investigatefred
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2016
- Messages
- 678
- Reaction score
- 8,240
Yes, my brain was not braining, lol. Thank you!Anf even then, that would be a half brother, not a step-brother.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes, my brain was not braining, lol. Thank you!Anf even then, that would be a half brother, not a step-brother.
Sebastian has a younger step sister who Chris was just denied primary custody of on Friday, I believe. In some of the videos CP said he didn’t want Sebastian around his daughter, in others he denied saying this. He said the reason was “family business” in the 3 hour interview.This is from page one. I remember CP in one of the earliest video's mentioning a younger stepbrother. Does anyone know if CP or KP have talked about a younger sibling in any of the other video's? Does he live with them permanently? Was he there the weekend that SR vanished? I don't want to sleuth him obviously but wondering if he was in the home that night.
When was the last time anyone saw Sebastian besides the mother and stepfather? Has anyone said?
I think LE are the only ones that know because it hasn't been reported that I can find.When was the last time anyone saw Sebastian besides the mother and stepfather? Has anyone said?
Seth talked to Sebastian on Thursday after school. Sebastian had school on Friday. CP had been away since early February, according to KP she & Sebastian had a busy weekend. They saw family members, went bowling, grocery shopping and went out to eat on Sunday. So if KP was truthful there would be plenty of ppl who saw him through early evening Sunday. The photo of Sebastian & KP in a restaurant booth seat was supposedly taken Sunday while they were at lunch. All of this was easy for LE to verify.Not to my knowledge. I've been curious about this as well.
Seth talked to Sebastian on Thursday after school. Sebastian had school on Friday. CP had been away since early February, according to KP she & Sebastian had a busy weekend. They saw family members, went bowling, grocery shopping and went out to eat on Sunday. So if KP was truthful there would be plenty of ppl who saw him through early evening Sunday. The photo of Sebastian & KP in a restaurant booth seat was supposedly taken Sunday while they were at lunch. All of this was easy for LE to verify.
Great to know. I'm sure there was video evidence for LE in both places. Thank you!Seth talked to Sebastian on Thursday after school. Sebastian had school on Friday. CP had been away since early February, according to KP she & Sebastian had a busy weekend. They saw family members, went bowling, grocery shopping and went out to eat on Sunday. So if KP was truthful there would be plenty of ppl who saw him through early evening Sunday. The photo of Sebastian & KP in a restaurant booth seat was supposedly taken Sunday while they were at lunch. All of this was easy for LE to verify.
Tbh he could have figured out how to enable it. Kids have a way with these things. As stated by others, I’m sure LE hs looked into it closely, but I wouldn’t totally rule out that possibility.No, CP was very adamant that Sebastian not use SM. He has an iPhone but CP disabled the internet. Mom has said over and over he is not a runner, he’s never run off.
Admitting you got CPS called on you and it involving the very child that’s missing is a huge red flag, imho.Yes they did. It was the first, or one of the first, interviews with a podcaster. They found no red flags, just a few 'stress points' in what they said. However, the subsequent 3-hour interview with a different podcaster provides some startling new background information, which I would like to hear the experts analyse.
The stepfather has now told us clearly that he is a strict disciplinarian who demands 'respect', he imitates in a contemptuous manner (imo) some of Sebastian's speech, and he speaks of his parenting in terms of crime and punishment. If he speaks proudly of some of the (IMO) cruel punishments he meets out to his autistic stepchild, imagine some of the punishments about which he might not be so forthcoming.
He admits to having been entangled with child protective services in two different states, but, again, in no part related to any misstep of his own. In Sebastian's case, when CPS was called on an occasion prior to him going missing, it was Sebastian's fault, apparently.
He tells us about where some of his previous four marriages have gone wrong (never his fault, for example one of the wives 'gave in to promiscuity' or some such weird pronouncement), but denies that he tried to kill Wife Number ?three ?four (I can't remember which).
These are just the things CP is TELLING us. I'm curious about what else could be analysed from this particular interview. I also wonder over what period of day it was conducted, as it became increasingly more bizarre over the course of the three hours of the voice-only (no cameras) interview.
If the account of events on the Sunday/Monday morning holds up, then at the very least we can now understand why the poor boy might have run away. Or tried to run away.
It sure would seem so, yes.Admitting you got CPS called on you and it involving the very child that’s missing is a huge red flag, imho.
Edit to add words missing.
Whoa, that’s alarming. What could “family business” mean? Maybe CP thought Sebastian was going to be a bad influence on CP’s daughter? Maybe CP thought Sebastian was acting inappropriately towards his daughter? I also wonder if CP might have viewed Sebastian’s presence in the home as an obstacle to CP getting custody of his daughter. I find it interesting that CP was apparently attempting to get custody of his daughter not too far in advance of Sebastian’s planned move out of the home CP and Sebastian’s mom shared.Sebastian has a younger step sister who Chris was just denied primary custody of on Friday, I believe. In some of the videos CP said he didn’t want Sebastian around his daughter, in others he denied saying this. He said the reason was “family business” in the 3 hour interview.
Whoa, that’s alarming. What could “family business” mean? Maybe CP thought Sebastian either was going to be a bad influence on CP’s daughter? Maybe CP thought Sebastian was acting inappropriate towards his daughter? I also wonder if CP might have viewed Sebastian’s presence in the home as an obstacle to CP getting custody of his daughter. I find it interesting that CP was apparently attempting to get custody of his daughter not too far in advance of Sebastian’s planned move out of the home CP and Sebastian’s mom shared.
Yes, I agree that is what he literally meant.I took it to mean that nobody outside the family has any right to know what the reason is. None of their business, only the family's.
Yes, I agree that is what he literally meant.
But for CP to express (or allude to) not wanting Sebastian around his daughter, and then say “it’s nobody’s business why” when asked for his rationale, strikes me as odd. If CP didn’t want to disclose the concerns he had re: the relationship between Sebastian and his stepsister, why even mention any reluctance he felt about having the two children living under the same roof?
The (I believe) first time the stepsister situation came up CP was saying Sebastian ‘gets in your face’ when excited and that was why he didn’t want Sebastian around his 7yoDD. Later CP denied saying he didn’t want Sebastian around DD, but in the 3 hour interview he was asked again, & he admitted it, but said it’s family business. I agree he flat out meant ‘Nun’ya!’ Not sure how that would work with both kids living under the same roof.Yes, I agree that is what he literally meant.
But for CP to express (or allude to) not wanting Sebastian around his daughter, and then say “it’s nobody’s business why” when asked for his rationale, strikes me as odd. If CP didn’t want to disclose the concerns he had re: the relationship between Sebastian and his stepsister, why even mention any reluctance he felt about having the two children living under the same roof?
This bothers me greatly. Taking away a non-autistic child's pet is over-the-line, discipline-wise, but what sort of effect would that have on an autistic child? Throwing away Sebastian's possessions, hitting him with a belt--none of that's okay in my book.Still digesting the Smiley interview.
CP took away Sebastian's snake as "discipline." He threw away things Sebastian left untidied in his room as "discipline." He hit Sebastian with a belt as "discipline."
Did he ever view Sebastian as a child who would respond better to love and patience than "discipline"?
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if at some point CP dismissed Sebastian's diagnoses with something along the lines of, "There's nothing wrong with that kid, he's just spoiled and needs some discipline."