Found Deceased NC - Maddox Ritch, 6 w/Autism, Gastonia, 22 Sept 2018 #3

[BetteDavisEyes]

I understand. I suppose what I am wondering about is whether anyone at the park has confirmed to LE whether they saw the three of them together at the park. And has anyone confirmed seeing dad chasing after Maddox? Or calling his name? Or dad and girlfriend running after him?

The articles I have seen state that it has been confirmed that Maddox was at the park that day. I haven’t seen anything where LE says that it has been confirmed that Maddox, Dad, and girlfriend were seen at the park together.

It seems to me that type of confirmation would help in putting together a timeline.

I'm sure LE has put together a timeline based on data they've collected. Just because it hasn't been reported in the media doesn't mean that LE doesn't have the information. At this juncture, we don't know if Maddox's death was accidental or if this has become a criminal investigation.

 

[Backstroke10]

IMO I don’t blame witnesses for not wanting to go public. I probably wouldn’t either but I’m sure other witnesses have spoken to LE in private. Because this is a high profile case with many questions/concerns/speculations, someone in LE should at least let the public know that they have spoken to other witnesses and they are absolutely sure Maddox was at the park with his father. They could at least put that question to rest. I pray I’m wrong but since the autopsy is taking so long, I think it was more than an accidental drowning.

 

[MistyM]

some people may not want to call in a tip because they are afraid of being blamed for something. if it comes back his death was accidental, perhaps more people will speak, but with not knowing, a witness might be paranoid. (think of 'bridge guy' in the abby and libby case)

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

IMO I don’t blame witnesses for not wanting to go public. I probably wouldn’t either but I’m sure other witnesses have spoken to LE in private. Because this is a high profile case with many questions/concerns/speculations, someone in LE should at least let the public know that they have spoken to other witnesses and they are absolutely sure Maddox was at the park with his father. They could at least put that question to rest. I pray I’m wrong but since the autopsy is taking so long, I think it was more than an accidental drowning.

I'm sure the autopsy has been completed because Maddox was laid to rest yesterday. Results of the autopsy have not been made public, but that is not unusual in a high-profile case. Toxicology reports can take several weeks.

 

[SuzDuJour]

FYI: In North Carolina autopsy reports are public record.

Autopsy, Investigation, and Toxicology Reports are public records and once finalized, may be obtained from the OCME. To request any of these documents, please use the Document Request web form. If you do not have Internet access, you may request documents by calling the OCME during regular business hours. There is no fee for these documents.

 

[Charlot123]

Thing is, it was reported there were hundreds of people in the park that day. One would think that out of hundreds of people more than one person would be in the news/social media by now.

This case seems to be straight from Chesterton's stories - he wrote a lot about the difference between what people see and what they assume they see.

What people really saw was a tiny kid who was lost, autistic and nonverbal, probably panicking inside and running fast. Leaving father far behind (or father not even noticing that the kid had run away). What they thought they saw was a generic-looking and -dressed tiny kid running somewhere. They assumed, probably towards his parents or behind them and they never bothered to check. It is the typical pattern of human thinking. If Maddox's looks stood out, or he had a T-shirt that said "I support autism" or anything people would pay attention to, they would remember him.

It is not about them not seeing him, it is about them not remembering him.

About photos. I was thinking about the fact that he was not in the photos.

When you take pictures, you don't want random people to be in them. I think it is illegal to post pictures with people without their consent, maybe not, but you are thinking of your photo and how it will look on social media. So if someone gets in your cadre, you either wait, or you edit them out. Usually tiny kids don't even get into the photo, unless you are shooting something very low on the ground (a flower). But when you are shooting and suddenly a tiny kid gets in your cadre, you don't ask where that kid came from and whether parents are with him or not. Your mind is on the shot, so you either wait till he is out of the cadre or delete it and take a new one.

In short, I can imagine why Maddox is not in people's photos.

Maybe we need more cameras in the parks and everywhere else, too.

 

[Charlot123]

Thing is, it was reported there were hundreds of people in the park that day. One would think that out of hundreds of people more than one person would be in the news/social media by now.

The problem is not people not going to LE with their stories. The major - major! - problem is that there was only one camera in a public park. We really can not rely on people's observation skills, or memory, or even good will. I was reading articles about (a different) case in Britain, someone mentioned that the Brits were "obsessed" with putting cameras everywhere.

Obsessed or not, they get a lot from their cameras.

If Britain can afford the cameras, we can afford them, too.

 

[Curious.1]

The problem is not people not going to LE with their stories. The major - major! - problem is that there was only one camera in a public park. We really can not rely on people's observation skills, or memory, or even good will. I was reading articles about (a different) case in Britain, someone mentioned that the Brits were "obsessed" with putting cameras everywhere.

Obsessed or not, they get a lot from their cameras.

If Britain can afford the cameras, we can afford them, too.

I know that some people have an issue with privacy (very valid issue) but I agree that when there are cameras everywhere, crimes are solved much quicker. And where it isn't known what clothes the missing person was wearing, it is very helpful to have footage from the last time the person was seen. Quite often footage looks very different to photos as photos show us at our best generally. Are personal cameras covering private property the main source of CCTV in the US at the moment? Or do most businesses also have them these days? I can think of 2 recent child murders in the UK where the case was solved within days and I think CCTV was a big part of both. I can also think of cases of missing people with dementia whose general direction was caught on CCTV.

 

[heartgoesout]

Sure, and excellent points. On the flip side surely out of a hundred people, more than one person, park employee, remembers seeing the couple in matching yellow shirts. That would stand out.

Surely more than one person would have seen a little boy in an orange shirt alone. That for sure adults would take notice.

Maybe several people have come forward and we don’t know about it. Or maybe no one has.

But... I think it is strange to have to keep trying to explain away why a hundred people didn’t see a child.

 

[Lillymac]

Sure, and excellent points. On the flip side surely out of a hundred people, more than one person, park employee, remembers seeing the couple in matching yellow shirts. That would stand out.

Surely more than one person would have seen a little boy in an orange shirt alone. That for sure adults would take notice.

Maybe several people have come forward and we don’t know about it. Or maybe no one has.

But... I think it is strange to have to keep trying to explain away why a hundred people didn’t see a child.

I think what would be more noticeable in a park, would be a child who was not running and playing. An unhappy child or one who appeared to be in distress. Later if Maddox realized he was lost and not able to find his dad he would be quite upset and agitated. But on the off beaten path from the park, there were no adults or anyone he could see or anyone that could see him. He's not in the park at that point. What a horrible thing for this child.

 

[heartgoesout]

Sure. But again, to date, only 1 person that we know of says she saw Maddox at the park. Out of hundreds. Hundreds!

In a world of look at me social media mania, with everything out there and nothing off limits, hundreds of people except 1 didn’t post anything or talk to friends who post or coworkers who post? No one?

We can go back and around on reasons why, this or that, some people, not everyone, I would, I wouldn’t etc...
But 1 person, in a highly publicized missing child case has come forward. For whatever reason.
I find that strikenly odd. JMO

 

[LietKynes]

The problem is not people not going to LE with their stories. The major - major! - problem is that there was only one camera in a public park. We really can not rely on people's observation skills, or memory, or even good will. I was reading articles about (a different) case in Britain, someone mentioned that the Brits were "obsessed" with putting cameras everywhere.

Obsessed or not, they get a lot from their cameras.

If Britain can afford the cameras, we can afford them, too.

BBM

That's a good point.
Do you have a link for there only being one camera in Rankin Park ?
This is the first time I've heard of there being a security camera.
And that there was only one of them.

 

[Cartie]

Haven't LE already confirmed that Maddox was at the park. If so why is it being debated? Am I missing something !

 

[Charlot123]

BBM

That's a good point.
Do you have a link for there only being one camera in Rankin Park ?
This is the first time I've heard of there being a security camera.
And that there was only one of them.

I read it in threads about Maddox. Someone posted. That one was at the entrance to the park.. I shall try to find on Google as the first thread is long.

 

[MsMarple]

Haven't LE already confirmed that Maddox was at the park. If so why is it being debated? Am I missing something !

After two weeks of asking people to come forward, especially the jogger and man with the white pickup LE confirmed Maddox was in the park. No details. What they said was:
@GPDNC wishes to expresses our heartfelt thanks to more than 65 agencies who helped search for Maddox. Public support & multiple investigative means confirm Maddox was at the park. We are awaiting autopsy results before an official ruling can be made in this tragic death.
9:58 AM - Oct 3, 2018
MISSING NORTH CAROLINA BOY MADDOX RITCH: Gastonia police confirm Maddox Ritch was in park before disappearance
Without telling us more we're kind of left scratching our heads so it's no surprise that some people aren't convinced. I can't see any harm to the case if LE had simply said something like numerous witnesses came forward or CCTV footage showed Maddox. Something concrete. JMO.

 

[LietKynes]

I read it in threads about Maddox. Someone posted. That one was at the entrance to the park.. I shall try to find on Google as the first thread is long.

That's ok.

It was possibly the park employee who mentioned it.
If you're busy, you don't have to post a link from here at WS.
I was just curious if there was an msm link.

In response to a post above..... I don't think it's being debated that Maddox was at the park.
And we know that the dad and girl friend asked the park employee for assistance.
The park employee called 911.

It was stated earlier in the previous thread about Maddox that dad initially didn't want the park worker to call 911. That was mind boggling.
So dad and gf were at the park.

What is still not known is how long the three of them were there together.
Witnesses who place Maddox at the park only saw him.

 

[heartgoesout]

Haven't LE already confirmed that Maddox was at the park. If so why is it being debated? Am I missing something !

LE has only confirmed Maddox was in the park. No one is debating that.
We don’t know any more details.
The discussion is based on what that simple wording means, if anything.

 

[Charlot123]

Medical examiner confirms boy found dead in creek was Maddox Ritch

In this article, it says "they were trying to obtain a security camera footage" meaning there was one

 

[Alethea]

Hoping the community will have some answers soon.

 

[Charlot123]

That's ok.

It was possibly the park employee who mentioned it.
If you're busy, you don't have to post a link from here at WS.
I was just curious if there was an msm link.

In response to a post above..... I don't think it's being debated that Maddox was at the park.
And we know that the dad and girl friend asked the park employee for assistance.
The park employee called 911.

It was stated earlier in the previous thread about Maddox that dad initially didn't want the park worker to call 911. That was mind boggling.
So dad and gf were at the park.

What is still not known is how long the three of them were there together.
Witnesses who place Maddox at the park only saw him.

I have my own thoughts but I did not read anything about Maddox except for this forum and what I could find on Google. I almost never watch TV.

Regarding people in the park. They don't say they did not see Maddox. They say they don't remember seeing Maddox.

It is a huge difference. Except for the heroine of Joe Nesbo's books who had unusually developed fusiform gyrus and hence would remember every face she saw, I know very few people who had good memory for random faces, much less a perfect memory. I am pulling out my impressions of walking with my family in the park and seeing kids playing - there are so many confounding factors! In short, I can see how a kid got lost, and no one understood it. (I can get into details of what I might be seeing that would not match the reality, but I hope people can understand).

I watched the interview with the dad, however. Painstakingly. Anyone who watches it till the end, probably, sees the same that I did - that the dad has issues not totally unlike of Maddox's. And that he is trying to be as honest as he is.

Moreover, I don't know the story of his relationship with Maddox's mother. When they got married, when and how they divorced. I know he was with his new GF.

One thing I can imagine happen is the father not wanting to call 911 because he did not want the mother to know he took Maddox to the park with the new GF, and that he was distracted enough by the GF to lose Maddox in the park. He had Maddox only on weekends, he did not want the parenting plan to be changed. He hoped he'd find the boy soon enough. 911 automatically means mom knowing.

In short, I don't think there is any malice on behalf of the dad. In hindsight, a huge mistake, yes, probably paying more attention to the girlfriend than to his active kid. But if we only could predict all decisions our kids would make!

(I remember once reading about a kid who took off during a camping trip. Afree six days of incessant search, he was found, dead, half a kilometer, not even half a mile, away from the tent. Made a huge round and got on the path leading back. Totally dehydrated. Kids lack the ability to use the resources that adults who got lost might find in the woods).

So to me, if the police said the family was together, they were together. If they are looking for witnesses and getting leads, great.
What happened after Maddox took off, we don't know. I hope, an accident, but my intuition is off at this point.

I wish the police, and the FBI, get their answers. They, and the community, seem to be doing great job in this case.

I wish that Maddox's parents go through the grieving process and find some form of consolation.