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

[Yellow Rose]

Oct 27 9am (Tomorrow, Sini Mathews bond reduction hearing)

Oct 29 1pm (Wednesday) Older Mathews Daughter/Biological Daughter's custody hearing

*CST

I'm sure you mean November! Time flies!

 

[Lucyray]

This might be a ridiculous question, but I'm trying to think of every possibility here..is there any chance that biological child did something to Sherin Mathews? That could lead to both parents going over the edge? I know she's young; could a child that young do a horrid deed? I am so perplexed by both WM and SM. Neither of them make sense to me. One person snaps. Do they both? Yet, both appear complicit to me, an outsider. Sigh.. Why?

 

[georgiajean]

I don't think that's what your post did. I think we simply had similar feelings on a specific subject, described them very differently and therefore misunderstood one another. No chip here or hard feelings at all nor did I get the impression that you have a chip. Most people here are passionate (myself included) because a sweet little 3 year old (who already seemed to have a terribly rough start in life) died and was thrown away in a culvert like she didn't matter. She mattered. Her life was precious and she deserved to live a long one to the fullest.

Tons of good ideas / theories / personal thoughts / personal stories have been shared here. We may not all agree on each theory or thought, but they are all still valuable because the way in which they are presented or, more importantly, the reason why. It's often the theories I don't originally think are likely that lead me to either dig further or in a different direction to support the theories I thought were more likely or more often, it helps me explore other options or ideas and keeps me from having tunnel vision when I would otherwise have my mind focused on one thing vs many other things that other posters bring to the table.

Well said. I, too, come here to get my thinking pushed and questioned, to be able to better articulate my ideas, and, more importantly, to read the impressive, clear thoughts of others. This is a particularly thoughtful thread, for Sherin, and I enjoy checking in here every day.

 

[JazzTune]

I certainly wouldn't tell anyone how or what to post. Sorry if it came across like that.
I just meant there's really long posts here and it gets confusing about the actual facts.
By the time I read through, I forget facts sometimes.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

You weren't telling people how to post. I didn't take it that way at all.

All I thought you meant is, you had noted that, 'yeah, there's a lot of passion on both sides.' Which is true.

I was actually using your post as a springboard then to tell others that I appreciate their points of view and don't intend to come across as a heat-seeking missile at times.

My now deceased brother was an attorney. His entire professional life he constantly ran legal scenarios past me, asking 'what would you do?'

When I'd give my answer, he'd take that special 'brotherly' delight in telling me when I was wrong and why. It went on for years and years.

His 'style' sort of rubbed off on me. It's almost second nature now, but I deeply regret if it feels like I'm hitting people over the head with it.

Not my intent at all!

This is such an informative and caring thread. I want to do my part to help keep it that way...

 

[JazzTune]

I don't think that's what your post did. I think we simply had similar feelings on a specific subject, described them very differently and therefore misunderstood one another. No chip here or hard feelings at all nor did I get the impression that you have a chip. Most people here are passionate (myself included) because a sweet little 3 year old (who already seemed to have a terribly rough start in life) died and was thrown away in a culvert like she didn't matter. She mattered. Her life was precious and she deserved to live a long one to the fullest.

Tons of good ideas / theories / personal thoughts / personal stories have been shared here. We may not all agree on each theory or thought, but they are all still valuable because the way in which they are presented or, more importantly, the reason why. It's often the theories I don't originally think are likely that lead me to either dig further or in a different direction to support the theories I thought were more likely or more often, it helps me explore other options or ideas and keeps me from having tunnel vision when I would otherwise have my mind focused on one thing vs many other things that other posters bring to the table.

Thank you so much for your understanding. Good post! Very well said!

I really appreciate you taking your time to share your thoughts. I agree with every word you wrote...

 

[dianaelaine59]

I'm not sure it's simply black and white; I think there are a lot of grey areas in regards to that. It's highly likely I'm in the minority (or possibly even alone) with my thoughts on this but I believe every person is capable of terrible things, even murder; it's just a matter of vast differences in personal limits being reached, individual levels or abilities of restraint, and personal beliefs in regards to when something is permissable in their own mind regardless of the law.

I realize some will think this is like comparing apples to oranges, but the core of it is really the same: taking someone else's life or being someone who can kill or someone who cannot;

If I were to find myself under attack on the front lines of a war and it's me or them...you bet your *advertiser censored* I'm going to shoot until I no longer have ammo.

Find myself the victim of a home invasion...they chose the wrong house to invade.

Find myself the victim of an assault/abduction/attempted murder....I've got too much to live for to go down without a massive fight.

So for myself, personally, if I am in a me or them/my life or theirs type of situation, I would definitely, without question be capable of killing someone. That is my (known) personal limit or times when I can knowingly justify it.

Each person is different. Some never think it is okay and would never harm another person. Others have much lower limits (road rage, gang retaliation, money, jealousy etc).
I suppose we all don't know our limits until we are face to face with them. Until that point, it's easy for the rest of us to point fingers or judge because "we would never...."

ETA: The Mathews obviously had a personal limit they had reached, if even in a fleeting moment. They don't get a pass from me either way; even if I too can admit to having my own personal limits.

I understand where you're coming from, I completely agree if it's self defense.

But I was not speaking of that.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[lorelei2017]

Well said. I, too, come here to get my thinking pushed and questioned, to be able to better articulate my ideas, and, more importantly, to read the impressive, clear thoughts of others. This is a particularly thoughtful thread, for Sherin, and I enjoy checking in here every day.

I feel exactly the same

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

 

[Elle*Bee]

Can you perhaps consider that others might have possibly erred in terms of placement, or lack of intervention?

I have a hard time believing that these two people simply woke up one day and decided to kill their child and toss her out like garbage. Or that they adopted with that in mind.

Again, I think it comes down to a need to put distance between them and ourselves--they are just bad, bad people.

The downside to that kind of thinking is that it does little to inform ongoing public policy. IOW placing children with "good" people and somehow figuring out in advance who the "bad" people are. Life, and people, are much more complicated than that.

I’m sure many (most) will disagree with me, but I believe - with few exceptions - that humans are neither all good or all bad. My opinion is formed by my husband’s years as a (former) police officer, my time working with a group that ministers to people in prison, and my 40 year experience with a person who has been wonderful to me and his family for decades and yet still committed a horrifying crime. No one saw it coming. Obviously, our relationship has changed dramatically with this new knowledge (it’s virtually non-existent now) but it’s hard to discount 40 years of genuine kindness. Obviously I’m not discounting or excusing his crime. Not sure where I’m going with this, other than human beings are very complex.

 

[Jennifer17]

I’m sure many (most) will disagree with me, but I believe - with few exceptions - that humans are neither all good or all bad. My opinion is formed by my husband’s years as a (former) police officer, my time working with a group that ministers to people in prison, and my 40 year experience with a person who has been wonderful to me and his family for decades and yet still committed a horrifying crime. No one saw it coming. Obviously, our relationship has changed dramatically with this new knowledge (it’s virtually non-existent now) but it’s hard to discount 40 years of genuine kindness. Obviously I’m not discounting or excusing his crime. Not sure where I’m going with this, other than human beings are very complex.

I so agree with that. When my children were still children, I had a definite no smacking policy, but there were a couple of occasions that I did smack them on the bottom. I didn't think about it, and am not proud of it then or now. I had been slapped (not beaten) as a child, and it was like an instinctive reaction, that happened before I knew it.

 

[Amonet]

This might be a ridiculous question, but I'm trying to think of every possibility here..is there any chance that biological child did something to Sherin Mathews? That could lead to both parents going over the edge? I know she's young; could a child that young do a horrid deed? I am so perplexed by both WM and SM. Neither of them make sense to me. One person snaps. Do they both? Yet, both appear complicit to me, an outsider. Sigh.. Why?

I have had it cross my mind a few times, but I didn't know why and just pushed it aside as it didn't make sense to me. You've given a possible reason for the odd behavior in that they both seem to be protecting some big secret.

Children can do things that lead to death in their siblings. Usually that's by accident, sometimes it's more of a malicious accident, and sometimes purely malicious. Perhaps parents might want to protect a child who caused such a thing by covering up because they don't want to believe their child could do something like that and they don't really want to explore it by admitting it to police. Maybe they're scared of losing the remaining child...and then maybe for WM and Sini the situation has snowballed out of their control and they're now just going with the flow. Maybe parents sometimes feel guilt in that they think they should have prevented what happened, maybe they weren't watching closely enough, or they thought they weren't, and the guilt becomes too much so they take the blame.

I was thinking maybe Sini snapped in some episode of temporary insanity and so WM's protective instincts came out to protect his family. Or maybe he just feels he should take ultimate responsibility as the man of the house.

We don't have a COD yet or know if there are healed abuse wounds or anything like that. So I can't work out in my head if it might have been ongoing abuse, either due to abusive parents or that abusive relationships developed due to the difficulties in the adoption that GrouchyMom suggested and that due to Sherin's possible misbehavior the 'parents' became more and more punitive with her?

I also can't figure out the pictures of Sherin and her sister. They're both well dressed, in similar clothing right down to the little flowers in their hair. Someone took time with those girls dressing them that way. What does it mean? Is it for outward appearances or is it due to genuinely seeing them as equal and precious? Although Sherin was tiny in stature, she doesn't appear particularly under-nourished in any of the photos. But then there was that adoption report that said Sherin was having problems with eating compliance at home and preferred to eat out. That could be down to almost anything, I was thinking how different her life was between the orphanage and then into a small family home. What did she learn about food in that orphanage where one of the news stories had a staff member say that there wasn't always enough milk to go around all the children? That's surely got to give a child psychological issues around food?

 

[MissMalowe]

I'm sure you mean November! Time flies!

Oh my word! Old age has officially set in! I don't even know what month it is! :facepalm:

November! It's November.
It's still 2017 too, right? :shame:




ETA

Monday, November 27
9:00am CST
Sini Mathews' Bond Reduction Hearing

Wednesday, November 29
1:00pm CST
Custody Hearing for the older daughter of Wesley and Sini Mathews

 

[BlinkOfAnI]

I've been reading articles on cases of international adoption and parent/parents that killed their child. I came across one that made me think about the possibility of Sherin being severely shaken in anger. If she were shaken before they went to dinner there is a chance she was still alive when they returned. Maybe barely alive and why WM made the statement about her breathing and felling her pulse.

 

[BlinkOfAnI]

Oh my word! Old age has officially set in! I don't even know what month it is! :facepalm:

November! It's November.
It's still 2017 too, right? :shame:




ETA

Monday, November 27
9:00am CST
Sini Mathews' Bond Reduction Hearing

Wednesday, November 29
1:00pm CST
Custody Hearing for the older daughter of Wesley and Sini Mathews

LOL, the good thing is that wisdom comes with age so we are very wise.

 

[BlinkOfAnI]

I hope they don't reduce it either. I've stayed awake thinking the tox results would be released (12.50 here in UK) but I can't keep my eyes open any longer.

I am thinking (and hoping against it) that unless she gets more serious charges she may get her daughter back. Her case will be judged wholly on her and what she is specifically responsible for. I've seen so many kids given back to the people that have abused them that it makes me sick. I did PSI's (pre-sentence investigations) for the courts and they included recommendations on sentencing. I would see the medical reports and pictures that made me sick. To many times I recommended jail but the judges went by what CSP thinks. CSP's whole ideology is get the family back together. Part of the reason is so that the judge doesn't have to take responsibility and can blame CSP if things go wrong later. That said, as much as I emotionally hate the thought of SW getting her daughter back (and I know I will get blasted), if they truly thought she would be safe and ok, it would be best for the daughter. She has nothing left. I really don't know enough factually about what happened to know what is best. But my heart breaks for her.

 

[georgiajean]

I've been reading articles on cases of international adoption and parent/parents that killed their child. I came across one that made me think about the possibility of Sherin being severely shaken in anger. If she were shaken before they went to dinner there is a chance she was still alive when they returned. Maybe barely alive and why WM made the statement about her breathing and felling her pulse.

I have thought along similar lines. What could have happened that would have left her alive but barely. So they could say she was alive when they returned, but it's kind of a half-truth.
Someone on an earlier thread hypothesized that she may have hurt herself on whatever she was restrained with, as in choked or pulled something down on top of herself.

I wonder if she really didn't care that they left her, if she had severe RAD. Them leaving her may have seemed almost a reward (I'm pulling that from the info that several posters shared about RAD, and punishment of being sent to their room isn't really punishment).

 

[SteveS]

(I haven't read the entirety of this thread, so my apologies if the following has been widely discussed. I have followed the case somewhat, but not super closely, so I know a little but may be missing details.)

I have no added evidence to support the following, so if it is obviously absurd, please let me know what I have missed. It derives from the fact that afaik I know the generalities of this case, and the parental claims of what happened, and have heard the eventual revelation that the family went to eat while leaving Sherin at home.

But when I hear that, rather than try to figure out how that could have happened, and what that means to the timeline of how she might have been hurt and why, I keep coming back to one sticking point in my mind:

I simply can't imagine parents leaving home and leaving a toddler there unattended, to go eat.

That's not a "bad parent" response. It's a "no way that really happened" reaction.

Since it doesn't really add up to me, it makes me think that they left her because they knew there was no reason to keep an eye on her - because she was already been deceased at that point. Were the parents getting out of the house to digest the situation, so to speak, before dealing with it?

Of course, that changes a lot of the framework of who did what, and when, and why, and how, and muddles a lot of the possibilities into things very different.

But, I just don't see the parents leaving her like that. AND - very importantly - it is way too coincidental to me that they just "happened to" have gone out and left her at home, on the very night in which she was later have said to have died by accident. Supposedly odd behavior that supposedly PRECEDED the start of an accidental death situation? I'm thinking there's a very different reality instead, and that's the explanation that to me makes the most sense.

 

[Philigumbo]

I really hope they do not reduce her bond. In my opinion, until they get a full autopsy report, I think she needs to stay where she is. In other words, if the autopsy shows any indication of past abuse, or if the tox report shows drugs that she had access to via her occupation, then she needs to stay put. Until that is released, at least.

Respectfully, she was a RN case manager working from home. She didn’t have access to drugs via that role.

 

[bleuboy]

(I haven't read the entirety of this thread, so my apologies if the following has been widely discussed. I have followed the case somewhat, but not super closely, so I know a little but may be missing details.)

I have no added evidence to support the following, so if it is obviously absurd, please let me know what I have missed. It derives from the fact that afaik I know the generalities of this case, and the parental claims of what happened, and have heard the eventual revelation that the family went to eat while leaving Sherin at home.

But when I hear that, rather than try to figure out how that could have happened, and what that means to the timeline of how she might have been hurt and why, I keep coming back to one sticking point in my mind:

I simply can't imagine parents leaving home and leaving a toddler there unattended, to go eat.

That's not a "bad parent" response. It's a "no way that really happened" reaction.

Since it doesn't really add up to me, it makes me think that they left her because they knew there was no reason to keep an eye on her - because she was already been deceased at that point. Were the parents getting out of the house to digest the situation, so to speak, before dealing with it?

Of course, that changes a lot of the framework of who did what, and when, and why, and how, and muddles a lot of the possibilities into things very different.

But, I just don't see the parents leaving her like that. AND - very importantly - it is way too coincidental to me that they just "happened to" have gone out and left her at home, on the very night in which she was later have said to have died by accident. Supposedly odd behavior that supposedly PRECEDED the start of an accidental death situation? I'm thinking there's a very different reality instead, and that's the explanation that to me makes the most sense.

This is a great theory and makes perfect sense to me. It does seem to be coincidence for them to have chose that particular night to be a bad parent twice for WM, leaving sherin alone then later ''assisting'' her with her milk and he choking.

 

[Yellow Rose]

These detectives weren’t born yesterday and even though WE the public don’t have autopsy results does not mean that they are not privy to information discovered in the autopsy to better serve their case. I’m praying they have enough by this hearing to keep her locked up and away from bio child. Or any child.

 

[SteveS]

These detectives weren’t born yesterday and even though WE the public don’t have autopsy results does not mean that they are not privy to information discovered in the autopsy to better serve their case. I’m praying they have enough by this hearing to keep her locked up and away from bio child. Or any child.

If that was a reply to what I wrote, I'm not for a second trying to imply that LE is buying her story. I'm just offering my own observations, that it really falls in the "more likely than not to be a weird lie" category, for me, for the reasons I offered. I trust they know more and are evaluating everything she is saying with a critical ear, as well they should.