installed in the house".....that we know of. Plus that would require constant monitoring, and these people had jobs, plus other kids to raise.

"she was allowed time alone with her younger brothers".....no one had suggested, up to the point of Elizabeth's murder, that Alyssa was a danger to anyone except herself. What would be the basis for not allowing her to be in the company of her siblings?

"She posted online a film of herself and her brothers touching an electric fence and there was also a video posted of her "play" stabbing another child".....the video of the electric fence, to people who have ever lived around one, is normal behavior for kids, not at all unusual. The play-stabbing was a photogrash, not a video, and even though we "know" because of the scars on the wrist that is is Alyssa, we see only her forearm and hand in the photo. Others may not have looked closely at it or known it was her.

"they didn't monitor her online activities,when her grandfather is an IT professional".....maybe they did monitor. We know she was punished when she was caught doing wrong (ex. loss of cell phone). Or maybe they didn't know how. Her gf may have been a mainframe database expert, for example. All IT professionals don't know everything about everything there is to know regarding computers.....yes, I are an IT professional and I are dumb about a LOT of computer stuff.

"Why after her suicide attempt was she not in an inpatient treatment facility? Why was she not enrolled in some kind of in house counselling facility?".......after her suicide attempt, she WAS in an inpatient facility, some say for a couple weeks, some indicate longer. At the adult competency hearing, it was reported that she received almost daily counselling, at least some of it at her home. It was reported that her grandparents took a very active role in her treatment.

"She was given money to spend on goth clothing and wore a hatchet charm around her neck".......Just about all the kids her age around here were wearing "goth" clothing a year or so ago. It's what was in style, what was available in the stores. They read the Twilight books, about vampires, and watched Adam whats-his-name on AmIdol, who wore black and eye-liner, etc. There was not specific "goth" behavior, just black clothes with skulls on them. When the trend changed, so did her fashion/style. The hatchet charm was in a picture taken ON Halloween. The charm may or may not have been Alyssa's.

kkmiami, I am not saying you're wrong, just that the gp's DID try, IMO. As a grandmother who had custody of a grandchild for awhile, I'm impressed with their efforts, myself. If I'd been the step-gf, after knowing what all gm had gone through with her own two children, I'm not sure I'd have been brave enough to take on those 4 grandkids. I don't know if gf has any kids or his own or not, but this just seems like a heroic undertaking on his part. I have met the man once, briefly, and he seemed really nice, and really tired...guess we know why, huh.



Merry Christmas Everyone!!!

So sorry that I "misstated" about the stabbing being a video - only a photo - so that makes it NOT SO BAD!!!
Yes she "snuck" out at night. Why was there not an alarm on her door? Believe me I would have installed one after she did it the first time. Do we know for sure that they moved to Missouri because of the custody of the children? I am not a grandparent - but I am a parent and when my son displayed some behavior far more benign than anything Alyssa did - I instituted every measure I could to stop that behavior including spy cameras, computer tracking software, and major restriction on his activities. Do you know the grandparents personally? Your post seems to suggest such. I am sorry but her influence on her brothers was substantial and the grandparents had to know she had mental issues that could affect them as well. We don't know what other behaviors she may have displayed since we did not live in the house with her. I am sure there were lots of signs but I think they chose to ignore them.

 

[W8nC]

So sorry that I "misstated" about the stabbing being a video - only a photo - so that makes it NOT SO BAD!!!
Yes she "snuck" out at night. Why was there not an alarm on her door? Believe me I would have installed one after she did it the first time. Do we know for sure that they moved to Missouri because of the custody of the children? I am not a grandparent - but I am a parent and when my son displayed some behavior far more benign than anything Alyssa did - I instituted every measure I could to stop that behavior including spy cameras, computer tracking software, and major restriction on his activities. Do you know the grandparents personally? Your post seems to suggest such. I am sorry but her influence on her brothers was substantial and the grandparents had to know she had mental issues that could affect them as well. We don't know what other behaviors she may have displayed since we did not live in the house with her. I am sure there were lots of signs but I think they chose to ignore them.

Honestly, kkmiami, I'm not disagreeing with you. If it had been me, I'd have been tougher on her, too. Only saying maybe these folks were somewhat overwhelmed. GM was running a business, which she apparently closed a couple months before this happened, and GF traveled in his job and was out of town, from what I understand, 4-5 days a week most weeks. I don't even know if he was at home when the murder occurred. There were 3 other kids to look after, as well.

I TOTALLY AGREE that the knife thing was bad, disturbing, and something I'd have jumped on with both feet, had I seen it and thought for even one second that my kid had anything to do with it...photo or video...and soooo sorry that sounded so nit-picky in my previous post.

No, I don't actually know the GPs. As I said, I met the GF once. My nephew, Alyssa, and some other kids had gone to a local Christiam Church to see a couple of bands play, and the To Write Love on Her Arms presentation. I went to pick up my nephew. It was pouring rain here and Alyssa's GF was coming to pick her up, but wasn't there yet, so we waited with her, drove her to the other parking area to look for him, etc. When he got there, we exchanged a few sentences, and as I said, he seemed nice, but really tired.

It's possible, given her intelligence and her ability to keep others from knowing her secrets, that she convinced her counsellors, and her grandparents, that she was "fine", no more demons in her head, etc. I agree, "if she was my kid", I'd have watched her a LOT closer, just saying I don't think her GPs were bad people, and I'm not ready to condemn them for severe negligence as I was not living in those circumstances and don't feel like I can be judgemental of them without knowing all the details. I know I, and you, would have been more vigilant, but we don't know for sure what their security measures were, or how well Alyssa may have been able to get past them. She may have been under video surveillance, but found ways out anyway. She may have only done MS and FB, etc, when at friends houses. She may have been too shrewd for her GPs to keep complete track of her. We just don't know.

Peace? :toast: