Found Deceased TX - Sherin Mathews, 3, Richardson, 7 Oct 2017 #6 *Arrest*

[Margo/Mom]

I don't believe the garage story.

As with the tree, I think that there is a reason that detail is in his story. His stories are meant to conceal as much as to reveal. Something that he fears might be discovered that he is seeking to explain away.

 

[katydid23]

If my child was missing or found dead, I would do everything possible to try and help the detectives.

HOWEVER, if I then heard an interview with an investigator, saying that he 'was looking closer into my actions and may bring charges in the future...'

I would end my voluntary interviews with them at that time.

 

[Margo/Mom]

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/pare...n-process-after-sherin-mathews-case/491010754

Wow. Interesting.

 

[Riice]

GOOD defense attorneys will rarely ever ask their client if they are guilty. They don't care if you are guilty or not and if you walk in and tell them you killed someone, they cannot purger themselves in court and argue that you didn't do it, which is why they don't want to know if you did it. If you have confessed they will start to look at other ways to defend you, like diminished capacity, illegally obtained confessions, being coerced into committing the crime,

All JMO

While I agree with some of what you have said, this comment about perjury is not true. Whether or not they know you killed someone, wont lead to perjury in court. Perjury is committed when you lie under oath, lawyers are not sworn in during trial. A defense attorney's sole duty is to raise enough reasonable doubt that a jury wont convict. Thats all.

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

 

[MarisaS1985]

While I agree with some of what you have said, this comment about perjury is not true. Whether or not they know you killed someone, wont lead to perjury in court. Perjury is committed when you lie under oath, lawyers are not sworn in during trial. A defense attorney's sole duty is to raise enough reasonable doubt that a jury wont convict. Thats all.

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

Do defense lawyers lie for their clients?


No matter what the defendant has done, he is not legally guilty until a prosecutor offers enough evidence to persuade a judge or jury to convict. However, thedefense lawyer may not lie to the judge or jury by specifically stating that the defendant did not do something the lawyer knows the defendant did do.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/representing-client-whom-the-lawyer-thinks-is-guilty.html

 

[Riice]

Do defense lawyers lie for their clients?


No matter what the defendant has done, he is not legally guilty until a prosecutor offers enough evidence to persuade a judge or jury to convict. However, thedefense lawyer may not lie to the judge or jury by specifically stating that the defendant did not do something the lawyer knows the defendant did do.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/representing-client-whom-the-lawyer-thinks-is-guilty.html

Gonna learn to respectfully disagree here.. it goes against everything I learned in law school and in 10 years of practice.. and its still not considered perury

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

 

[Riice]

Gonna learn to respectfully disagree here.. it goes against everything I learned in law school and in 10 years of practice.. and its still not considered perury

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

To be more concise, your understanding of the defense attorney in my opinion is incorrect, you killing someone does not equate to murder. The duty is to creat reasonable doubt by poking holes in the prosecutions case, this can be done without lying. And as a defense lawyer .. i would want to know if the persona actually did what they are accused of so i can build a proper defense.

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

 

[Grouchymom]

Gonna learn to respectfully disagree here.. it goes against everything I learned in law school and in 10 years of practice.. and its still not considered perury

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

:scale:One can can only commit perjury during a sworn statement or testimony an then only if it is material to the proceeding whereas suborning is when you get someone to give a false sworn statement or testimony or when an attorney with knowledge of allows a person to give a false sworn statement or testimony.

:scale:Perjury

Perjury is the intentional act of swearing a false oath or falsifying an affirmation to tell the truth, whether spoken or in writing, concerning matters material to an official proceeding.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][A][/SUP] Contrary to popular misconception, no crime has occurred when a false statement is (intentionally or unintentionally) made while under oath or subject to penalty—instead, criminal culpability only attaches at the instant the declarant falsely asserts the truth of statements (made or to be made) which are material to the outcome of the proceeding. For example, it is not perjury to lie about one's age except where age is a fact material to influencing the legal result, such as eligibility for old age retirement benefits or whether a person was of an age to have legal capacity.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perjury

:smiliescale:Subornation of perjury

[FONT=&quot]In [/FONT]American law[FONT=&quot] and in [/FONT]Scots law[FONT=&quot] the [/FONT]subornation of perjury is the crime of persuading a person to commit perjury — the swearing of a false oath to tell the truth in a legal proceeding, be it spoken or written. The term subornation of perjury further describes the circumstance wherein an attorney at law causes a client to lie under oath, or allows another party to lie under oath.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subornation_of_perjury

 

[Riice]

:scale:One can can only commit perjury during a sworn statement or testimony an then only if it is material to the proceeding whereas suborning is when you get someone to give a false sworn statement or testimony or when an attorney with knowledge of allows a person to give a false sworn statement or testimony.

:scale:Perjury



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perjury

:smiliescale:Subornation of perjury



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subornation_of_perjury

Thanks for this thorough explanation of Perjury - but a lawyer whose client admits to killing someone isnt commiting perjruy just because they know their client committed an act - is the only point I am trying to make here.

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

 

[MarisaS1985]

:scale:One can can only commit perjury during a sworn statement or testimony an then only if it is material to the proceeding whereas suborning is when you get someone to give a false sworn statement or testimony or when an attorney with knowledge of allows a person to give a false sworn statement or testimony.

:scale:Perjury



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perjury

:smiliescale:Subornation of perjury



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subornation_of_perjury

Thanks! I was wrong with the word "perjury" but WS only allows editing withing the first hour. But, like the info I quoted says, a defense attorney can't lie if they have things they already know. If caught I have no clue what the "punishment" would be. It's probably different in every court.

I just remembered this from when I had to hire a lawyer for when I escaped my psycho ex. They asked me straight out to NOT tell them anything that may be incriminating, as my ex had tried to have me charged for assaulting him. I wasn't charged as it was defensive wounds on his body and nothing compared to what had happened to me.

Anyway, the lawyer said that if I said I had randomly done something that may have caused him to abuse me, as he was trying to suggest, the lawyer wouldn't be able to say I hadn't confessed that to him. Yes, he would be able to argue around it but he would not be able to straight out say "my client did not do this, she was always the victim and it was always unprovoked" if I had said something to him like "I punched him whenever I could because I was always angry, and then he snapped" (didn't happen but just an example).

Of course there are tons of very cunning lawyers who manage to get around this. They either aren't afraid of possible repercussions, or they know for a fact that the info that they have been told would not be found out by anyone. Attorney client privilege is pretty powerful, but on occasion, people insist on having a family member or friend in the meeting and this generally ends that privilege, even if the lawyer doesn't say anything, it also wouldn't stop that "witness" from saying "i was in the room when she told her lawyer ____"

I hope this clarifies what I mean by them not being "allowed" to lie about what a client has said.

In this case with Sini's lawyers, everyone is so quick to say they are lying (straight out on FB and in comments to MSM), and while they may be embellishing things, I can't imagine them giving a signed statement that directly contradicts LE. I don't feel they have and agree that both statements from LE and her attorney can be verified.

It has just been "community" opinion that she hasn't cooperated, and IMO they feel this way because they didn't see her out at the memorial (witch hunt), or searching for her daughter, or making a public plea etc.

But, also IMO, I think that she didn't search because LE had SPECIFICALLY said they didn't need searchers and that they had it under control. I wouldn't want to go against LE when it's my child they are searching for. I wouldn't want to interfere and waste resources that way. As for a public plea, I think it was determined very early on that Sherin was likely dead and that was why there was no request from LE to put out a plea to a potential kidnapper, and that the house and personal vehicles were treated at the primary crime scene as far as evidence collection went.

Of course we don't KNOW when LE began to think this way. What they did say up until they found her was very little, they offered a bit of hope but also added that time was the enemy.

Again IMO, they cancelled the Amber Alert and arrested WM very close together. We don't know what his full affidavit was on that either, but what he said then was enough to have him arrested and for his older child to be removed from the home. If they really thought Sherin had been kidnapped I simply can't see them arresting WM when they did, or removing the other child at that point. I personally feel it was in these first few days that they believed she was most likely dead and felt that WM was very dangerous.

ALL JMO and some experiences.

 

[Riice]

I have been pretty quiet lately reading everyones thoughts and feel like I wouldnt have much to add that would be meanginful.. but one thought I have add repeatedly since WS's second statement is this:

Why would someone attest to such a bizaare statement of facts.. like really.. and then I ask myself why would I? And the answer seems so obvious.. he wants LE to STOP poking around.. which only means.. the truth is much more horrible than we can imagine.

With that said.. Sini in my opinion isnt doing anything wrong.. its in her right to not subject herself to police interrogation as she has already disclosed "everything she knows" (read she was sleeping so she knows nothing)..

But for the love of children.. I wish she would talk a bit more.. there is so much more missing here and I am certain WS is not the only one that knows whats going on..

Lastly.. As an Indian of India myself.. i do not pay attention nor give any weight to Indian Media.. and would suggest we all take those sources with a grain of salt.a



Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

 

[Grouchymom]

I have been pretty quiet lately reading everyones thoughts and feel like I wouldnt have much to add that would be meanginful.. but one thought I have add repeatedly since WS's second statement is this:

Why would someone attest to such a bizaare statement of facts.. like really.. and then I ask myself why would I? And the answer seems so obvious.. he wants LE to STOP poking around.. which only means.. the truth is much more horrible than we can imagine.

With that said.. Sini in my opinion isnt doing anything wrong.. its in her right to not subject herself to police interrogation as she has already disclosed "everything she knows" (read she was sleeping so she knows nothing)..

But for the love of children.. I wish she would talk a bit more.. there is so much more missing here and I am certain WS is not the only one that knows whats going on..

Lastly.. As an Indian of India myself.. i do not pay attention nor give any weight to Indian Media.. and would suggest we all take those sources with a grain of salt.a



Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

wonderful post thank you so much. You really should. Be posting more, you definitely have a lot to offer and I for one would be delighted to see it.

 

[Philigumbo]

IMO WM is either being almost completely honest about the milk and the garage and then removing her (I assume the actual statement includes more detail on the inbetween milk & removal), OR the entire story is basically a lie and it is far more sinister than any of us are even willing to imagine. I do believe that his story has truth, almost all lies do have some truth to them outside of metaphors, but I am really wondering now if most of the story is the truth or if most of it is fake.

Whichever the case, I almost think its worse if he took her out to innocently have her protein shake and then as he kindly assisted her in drinking (maybe holding it for her) and she began to choke and he did nothing to help her, not waking up Sini, not using one of the 5 cell phones to call 911, NOTHING, and just watching her struggle to breathe and then take her pulse and leave, is IMO probably the most cold-blooded thing someone could do.

I just can't imagine, when my daughter was little she was in my arms and someone gave her a cracker, a piece went down wrong and she started to turn blue. The house was FULL of people and I was in the room with two people and was SCREAMING that the baby was choking and NO ONE so much as looked at me and this was my childs paternal family. I flipped her forward and was scooping her throat out and basically shaking her upside down to get it free and when it broke free she screamed and then people looked. I was clearly beyond furious and never trusted anyone with my child, not even the dad, as a result.

This does make me wonder though, if he did call for help and it fell on deaf ears. Esp if, as we discussed in previous threads, Sini was using a sound machine, ear buds, ASMR, any medications, ear plugs etc. It doesn't explain why he wouldn't have picked Sherin up and flew into the house and shook Sini awake though. I feel really bad for Sini, if she really was sleeping as we are to believe, (and i actually do at this point), I can only imagine the questions going through her head. Why didn't he wake me? Did he try and I missed him? Is he really a monster? How did I not see this?... I can only begin to imagine the level of fear and guilty she has based on just wondering if she could have done something

ALL MOO

Just jumping off your post...I’m sorry you had that frightening experience with your child. You didn’t leave her and run for help, you helped her. And I believe if Sharin’s dad wanted to save her, if it happened like he said, he would have PICKED 20lb. SHARIN UP AND CARRIED HER TO THE NURSE WHO WAS IN THE HOUSE! If you run into a bedroom where the nurse mother is sleeping, with a DYING/CHOKING child, and wanted help, no one would remain sleeping. He says he didn’t do that. Why? Simple...it didn’t happen like he said and he is/was hiding what he really did to Sharin. He took her to the garage to prevent his wife and daughter from hearing or seeing what he was doing to Sharin and I don’t believe it was forcing her to drink milk. I believe he was assaulting her, whatever that entailed, and putting walls between her and her nurse mother’s ears.

 

[rosesfromangels]

Just jumping off your post...I’m sorry you had that frightening experience with your child. You didn’t leave her and run for help, you helped her. And I believe if Sharin’s dad wanted to save her, if it happened like he said, he would have PICKED 20lb. SHARIN UP AND CARRIED HER TO THE NURSE WHO WAS IN THE HOUSE! If you run into a bedroom where the nurse mother is sleeping, with a DYING/CHOKING child, and wanted help, no one would remain sleeping. He says he didn’t do that. Why? Simple...it didn’t happen like he said and he is/was hiding what he really did to Sharin. He took her to the garage to prevent his wife and daughter from hearing or seeing what he was doing to Sharin and I don’t believe it was forcing her to drink milk. I believe he was assaulting her, whatever that entailed, and putting walls between her and her nurse mother’s ears.

100% agree. You stated my hypothesis completely. Milk is a metaphor for something far more sinister and debauched. Whatever happened, a toddler's body could not endure. I won't go any further with this speculation or I will become ill.

All amateur speculation and opinion.

 

[AgeofAquaruis]

http://www.wfaa.com/news/sherin-mathews-parents-return-to-court-for-biological-child/491232310
NOPE. WTH?

 

[margarita25]

http://www.wfaa.com/news/sherin-mathews-parents-return-to-court-for-biological-child/491232310
NOPE. WTH?

"Sherin Mathews' parents return to court for biological child

The parents of Sherin Mathews are set to return to back to court Monday morning for the custody of their biological 4-year-old daughter."

 

[margarita25]

Qmfr:

"Sherin Mathews' parents return to court for biological child

The parents of Sherin Mathews are set to return to back to court Monday morning for the custody of their biological 4-year-old daughter."

Who the heck in their right mind is going to allow this? Custody for the mom, maybe...the dad? No way. And he's in jail anyway...I don't get it...?

 

[DakotaMayi]

Qmfr:


Who the heck in their right mind is going to allow this? Custody for the mom, maybe...the dad? No way. And he's in jail anyway...I don't get it...?

I'd be surprised if they do imo. No one has anywhere near the full story yet so they wouldn't be able to guarantee the safety of the child. I don't know, maybe I'm missing something. That's just moo.

 

[angorwat]

I'd be surprised if they do imo. No one has anywhere near the full story yet so they wouldn't be able to guarantee the safety of the child. I don't know, maybe I'm missing something. That's just moo.

It had been discussed during the time of the last hearing that a possible option considered is to allow relatives to take care of the child.

This has been noted in today's report also:
http://www.wfaa.com/news/sherin-mathews-parents-return-to-court-for-biological-child/491232310

CPS has been looking into possible relatives for the biological child to stay with moving forward.

 

[DakotaMayi]

It had been discussed during the last time of the last hearing that a possible option considered is to allow relatives to take care of the child.

I understand that. And support that. But I wasn't referring to other family members in the post you quoted. I remember what was discussed the first time around.