GUILTY OH - Marcus Fiesel, 3, Union Township, 4 August 2006

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Ohhhh, my blood is boiling! Why in hell would only be charged with INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER when they willingly put him in a closet and left him there for 2 days???!!!! What did they think they were going to come back to? And then the foster father BURNS the boys body?????

I think they must have some friends or family in the LE/DA dept there. This is clearly a case of intentional murder to me. The little boy was 3, but had the mind of a 1 year old. A 1 year old!!!!!!!!!!

EDITED TO ADD: They SAY that it was just for 2 days---I betchya anything they are lying & it was longer than that. I mean, it's pretty obvious already that they are quite comfortable in lying.
 
julianne said:
Ohhhh, my blood is boiling! Why in hell would only be charged with INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER when they willingly put him in a closet and left him there for 2 days???!!!! What did they think they were going to come back to? And then the foster father BURNS the boys body?????

I think they must have some friends or family in the LE/DA dept there. This is clearly a case of intentional murder to me. The little boy was 3, but had the mind of a 1 year old. A 1 year old!!!!!!!!!!

EDITED TO ADD: They SAY that it was just for 2 days---I betchya anything they are lying & it was longer than that. I mean, it's pretty obvious already that they are quite comfortable in lying.
Click to expand...


I am mad as hell too, but I think these are the best charges they can get, although that's not to say that they shouldn't receive the strongest punishment they can get. We don't yet know what the cause of death was. We don't know if he was actually alive when they left; if they didn't give him any food or water to drink and/or if they turned off the air conditioning. Certainly, a child this age has survived being alone for two days, so unless something else was done as outlined above, its very hard to prove that they intentionally set out to kill him. Please don't think that I wouldn't like to see these two in jail for life -- I'm simply trying to explain why this decision was made.
 
i am sick. SICK. They thought it would be okay to leave him in a closet for "just two days." I'd like to know how they finally got a confession.
 
Kan499 said:
http://www.channelcincinnati.com/news/9749256/detail.html?treets=cin&tml=cin_break&ts=T&tmi=cin_break_1_02050308282006

"Foster parents Liz and David Carroll have been arrested in connection with the disappearance and death of 3-year-old Marcus Fiesel"
Click to expand...
Snip...Fiesel's foster family said the special-needs toddler disappeared from Julifs Park in Anderson Township almost three weeks ago, sparking a massive search for nearly three days.

But Deters said the Carrolls left Fiesel in a closet for two days starting Aug. 4 while they were at a family reunion in Kentucky.
"They intentionally left him there," Deters said.

When the Carrolls returned on Aug. 6, Deters said, Fiesel was dead.

David Carroll then allegedly took the body to Brown County and incinerated it, Deters said. The body has not yet been recovered.


How horrible:furious:
 
How horrible for that little boy...to be left in a closet for two days while they went to a family reunion and to die alone...he must have been so scared.

What about the foster father's live-in girlfriend? Will they charge her, too?
 
Many kids with Autism bang their heads. It's possible that Marcus could have injured himself this way. I know if my son were locked in a room like that, he would have banged his head on the walls and doors until he passed out.
 
Deters said a social worker was turned away from the Carrolls' Union Township home on Aug. 10 after they claimed the boy was sick. Another scheduled visit with a social worker was pending, Deters said, possibly prompting the false claim that Fiesel had disappeared at the park.

"They were running out of time," Deters said.
I just knew the poor baby was already dead when that case worker was turned away at the door. Prayers for little Marcus.




 
That boys mother needs to sue the pants off the state. She VOLUNTARILY gave her children up because she felt she could not protect them herself. She TRUSTED the system to protect her child.

damn i'm so angry. there are so many things wrong with this whole situation.
 
SewingDeb said:
How horrible for that little boy...to be left in a closet for two days while they went to a family reunion and to die alone...he must have been so scared.

What about the foster father's live-in girlfriend? Will they charge her, too?
Click to expand...
Live in girl friend?
 
californiacarrie said:
That boys mother needs to sue the pants off the state. She VOLUNTARILY gave her children up because she felt she could not protect them herself. She TRUSTED the system to protect her child.

damn i'm so angry. there are so many things wrong with this whole situation.
Click to expand...


They don't even have the money for the budget they've already got. How many children will they be able to at least try and protect once they have to pay out a judgment to this woman? I think the LAW needs to be changed and if the foster family won't allow them access, he or she should have the right to call 911 right then and there and gain entrance into that house. Why are they accepting as truth what the foster parent says? If you're being paid by the state to accept responsibility for a child, then I think you give up a certain amount of freedom. This wasn't her child. The state has final say about the children in foster care.
 
Jeana (DP) said:
They don't even have the money for the budget they've already got. How many children will they be able to at least try and protect once they have to pay out a judgment to this woman? I think the LAW needs to be changed and if the foster family won't allow them access, he or she should have the right to call 911 right then and there and gain entrance into that house. Why are they accepting as truth what the foster parent says? If you're being paid by the state to accept responsibility for a child, then I think you give up a certain amount of freedom. This wasn't her child. The state has final say about the children in foster care.
Click to expand...
The agency already stated that they had no reason to believe Marcus was in danger. Why wouldn't they take the foster parents word for it? They were seemingly good people. The social worker could have, and would have called police and forced entry into the home if they thought otherwise. This was all mentioned in a previous article within the thread.
The bottom line is, no ammount of law, rules, tracking devices, programs, alert systems, background checks, etc can stop something like this from happening. It can't be predicted. There are plenty of bad people out there who have always maintained under the radar.
 
californiacarrie said:
The agency already stated that they had no reason to believe Marcus was in danger. Why wouldn't they take the foster parents word for it? They were seemingly good people. The social worker could have, and would have called police and forced entry into the home if they thought otherwise. This was all mentioned in a previous article within the thread.
The bottom line is, no ammount of law, rules, tracking devices, programs, alert systems, background checks, etc can stop something like this from happening. It can't be predicted. There are plenty of bad people out there who have always maintained under the radar.
Click to expand...


If the foster parent won't allow them at least get a "visual" on the foster child, then they must ASSUME that something isn't right. I would think MOST foster families would welcome this. I agree that if foster parents, or any other parents, want to harm children, they're going to do it. But if a child is purposely placed in a home by the state, they've got a greater duty to protect that child.
 
May they rot in HE!! After Marcus died it is alleged that David took his body to Brown County, which is one county over from where they live, and burned his body. They are searching for it now. Children's services have the couple's 4 biological children. And it isn't in their written report, but channel 12 said that Amy Baker is not charged. But it is believed that she was aware of what happened. WKRC is more or less guessing that she may have been the one who told LE what happened to Marcus.
http://www.wkrc.com/breaking/story.aspx?content_id=63D47FE6-FF0A-487F-B31E-CB8B04FC11B3

I live in Brown Co. I don't know where they are searching, but just hope it is nowhere near me.
They had older children in that home!!!! Those kids had to have known at least part of what happened!!!
 
Jeana (DP) said:
If the foster parent won't allow them at least get a "visual" on the foster child, then they must ASSUME that something isn't right. I would think MOST foster families would welcome this. I agree that if foster parents, or any other parents, want to harm children, they're going to do it. But if a child is purposely placed in a home by the state, they've got a greater duty to protect that child.
Click to expand...
I don't think she told the social worker "Oh you absolutely can not see him today." If she simply stated that they boy was asleep (upstairs as per her report) and not feeling well the social worker still would have no reason to suspect anything if it were the first instance. I imagine a few questions transpired ("Well how is he doing otherwise?" etc) and so contact was made/attempted and rescheduled. I agree that there is an importance to at least lay eyes on the child, but I still don't believe the social worker had any reason to be suspicious at that point in time.
 
californiacarrie said:
I don't think she told the social worker "Oh you absolutely can not see him today." If she simply stated that they boy was asleep (upstairs as per her report) and not feeling well the social worker still would have no reason to suspect anything if it were the first instance. I imagine a few questions transpired ("Well how is he doing otherwise?" etc) and so contact was made/attempted and rescheduled. I agree that there is an importance to at least lay eyes on the child, but I still don't believe the social worker had any reason to be suspicious at that point in time.
Click to expand...


You might be right, but you also might not be. From the following quote from the paper, they were supposed to check on the children once a month, but for some reason, they were checking out this family every week. Why???? Three extra times in a one-month period? Don't you think something had to have happened or at least the suspicion of something happening to add this burden on an already-over loaded staff??

Under a contract agreement between children's services and Lifeway, each child has to be checked on at least once a month. Sources said Lifeway had been checking on Fiesel about once a week.
 
The state requirements for foster home visits are one per month. He was seen more frequently than once a month because of his medical condition and things had been going well. And they saw him once the month already. So there wouldn't have been any urgency to see him again if they were told he was asleep or ill or away from the home. At that point they would just say we'll see him next week. And to be honest....it wouldn't have helped Marcus anyway if they had insisted on seeing him. He had been dead for about 4 days by that time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 57 more.
Total: 3,590 (members: 58, guests: 3,532)

Online statistics

Members online
58
Guests online
3,532
Total visitors
3,590
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
604,422
Messages
18,171,827
Members
232,557
Latest member
Velvetshadow
Back
Top