WA WA - Seraya Aung Harmon, 2, Pullman, 29 May 2024 *father and daughter went on a fishing trip in Montana but did not return*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Penalties for Custodial Interference in Washington State
A first-degree charge of custodial interference in Washington is a class C felony.

RCW 9A.40.060
Custodial interference in the first degree.
(1) A relative of a child under the age of eighteen or of an incompetent person is guilty of custodial interference in the first degree if, with the intent to deny access to the child or incompetent person by a parent, guardian, institution, agency, or other person having a lawful right to physical custody of such person, the relative takes, entices, retains, detains, or conceals the child or incompetent person from a parent, guardian, institution, agency, or other person having a lawful right to physical custody of such person and:
(a) Intends to hold the child or incompetent person permanently or for a protracted period; or
(b) Exposes the child or incompetent person to a substantial risk of illness or physical injury; or
(c) Causes the child or incompetent person to be removed from the state of usual residence; or
(d) Retains, detains, or conceals the child or incompetent person in another state after expiration of any authorized visitation period with intent to intimidate or harass a parent, guardian, institution, agency, or other person having lawful right to physical custody or to prevent a parent, guardian, institution, agency, or other person with lawful right to physical custody from regaining custody.
(2) A parent of a child is guilty of custodial interference in the first degree if the parent takes, entices, retains, detains, or conceals the child, with the intent to deny access, from the other parent having the lawful right to time with the child pursuant to a court order making residential provisions for the child, and:
(a) Intends to hold the child permanently or for a protracted period; or
(b) Exposes the child to a substantial risk of illness or physical injury; or
(c) Causes the child to be removed from the state of usual residence.
(3) A parent or other person acting under the directions of the parent is guilty of custodial interference in the first degree if the parent or other person intentionally takes, entices, retains, or conceals a child, under the age of eighteen years and for whom no lawful custody order or order making residential provisions for the child has been entered by a court of competent jurisdiction, from the other parent with intent to deprive the other parent from access to the child permanently or for a protracted period.
(4) Custodial interference in the first degree is a class C felony.
RCW 9A.40.060: Custodial interference in the first degree.


A class C felony is punishable by up to five years in prison and/or a fine of $10,000. A gross misdemeanor is punishable by imprisonment for up to 364 days and/or up to $5,000 in fines.
 
Whatever they are doing, they are learning it's not so easy to live a romantic runaway life while also caring for a two-year old full-time. (Assuming the intention was to romantically runaway).

I'm honestly surprised they haven't been located yet.

jmo

I have to wonder if NC knew ahead of time that AA’s constipated toddler daughter was going along with them. If not, she may not be a “happy camper.”
 
Understandable now that I've just read @tlcya post! I thought that charges would be upgraded to kidnapping, but I see the charge of 1st degree custodial interference is pretty much the same thing.
I meant hopefully that would be all the charges and not something worse, as in - baby girl is safe and healthy.

jmo
 
I’m late to the thread and have not read the whole thing, so sorry if this has already been discussed. Has the possibility that they are not voluntarily missing been considered at all? Could they have gone for a few days to unwind in Montana and had an accident? Or met with foul play? Has the car been located? The pieces here are just not adding up. I don’t think they are in Mexico.
 
There was a post of hers in her social media where she commented that she didn't 'like the outdoors.' Just a one off comment so I might not mean much, but it is interesting...If I had to guess, I'd lean towards her being more of a Glamper than a camper.


You are probably right. But that post is dated 12/2020. Tastes can change in 3 1/2 years especially if a boyfriend introduced camping as one of his favorite activities. Of course, I don't think we really know if AA is a regular camper. He may not be if he had to buy much equipment for the purported Montana trip. Maybe he didn't buy much though in laying that false trail.

MOO
 
I’m late to the thread and have not read the whole thing, so sorry if this has already been discussed. Has the possibility that they are not voluntarily missing been considered at all? Could they have gone for a few days to unwind in Montana and had an accident? Or met with foul play? Has the car been located? The pieces here are just not adding up. I don’t think they are in Mexico.
I mean, anything is possible but given the facts of this case, it doesn't appear to be at all probable. KISS is how I am leaning.

Dad takes 2 year old baby "allegedly" on fishing trip out of state to Montana but doesn't tell custodial mom? His fiance just so happens to walk away minutes before boarding a flight for a planned trip to Italy with her parents the same day the dad departs on his alleged fishing trip? Dad never shows at custody exchange and none are seen again.

Walking an awful lot like a duck JMO
 
You are probably right. But that post is dated 12/2020. Tastes can change in 3 1/2 years especially if a boyfriend introduced camping as one of his favorite activities. Of course, I don't think we really know if AA is a regular camper. He may not be if he had to buy much equipment for the purported Montana trip. Maybe he didn't buy much though in laying that false trail.

MOO
True! When I first started dating hubby, I went camping a few times with him but have always hated it so put on a brave face and found I semi enjoyed it, so it could be the same for Nadia. Needless to say a couple of years into the relationship I dropped my fabricated outdoorsy character trait.
 
yah, me too.
Especially since I read the report that AA was known to have bought Montana maps and some camping equipment, which made LE originally believe he was going to Montana.

So was that a ruse too---he bought that stuff to fool someone? WHO? Did he show his parents that stuff to convince them he was going fishing?

[Such a weird alibi though---who takes a 2 yr old on a Montana fishing/camping trip? I took a 2 yr old camping but there was also her older brother and her father and aunt and uncle and cousins there as well. I'd never have gone with just her.]
Agree with everything except the fishing/camping part.

FWIW, lots of parents here take their 2-year-olds fishing/camping. It’s really common for weekend dads especially, altho we don’t know the parenting time split here. MOO.

The MT part raised my eyebrows a bit because we have so many great littles-friendly fishing/camping spots much closer, but since I know nothing about AA, I thought maybe he was meeting up with friends/family, which is also really common this time of year.

It worries me that this is dragging on & I fervently hope there’s a successful resolution before desperation spirals out of control :(
 
I agree about the paper map....unless the 21yo was planning to go offline??

jmo
MOO, that’s exactly what the plan was, regardless of where they may be.

MOO, this was planned, not a spur of the moment thing, at least for AA. NC intentionally & voluntarily, MOO, left her phone behind, which speaks volumes to me.
 
I mean, anything is possible but given the facts of this case, it doesn't appear to be at all probable. KISS is how I am leaning.

Dad takes 2 year old baby "allegedly" on fishing trip out of state to Montana but doesn't tell custodial mom? His fiance just so happens to walk away minutes before boarding a flight for a planned trip to Italy with her parents the same day the dad departs on his alleged fishing trip? Dad never shows at custody exchange and none are seen again.

Walking an awful lot like a duck JMO
I get what you’re saying. I was thinking along the lines of her skipping out on her parents to join him for a few days in Montana. An immature thing to do, but nothing particularly nefarious planned. Then an accident or something happened.
 
You are probably right. But that post is dated 12/2020. Tastes can change in 3 1/2 years especially if a boyfriend introduced camping as one of his favorite activities. Of course, I don't think we really know if AA is a regular camper. He may not be if he had to buy much equipment for the purported Montana trip. Maybe he didn't buy much though in laying that false trail.

MOO
It doesn’t appear that AA is an outdoorsy person, according to SH, the ex.

From transcript from Crime Stories with Nancy Grace
24:59
Speaker 2
Dad was spotted buying maps and camping equipment. Did you ever know him to be an outdoorsman.
25:08
Speaker 4
No, when I knew him, he was not. He was more of a germophobe and would rather stay inside than go out. I tried to get him engaged in fishing, It's an activity I like to do, but he never really took any interest in it. So when I knew him, no, it was not something it was known to do. It was not something I'd heard him even show any interest in.

(I only read the transcript; I didn’t listen to the audio, so am just going by the written transcript.)
 
MOO, that’s exactly what the plan was, regardless of where they may be.

MOO, this was planned, not a spur of the moment thing, at least for AA. NC intentionally & voluntarily, MOO, left her phone behind, which speaks volumes to me.
I am going to hazard a guess that the reason for NC appearing "distressed" had to do with her not being able to figure out how to slip away from her parents at the airport WITH her luggage in tow. I doubt very much the alleged distressed appearance had to do with this beinga last minute plan for her.

What AA did took planning. IMO this was no spur of the moment thing. His disapeparance was not an accident. I believe NC was also in on that plan. As you and others have pointed out, the fact that she left her phone behind is telling. JMO MOO
 
I wish we knew why LE said they may be headed to Mexico or already there at this point. It'd be interesting to know what specifically tipped them off as a possible destination...was it something someone said or saw...have they been seen or the car been seen and where?

Also, I am very perplexed, even if they had help, that they still have not been located as we are going on two weeks at this point. A young, good looking couple with an adorable little girl you think might stick out a bit especially with her long platinum blonde hair if they were in Mexico unless they are for some reason in a touristy area where they would blend in a little more however that would most likely be a rather expensive area to be hiding out in. It's also quite possible that she dyed her hair, even if temporarily which would not make them stick out as much in public and they might easily pass for a young local Mexican family.
 
Moo...I got married at 18....just to get away from my parents. Sure at 21 she could as an adult say I am an adult. But with some families, they will never see you as an adult. Their rules or you are disowned....moo.....I left marriage after 6 months.
 
I wish we knew why LE said they may be headed to Mexico or already there at this point. It'd be interesting to know what specifically tipped them off as a possible destination...was it something someone said or saw...have they been seen or the car been seen and where?

Completely my own speculation here, but the news about the Cadillac and the news about Mexico came out the same day. I wonder if someone back home in Idaho finally broke down in a LE interview and said something along the lines of, "They told me not to tell anyone, but they took the Cadillac and are going to Mexico!" Given that that news came out several days after the disappearance, they could have made it into Mexico by that time. Again, JMO!
 
I wish we knew why LE said they may be headed to Mexico or already there at this point. It'd be interesting to know what specifically tipped them off as a possible destination...was it something someone said or saw...have they been seen or the car been seen and where?
^snipped

From the transcript I linked in my prior post:

Back to Soria's mom, Samara Harmon, what are cops telling you about Mexico as a possibility?
37:40
Speaker 4
They just said that they had seen the vehicles registered to the family crossing the border. They have informed me that well, specifically, the FBI has informed me that even with this fighting, they are still searching everywhere. They are leaving no stone unturned. They aren't completely sold on any theory. They're following the evidence and it hasn't made them one percent believe in one reaction or not. But they are searching high and low across the globe for my daughter.
 
There was a Cadillac STX with an Idaho license plate on its way to Mexico at the border and Nadio's car and Aaron's vehicle state in Pullman. There have been reports that this vehicle might be tied to Aaron's father, but that is not yet confirmed. It is just tied to a quote family member.
[snip]
Well, I can tell you this much, Tara Malik, It'll be a cold day and hublel this woman gets into law school. If she's part of the custodial interference in taking this child away from her mother, that's not happening. If I have to see to it myself, you are not going to be an officer of the court after you have taken part in this if in fact she did no way.
TOT- GIRL, 2, MISSING AFTER MAN BUYS CAMPING GEAR, MAPS | MOM SPEAKS TO NANCY - Crime Stories with Nancy Grace

anybody that has known me for more than five minutes knows I am not a huge fan of NG but on the second emphasised paragraph I am in total agreement with her.

NC is a willing part of this planned disappearance/custodial interference. Not only have they left the state they have left the country. NC will never practice law. All that school and effort wasted. MOO.
 
There was a post of hers in her social media where she commented that she didn't 'like the outdoors.' Just a one off comment so I might not mean much, but it is interesting...If I had to guess, I'd lean towards her being more of a Glamper than a camper.


Wow, look at how beautiful it is there. Hard to understand how you could not like the outdoors living in such a magnificent place.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
68
Guests online
1,896
Total visitors
1,964

Forum statistics

Threads
600,322
Messages
18,106,740
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top