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

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
cobalt sky said:
Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe there is truth to some or all of the Aung family claims?
Click to expand...

Even if all of it is true, it's irrelevant to me. Nothing they said makes Samara unfit to care for her daughter. They're trying to justify a criminal act with absolute nonsense. No wonder their son is on the run and evading law enforcement.

cobalt sky said:
That maybe Nadia loves Seraya and her fiancée and witnessed some of it herself? That maybe two very young kids made an impulsive and desperate yet foolish move to protect a toddler they dearly love?
Click to expand...

Criminal action is criminal action. They kidnapped a child from her mother. I don't care that if it was impulsive, done for love, desperate or anything else.

cobalt sky said:
Meanwhile, everyone wants to conveniently ignore the alleged issues with the mother that may have been creating a potentially unsafe environment for Seraya.
Click to expand...

Wait, what issues suggest she may be creating a potentially unsafe environment? The mess? The father lived there too. The alleged pot? That doesn't make a parent unfit. The mental health issues? Again, doesn't make her unfit. I have yet to read anything that suggests the mom is unfit. In fact, given her stance on vaccinating her baby, I'd say she's more fit than the father and his family. JMO.

cobalt sky said:
It is likely that two young kids made poor choices in an effort to protect a beloved child. They should be getting the same benefit of the doubt as the mother.
Click to expand...

The mother didn't break the law and she isn't on the run. If the father had dealt with these issues in court, I'd give him the benefit of the doubt. But instead, he chose to break the law to get what he wanted. He doesn't get a pass in my book.

MOO.
 
WOW is all I can say at this point. This has taken a wild turn and one that I haven't really seen before...the family statement is absolutely bizarre IMO.

Luckily, by them making it though I believe they will be found swiftly at this point. We've got the FBI involved and he has an arrest warrant and technically NC is still "missing" as she was reported. The parents have made it very clear in their statement that they had prior and/or current knowledge that Seraya is with their son and NC. There is no way they would issue a statement like that if they had no idea where the three of them were as even if they thought Seraya was in good hands, if they've had no contact with their son for weeks I think they would be worried and wanting an update they are all "ok" which is why I believe they have that.

I can only hope LE and FBI can close in on this fast and get that baby girl back to her mother. The other problem is IF some of those allegations are 100% true, which I tend to not believe or think are exaggerated) now they have possibly ruined ever getting Seraya out of that living arrangement that they feel has her so endangered. IMOO they've now made it easier to award Seraya's mother more if not full custodial rights based on his custodial criminal behavior...thoughts?
 
viccity said:
If you know the location of someone who has a warrant, do you have any obligation to tell LE where they are?
Click to expand...

A good question for the attorneys here. Using my armchair lawyering/Google skills, I would think that withholding the information would be something like aiding and abetting a wanted criminal, no?
 
viccity said:
If you know the location of someone who has a warrant, do you have any obligation to tell LE where they are?
Click to expand...
No. Fortunately in the US citizens are not required to be informers. Lying to LE is a different matter & is not allowed. (Could be obstruction of justice) But staying silent & refusing to answer questions is a basic Constitutional right guaranteed to all of us.
MOO
 
I will just preface this by saying this is all my opinion. I find it terribly sad that some are defending what this "man" and his GF have done. According to the family and supporters, if you have been the victim of SA you can't be a parent, if you have ever smoked weed you can't be a parent, if you have taken medication and sought therapy you can't be a parent. If their allegations were true, the only course of action that falls under good intentions would have been to report it and trust the law. No proof has been shown that they ever did that. What there is proof of, is that an innocent little girl has been kidnapped, her world upended, and put in what is truly imminent danger. When the law catches up with them, and they will, how is someone who appears to be incredibly immature and rash going to react? I doubt the first thought will be about the poor child. And the GF? Well she choose the most cruel and heartless way to go missing she could find. She could have just left a note and been gone. But no, she choose to waste(I don't even want to imagine how much the trip cost)a lot of her parents money, and then go on to create panic and terror and then sorrow on her poor parents. Is this something a caring person would do to their own family? And now you want to trust her with a tiny child that isn't even family?
 
cobalt sky said:
Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe there is truth to some or all of the Aung family claims? That maybe Nadia loves Seraya and her fiancée and witnessed some of it herself? That maybe two very young kids made an impulsive and desperate yet foolish move to protect a toddler they dearly love?

Just because the way the Aungs went about airing the dirty laundry was in poor taste doesn’t mean that it isn’t true! Why is it that when a mother takes off with her children to protect them from an unsafe situation with their father, everyone assumes it must be true and cheers her on. When a father does it, it’s automatically assumed that he’s lying and using it for leverage or control and he is demonized.

Meanwhile, everyone wants to conveniently ignore the alleged issues with the mother that may have been creating a potentially unsafe environment for Seraya. It is likely that two young kids made poor choices in an effort to protect a beloved child. They should be getting the same benefit of the doubt as the mother. The real problem here imo is the way the Aung parents are handling the situation, but again they probably think they are protecting their son and gd not realizing what a shitshow they have created. I can also say from personal experience that there are likely cultural issues at play as well.

This entire situation imo is a whirling mass of good intentions mixed with poor choices.

All imo
Click to expand...
There definitely is truth to some of the Aung family claims. The problem though is that there is so much obvious mistruth and exaggeration, that it puts their whole statement into question. For example, the ridiculous claim that Nadia is studying for her law degree. She is not. So why make this baseless claim when they didn't even have to? They state that Nadia and Aaron are compassionate and loving. I have no doubt that they can be. They can also be selfish and cruel.

I am willing to believe that there is some truth to their claims e.g the messy house, the texts - signs of someone struggling. But regardless, there is no right for Aaron and Nadia to do what they did. None. It is for CPS and the courts to decide if it is necessary to remove Seraya from one or both parents. Not the Aungs.

There definitely are cultural differences here too and I am totally sensitive to that, but that does not excuse this outlandish statement.

Aung Family Statement

Site Released 6/12/24 | Site Updated 6/14/24 10:32 PM | **** NEW YOUTUBE VIDEOS ****
aungfamilystatement.com aungfamilystatement.com
 
Lorenathered said:
I will just preface this by saying this is all my opinion. I find it terribly sad that some are defending what this "man" and his GF have done. According to the family and supporters, if you have been the victim of SA you can't be a parent, if you have ever smoked weed you can't be a parent, if you have taken medication and sought therapy you can't be a parent. If their allegations were true, the only course of action that falls under good intentions would have been to report it and trust the law. No proof has been shown that they ever did that. What there is proof of, is that an innocent little girl has been kidnapped, her world upended, and put in what is truly imminent danger. When the law catches up with them, and they will, how is someone who appears to be incredibly immature and rash going to react? I doubt the first thought will be about the poor child. And the GF? Well she choose the most cruel and heartless way to go missing she could find. She could have just left a note and been gone. But no, she choose to waste(I don't even want to imagine how much the trip cost)a lot of her parents money, and then go on to create panic and terror and then sorrow on her poor parents. Is this something a caring person would do to their own family? And now you want to trust her with a tiny child that isn't even family?
Click to expand...
Maybe just MAYBE if they HAD gone to the court with these claims to try and get a judge to grant them more custody etc., and then were unsuccessful I could see them having this idea, but they didn't even try, just already assumed everything was against them, like this was their only option. Sounds like borderline conspiracy theorists, ya know?
 
BeginnerSleuther said:
Even if all of it is true, it's irrelevant to me. Nothing they said makes Samara unfit to care for her daughter. They're trying to justify a criminal act with absolute nonsense. No wonder their son is on the run and evading law enforcement.



Criminal action is criminal action. They kidnapped a child from her mother. I don't care that if it was impulsive, done for love, desperate or anything else.



Wait, what issues suggest she may be creating a potentially unsafe environment? The mess? The father lived there too. The alleged pot? That doesn't make a parent unfit. The mental health issues? Again, doesn't make her unfit. I have yet to read anything that suggests the mom is unfit. In fact, given her stance on vaccinating her baby, I'd say she's more fit than the father and his family. JMO.



The mother didn't break the law and she isn't on the run. If the father had dealt with these issues in court, I'd give him the benefit of the doubt. But instead, he chose to break the law to get what he wanted. He doesn't get a pass in my book.

MOO.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure with all the problems Washington does have, cocaine is still illegal.
 
cobalt sky said:
Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe there is truth to some or all of the Aung family claims? That maybe Nadia loves Seraya and her fiancée and witnessed some of it herself? That maybe two very young kids made an impulsive and desperate yet foolish move to protect a toddler they dearly love?

Just because the way the Aungs went about airing the dirty laundry was in poor taste doesn’t mean that it isn’t true! Why is it that when a mother takes off with her children to protect them from an unsafe situation with their father, everyone assumes it must be true and cheers her on. When a father does it, it’s automatically assumed that he’s lying and using it for leverage or control and he is demonized.

Meanwhile, everyone wants to conveniently ignore the alleged issues with the mother that may have been creating a potentially unsafe environment for Seraya. It is likely that two young kids made poor choices in an effort to protect a beloved child. They should be getting the same benefit of the doubt as the mother. The real problem here imo is the way the Aung parents are handling the situation, but again they probably think they are protecting their son and gd not realizing what a shitshow they have created. I can also say from personal experience that there are likely cultural issues at play as well.

This entire situation imo is a whirling mass of good intentions mixed with poor choices.

All imo
Click to expand...
I’m quoting my own post for reference because I’m seeing responses to it that seem to be misunderstanding me or putting words in my mouth.

I am not defending what they did, I am considering circumstances and mindsets that might have prompted them to act impulsively and make poor choices BUT be doing so in what they believe is in the child’s best interest. Why is that so difficult to understand? It doesn’t necessarily make them terrible people! We still don’t know the whole real story and therefore I’m keeping an open mind. Light your torches and sharpen your pitchforks that’s fine, but I’m not doing that.

The worst part of all is that none of this is any of our business but here we are.
 
viccity said:
Maybe just MAYBE if they HAD gone to the court with these claims to try and get a judge to grant them more custody etc., and then were unsuccessful I could see them having this idea, but they didn't even try, just already assumed everything was against them, like this was their only option. Sounds like borderline conspiracy theorists, ya know?
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm not understanding the timing, but it sounded to me like they brought all of these claims to court during the 2023 custodial case. In the end, that case was settled by mediation but it sounded like the Aung family wasn't happy with how the mediation went and still has all of these complaints and issues with Seraya's mother.
 
viccity said:
Maybe just MAYBE if they HAD gone to the court with these claims to try and get a judge to grant them more custody etc., and then were unsuccessful I could see them having this idea, but they didn't even try, just already assumed everything was against them, like this was their only option. Sounds like borderline conspiracy theorists, ya know?
Click to expand...
In their statement when they say:
(and I am presuming this is actually the Mrs doing the writing here by the way she refers to her husband and father in law)

"Mr. Aung’s father, Dr. Tin Aung, left Burma, in the early 1970’s to escape a totalitarian government and was afraid for his own children’s lives. Mr. Aung now finds himself in a surreal episode having to think that the USA is heading this way, especially in the family court system which now impacts his own kids and grandkids."

This over the top statement that the US is heading towards the totalitarianism of Burma does have a whiff of conspiracy theory type thinking.

Aung Family Statement

Site Released 6/12/24 | Site Updated 6/14/24 10:32 PM | **** NEW YOUTUBE VIDEOS ****
aungfamilystatement.com aungfamilystatement.com
 
sasha17 said:
Maybe I'm not understanding the timing, but it sounded to me like they brought all of these claims to court during the 2023 custodial case. In the end, that case was settled by mediation but it sounded like the Aung family wasn't happy with how the mediation went and still has all of these complaints and issues with Seraya's mother.
Click to expand...
I am not sure either, but if that were the case then that is also not the proper way to handle the situation. If you have evidence(or suspicion) of crimes happening to and around your child, you go to LE. you don't try and use it for leverage in custody IMO.
 
I think like most things in life the truth lies somewhere in the middle— do I believe that Samara may be troubled and struggling? Sure, but that doesn’t automatically designate her as someone who shouldn’t have custody of her daughter. Do I believe that Aaron, Nadia, and his family believe that they’re doing the “right thing” because of the environment that they believe Seraya is living in with her mother? Again, sure, but as I’ve said in past posts— we have a legal system for a reason and from what I can gather they haven’t addressed these apparent issues through the appropriate channels. That makes what they’re doing illegal, regardless of whether their claims are true or not.

MOO.
 
sasha17 said:
Maybe I'm not understanding the timing, but it sounded to me like they brought all of these claims to court during the 2023 custodial case. In the end, that case was settled by mediation but it sounded like the Aung family wasn't happy with how the mediation went and still has all of these complaints and issues with Seraya's mother.
Click to expand...
if that is the case then their concerns must not have amounted to sufficient grounds to warrant sole custody. Even if they were unhappy with the mediation result, mediation in family matters in the state of washington appear to be NON BINDING, the Aungs still had options of contacting child protective service, repetitioning the court etc.

Courts use mediation as a means to hopefully reach a resolution and reduce the acrimony in a custodial dispute.
RCW 26.09.015: Mediation proceedings.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 104 more.
Total: 2,112 (members: 105, guests: 2,007)

Online statistics

Members online
105
Guests online
2,007
Total visitors
2,112
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,456
Messages
18,095,644
Members
230,861
Latest member
jusslikeme
Back
Top