GUILTY VA - Noah Thomas, 5, Pulaski County, 22 March 2015 #3

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe I need clarity here but I'm under the impression that LE did not open the lid of the septic tank prior to getting the hard and credible lead. I do understand that they searched multiple times in the home and around the home but I have not seen any thing suggesting that they opened the lid during those multiple searches. Stating that they searched the area multiple times does not mean that they opened the lid until they received the lead. Correct me with the statement if I'm wrong.

Your right.

They never opened the lid until they received the lead.

here is the video-

The Pulaski county Sheriff was asked: Did anyone searched inside that septic tank before Friday.

Pulaski county Sheriff response: That information was not conveyed to me and is part of the current investigation.

http://www.wdbj7.com/video/police-sa...homas/32053506
 
Also Elizabeth Smart's father (man was he skewered and accused!), Somer Thompson's mother, Breann Rodriguez's dad, etc., etc..



You know, the fact that the police stated that a "hard, credible tip" led them to the child, raises alarm bells to me. Seems like something else may be going on. But in the absence of any information to the contrary, we are left with the assumption that the facts as stated are true, and operating under the assumption that this is purely a case where the mom fell asleep and the child wandered off and died, then I can explain the dynamic here. That dynamic is that some of us are willing to admit we are not perfect. Some of us are willing to admit that bad things can happen to good parents. Some of us are unwilling to accept, despite the risk otherwise, that children must be totally bubble wrapped and observed at every moment, no matter the age or circumstances, or we are "neglecting" our kids or being "negligent".

And some of us can put ourselves in the shoes of a worn out, exhausted, low income mother of a kindergartner and an infant, who works late, who took a fateful nap with her baby, while her 5 year old child, who is not known to wander, sat watching cartoons.

I call that empathy.



Not only would this conduct NOT be criminal negligence, as I cited and explained above, it would not even be considered child neglect, BTW (a totally separate charge). Napping while your kindergartner watches tv in the same house would not be chargeable as child neglect whether or not he wandered off and died:
Oh and the case that I quoted above for the definition of willful involved the appeal of a conviction for child neglect of a mother who left her almost five year old and 27 month old alone, who were napping, in an apartment, for up to half an hour while she went and socialized with a friend in the complex, after accidentally leaving a burner on that she had used to light a cigarette. A fire started and her kids suffered serious injury.

She won her appeal.

I'm glad she"won". But her children are dead. I don't see how anyone "won".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Your right.

They never opened the lit until they received the lead.

here is the video-

The Pulaski county Sheriff was asked: Did anyone searched inside that septic tank before Friday.

Pulaski county Sheriff response: That information was not conveyed to me and is part of the current investigation.

http://www.wdbj7.com/video/police-sa...homas/32053506

Isn't the sheriff saying he doesn't know if the septic tank was searched?
 
Maybe the mechanism used to empty the septic (I'm imagining a large vacuum type of of hose) pulled up some of the clothes off of Noah? JMO
 
I'm starting to think LE really doesn't know if it's an accident and really are waiting on other tests to come back to confirm if it was an accident or not.I'm just confused on why they said they felt there was no danger to other children.
 
Maybe the mechanism used to empty the septic (I'm imagining a large vacuum type of of hose) pulled up some of the clothes off of Noah? JMO

Isn't it funny how we all read the same thing and picture different scenarios? I pictured him draining the tank, occasionally looking in to check progress, and then seeing clothing. On a child. At the time, maybe the coat or other clothing was all he could see with the tank now partially drained.
 
No amount of helicopter parenting can guarantee a child's safety. Accidents happen. It doesn't matter if you are staring right at them, things can happen. Life is full of risks and every house is full of dangers inside and out. We all want to protect our children and we all want to believe the way we raise them is the best and so much better than anyone else could because we love them so dearly. The truth is accidents happen and we can lose them in the blink of an eye.

I believe it is wrong for us to judge this poor woman so harshly at this time. She buried her son today. She will never see his smile again nor hear his voice. She will forever be haunted by her dead child. I feel so sorry for her and his father. His whole family must be heartbroken and devastated tonight.

BBM: Thanks for this.
 
I hate to veer off too far from topic, but it seems after a generation of helicopter parenting, the pendulum of thought is turning the other way.

I was reading an article a couple days ago about letting your children take their own risks, ride their bicycles to friend's houses, explore in the woods behind the house, etc. The way kids, until this past generation, have always been raised.

And there was a quote from someone on the Austin School Board - about get out of your kid's classroom. This is your kid's work, your kid's homework, your kid's friends, your kids have to find their way and learn to manage their lives for themselves. Quit checking their homework assignments and grades online every day. Quit micromanaging their friendships with classmates. Quit walking your 4th grader to the bus stop 5 houses down.

It's a compelling point, to me. Seeing how this last generation has such trouble doing for themselves and how so many are living with mom and dad still in their late 20's.

There is a saying - your kid's lives will be made much easier not by what you do for them, but by what you make them learn to do for themselves. So true.

Anyway, I'm not trying to start an argument, just musing. I think kids do better in general - as a whole population - when allowed to have to take care of themselves sometimes. Statistically abduction by strangers reached a peak in the 60's and is extremely, extremely rare.

Just because one school doesn't want parents involved doesn't mean all schools feel this way. As long as our school asks for volunteers, I absolutely will be there. Being able to be involved and help these little ones grow and learn is a wonderful experience.

There also tends to be plenty of freedoms for young children, many kindergarteners walk to/from school, ride their bikes around town, go to the park by themselves. Sure nothing may happen to them, but that's b/c us "helicopter" parents watch out for other people's kids, too. I'm the mom at the park w/my kids, I'm the one that makes sure that the free range children make it across the street w/o running into traffic, I'm the one that keeps an eye on the RSO who sits at the park and watches the kids while he eats lunch. I'm sure there are lots of parents in my town who have no clue their child is afraid to cross main street, or that their child is frequently helped across the street. I'm sure they don't know their kid is hungry and thirsty at the park b/c they've been there all day w/o drinks or snacks. I'm sure they don't know that I've bought coats for their children that they keep at the school b/c their kid left the house w/o one. I'm sure they don't have any idea how much their kids wish they were playing at the park with them, walking to school with them, or just being around when they need someone.
 
Jassiah Clark was 4. He was unsupervised and fell into a well. His mom was charged with negligent homicide. Not supervising your kids (especially when it results in harm or death) is a crime. I am not debating the sleep vs. do not sleep issue. I just know that as a parent, you are responsible for your children. If you are driving, run a red light UNINTENTIONALLY, hit another car and kill them, it is negligent homicide. Harm coming from an accident does not excuse the negligent party. It just doesn't. His case is a quick little read. :

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-Jassiah-Clark-4-Baton-Rouge-20-December-2014

The case of Jassiah Clark is far different. His mother is drug user who was getting high when he disappeared, scoring drugs. She let him play OUTSIDE unsupervised for hours, on not only the day he died but all the time. She also lied to police.

Drug usage typically is at play in negligent homicide charges. Lying to police and a pattern of inattentiveness also plays a part.

As to running a red light and killing someone being "negligent homicide", it depends. Most involuntary manslaughter/negligent homicide cases involving running a red light UNINTENTIONALLY, also involve illegal distractions such as talking on the phone or texting, or something else illegal, such as speeding.

And being at the wheel of a 4,000 pound vehicle, and doing something that is illegal, like texting or speeding, causing you to break another law and ultimately causing the death of an innocent, is simply different than an exhausted mother taking a nap in her home with her kids, one of whom is awake and watching tv, unless there is something else at play, such as the child has autism, is known to get into trouble, the mom is passed out, high, etc.

It just is. It's different. 4,000 pound vehicles will absolutely, certainly cause injury or damage if they hit something or someone. It is not certain that a 5 year old child left awake while mom naps in the same home will become injured.

The law is pretty clear. I cited it. Please cite to evidence that what I cited is bad law.
 
Just because one school doesn't want parents involved doesn't mean all schools feel this way. As long as our school asks for volunteers, I absolutely will be there. Being able to be involved and help these little ones grow and learn is a wonderful experience.

There also tends to be plenty of freedoms for young children, many kindergarteners walk to/from school, ride their bikes around town, go to the park by themselves. Sure nothing may happen to them, but that's b/c us "helicopter" parents watch out for other people's kids, too. I'm the mom at the park w/my kids, I'm the one that makes sure that the free range children make it across the street w/o running into traffic, I'm the one that keeps an eye on the RSO who sits at the park and watches the kids while he eats lunch. I'm sure there are lots of parents in my town who have no clue their child is afraid to cross main street, or that their child is frequently helped across the street. I'm sure they don't know their kid is hungry and thirsty at the park b/c they've been there all day w/o drinks or snacks. I'm sure they don't know that I've bought coats for their children that they keep at the school b/c their kid left the house w/o one. I'm sure they don't have any idea how much their kids wish they were playing at the park with them, walking to school with them, or just being around when they need someone.

I agree with you on all counts. You and I are like the same person, separated by a generation. My kids are in their 20's now, but I was the mom at the park and the mom on the fieldtrips and the mom who had all the kids over at my house on summer afternoons. And now, with college kids I'm struggling against helicoptering. BUT, since we live on the side of a hill covered in acres of woods, I am also the mom who encouraged kids to go on a long explore in the woods.
 
I really did mean it when I said I wasn't trying to argue, just musing.

I guess I don't even understand what the term "independent with supervision" means because those seem to be opposites to me - "independent" means you have to figure this out for yourself because no one will help you. Like, you are now lost and have to find your way back home.

I certainly NEVER napped when I had kids - although I was so tired I couldn't do simple math. So I get that - and am kind of jealous of moms who took showers and napped when they were supervising their kids. My kid's natures wouldn't allow me to do that - something would go terribly wrong if they knew I was otherwise occupied.

I don't know what "one kid loves because orbit" means - but my guess is it's an autocorrect gone bad. ;D

Best wishes to your daughter in her gymnastics.

Wow, you read fast... I fixed that within 1 minute of posting, lol.

Yes, you can supervise your children, solely for safety's sake, and them still be independent. I'm not sure where that is a misnomer. My children independently do their homework in a safe environment where parents are present. And awake. And available. My children play in the fenced yard, with me outside enjoying the sun in the hammock with a book. I'm awake, available, there if an accident happens, to give them the best chance of surviving an accident if it happens. I don't think any child should be in a position at age 5 to be "lost and find your way back home", in order to be independent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
And, I wasn't upset by any comment.. It's always interesting to see how other people "tick". Just wanted to be clear. :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Wow, you read fast... I fixed that within 1 minute of posting, lol.

Yes, you can supervise your children, solely for safety's sake, and them still be independent. I'm not sure where that is a misnomer. My children independently do their homework in a safe environment where parents are present. And awake. And available. My children play in the fenced yard, with me outside enjoying the sun in the hammock with a book. I'm awake, available, there if an accident happens, to give them the best chance of surviving an accident if it happens. I don't think any child should be in a position at age 5 to be "lost and find your way back home", in order to be independent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Much earlier in this discussion - days ago - I posted something from 1979 - a first grade readiness checklist. At 6, this said, is your child able to navigate the neighborhood independently and find their way back home several blocks away. I forget what school district it was, but back in 1979, it was expected as a developmental milestone that kids venture out alone and get themselves back home successfully.

I thought that was interesting.
 
The case of Jassiah Clark is far different. His mother is drug user who was getting high when he disappeared, scoring drugs. She let him play OUTSIDE unsupervised for hours, on not only the day he died but all the time. She also lied to police.

Drug usage typically is at play in negligent homicide charges. Lying to police and a pattern of inattentiveness also plays a part.

As to running a red light and killing someone being "negligent homicide", it depends. Most involuntary manslaughter/negligent homicide cases involving running a red light UNINTENTIONALLY, also involve illegal distractions such as talking on the phone or texting, or something else illegal, such as speeding.

And being at the wheel of a 4,000 pound vehicle, and doing something that is illegal, like texting or speeding, causing you to break another law and ultimately causing the death of an innocent, is simply different than an exhausted mother taking a nap in her home with her kids, one of whom is awake and watching tv, unless there is something else at play, such as the child has autism, is known to get into trouble, the mom is passed out, high, etc.

It just is. It's different. 4,000 pound vehicles will absolutely, certainly cause injury or damage if they hit something or someone. It is not certain that a 5 year old child left awake while mom naps in the same home will become injured.

The law is pretty clear. I cited it. Please cite to evidence that what I cited is bad law.

Hi Git, :seeya: so good to see you again. I always value your expertise with the law and your opinion.

Oh my I came to see if there was any news. I see there's not. Guys please don't become too upset with each other. It's hard waiting but given time we will all know what happened.
 
I'm glad she"won". But her children are dead. I don't see how anyone "won".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

She won her case. She does not have to carry the burden of being convicted of child neglect. Her kids did not die by the way. They are alive. But regardless, I'm not sure what point is being made here. Accusing a mother who lost her child of negligence or child neglect is serious. It is a harsh judgment. I cited precisely to the law that shows that this particular mother, under only the circumstances that we know (there could be much more to the story and frankly, based on the tip statement, I'm betting there is), is not guilty of criminal negligence or child neglect. The response I received is "I'm glad she "won". A bit snarky but it does nothing to disprove what I stated.

If the facts are as reported, it was an accident and the mother will not be charged. Period. And I am not going to blame her for being totally exhausted with two little ones and a job with those hours. Again, if it was a crime to sleep while our kids are awake, then any sleep would be wrong unless someone else was watching the kids, because they occasionally get up in the night or early early morning and do all sorts of things unattended that could lead to trouble, such as messing around in the kitchen trying to get food, going to the bathroom, sometimes running water, climbing on things, sometimes even trying to get outside.

Under the circumstances, what this mother did was fateful but understandable. And as an imperfect person myself, I refuse to cast stones.
 
Much earlier in this discussion - days ago - I posted something from 1979 - a first grade readiness checklist. At 6, this said, is your child able to navigate the neighborhood independently and find their way back home several blocks away. I forget what school district it was, but back in 1979, it was expected as a developmental milestone that kids venture out alone and get themselves back home successfully.

I thought that was interesting.

It IS interesting, and I'm sure most 6 year olds could. However, when I visited the website that shows how many RSO's live within 3 miles of me, that became a non-issue. :)
 
Okay...then the question goes back to WHY hadn't any LE thought to check the septic tank earlier in the week?? Was it because the lid was indeed hidden or buried or not in plain sight? I can't understand not thinking about a septic tank, when countless examples have been presented, and this is a rural community where they exist.

I am not accusatory, just completely baffled, and mostly down to LE's words and behavior. I almost feel like they don't want to admit that it was an accident...because they apparently never thought to look in the tank themselves. Who knows if they ever would have? A "tip" could be someone calling in to say that the lid on that particular tank was faulty or very easy to open, for all we know. That would be a credible tip. IT does not have to mean that the caller knew Noah was there.

If this was an accident...I am totally unimpressed with the handling of this case. My impression as of now is that LE knows they messed up, and that Noah got in there by himself and that is why they are trying to protect the parents while putting off the admission that they "messed up" in not finding him sooner. But of course...JMO.
 
We don't know the baby was asleep either - and the baby is 8-9 months old, so would be in a crib. A mother putting the baby down for a nap (at 8 a.m.? I don't think so) wouldn't fall asleep herself accidentally. I'm not trying to heap blame on the mother - I firmly believe this could have happened in a 3 minute time span while Mom was in the bathroom - but it doesn't seem she accidentally fell asleep for 2.5 hours.
In order to get him to work at 7:00 am, I would assume she got the baby up at least by 5:30 or so in order to have time to change and feed her before they drove to work. It would be almost 3 hours of wake time and I would think not unusual for a baby's long morning nap.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
104
Guests online
1,647
Total visitors
1,751

Forum statistics

Threads
605,847
Messages
18,193,589
Members
233,600
Latest member
Jojo1965
Back
Top