WA - Lindsey Baum, 10, McCleary, 26 June 2009 - #16

[CorallaroC]

Is that the same mysterious person who said we should look in/near his back yard?

Also, I'm not sure why, but August 20 sticks out in my head for other reasons too. But it appears we lost thread #11 around that date. I might be able to find it in my handwritten notes...

 

[scandi]

Is that the same mysterious person who said we should look in/near his back yard?

Also, I'm not sure why, but August 20 sticks out in my head for other reasons too. But it appears we lost thread #11 around that date. I might be able to find it in my handwritten notes...

No, the guy who said we should look in his backyard and that she is within 1/4 mile from the property they searched is Mr Mulder who lives on Overlake Lane, right off of Old Sand Creek Rd.

 

[scandi]

Yes M (town drunk) lives on the corner of 4th and Pine Street. He takes care of an elderly woman.

Hi Thelma, I wish I xould just reach through this screen and talk to you LOLOLOL Anyhoo, WELCOME to WS and thanks for that short but Xclellent post ;}

 

[boondock]

I was with Jen today when we made some records requests & spoke with Polly.

Pretty sure Polly had never heard of me.

Would these records requests have anything to do with other search warrants issued in Lindsey's case? If so, are you going to share? :innocent:

 

[scandi]

Would these records requests have anything to do with other search warrants issued in Lindsey's case? If so, are you going to share? :innocent:

Hi Boondock, Anyone can review the SW's in McCleary or reall Montesano as they are public info. One simply has to write for an appt and they are given a time to come in and read them on site. The gal I talked to several months ago said there were several SW's, not just those for the Golder searches. xox

 

[jvk]

Hi Boondock, Anyone can review the SW's in McCleary or reall Montesano as they are public info. One simply has to write for an appt and they are given a time to come in and read them on site. The gal I talked to several months ago said there were several SW's, not just those for the Golder searches. xox

The clerks office, the sheriffs dept & Polly made no mention of this possibility. All of them seemed to be puzzled as to what would be publicly available. No one said anything about making an appt or where/how it would be viewed.

 

[JenniferO]

Hi Boondock, Anyone can review the SW's in McCleary or reall Montesano as they are public info. One simply has to write for an appt and they are given a time to come in and read them on site. The gal I talked to several months ago said there were several SW's, not just those for the Golder searches. xox

According to Rick Scott and Polly Davin.. it's up to the Prosecuting Attorney on whether or not anything is available for the public to view. Everything possibly could be sealed due to it being an ongoing investigation.

Oops.. I didn't refresh the screen before posting. I didn't see JVK had already answered.

 

[scandi]

The clerks office, the sheriffs dept & Polly made no mention of this possibility. All of them seemed to be puzzled as to what would be publicly available. No one said anything about making an appt or where/how it would be viewed.

Hi Jvk, I called right after the Golder searches were done and the Affidavit was published. I remember I had a hard time finding the right person to talk to as Montesano is such a small court dept. I know I spoke to a gal in the Prosecutors office as I don't think they have a general clerk's office. It's been a while ago {Lordie, as active I've been in Lindsey's case and all the reading . . . .}.

But this lady told me the procedure, to send or bring in person a letter asking to review the SW's in Lindsey's case. The office then sets a date and time when the person can come in for their appt and are allowed to read the SW's and then leave when they are done. I asked her if there were other SW's other than the Golder ones and she said, Oh yes, there are several. And she mentioned something 'like the cell phone ones'.

And then she said something very strange that I simply chalked up to it being a very small dept. It was SS to 'They don't always use SW's and simply come back with written notes'.

On Mon I will call and find that lady again. It won't be very hard. I'll start with the prosecutors office and since I know I talked to one dept before being referred to that one, it might be who I talked to.

I would think Polly would certainly know all of that!

 

[scandi]

According to Rick Scott and Polly Davin.. it's up to the Prosecuting Attorney on whether or not anything is available for the public to view. Everything possibly could be sealed due to it being an ongoing investigation.

Oops.. I didn't refresh the screen before posting. I didn't see JVK had already answered.

Well I was never told that, and remember I called maybe the Thursday after the Golder searches. They might have changed their policy now due to the breadth of the case and the public attention it is getting. If there is a court order to issue the SW's as sealed it will be a public document too.

Believe me, I will get the same gal on the phone as I will remember her pattern of speech and be very nice, remind her of what I was told as far as viewing the SW's and ask for the address to send my letter.

After I made that call I wrote a post here all about it which is still here somewhere. It will confirm that what I am saying now is what I was told back then. xox

PS: I do know too that there were several properties/houses searched in GHC where LE might not have needed a SW if given permission by the owner. But if there was a SW written by the Prosecutor it will be of public record always unless a judge orders any or all of them sealed. In other words, once written and signed it can't simply disappear as it is of public record whether it is viewable now or not.

 

[jvk]

I'll start with the prosecutors office

We were never directed there. Wherever that is. Supposedly that's where my request will be going though. I'm interested in knowing.

 

[not_my_kids]

The public has a right to information...not to dissemination. It is within anyone rights to view the paperwork of public record...however, there is a very good chance that even if someone does get to see it, we won't hear about it here. I have to sign non-disclosure and breach of contract paperwork when I spend time in our records room, and it wouldn't surprise me if the same thing is asked for in this case.
MOO.

 

[Knox]

According to Rick Scott and Polly Davin.. it's up to the Prosecuting Attorney on whether or not anything is available for the public to view. Everything possibly could be sealed due to it being an ongoing investigation.

Oops.. I didn't refresh the screen before posting. I didn't see JVK had already answered.

So when you or JVK made the records request they could not tell you whether the records were available or sealed? Would seem like this is something they would know immediately. Maybe it just depends on what the information is for and every request has to be reviewed by prosecutor's office first.

That said, I would not expect anything of a critical nature to be shared here. Underscored by the fact you are a member of the core search group and are bound by confidentiality in all matters. So why mention the request at all? I am not being flippant or derogatory when asking, just curious why.

 

[scandi]

We were never directed there. Wherever that is. Supposedly that's where my request will be going though. I'm interested in knowing.

Morning Jvk, Crazy isn't it, and wonder if they just don't want the SW's discussed in every last detail on a public forum. I'm sure they know Jennifer is an active poster.

When I wrote that post a couple of months ago I remember asking here if there was a local who could take the time to go thru the process to view the warrants. xox

 

[jvk]

they could not tell you whether the records were available or sealed?

Correct. Or what if any were available.

Would seem like this is something they would know immediately.

Not quite sure..

Maybe it just depends on what the information is for

What's public is public...

why mention the request at all?

Not too worried about mentioning a request for public info.

 

[jvk]

Morning Jvk, Crazy isn't it, and wonder if they just don't want the SW's discussed in every last detail on a public forum.

I would say that's probably true.

I'm sure they know Jennifer is an active poster.

That might depend on defining 'they'

FYI: I can entertain what you were told, we could just be getting mixed messages or taking the long way.

 

[JenniferO]

Morning Jvk, Crazy isn't it, and wonder if they just don't want the SW's discussed in every last detail on a public forum. I'm sure they know Jennifer is an active poster.

When I wrote that post a couple of months ago I remember asking here if there was a local who could take the time to go thru the process to view the warrants. xox

Contrary to what everyone thinks.. I'm not that well known beyond the internet when it comes to Lindsey.

 

[boondock]

This is OT and if not appropriate to put here, please delete. A post by someone on another forum has directed people to pm me here at WS asking me to verify information. Since my mailbox is getting full, I just wanted to put my answer here for all to see.

This is regarding some information that was reportedly posted by someone publicly on the other forum which I was said to be witness to. This is NOT CORRECT, the posts were never public and to my knowledge nothing was, or ever has, been posted or publically shared with others that would compromise this investigation by this person.

As to why this individual on the other forum thought I would validate otherwise is a mystery.

It may be wise to take information posted on any of these forums with a grain of salt. Don't take everything you read as the gospel truth. Keep an open mind.

If I recall, the astros said something about someone trying to "mask the truth or deceive". IMO it is not the person/people that many of you are being led to believe.

 

[Normcar21]

Not sure if this has been posted already but it was nice to see AMW feature Lindsey's case tonight, with a close up of her face ( a photo all of us are familiar with as well as the one with her t-shirt). I was personally very happy to see this after all of the "on air" silence relative to Lindsey.

 

[SheWhoMustNotBeNamed]

I'm not sure what's been going on in here lately. Kind of deterring some folks (not just me) from hanging around. Sorry if that offends anyone, but the focus is not on LINDSEY, and that's very disappointing. Anyway, that wasn't the original intent of this post, so anyway...

Because I haven't read everything lately, I don't know if this was mentioned already or not. Forgive me if it was. But I just wanted to let everyone know that Lindsey was on AMW again tonight. I didn't get a chance to see it, so I'm not sure how detailed it was or what exactly was shown, but she was on.

ETA: I see Normcar beat me to it. Thanks!!!


Change Of Seasons Makes Search More Desperate

With Winter approaching, volunteers and independent funds are drying up in the search for 11-year-old Lindsey Baum, but her friends and family remain forever hopeful. Meanwhile, law enforcement continues its valiant efforts to uncover credible information despite a recent deluge of false tips.

http://www.amw.com/missing_children/brief.cfm?id=66559

 

[Normcar21]

Hey, Idaho, thanks for sharing, I'm so far behind on reading this forum that I am somewhat embarrassed even to contribute because I'm just not up on recent chat. I just had to input after watching AMW tonight, and was "really" pleased to see Lindsey being featured. If only NG, AMW, and JV as well as others would just take a few secs to do this it would keep the focus going and the eyeballs watching. I was very impressed and hope that the daily programs would think about doing the same (a 10 or 20 second video and sound byte update on children still not found).

PS - I didn't beat y'all, with time zone considerations we tied