GUILTY VA - Noah Thomas, 5, Pulaski County, 22 March 2015 #6

[iamnotagolem]

I would think and hope that they had more to go on than the baby had a cold as a reason to remove her from the home.

I can't see them removing her if she had asthma or bronchitis, etc. and had been receiving medical treatment.

I think the respiratory issues were not the main reason she was removed. Surely there were other, more obvious signs of neglect. You don't remove a child from the home that has a medical condition they are being treated for, with that being the sole or even main reason.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I concur

 

[LadyMaryB]

Thank you very, very much for posting the links! I just logged back on, as I have more time now than when I posted my reply, and was going to search for a source. I appreciate you posting them

Just dropping in the link

she was found to have bad respiratory problems and was treated by doctors
http://wric.com/2015/04/15/parents-charged-in-death-of-noah-thomas-denied-bond/

The Commonwealth said the couple's baby had significant respiratory problems when she was taken under the care of Social Services.
http://www.wset.com/story/28809827/update-noah-thomas-case-both-parents-bond-hearings-today

 

[ANonyMs]

The 6 month old was removed from the home the day after Noah was reported missing after police called in DSS medical personal who evaluated the baby. It 2 as the Commonwealth’s Attorney who said in court she was removed for (I remember the CA exact quote) "fairly serious respiratory problems." I'm sorry I don't currently have time to search either WDBJ.com or Roanoke Times (at roanoke.com) right now, although that quote can be found at at least one of those sources, as they're the only two I generally read, unless it's a link posted here. Please feel free to search them however, had the parents taken the baby to get medical attention, she wouldn't have been removed from their care.

I understand where you are coming from and tend to agree with you on this, however, I disagree that the *only* possible reason they took her was if the parents failed to seek medical attention. Just throwing out potential other scenarios...they could have sought medical attention but when LE (and subsequently CPS or DSS) came in, they may have found conditions in the home which could have been causing or contributing to her condition and/or inhibiting her from recovering from a respiratory illness (that a doctor may not have known about). An example might be the presence of a heavy smell of smoke in the home, particularly if it was obvious the parents had been smoking pot in the house (we know now that PT admits to smoking weekly for 15 years. We can only guess whether or not he smoked in the house or not). Just one possible scenario.

(Personally, with as little care as they seem to have had for their childrens general safety - ie: leaving them alone at home - I would venture to guess that they did not seek medical attention for Baby A but I also think there *are* possible scenarios where they did.)

 

[ANonyMs]

May I make a very respectful request? When new MSM and official LE news comes out, could you please pop over to the Media thread and drop a post? It makes it easier for new people joining the case or dorks like me who have to re-read this stuff several times over.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ski-22-March-2015-**Media-Maps-and-Timeline**

 

[LadyMaryB]

I would think and hope that they had more to go on than the baby had a cold as a reason to remove her from the home.

I can't see them removing her if she had asthma or bronchitis, etc. and had been receiving medical treatment.

I think the respiratory issues were not the main reason she was removed. Surely there were other, more obvious signs of neglect. You don't remove a child from the home that has a medical condition they are being treated for, with that being the sole or even main reason.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hi Courtney- my original, too lengthy post went the way of the wind, so I'll just say I agree, the baby wasn't removed for just her illnesses, unless she was critical. Social services typically only remove a child as a last resort because of current and future mental health issues it *can* cause for some children, but not all.

Personally, I'm glad she was removed, although, she would've been removed shortly afterwards when both parents were arrested for felonies. I hope she will be raised in a loving home.

 

[ANonyMs]

I wonder what grounds she is appealing on. The witness was the same Uncle who offered to house Ashley at the first bond hearing. I will find the link when I get the kids settled.

Possibly she is talking? Unless I missed it, Paul isn't appealing his bond, and she has the more serious charges.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There was something saying that the witness who did not come today was the uncle? The only thing I can find is where he testified on her behalf in the first bond hearing.

 

[LadyMaryB]

Unless the baby was critical, I agree. There were other reasons she was removed. I'd just replied to courtneyb about this.

(Edited to remove these few sentences. Maybe I shouldn't have said them) Either way, the right call was made in getting her out of that environment.

Again, all this is just my thoughts and opinions.

I understand where you are coming from and tend to agree with you on this, however, I disagree that the *only* possible reason they took her was if the parents failed to seek medical attention. Just throwing out potential other scenarios...they could have sought medical attention but when LE (and subsequently CPS or DSS) came in, they may have found conditions in the home which could have been causing or contributing to her condition and/or inhibiting her from recovering from a respiratory illness (that a doctor may not have known about). An example might be the presence of a heavy smell of smoke in the home, particularly if it was obvious the parents had been smoking pot in the house (we know now that PT admits to smoking weekly for 15 years. We can only guess whether or not he smoked in the house or not). Just one possible scenario.

(Personally, with as little care as they seem to have had for their childrens general safety - ie: leaving them alone at home - I would venture to guess that they did not seek medical attention for Baby A but I also think there *are* possible scenarios where they did.)

 

[courtneyb]

https://mobile.twitter.com/CameronOAustin/status/588349757967466496

Has there been clarification on whether the baby had a "respiratory illness" or "respiratory problems"? The msm reporting last week used the term "illness" for the most part, but now I'm reading more and more using "problems". It is an important distinction, if drugs (some of which were present at the home) are being considered as possibly being involved. I would associate "problems" with difficulties breathing.. Shallow, labored respirations, strider, periods of apnea. Those things are more likely to be associated with drug ingestion. "Illness" would mean an infection, bronchitis, generally something treatable and common. Though certainly if a respiratory illness is severe enough, it can cause respiratory problems, as listed above. In either case, I don't think she had a simple virus or infection with congestion.

When my 6 month old got his first upper respiratory infection and was stopped up, I didn't leave him in the room alone, he was so congested and miserable, but not having respiratory "problems" per say. I could fathom any reason to leave a sick baby alone.

Either she had an illness severe enough to cause breathing problems, which is dangerous, and was left alone, or she was medicated and had depressed respiratory function, which is the number one side effect of opioids and their derivatives, and was left alone.

Or the information released was just wonky and the baby had a cold/infection or the like but that really did not carry much weight in her removal
and she was removed for some other, more obvious neglect or abuse.

http://www.wset.com/story/28809827/update-noah-thomas-case-both-parents-bond-hearings-today


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[courtneyb]

There was something saying that the witness who did not come today was the uncle? The only thing I can find is where he testified on her behalf in the first bond hearing.

I'm off to find it now for you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LadyMaryB]

https://mobile.twitter.com/CameronOAustin/status/588349757967466496

Has there been clarification on whether the baby had a "respiratory illness" or "respiratory problems"?

Snip...
According to this quote in the Roanoke Times, it was respiratory problems: "Shortly after Noah Thomas went missing, Fleenor [Commonwealth’s Attorney] said the county Social Services Department was contacted to examine Thomas and White’s 6-month-old daughter, ******* ******, When medical personnel inspected her, they found that she had “fairly serious respiratory problems,” Fleenor said Wednesday."

Source: http://www.roanoke.com/news/crime/p...b8b-6e9d-5408-b5f5-52697738366e.html?mode=jqm

 

[kaen]

My thought on the medical condition of the baby was that there may have been a respiratory illness that would have warranted medication. As a child under a year, there are major consequences if an illness goes untreated. (Now I speculate...) I wonder if the illness caused a look back at her well baby visits (vaccinations, height/weight, solids/no solids, history of asthma) and sick baby visits. If the baby had not been back for well-baby visits and she was fairly ill on the 22nd/23rd, you might be able to easily argue medical neglect. This was a mom who had an older child so she knew about pediatric care needs. If she had asthma or breathing problems and you have parents who smoke pot or cigarettes and don't provide medical care, then, you have another medical neglect.

 

[courtneyb]

There was something saying that the witness who did not come today was the uncle? The only thing I can find is where he testified on her behalf in the first bond hearing.

I snipped it out of my original post until I can find the link for you. I'm asking the other poster who I know read it to see if she can get the link for you. If not, I will search more when Baby goes down for a nap, as he is currently sitting on my hip yanking my hair and chortling.

 

[Strawberry Fields]

I wonder if they checked the baby for substances because certain drugs do depress respirations.

 

[LadyMaryB]

I'll try to help find the source. Do you happen to recall any exact quote from the article? That'd make searching for it sooooo much easier.

I snipped it out of my original post until I can find the link for you. I'm asking the other poster who I know read it to see if she can get the link for you. If not, I will search more when Baby goes down for a nap, as he is currently sitting on my hip yanking my hair and chortling.

 

[Strawberry Fields]

It has probably been discussed but I do wonder if the baby is in foster care or with relatives.

 

[iamnotagolem]

I'll try to help find the source. Do you happen to recall any exact quote from the article? That'd make searching for it sooooo much easier.

I saw it posted on the Justice for Noah fb page but the poster was a reporter, so it's probably not linkable or verifiable.

 

[courtneyb]

I'll try to help find the source. Do you happen to recall any exact quote from the article? That'd make searching for it sooooo much easier.

I found where I read it...It was a reporter familiar to this case who said it but it was the reporter replying to a comment on a page we cannot link here. But thank you!

But if you find it somewhere we can link, that would be great! I'm guessing we will get confirmation of this tomorrow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LadyMaryB]

Edited to say...ok, read your response courtneyb. Initial message deleted.

I snipped it out of my original post until I can find the link for you. I'm asking the other poster who I know read it to see if she can get the link for you. If not, I will search more when Baby goes down for a nap, as he is currently sitting on my hip yanking my hair and chortling.

 

[courtneyb]

I saw it posted on the Justice for Noah fb page but the poster was a reporter, so it's probably not linkable or verifiable.

It was my mistake... I could have sworn I saw it on her Twitter page late morning/early afternoon. But I just looked and I don't see it. Sorry!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mollyandme]

Just to clarify my post about CPS, there's no way her respiratory illness was the sole reason for removal unless it was something so egregious that it was an imminent danger, but it could have been one of the multiple reasons they told a judge she should be removed. The burdens are different than a criminal court, sorry for confusing anyone.