GUILTY OH - Annabelle Richardson, newborn, found in grave , 7 May 2017 *GUILTY OF ABUSE OF CORPSE ONLY* *resentencing 2022* #4

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Seattle1 said:
No misspeaking here -- attorney is very polished in his craft.

He made reference to pediatrician twice. Last thing he could do for as her attorney was to paint her as a weak, helpless child to the world watching.
Click to expand...
right

however after birthing 3 children of my own ......
the guts, resilience and determination to silently birth that baby and discard it,alone and feel elated after the fact?

weak....helpless child.......I THINK NOT.:mad:
 
gitana1 said:
Ok. I'm an attorney. Her words, including "Am I getting arrested for murdering her?" "I didn't mean to kill her." "Maybe I squeezed her a little". Among others, her actions in putting her baby naked in a pit and concealing the pregnancy, birth and the body and her glee and relief after as shown in texts, establish probable cause IMO.

So while you may not agree she killed her child I see zero ethical violation in pursuing this case.
Click to expand...
I'm an attorney as well -- not verified here -- but I have been one for many years. I think it's likely that she harmed her child, but I do not think so beyond a reasonable doubt. There may have been probable cause, but I do not see proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I do not know what was in the mind of prosecutor or if it it was an ethical violation to take the case to trial, but his explanation of why he took the case to trial surprised me. JMO.
 
Last edited:
In reference to the Ryan Widmer case, I really have difficulty in trying to understand how his wife fell asleep in the bath and drowned with no evidence in the bathroom of a bath or her body even damp let alone wet....no water anywhere

His story did not match the evidence, which should lead to a conviction, as the evidence prevails at trial
 
Hope4More said:
Thanks Gardenista (and Geevee) for posting the link to Fornell's full post-verdict news conference in the thread just closed.

What a performance. It's one thing for a DA to say he disagrees with a verdict but respects the jury that delivered it, but it's quite another to assert he's sure the entire jury knew Skylar killed her baby. And that the only question they might have disagreed on was if the State could PROVE the baby was born alive, but the jury knew the only reason the State couldn't prove that was because Skylar got away with concealing the remains for long enough to make a medical determination impossible.

Not content with speaking for the jury about it's homocide-related deliberations and verdicts, without having spoken to a single juror, Fornell slips into one of his replies that Skylar was convicted on the abuse of a corpse charge because the jury believed she did burn her baby.

Unreal. But in keeping with how the State brought the charges, attempted to taint the jury pool, interrogated Skylar, and prosecuted their case.
Click to expand...
Can I ask what the time period was between
Skylar giving birth to baby Annabelle and burying her and when Annabelles body was retrieved from her resting place by LE and a post mortem conducted? I ask because having been involved in such investigations in the UK, it has never been an issue to determine if the baby took a breath or not because the HOPM Dr was able to ascertain this by virtue of examining the lungs. So unless there were real time frame issues or something else of a problematic nature, I cannot understand why this was unable to be deduced without question.
 
k-mac said:
right

however after birthing 3 children of my own ......
the guts, resilience and determination to silently birth that baby and discard it,alone and feel elated after the fact?

weak....helpless child.......I THINK NOT.:mad:
Click to expand...

I see women who do this to infants to be terribly flawed. There are some deep psychological problems, with the denial of the pregnancy, or that they hid the pregnancy. Who knows?

What type of parents do these young women have, that they can't go to them for help? Or do they think that they will be judged by their family for getting pregnant?

I don't know this young woman's situation. But every time I hear about a newborn infant being discarded like trash, I really think that the Mother needs help, rather than prison.
 
Angleterre said:
Can I ask what the time period was between
Skylar giving birth to baby Annabelle and burying her and when Annabelles body was retrieved from her resting place by LE and a post mortem conducted? I ask because having been involved in such investigations in the UK, it has never been an issue to determine if the baby took a breath or not because the HOPM Dr was able to ascertain this by virtue of examining the lungs. So unless there were real time frame issues or something else of a problematic nature, I cannot understand why this was unable to be deduced without question.
Click to expand...
It was around 2 months I think. Only bones, no soft tissue.
 
BlackCloud said:
I hope you're not right because it would be very frustrating for the judge (he can't override the verdict...) o_O
Click to expand...
He clearly thinks she is IMO.
Skylar Richardson sentenced to 3 years probation
"I think your choices before birth, during birth and after birth show a grotesque disregard for life," Oda said. "I firmly believe Miss Richardson, in fact, I know in my heart, that if you would have made different decisions in this case, Annabelle would be here today."
 
oviedo said:
Richardson going home, sentence is 3 years community control

UPDATE -- Judge Donald Oda sentenced Brooke Skylar Richardson to three years of basic supervision Friday for the charge of abuse of a corpse. He said the standard rules for community control, or probation, apply.

Oda also ordered Richardson to spend seven days in the county jail, but credited her for seven days already served. That means, she is going home.
Click to expand...
In other words she is prohibited from leaving her residence for three years...that's what community control means (as far as I know...) :cool:
A different form of house arrest... :cool:
 
gitana1 said:
Ok. I'm an attorney. Her words, including "Am I getting arrested for murdering her?" "I didn't mean to kill her." "Maybe I squeezed her a little". Among others, her actions in putting her baby naked in a pit and concealing the pregnancy, birth and the body and her glee and relief after as shown in texts, establish probable cause IMO.

So while you may not agree she killed her child I see zero ethical violation in pursuing this case.
Click to expand...

1. "They had no proof at all. (...). Their ( accusations at trial that Skylar burned her baby) were based on a a false premise, and they knew it. They had no proof at all." Juror.

The question is whether the State acted ethically in taking her all the way to trial, and in trying the case they did AFTER they knew the core of their case was compromised, not whether they had probable cause when they indicted, however weak their case against her most certainly was, even then.

I'm not an attorney. Other attorneys disagree with your opinion. It isn't necessary to be an attorney to have an opinion about whether or not the State acted ethically in accusing Skylar of burning her baby all the way through trial.

The opinions that mattered most were those of the jurors. At least one of them believed the State lied to the jury. The fact they reached verdicts as quickly as they did, and that they made a point of telling the judge in writing they did not believe Skylar caused harm to her baby, hints at what the rest of the jury thought of the State's case.
 
dizzychick said:
she only admits when she is caught and I agree,this very dangerous unstable female will kill again, hide and watch and I think the parents had at least a hint she had these tendencies. After I cool off I will look again at the videos and see what else we can dig up on her but I would not be surprised if she did more to that baby that was not discovered, remember she was successful in hiding the act for 2 months, not 31 days (CA). In the Ohio heat that worked to her favor immensely, I think she is very clever and the sheepish whine is just one of her techniques she needs to drop, may have worked when she was 4 but not now. Who would even consider taking birth control pills once you are already pregnant unless your intention is to harm your unborn child? Why is that not considered " Child Endangerment"? Why didn't the jury see that? Even her father saw that right out of the gate! He knew what she was doing and why she was doing it. I am so angry I need a pill lol


Oh, I would like to add: What is the Morning After Pill made of? I think it is some type of supercharged hormone aww.... like an entire package of birth control pills all at once! Imagine that
Click to expand...

The morning after pill is indeed a high dose of the hormones found in birth control pills. However, it only works to delay ovulation if it hasn't yet occurred. Even taking the morning after pill while already pregnant will not abort a pregnancy or kill a fetus.

Tillicum said:
It was around 2 months I think. Only bones, no soft tissue.
Click to expand...

You're right! She was born May 7th and the remains were found July 14th.
 
Tillicum said:
He clearly thinks she is IMO.
Skylar Richardson sentenced to 3 years probation
"I think your choices before birth, during birth and after birth show a grotesque disregard for life," Oda said. "I firmly believe Miss Richardson, in fact, I know in my heart, that if you would have made different decisions in this case, Annabelle would be here today."
Click to expand...

I agree judge believes BSR immediately caused infant to stop breathing — and not disturb a sleeping soul.

The clarifier was his reference to Annabelle being here today— well knowing BSR did not want her, and never planned for her to live beyond the bathroom. MOO
 
Hope4More said:
Reading between the lines, it sounds like one or more jurors thought it at least possible the baby was born alive, but they easily reached consensus that the State hadn't met it's burden of proof.

I wonder how many jurors agreed with Ms. Grawe that the State acted in bad faith in making the burn accusations at trial....
Click to expand...
I agree. That’s a very click-baity headline implying that the juror felt they saw no proof of ANYTHING. Her full quote shows she meant no proof of burning. I can see why 12 jurors could not find guilt beyond reasonable doubt and they did the right thing. IMO she should have been guilty of child endangerment but the State did not meet the burden of proof.
 

Attachments

  • 238C2C74-3C7A-4CE4-8785-CE98683E7CA9.jpeg
    238C2C74-3C7A-4CE4-8785-CE98683E7CA9.jpeg
    29.5 KB · Views: 12
Owutatangledweb said:
Actually, a judge can override a verdict if he or she be,I Eve's that the jury clearly lost their way.


Community control sanctions means she's out in the community as opposed to prison with probation rules that she has to follow.
Click to expand...
Didn't know that! I thought override was impossible...
Thanks for the info :)
 
Seattle1 said:
If you only watch the interrogation videos without any background of the case, I believe the burning accusations the juror is referring to were very confusing.

I think the prosecution could have done a better job in explaining the basis of the second interrogation, and the role the coroner's office played here. Their office made a mistake, and the detectives and prosecution payed for it, dearly.

Detectives asked BSR to come to the police station because they'd received autopsy/medical information never seen before. They were just informed by professionals they trust that there was evidence of thermal injury (burning) -- more so on one side of the body!

The professional/forensic anthropologist did not recant or amend her report about thermal injury until several weeks later, after the grand jury, and indictment.

Prosecution should have then concentrated more on what BSR repeatedly admitted: squeezing the baby hard and/or too tight.

"I think I killed her --but I didn't mean to."

I had to read the transcripts and other archived news to draft my own timeline to get a better understanding of how it went down. And jurors are prohibited from doing what I did!

They had a verdict in 4 hours -- including lunch.

MOO
Click to expand...

Yes! I wish the jurors could have had the transcripts of both interrogations, but understand they are not considered evidence, only the video/audio are allowed in jury room. BSR made several admissions in the first interview with absolutely no prompting or leading. Wish the prosecution hadn’t ended their closing statement with “ you don’t even have to watch the video, focus on her words”. And of course then showing her texts (which was a good touch) I wouldn’t have wanted to serve on this jury with all they had to consider. And I’m by no means a lawyer. Prosecutors had a rough job with trying to keep the focus on BSR’s own words, both in written texts and spoken in the interviews. They also had to try to disprove the defense’s claims of IUGR/stillbirth with all of the medical testimony. I feel like I could write a thesis in fundal height. Just my own observations, but a 4 hour deliberation was not long enough. IMO MOO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 162 more.
Total: 1,680 (members: 163, guests: 1,517)

Online statistics

Members online
163
Guests online
1,517
Total visitors
1,680
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
606,224
Messages
18,200,730
Members
233,783
Latest member
Moonfire
Back
Top