Recovered/Located PA - A.Y., 16, Allentown, 5 March 2018 *Arrest*

[Irishboy]

[h=1]Missing Teen Changed Paperwork to List Man as Stepdad: Police[/h]
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/loc...hool-10-Times-Both-Now-Missing-476301433.html

School should have only taken that information from the mom

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

 

[borndem]

First priority get the girl home safe. Second priority, hire a lawyer.

Amateur opinion and speculation.

Depending on what happened between the two of them (i.e., if they engaged in sex), a charge of statutory rape could be brought. Read this interesting twist re PA's statutory rape law:

Pennsylvania statutory rape law is violated the de-facto age of consent law in Pennsylvania is actually 18 (due to Pennsylvania's corruption of minors statute). This creates an interesting dynamic, as the laws allow teens aged 17 and 16 to consent to each other, but not to anyone 18 or older....

bbm

https://www.ageofconsent.net/states/pennsylvania

Interesting... Maybe it is common in a lot of states, but I don't recall ever seeing the 16 -17 y/o consent angle anywhere else. IANAL. :waitasec:

 

[borndem]

ALLENTOWN, Pa. -- A 45-year-old man managed to sign a 16-year-old girl out of her school 10 times in the last few months, and now the two are missing, police said.

Allentown police issued a missing person alert Wednesday for Kevin Esterly and A.Y. A warrant for Esterly's arrest for interference with the custody of a child also was issued Wednesday, according to the Allentown Morning Call.

http://6abc.com/cops-man-got-girl-out-of-school-10-times;-now-both-missing/3190655/?sf184007148=1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, now, from the above article:

According to police, A. altered her school records and put Esterly down as her stepfather, allowing him to sign her out of school.

http://6abc.com/cops-man-got-girl-out-of-school-10-times;-now-both-missing/3190655/?sf184007148=1

Now we're getting down to it. Poor little girl -- what was she thinking? What was she seeking/needing? She list him as "stepfather." SMH. Heart-breaking and scary.

Esterly probably saw her as not only young and attractive, but a likely easy mark. Grrrr. He really must have done a number on this 16 y/o. My heart aches for her and her family. This is gonna be a tuff one, IMO.

 

[jns207]

Depending on what happened between the two of them (i.e., if they engaged in sex), a charge of statutory rape could be brought. Read this interesting twist re PA's statutory rape law:



bbm

https://www.ageofconsent.net/states/pennsylvania

Interesting... Maybe it is common in a lot of states, but I don't recall ever seeing the 16 -17 y/o consent angle anywhere else. IANAL. :waitasec:

The age of sexual consent in PA is actually 16, however, the age for defining a minor is 18. So, the way that plays out is that IF a sexual relationship existed before she turned 16, then he could be charged with statutory rape and corruption of minors. And IF a sexual relationship existed after she turned 16, then he could be charged with corruption if minors.

ETA: Here's the applicable statutes for reference.

§ 3122.1. Statutory sexual assault.
(a) Felony of the second degree.--Except as provided in section 3121 (relating to rape), a person commits a felony of the second degree when that person engages in sexual intercourse with a complainant to whom the person is not married who is under the age of 16 years and that person is either:
(1) four years older but less than eight years older than the complainant; or
(2) eight years older but less than 11 years older than the complainant.
(b) Felony of the first degree.--A person commits a felony of the first degree when that person engages in sexual intercourse with a complainant under the age of 16 years and that person is 11 or more years older than the complainant and the complainant and the person are not married to each other.

§ 6301. Corruption of minors.
(a) Offense defined.--
(1) (i) Except as provided in subparagraph (ii), whoever, being of the age of 18 years and upwards, by any act corrupts or tends to corrupt the morals of any minor less than 18 years of age, or who aids, abets, entices or encourages any such minor in the commission of any crime, or who knowingly assists or encourages such minor in violating his or her parole or any order of court, commits a misdemeanor of the first degree.
(ii) Whoever, being of the age of 18 years and upwards, by any course of conduct in violation of Chapter 31 (relating to sexual offenses) corrupts or tends to corrupt the morals of any minor less than 18 years of age, or who aids, abets, entices or encourages any such minor in the commission of an offense under Chapter 31 commits a felony of the third degree.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[borndem]

I

Hmmm, so if A.'s mother didn't put him on the list, maybe A. did? I think a 16yo could easily be savvy enough to get a blank form, fill it out how she wants it, and turn it in.

I find it VERY hard to believe the school (especially in this day and age) would release a child (especially a girl to an unrelated adult male) without authorization. 10 times. So either A. or someone else falsified the document, or mom really did put his name on there, is what I'm thinking.

I wonder if her pick-up card had any emergency pick-up name on it, other than Esterly. If not, I could a bit more easily see the school official seeing Esterly as a pick-up person as okay.

 

[borndem]

I work with multiple schools and although it's here in Australia, I would have to say 10 instances of removing a child from school SHOULD result in a conversation with the parent. This would be the norm in the schools I deal with. I'm not sure whether this does raise flags in schools in US, but it absolutely would here, regardless of whether the student was been collected by a person on the emergency list, a parent, whomever. Usually the school guidance counsellor would arrange a meeting to discuss if the student needs support as something clearly is going on (10 is just too high a number to be ignored even if for a totally unhinky reason).

Absolutely agree -- 10 early pickups in such a short time -- even with a parent picking up should be seen as a red flag -- sick? bullied? harassed? panic attack? Very odd unless a reason had been previously given. MOO.

 

[Irishboy]

Depending on what happened between the two of them (i.e., if they engaged in sex), a charge of statutory rape could be brought. Read this interesting twist re PA's statutory rape law:



bbm

https://www.ageofconsent.net/states/pennsylvania

Interesting... Maybe it is common in a lot of states, but I don't recall ever seeing the 16 -17 y/o consent angle anywhere else. IANAL. :waitasec:

She turned 16 in December, she was 15 prior

 

[jns207]

I may have just missed it, but I don't recall reading these two pieces of information previously:

While we don't know why Esterly's wife was told to keep her distance, police did confirm they were called to the Esterly's home in Orefield, for a domestic incident between the two.

Then, on Monday, A.'s mom dropped A. and John off at the bus stop. That's when A. disappeared.

"She left," John says, "She just walked out, and went somewhere."

www.wfmz.com/news/lehigh-valley/police-release-new-details-about-allentown-missing-teen/714161185

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[KaaBoom]

I work with multiple schools and although it's here in Australia, I would have to say 10 instances of removing a child from school SHOULD result in a conversation with the parent. This would be the norm in the schools I deal with. I'm not sure whether this does raise flags in schools in US, but it absolutely would here, regardless of whether the student was been collected by a person on the emergency list, a parent, whomever. Usually the school guidance counsellor would arrange a meeting to discuss if the student needs support as something clearly is going on (10 is just too high a number to be ignored even if for a totally unhinky reason).

I think it could vary from school to school, but I don't think 10 times would necessarily be a red flag. When I was in school I remember some kids with health problems who were constantly being released to go to doctors appointments. Probably it happened a lot more than 10 times.

 

[Strangeworld]

I think it could vary from school to school, but I don't think 10 times would necessarily be a red flag. When I was in school I remember some kids with health problems who were constantly being released to go to doctors appointments. Probably it happened a lot more than 10 times.

I get what you are saying but the schools would (should) know about the students that have ongoing health issues. Schools have a vested interest in keeping track of their students' attendance - not only for reporting/funding reasons (attendance plays a part) but also student engagement in school and child protection legislation. I believe the school will be in BIG trouble over this. Obviously deception on the part of A./Kevin contributed, but they are more responsible given her age and that they are entrusted with her care whilst at school.

 

[KaaBoom]

Even though A. took her passport, I think she would still have to provide either a birth certificate or written permission from her parent’s to travel out of the country.

As of January 2014 Mexico does not require a letter for non-Mexican children entering or leaving Mexico. They only need a valid passport.

Since January 2014, new regulations for children traveling to Mexico stipulate that foreign children who travel to Mexico as tourists or visitors for up to 180 days only need to present a valid passport, and are not required to present other documentation.

Authorization Letter for Minors Traveling to Mexico

 

[KaaBoom]

I get what you are saying but the schools would (should) know about the students that have ongoing health issues. Schools have a vested interest in keeping track of their students' attendance - not only for reporting/funding reasons (attendance plays a part) but also student engagement in school and child protection legislation. I believe the school will be in BIG trouble over this. Obviously deception on the part of A./Kevin contributed, but they are more responsible given her age and that they are entrusted with her care whilst at school.

I don't disagree with that. I just don't think 10 times is an automatic red flag.

 

[Irishboy]

Upthread there is a suggestion of "found" in Mexico but not confirmed. When that was reported it would have been about 72 hours from when last seen. IMO too soon to have traveled that way by car with stops. Some posts on FB suggest that Mexico was a destination (MOD please let me know if it can be linked). They took with them documentation so it is not unreasonable to think that leaving the country was a plan. Then to get that far that too fast only by car. There is a regional airport in Allentown capable of serving small jets. And Philadelphia International is about an hour drive away. Would be interesting if the car has already been spotted parked in either place. The small regional would draw less attention boarding connections and saying they are related. And it would be easier leaving the country with valid documentation, getting back would be harder. Any of these would generate at least a trail of their travel. IMO they will be tracked soon.

 

[Strangeworld]

I don't disagree with that. I just don't think 10 times is an automatic red flag.

It might not be but it should be - if it isn't the school has an issue with their understanding of child protection and student engagement. There's 2 issues - 1 is the high rate of A.'s absence from school (10 is actually a high number these days and a red flag trigger as per the factors I mentioned earlier), and the fact she was not leaving the school grounds with her primary caregiver (Mum). Even if the school was given the fraudulent document by A. stating he was her stepfather, they should NEVER have accepted this as truth until they spoke with her Mum. They are in the business of caring for young people - confirmation should have been sought directly from the mother. Butts will be kicked, and who knows how far it will go legally.

 

[KaaBoom]

It might not be but it should be - if it isn't the school has an issue with their understanding of child protection and student engagement. There's 2 issues - 1 is the high rate of A.'s absence from school (10 is actually a high number these days and a red flag trigger as per the factors I mentioned earlier), and the fact she was not leaving the school grounds with her primary caregiver (Mum). Even if the school was given the fraudulent document by A. stating he was her stepfather, they should NEVER have accepted this as truth until they spoke with her Mum. They are in the business of caring for young people - confirmation should have been sought directly from the mother. Butts will be kicked, and who knows how far it will go legally.

I don't think who she was leaving with, is really relevant. A lot of mothers are working, so they might have to designate another adult to handle matters like that. If the person is on their emergency contact list, then it should be the same is if a parent came to get them. The only improvement I can see that the school should make is to better verify who should be on the emergency contact list.

 

[Irishboy]

It might not be but it should be - if it isn't the school has an issue with their understanding of child protection and student engagement. There's 2 issues - 1 is the high rate of A.'s absence from school (10 is actually a high number these days and a red flag trigger as per the factors I mentioned earlier), and the fact she was not leaving the school grounds with her primary caregiver (Mum). Even if the school was given the fraudulent document by A. stating he was her stepfather, they should NEVER have accepted this as truth until they spoke with her Mum. They are in the business of caring for young people - confirmation should have been sought directly from the mother. Butts will be kicked, and who knows how far it will go legally.

Agree with all your points. I guess the lapses in the school protocol have been covered and there will be accountability and changes some day. This guy took advantage of a young girl and hurt families. I think they will be caught. The girl will go into therapy and he will go into the judicial system and likely for a long time. I feel for the mom who thought she was doing best and this scum took advantage of that. But there is one other victim forgotten and that is the younger brother who apparently was with her last to see her at the bus stop and she just walked away and left. I don't know how you get over that.

 

[Irishboy]

I don't think who she was leaving with, is really relevant. A lot of mothers are working, so they might have to designate another adult to handle matters like that. If the person is on their emergency contact list, then it should be the same is if a parent came to get them. The only improvement I can see that the school should make is to better verify who should be on the emergency contact list.

It is relevant if they are signed out during normal school hours. I have picked up mine at dismissal and some go to buses, some to parents (or really whoever). But signing a child out of regular school session is a big deal.

 

[Strangeworld]

I don't think who she was leaving with, is really relevant. A lot of mothers are working, so they might have to designate another adult to handle matters like that. If the person is on their emergency contact list, then it should be the same is if a parent came to get them. The only improvement I can see that the school should make is to better verify who should be on the emergency contact list.

It's very relevant. Kids will lie, they will write fake notes, they will skip school. They are also vulnerable. Even though schools can be responsible for a large number of students, part of their protocols should be confirming this type of information. The consequences are dire if they don't. In this instance, they have basically handed A. over to a person that Mum never approved - Mum entrusted the school to care for her during school hours - they have significantly let her down. The issue is not with them sending A. off with someone on the emergency contact list or with her 'stepfather'. It's that Mum never put his name on either of these documents and the school took a piece of paper from a student as acceptable. Infuriating!

 

[KaaBoom]

It's very relevant. Kids will lie, they will write fake notes, they will skip school. They are also vulnerable. Even though schools can be responsible for a large number of students, part of their protocols should be confirming this type of information. The consequences are dire if they don't. In this instance, they have basically handed A. over to a person that Mum never approved - Mum entrusted the school to care for her during school hours - they have significantly let her down. The issue is not with them sending A. off with someone on the emergency contact list or with her 'stepfather'. It's that Mum never put his name on either of these documents and the school took a piece of paper from a student as acceptable. Infuriating!

Which is why I said the school should better verify who should be on the emergency contact list

 

[Irishboy]

And what is an "emergency", that is a situation they need to contact the primary, and (the school) cannot get to the primary contact to resolve - i.e. the mom
10 "emergencies" in 3 months is a problem that should have generated an alert
Routine exams (PT) are not emergencies, e.g. snow school closings would.