Found Deceased TX - Sherin Mathews, 3, Richardson, 7 Oct 2017 #5 *Arrest*

[bluesneakers]

Only SM (and WM) know whether or not SM actually has any useful information for investigators beyond what she has already told them. WM's story changed; that doesn't mean SM's did.

Families' of victims react in different ways. Some want to see perpetrators get the max penalty. Some wind up asking judges to spare the perpetrator the death penalty. Some find it healing to ultimately forgive. I can't imagine it, myself, but it happens. And that's without the messy emotions of a pre-existing relationship with the killer. In this case, I'm not assuming SM wouldn't want WM to be punished severely. But that doesn't mean the extent of his punishment is or needs to be a priority of hers at the moment. The prospect of their surviving daughter being in any danger from him is far-fetched, IMO. Right now, it is doubtful whether or not she is going to get custody back anytime soon. Even if WM were released on bail pending trial and received a relatively light sentence, the chances that he's going to have any unsupervised contact with that young child while she is still a young child seems slim to nil.

So, assuming that SM feels she has little to add, the calculations go something like this.

In favor of talking to LE:
She may make it marginally easier for investigators to build a case against a man who has already essentially confessed to a charge likely to put him in prison for some time.

Against it:
If LE is suspicious of her, they might use some minor inconsistency on her part as pretext to charge her.
It forces her to relive the grief and pain.
It takes her attention away from other, extremely pressing matters, like regaining custody of her surviving daughter, or at least arranging a better placement for her in the interim.

Whether or not this is actually what is going on in SM's mind is anyone's guess. But, at least in theory, I could see a loving mother refusing to cooperate further under these circumstances. Recently, I was interviewed by LE as part of a routine background check for a close childhood friend who had applied for high-level security clearance. This was an unemotional situation; in fact, it involved a good thing. I was still surprised at how long it took and how many tedious, repetitive questions they asked (things like "what kinds of activities did you like doing together when you were children" and verifying precisely how often, on average, we had contact with one another at each point in our lives). I can only imagine what it would be like to be an innocent person being questioned by suspicious investigators under such horrific circumstances.

I can see it too, but not talking to LE might not be what she wants to do but is on the advice of her lawyers.

 

[agilbe]

So she used to be able to talk? I wonder why she stopped?


Maybe it was the language barrier and she needed time to catch up. But if so, then she was not a 'special needs' child at all.

Sherin used to eat just fine and then didn't. Holt even noted it in a report they filed. I'm wondering if Sherin was being compared to the "norm".
One of my kids was at the high end of the percentiles and the other at the bottom.

https://scroll.in/latest/855462/she...ner-in-india-says-girl-had-no-eating-problems

 

[blue22]

I don't think that LE has made any statements about the amount of time they spent interrogating SM. There has been no interrogation since obtaining counsel. The new information provided by the current attorney is simply more specific about the extent to which she was questioned prior to obtaining counsel. I would imagine the statement issued by the current attorney, including the specifics regarding how much she has already cooperated is responsive to a lot of buzz about why she is not currently going in for interrogation.

Actually , she stopped speaking to LE BEFORE she retained counsel. I simply don't buy what the attorney's are selling. And you appear to. It's okay that we don't agree, that's what makes the world go 'round. IMO, they are only trying to improve her public image and are being hyperbolic.

 

[MsMarple]

It seems to me it's instinctive for someone, who's with someone else who is choking, to hit them on the back. Like your husband did. Guess WM instinctively took her pulse instead.

Instead of using that finger to dial 911. If the info linked in the last thread about choking/aspiration potentially causing death in 4 to 10 minutes (and the link was a good one) then WM might as well have confessed to cold-blooded murder. Even 2 minutes is an eternity when a child is choking and certainly enough time for an adult to realize medical help is needed.

If WM was willing to tell this horrible second version we have to wonder what truth he's not telling. I'm afraid version 3, which may end up coming from LE and the ME, could be far worse. I'm just glad he's already incriminated himself into a long sentence in case Sherin's body was found too late to prove version 3.

 

[pamelado2]

But most usually at least put a personal plea out to the media. Even the guilty ones do.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

To what end?

The reason I thought it was done was so that there was more coverage on the news.

I personally think that she never believed her husband's story and she knew he did something with Sherin.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

[blue22]

The only thing taken into account in parental rights situations is the best interests of the child. That is the standard and that is it.

No, this is not true. The totality of the situation which required CPS to be involved is taken into account. He behavior and actions before, during, and after he daughter was killed WILL be scrutinized. To determine what is best for the child, her choices factor in enormously. When a child is killed in a parent's home, everything about that parent's ability is considered. They cannot determine that while ignoring the situation. CPS cannot determine the best interest of the child without examining the parent. They ALWAYS consider the parent's behavior and actions. Every.Single.Time.

 

[RiceCasparr]

From following other missing child cases LE don't always recommend parents search for their missing child for obvious reasons, but i don't think LE can prevent parents of a missing child to do so.
I can't bear to think of some of the shocking way some missing/murdered children that have been located to have innocent parents to find them that way.

Often if they suspect parental involvement (and even when they dont) they don't want them looking/finding the child, at least on their own, as it can compromise DNA evidence.

Case in point: John Ramsey finding Jonbenet and disturbing the scene/moving the body.

JmO

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[CanadianWells]

I totally understand why you'd take the opportunity to sleep while hubby is home with you. Makes sense, because as you say, you totally trust him.

So we can assume, most likely, that your hubs has never put one of your kids out in the alley at 3 am for not drinking their milk? :wink:

Did SM have the same trust in her husband? Had he never done anything too strict or severe? I really wonder because his initial story is so bizarre that it seems like he must have thought it was normal?

LOL. No, we would have our own thread on here if he did. Hehe. I wonder too... I mean, like I said I have no idea what to make of it. Maybe he was very trustworthy in her eyes and hence she was able to sleep through whatever happened. People do snap. Or maybe it’s exactly what so many fear— that she wasn’t sleeping after all. Hard to tell, but I do know it’s possible to sleep through a lot and still be a good mom, as I consider myself to be one. I do have my own speculations on what happened, but I’m pretty sure I’m not allowed to discuss them atm, and I probably have followed too many cases that sway my opinion.

 

[DakotaMayi]

Often if they suspect parental involvement (and even when they dont) they don't want them looking/finding the child, at least on their own, as it can compromise DNA evidence.

Case in point: John Ramsey finding Jonbenet and disturbing the scene/moving the body.

JmO

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

BBM. That was far too convenient. That scene had been disturbed long before he "found" Jonbenet right then.

Sorry, O/T.. but those Ramsey's really get me.

 

[kirkassoc]

I can't help wondering if this horrific nightmare could have been avoided if there had only been a biological child in that home. MOO, JMO

 

[DakotaMayi]

To what end?

The reason I thought it was done was so that there was more coverage on the news.

I personally think that she never believed her husband's story and she knew he did something with Sherin.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Would you not still want to find your baby? Make sure they are not out there alone any longer than they have to be?

(I really cannot put myself in that position and imagine what it would feel like so this is a general question to see what everyone thinks, Nothing snarky... )

 

[DakotaMayi]

I can't help wondering if this horrific nightmare could have been avoided if there had only been a biological child in that home. MOO, JMO

ETA. Ignore me... I read it wrong. :crosseyed:

 

[RiceCasparr]

BBM. That was far too convenient. That scene had been disturbed long before he "found" Jonbenet right then.

Sorry, O/T.. but those Ramsey's really get me.

Exactly. And I believe LE found the disturbance convenient too.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Amonet]

I don't think the attorney's notice said much different in substance from what the police have said, but it had a very different spin on it.

I don't think we, or even the mom, can know for sure whether she has any information that might be useful to them. There's usually something someone forgets to say, especially when they're stressed out.

When Sherin's status was 'missing' would the police have asked the mom, "did your husband ever take Sherin into the garage to drink milk when she woke in the night?" But now it's a very important question. What if the mom woke up one night and did think the door to the garage had just closed as she walked into the room and she didn't mention that when she was questioned while Sherin was 'missing'? Memories like that might be very important now that they're in the case-building phase rather than in the 'where can she be?' phase.

But, as someone earlier said, if those earlier dealings with the police really did feel like interrogations, then it's understandable that the mom wouldn't want to repeat that experience. She might be terrified they'll take something out of context or twist something she says and it might harm her chances of future contact with her remaining daughter.

As for her not searching, I think police usually hold parents off from participating in searches and try to keep them in the home or a friend/relative's house with a police liaison officer. A police representative should be the one making pleas in front of the media and it's optional for parents to join them for that.

A family representative, either from LE or the attorney's office should, imo, be the one to make a statement to the media to thank people for their concern and for assisting LE with searching or tips. I wouldn't blame a parent or family for being lackadaisical if such a notice didn't go out, I don't consider it to be their responsibility.

 

[agilbe]

Interesting information about the adoption reports.
https://www.outlookindia.com/newssc...-adjusting-well-but-had-eating-issues/1175180

 

[MsMarple]

I don't think the attorney's notice said much different in substance from what the police have said, but it had a very different spin on it.

I don't think we, or even the mom, can know for sure whether she has any information that might be useful to them. There's usually something someone forgets to say, especially when they're stressed out.

When Sherin's status was 'missing' would the police have asked the mom, "did your husband ever take Sherin into the garage to drink milk when she woke in the night?" But now it's a very important question. What if the mom woke up one night and did think the door to the garage had just closed as she walked into the room and she didn't mention that when she was questioned while Sherin was 'missing'? Memories like that might be very important now that they're in the case-building phase rather than in the 'where can she be?' phase.

But, as someone earlier said, if those earlier dealings with the police really did feel like interrogations, then it's understandable that the mom wouldn't want to repeat that experience. She might be terrified they'll take something out of context or twist something she says and it might harm her chances of future contact with her remaining daughter.

As for her not searching, I think police usually hold parents off from participating in searches and try to keep them in the home or a friend/relative's house with a police liaison officer. A police representative should be the one making pleas in front of the media and it's optional for parents to join them for that.

A family representative, either from LE or the attorney's office should, imo, be the one to make a statement to the media to thank people for their concern and for assisting LE with searching or tips. I wouldn't blame a parent or family for being lackadaisical if such a notice didn't go out, I don't consider it to be their responsibility.

A minor correction: the garage wasn't mentioned until after Sherin's body was found. But that reminded me - someone posted a link to video of SM and a relative arriving home and driving into the garage. Maybe it was Maria Guerrero?

Hang on... yes! Here it is:

https://www.facebook.com/MariaGuerreroNews/videos/1039832706159513/

Does that look like a typical place to feed a child milk at 3am? It sure doesn't to me!

 

[Inthedetails]

Interesting information about the adoption reports.
https://www.outlookindia.com/newssc...-adjusting-well-but-had-eating-issues/1175180

From the link:

"The social worker who visited Sherin Mathew's family for follow-ups records that 'eating has become more and more challenging for the family'. 'She likes to eat food outside but not at home'."


Could the garage be an "outside" place that Sherin preferred to eat?? IDK.


jmopinion

 

[bluedivergirl]

This case brought back a 50-yo memory., from when we were vacationing at a northern resort.

My little sister was very young, months old. I was 8. My mom was feeding her a cereal slurry, as was common then. My sister sneezed, and suck the cereal mix back into her lungs.

My mother snatched her out of her carrier and ran screaming to a central area. There was a fire bell and she began clanging it wildly. Help came, and after a short hospitalization, lil sis was fine.

That's normal.

 

[agilbe]

We all decide what is normal and what works for our families. What works for you might make me raise an eyebrow, but it's what works for your family and situation. JMO

 

[tlcya]

Lawyers Michelle Nolte and Gregg Gibbs, representing Sini Mathews published a statement late yesterday saying she denied any involvement in the death of her adoptive daughter.

In the statement, the lawyers insist that Mathews cooperated with the Richardson Police investigation into her daughter's disappearance on October 7. She was "interrogated for hours by several officers with no attorney present" a few days later, as per the statement.

[...]

Richardson Police had no immediate comment to the statement.

The police previously said Sini Mathews initially cooperated in the investigation on October 7, but then stopped. This week, police said Mathews provided dental records and identified clothing found with Sherin's body in order to help the medical examiner make a positive ID. Police also said Mathews never provided a full account of what happened when Sherin died.

https://www.ndtv.com/indians-abroad...oster-mother-denies-role-in-her-death-1767271

[FONT=&amp]Police have unsuccessfully tried to get Sini to voluntarily answer questions, said Richardson police sergeant Kevin Perlich. She works at Youngsters Medical Middle in Dallas, the hospital confirmed yesterday.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Police spoke with her on Monday – the day after Sherin’s body was found but before authorities confirmed her identity.

[...]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Police asked Sini to identify clothing found on the body.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]She told police the clothing, which Perlich did not detail, looked like something Sherin might have worn. She also provided police with dental records, which were used to identify Sherin.

http://indianexpress.com/article/wo...s-in-us-richardson-after-girls-death-4905588/ (MOO - this article is rife with contradictions and light on actual quotes)
[/FONT]
Sgt. Kevin Perlich told India-West that {W}Mathews could be charged with murder as the investigation continues. “Based on the information he provided, felony child endangerment is the most appropriate charge at this time,” he said, noting that murder and felony child endangerment both carry a life sentence. “It doesn’t matter what you call it,” he explained.

Sini Mathews, Sherin’s adoptive mother, continues to be under investigation, revealed Perlich, adding, however: “Until we have something to charge her with, we cannot arrest her.”

[...]

“The investigation is still open and more arrests may need to be made,” Perlich told India-West.

http://www.indiawest.com/news/globa...cle_6c7f67b8-b9bf-11e7-8b97-f7a059ba587d.html (Don't mind me, just making note for myself which statements are supported by a quote from LE and which are not)