GUILTY NH - Abby Hernandez, 14, North Conway, 9 Oct 2013 - #15

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Bodhi said:
No, he gave her the cookbook at some point during her captivity.

See Attachment A, number 25, to the arrest warrant. It states "During the interview, A___________ told investigators that she knew it was Nate Kibby who held her captive because at one point during her confinement, he handed her a cookbook that had Nate Kibby written inside. He also provided her with a ruler that had the initials NEK written on it."

http://www.wmur.com/blob/view/-/29683388/data/1/-/c24tyjz/-/Kibby-arrest-warrant-affidavit.pdf
Click to expand...

In the affidavit it also states she also told her mom she knew his name on October 9, 2013, which is the day she was abducted.

ETA: I see now. It's the way the sentence was constructed. You are correct. My apologies!
 
SurfieTX said:
In the affidavit it also states she also told her mom she knew his name on October 9, 2013, which is the day she was abducted.

ETA: I see now. It's the way the sentence was constructed. You are correct. My apologies!
Click to expand...

My apologies too because I see that the link to the WCSH article I posted last night states that she knew him from the day she was kidnapped. But this is incorrect reporting. The arrest warrant attachment clearly states she didn't.
 
If she knew his name for that long, it makes her homecoming all the more wonderful as he must have known she knew and was a threat to tell the police. Just guessing, but I would think the pure fear she felt would have prevented her from using his name upon her return home. After a few days, she felt safer and able to open up. All speculation of course.
I do hope since she didn't name him immediately, and the original sketch was different than pictures of NEK, that he thought he got away with it. His euphoria would have been short lived!
 
This new information causes me to wonder if the letter home was addressed to a PO box because Abigail feared directing it to the home, thereby giving Kibby her family residence address where he may then be able to more easily go and harm her family members.

That whole business about the letter sitting unread in a not frequently checked PO box always was bothersome. But if Abigail was under threat or specifically threats to go harm her family members were employed, I could see her wanting to make sure she directed that letter somewhere (anywhere) but home but where it would eventually reach her mom
 
She may have been protecting her family.....though of course I'm sure NEK could have found them anyway, just from the publicity the disappearance created. Still, if true, what an amazingly sophisticated mind she has to do what she could to protect her family while she herself was in danger.
 
I wish it wasn't being reported as Abby 'waiting a week', as if she was deliberately protecting Kibby. She was a traumatized child who suddenly re-appeared on her mom's doorstep. I think she told her mother as soon as she was able to. And kudos to Abigail for surviving a horrendous ordeal and having the resourcefulness to lead LE directly to her captor, who was not even on their radar. It's quibbling, I know. But I think the headlines that she "waited" or "delayed" has connotations that she made a knowing choice to hinder his apprehension.
 
I hate that a victim, a child victim at that, is being villainized like that. We cannot possibly understand Abby's mindset. She was taken at fourteen-years-old and her only contact for 9 months was with a mentally unstable criminal. It has been implied that she was abused ("defiled"), and that for at least some of her captivity was kept confined a shipping container. Even as an adult, it is impossible to imagine what this would do to your mind. How much control Kibby would have over you.

I think Abby is very strong. Sadly, it was probably for the best that she did not return to school. This circus will not be over anytime soon unfortunately and I am afraid that this is just the beginning of the mudslinging. Thankfully she has Zenya, who is such a momma bear and I know will try to protect her daughter.

I wish the public would not lose sight of who the real villain is here; the ONLY person to blame is Nate Kibby. The adult who is solely responsible for this crime and any physical/mental suffering that Abby has experienced and may still be struggling with.
 
Bodhi said:
I wish it wasn't being reported as Abby 'waiting a week', as if she was deliberately protecting Kibby. She was a traumatized child who suddenly re-appeared on her mom's doorstep. I think she told her mother as soon as she was able to. And kudos to Abigail for surviving a horrendous ordeal and having the resourcefulness to lead LE directly to her captor, who was not even on their radar. It's quibbling, I know. But I think the headlines that she "waited" or "delayed" has connotations that she made a knowing choice to hinder his apprehension.
Click to expand...

According to the redacted documents recently released, during the week after she returned home, Abby didn't provide LE with an accurate description of Kibby, and it was 7 days before Abby told her mother that she hadn't given LE all the necessary information they needed and then told LE Kibby's name. The documents say she met with LE several times over the first week and provided them with a sketch (one that doesn't match Kibby's description). So the news articles that say Abby waited are correct. What we don't know, perhaps because of all the missing areas in the documents, is why. She may have felt too fearful for her family or embarrassed (not that she had anything to be embarrassed about) or traumatized, or all three of those things. Maybe what she went through affected her memory. Maybe she didn't want to relive what she went through. In the absence of some sort of explanation, many people will come up with their own reasons, regardless of how far-fetched or inconsiderate they are. But none of the news articles that I've read online said that she was deliberately protecting Kibby or trying to hinder his apprehension. Whatever the reasons for the delay, Abby did confide in her mother and gave Kibby's name to LE so that he was apprehended. Abby helped to make sure what happened to her won't happen to someone else.
 
The small bits of her captivity which we know are enough to make any of us cringe. The fact that she has lived to tell her story is amazing. If it took her a few days to feel safe and comfortable enough to open up, (modsnip)......I don't know what she is doing these days as she tries to return to a "normal" life......but I hope and pray she is transitioning smoothly.
 
This man controlled her entire existence for almost a year! I have nightmares sometimes and it takes a couple of minutes after I wake up for my heart to stop pounding and for me to realize what's real and what is not. She lived a nightmare for almost an entire year. It would probably take me more than a week to realize that I was safe and that this man could not hurt me again and I am a grown adult. (modsnip)
 
Please stop commenting about the comments. It only draws more attention to the harsh remarks, and to the ignorant persons behind them.

Thanks.
 
I knew, and withheld the name of my rapist abuser for 30 years before I told anyone. And it was my own uncle.
 
Steleheart said:
BBM, Thanks.

While I agree with your initial assessment, on what do you base your theory of Stockholm Syndrome ( bonding with a captor)? And on what basis do we come to the conclusion that there was some kind of 'oath'?

None of the facts of the case lead me to believe that Abby ever 'bonded' with her captor. In fact the family's lawyer said explicitly “Abby was violently abducted by a stranger. For many months, she suffered numerous acts of unspeakable violence.”
http://www.wmur.com/news/abigail-he...e-violence-lawyer-says/27437382#ixzz3IMqO95am


So where is the 'bonding' in those many months? Where is the bonding during that unspeakable violence?

"made her swear some kind of an oath " While a guess can be useful, on what should we base that guess? And what, do you suppose, was the oath - that she promised to remember his name and show up in court to boldly see him arraigned? Because in the facts of the case that is what she did.

"Abigail Hernandez clasped her hands and fixed her eyes on the lanky man in the orange jumpsuit accused of kidnapping her while she walked home from school last fall, just days before her 15th birthday."
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...ighbors-say/xxTmpK9lpsVN1DfXVgtYoJ/story.html

Or do you think she just tossed whatever oath out the window and this calculating, misogynist, violent criminal was so stupid that he trusted her with an oath after many months of unspeakable violence?

IMO this Nathaniel Kibby was making a statement directed at Law Enforcement with whom he had numerous interactions and conflicts with. This had much to do with his hatred of women and law enforcement;

"Kibby has a lengthy criminal record, including several assaults. Particularly disturbing, Perley said, was an arrest in March when Kibby was charged with criminal trespass and assault after following a Conway woman to her home after a minor car accident. Police said he pushed her to the ground in her driveway after she ordered him to stop taking pictures of her car."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rnandezs-alleged-kidnapper.html#ixzz3IMwu7xOT
Please read further about his interactions with LE, specifically Conway PD and his view of government and his history of violence.

Perhaps during the trial of Kibby, the criminal, we may find that ABBY had some success in manipulating him to save her own life but I would be hard pressed to call that 'Stockholm Syndrome".

I do not think that she was ever compliant, complicit or sympathetic toward a captor by whom for "many months, she suffered numerous acts of unspeakable violence".

People could not believe she was violently snatched off the street, so what about this?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/harrowing-video-shows-womans-abduction-philadelphia/story?id=26663931

This had nothing to do with Abby and Abby had nothing to do with this. It was all Kibby.
IMO Snatching her in broad daylight, keeping her hidden with such a high profile search, and then boldly dropping her off near home in the same clothes was a bold and calculated statement between he and Law Enforcement. Period.


This post was actually written by my :cow::
Click to expand...

First off, I'm not trying to challenge you, just being devil's advocate. Abigail is 100% a victim in all this and I am so glad she is home where she belongs.

That being said, why are you so adamant that this is not a case of Stockholm Syndrome? The fact she gave the police a very misleading description of the guy and did not tell LE his name for several days after coming home makes me think this is indeed related to Stockholm Syndrome.

Take, for instance, Elizabeth Smart. She testified that during her 9 months of captivity to being raped three to four times daily, tied up and threatened with death. Yet many have theorized that one of the reasons she never ran away when she had the opportunity was due to Stockholm Syndrome. She initially even refused to confirm her identity when the police questioned her and wanted to be returned to her captors.

I'm not going to try to psychologically diagnose someone that I know so little about, but the fact that AH was violently assaulted during her captivity does not rule out Stockholm Syndrome. Actually, (just from reading the Wikipedia page on it) violence seems to be part of inducing the syndrome in that the abducted person begins to associate periods of non-violence as kindness.

Our minds do strange tricks to us sometimes....
 
T-Rex said:
I only started reading about this after Abigail was home safe, but it sounds like a straight-out kidnapping with Stockholm syndrome. And, I'm guessing Abbie's captor made her swear some kind of an oath in return for letting her go, so she's conflicted in helping the prosecution.
Click to expand...

Steleheart said:
BBM, Thanks.

While I agree with your initial assessment, on what do you base your theory of Stockholm Syndrome ( bonding with a captor)? And on what basis do we come to the conclusion that there was some kind of 'oath'?

None of the facts of the case lead me to believe that Abby ever 'bonded' with her captor. In fact the family's lawyer said explicitly “Abby was violently abducted by a stranger. For many months, she suffered numerous acts of unspeakable violence.”
http://www.wmur.com/news/abigail-he...e-violence-lawyer-says/27437382#ixzz3IMqO95am


So where is the 'bonding' in those many months? Where is the bonding during that unspeakable violence?

"made her swear some kind of an oath " While a guess can be useful, on what should we base that guess? And what, do you suppose, was the oath - that she promised to remember his name and show up in court to boldly see him arraigned? Because in the facts of the case that is what she did.

"Abigail Hernandez clasped her hands and fixed her eyes on the lanky man in the orange jumpsuit accused of kidnapping her while she walked home from school last fall, just days before her 15th birthday."
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...ighbors-say/xxTmpK9lpsVN1DfXVgtYoJ/story.html

Or do you think she just tossed whatever oath out the window and this calculating, misogynist, violent criminal was so stupid that he trusted her with an oath after many months of unspeakable violence?

IMO this Nathaniel Kibby was making a statement directed at Law Enforcement with whom he had numerous interactions and conflicts with. This had much to do with his hatred of women and law enforcement;

"Kibby has a lengthy criminal record, including several assaults. Particularly disturbing, Perley said, was an arrest in March when Kibby was charged with criminal trespass and assault after following a Conway woman to her home after a minor car accident. Police said he pushed her to the ground in her driveway after she ordered him to stop taking pictures of her car."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rnandezs-alleged-kidnapper.html#ixzz3IMwu7xOT
Please read further about his interactions with LE, specifically Conway PD and his view of government and his history of violence.

Perhaps during the trial of Kibby, the criminal, we may find that ABBY had some success in manipulating him to save her own life but I would be hard pressed to call that 'Stockholm Syndrome".

I do not think that she was ever compliant, complicit or sympathetic toward a captor by whom for "many months, she suffered numerous acts of unspeakable violence".

People could not believe she was violently snatched off the street, so what about this?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/harrowing-video-shows-womans-abduction-philadelphia/story?id=26663931

This had nothing to do with Abby and Abby had nothing to do with this. It was all Kibby.
IMO Snatching her in broad daylight, keeping her hidden with such a high profile search, and then boldly dropping her off near home in the same clothes was a bold and calculated statement between he and Law Enforcement. Period.


This post was actually written by my :cow::
Click to expand...

KellyConQueso said:
First off, I'm not trying to challenge you, just being devil's advocate. Abigail is 100% a victim in all this and I am so glad she is home where she belongs.

That being said, why are you so adamant that this is not a case of Stockholm Syndrome? The fact she gave the police a very misleading description of the guy and did not tell LE his name for several days after coming home makes me think this is indeed related to Stockholm Syndrome.

Take, for instance, Elizabeth Smart. She testified that during her 9 months of captivity to being raped three to four times daily, tied up and threatened with death. Yet many have theorized that one of the reasons she never ran away when she had the opportunity was due to Stockholm Syndrome. She initially even refused to confirm her identity when the police questioned her and wanted to be returned to her captors.

I'm not going to try to psychologically diagnose someone that I know so little about, but the fact that AH was violently assaulted during her captivity does not rule out Stockholm Syndrome. Actually, (just from reading the Wikipedia page on it) violence seems to be part of inducing the syndrome in that the abducted person begins to associate periods of non-violence as kindness.

Our minds do strange tricks to us sometimes....
Click to expand...


Adamant? based on what? That I asked on what the poster's diagnosis was based on? LOL, Really?

BBM- You said ; "I'm not going to try to psychologically diagnose someone that I know so little about" +

But that is exactly what the poster I replied to did, in FACT. So I questioned what their distant diagnosis was based on.

Based on that Inquiry, you came to the conclusion that I dismissed that possibility and was "adamant" that it could not be?.

No, I merely Wondered based on information we have, what we know and what we do not know, that it is not possible to make a diagnosis, nor is it possible to make an assumption, nor is it possible to make a semi-educated guess that the victim, who we have not personally interviewed, was a victim of Stockholm Syndrome.

Would you, in FACT, make a diagnosis of ANY syndrome without interviewing the client in person? I am asking a serious question.

On THAT question I am ADAMANT!

HAHA!
Now what.

THIS...

Specialist is surprised N.H. teen named kidnap suspect after only a week


<snipped>

"Dr. Judy Cohen, medical director of the Center for Traumatic Stress in Children & Adolescents at Allegheny General Hospital in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, said it’s not unusual for a kidnap victim to wait a week or more to reveal information about her alleged captor that leads to his arrest."

"Rather than protecting her captor [a symptom of Stockholm Syndrome] as some have suggested, Cohen said it’s more likely she was trying to protect herself from the reality of what happened."

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...med-quickly/8PNwmC152Ay6gTcjUUQdMJ/story.html


So "adamant"?
I merely ask for support for a random supposition or conclusion - some intelligent basis for it, either based on the facts of the case or the evidence before us - rather than on some random hypothetical guess like " this is what I think and so it becomes fact.

It don't fly -
On that I am adamant.

:cow:
 
Steleheart said:
Adamant? based on what? That I asked on what the poster's diagnosis was based on? LOL, Really?

BBM- You said ; "I'm not going to try to psychologically diagnose someone that I know so little about" +

But that is exactly what the poster I replied to did, in FACT. So I questioned what their distant diagnosis was based on.

Based on that Inquiry, you came to the conclusion that I dismissed that possibility and was "adamant" that it could not be?.

No, I merely Wondered based on information we have, what we know and what we do not know, that it is not possible to make a diagnosis, nor is it possible to make an assumption, nor is it possible to make a semi-educated guess that the victim, who we have not personally interviewed, was a victim of Stockholm Syndrome.

Would you, in FACT, make a diagnosis of ANY syndrome without interviewing the client in person? I am asking a serious question.

On THAT question I am ADAMANT!

HAHA!
Now what.

THIS...

Specialist is surprised N.H. teen named kidnap suspect after only a week


<snipped>

"Dr. Judy Cohen, medical director of the Center for Traumatic Stress in Children & Adolescents at Allegheny General Hospital in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, said it&#8217;s not unusual for a kidnap victim to wait a week or more to reveal information about her alleged captor that leads to his arrest."

"Rather than protecting her captor [a symptom of Stockholm Syndrome] as some have suggested, Cohen said it&#8217;s more likely she was trying to protect herself from the reality of what happened."

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...med-quickly/8PNwmC152Ay6gTcjUUQdMJ/story.html


So "adamant"?
I merely ask for support for a random supposition or conclusion - some intelligent basis for it, either based on the facts of the case or the evidence before us - rather than on some random hypothetical guess like " this is what I think and so it becomes fact.

It don't fly -
On that I am adamant.

:cow:
Click to expand...

OK - chill - that's fine. My point was that you said it couldn't be SS because of the violence and I was merely pointing out that the violence is a part of SS. Dr. Cohen has not examined AH so I do not understand why you are placing so much emphasis on this article as a factual representation of what's going on AH's mind. But it is an interesting theory.

Like I said, our minds do strange tricks to us sometimes.
 
KellyConQueso said:
OK - chill - that's fine. My point was that you said it couldn't be SS because of the violence and I was merely pointing out that the violence is a part of SS. Dr. Cohen has not examined AH so I do not understand why you are placing so much emphasis on this article as a factual representation of what's going on AH's mind. But it is an interesting theory.

Like I said, our minds do strange tricks to us sometimes.
Click to expand...

BBM

~ I made no such statement.

~ I put no emphasis on it - I merely presented it as a different conclusion, also based no actual interview with the victim. Most of us who have followed this case from the beginning felt that she was traumatized and scared and so was fearful to give details in the first few days. But a diagnosis or even a presumption of Stockholm Syndrome would require much more knowledge about symptoms IMO.


:cow:
 
I am wondering now if it was wise for LE to have played this one so close to their chest. Presumably, Abby was kidnapped at around 3 pm on a weekday and was taken in a northbound direction, and presumably the letters she sent were postmarked in the Conway area. So the person who did it was likely a local who traveled the North-South road on a weekday at 3 pm. Nate Kibby went to work early so I assume he got off early too, and that would have been his route home.

I think LE made a big mistake in not releasing where the letter was postmarked. I know hindsight is 20/20, but I wonder now if Kibby's name would have popped up much earlier if LE would have said that they were looking for a local man who is known to travel northbound on the North-South road in the afternoons and who lives alone and who likes writing letters - all things that applied to Kibby. Heck, once LE knew that Abby was still local, why not record who regularly travels that route at that time and investigate it? LE claims to have had no leads, but in the end, it turns out that they had a huge lead right under their noses: Nate Kibby got off work around that time and would have taken that route to have gone home. So many people have come forward to say that Nate was weird, etc, etc, but no one had him are their radar because LE was not releasing any information that would have pinged on anyone's radar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 116 more.
Total: 2,922 (members: 117, guests: 2,805)

Online statistics

Members online
117
Guests online
2,805
Total visitors
2,922
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,758
Messages
18,113,065
Members
230,991
Latest member
DeeKay
Back
Top