WA WA - Sky Metalwala, 2, Bellevue, 6 Nov 2011 - # 5

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
What? The dogs found no evidence he was outside that car and didn't leave with shoes.
 
His "last seen" description includes white socks and no shoes.
 
I was just about to say how I would not be shocked if he didn't have shoes on. My 19 month old hates wearing shoes and socks and will take them off all the time - especially when she is in her car sear. It is to the point where I usually only put her shoes on if it is cold out. Otherwise I just throw them in the diaper bag until we get where we are going. Which makes me wonder...did she have a diaper bag on her?

I wonder if that is his little shoe.
 
HRCODEPINK said:
I know, but someone replied to me asking about her doing that with her being homeopathic/organic saying that she could have been using melatonin and gave a link to an article about people using that with their kids. I am curious about how safe that would be at that age. My daughter has a blood disorder that she got from me where our bodies think we don't need vitamins and minerals and our bodies throw it away. I was not allowed to give her any vitamins until she was 3 because it wouldn't be safe, so until then we dealt with Pica.

ETA: Sorry, I should have been clearer on my post above.
Click to expand...

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/natural/940.html

http://blog.oregonlive.com/themombeat/2009/12/post_6.html

http://www.umm.edu/altmed/articles/melatonin-000315.htm
 
~n/t~ said:
Why does he have a lawyer? Was anything said about his second poly? Thanks for all the updates.....I'm tv-less tonight.
Click to expand...

Patty G said:
I think the lawyer that is with him, is the lawyer representing him in the divorce. So far, nothing has been mentioned about the poly. Only 18 minutes into the show.

I am recording it and it will be uploaded to my YouTube channel after the show.
http://www.youtube.com/Sierra1947
Click to expand...

Since there are on-going custody issues, he probably wants his divorce attorney present so he doesn't screw up his custody case. Clients can be stupid that way.

Cubby said:
BBM. If this is true, it amazes me CPS allowed the children around mom unsupervised. Shaking my head.
Click to expand...

I think prejudice towards men from his region played a huge part. We hear way too much in this country about serious child and spousal abuse at the hands of men from those regions (Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Middle east). I think in the case of the court, they didn't want this to be sent back to CPS, courts are very reluctant to do that. So they picked the parent they felt was more believable. I think Julia is a good liar.

Cortne said:
Interesting to me that, IMO the father is not bashing or speaking for Julia. Every time Nancy asks him a question, one example, did she want the baby he only said his feelings. Hes not saying a bad word about her. Very telling IMO.
Click to expand...

It is. He's doing what I would advise in a custody case.

Okay guys, I'm insane. While doing laundry this evening, I counted the photos on Julia's flikr account. The results:

Counting only photos from sets that date to after Sky was born:

714 include M. 362 include Sky. That means, Sky was featured 50% less times than his sister was, in photos taken only after he was born.

449 photos included M without her brother Sky. 107 photos included Sky without his sister M. That means Sky is featured solo 23% of the time and M 77% of the time.

Looking at the whole photo stream, M's first Memorial Day, first Thanksgiving, first trip to the doctor (strangely when she looks about two years old!) and first Father's Day were all recorded, as well as two, different birthdays. None of those firsts were recoded for Sky and none of his birthdays were recorded.

Of course, he is the second child and things were probably going south in the marriage after he was born, yet that didn't stop mom from recording two of M's birthdays during that time period and the averages I listed above were also from that time period. So M continued to be the focal point and her milestones continued to be recorded and published while Sky's were not.

I;m not sure how much weight to give it, and I know there could be many variables that explain it, but my initial impression remains that there seems something off.

I have the breakdown by set if anyone is as crazy as me and wants it.
 
gitana1 said:
Since there are on-going custody issues, he probably wants his divorce attorney present so he doesn't screw up his custody case. Clients can be stupid that way.



I think prejudice towards men from his region played a huge part. We hear way too much in this country about serious child and spousal abuse at the hands of men from those regions (Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Middle east). I think in the case of the court, they didn't want this to be sent back to CPS, courts are very reluctant to do that. So they picked the parent they felt was more believable. I think Julia is a good liar.



It is. He's doing what I would advise in a custody case.

Okay guys, I'm insane. While doing laundry this evening, I counted the photos on Julia's flikr account. The results:

Counting only photos from sets that date to after Sky was born:

714 include M. 362 include Sky. That means, Sky was featured 50% less times than his sister was, in photos taken only after he was born.

449 photos included M without her brother Sky. 107 photos included Sky without his sister M. That means Sky is featured solo 23% of the time and M 77% of the time.

Looking at the whole photo stream, M's first Memorial Day, first Thanksgiving, first trip to the doctor (strangely when she looks about two years old!) and first Father's Day were all recorded, as well as two, different birthdays. None of those firsts were recoded for Sky and none of his birthdays were recorded.

Of course, he is the second child and things were probably going south in the marriage after he was born, yet that didn't stop mom from recording two of M's birthdays during that time period and the averages I listed above were also from that time period. So M continued to be the focal point and her milestones continued to be recorded and published while Sky's were not.

I;m not sure how much weight to give it, and I know there could be many variables that explain it, but my initial impression remains that there seems something off.

I have the breakdown by set if anyone is as crazy as me and wants it.
Click to expand...

Thanks for doing that!! I was wondering.

What we don't know is how many albums or photo's were "hidden" to public view, or deleted..maybe she didn't want dad to see him, maybe he was closer to Sky because he was a boy? MOO
 
gitana1 said:
Since there are on-going custody issues, he probably wants his divorce attorney present so he doesn't screw up his custody case. Clients can be stupid that way.



I think prejudice towards men from his region played a huge part. We hear way too much in this country about serious child and spousal abuse at the hands of men from those regions (Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Middle east). I think in the case of the court, they didn't want this to be sent back to CPS, courts are very reluctant to do that. So they picked the parent they felt was more believable. I think Julia is a good liar.



It is. He's doing what I would advise in a custody case.

Okay guys, I'm insane. While doing laundry this evening, I counted the photos on Julia's flikr account. The results:

Counting only photos from sets that date to after Sky was born:

714 include M. 362 include Sky. That means, Sky was featured 50% less times than his sister was, in photos taken only after he was born.

449 photos included M without her brother Sky. 107 photos included Sky without his sister M. That means Sky is featured solo 23% of the time and M 77% of the time.

Looking at the whole photo stream, M's first Memorial Day, first Thanksgiving, first trip to the doctor (strangely when she looks about two years old!) and first Father's Day were all recorded, as well as two, different birthdays. None of those firsts were recoded for Sky and none of his birthdays were recorded.

Of course, he is the second child and things were probably going south in the marriage after he was born, yet that didn't stop mom from recording two of M's birthdays during that time period and the averages I listed above were also from that time period. So M continued to be the focal point and her milestones continued to be recorded and published while Sky's were not.

I;m not sure how much weight to give it, and I know there could be many variables that explain it, but my initial impression remains that there seems something off.

I have the breakdown by set if anyone is as crazy as me and wants it.
Click to expand...

BBM

Lol! Thank you for doing this! I AM as crazy as you and I wanted to do it, but haven't found the time! On the first thread for Sky when everyone was first starting to comment on whether they felt the pics were evenly split or not, I had guessed that it was around a 1:5 (sky:m) ratio, making it pretty close to your calculations! I knew I wasn't crazy for thinking there were WAY more of the sister, but it was starting to drive me crazy because I didn't have time to sit down and PROVE it to myself yet!! WOOHOO for you!! :woot:

I know that there's the possibility that every picture of Sky could possibly could be hidden from public viewing. But if her goal was to only hide pics of Sky to keep his father from seeing them, why would she leave over 100 solo pics Sky available for public viewing? I think that would be counterproductive in a way. But who knows! It is not like much of anything having to do with this woman makes a lick of sense!

Anyway, THANK YOU again for doing this! I really thought I was crazy for wanting to do it as well! :)
 
I don't know if photobucket is the same as facebook,I don't have one.Are you able to hide individual pictures or individual sets there like you can on facebook?
If I'm not mistaken either your entire account is private or public? Does anyone know for sure?
 
Regarding FB pics I tend to have more of my daughter because she is an aspiring model and loves the camera. Typically 2 year old boys don't do a whole lot to have their pics taken. 4 year olds especially girls are much more into the whole camera thing and quite frankly are doing more interesting things to take pics of. Speaking in generalities here of course. BTW I am the youngest with o baby pics. My dad says it's because he got his home movie camera when I was born and they took less photos. I think we are reading into the FB thing too much. I am far more concerned with her instability, irresponsibility and her nightmares about killing her child previously. Oh and her story that makes no sense.
 
claudicici said:
I don't know if photobucket is the same as facebook,I don't have one.Are you able to hide individual pictures or individual sets there like you can on facebook?
If I'm not mistaken either your entire account is private or public? Does anyone know for sure?
Click to expand...

I don't know claudicici but aren't her photos on Flickr, not photobucket?
 
There are so many possible reasons for the difference in posted photos.

Quite often one parent takes the photos while the other parent deals with the child at the event. Seeing as how the couple had broken up, there might not have been another partner to snap the photos.

Can we be certain that she actually took all those photos, or did she upload the photos from the family camera that were taken by both parents?
 
BritsKate said:
RBBM
This isn't always true though either. I agree with almost everything you and Cubby have posted about the gender stereotypes in abuse cases. I lived in a state that legally makes the presumption shared parenting is always in the best interest of the child(ren).

Even though my ex had well documented violent tendencies, mental health issues, a long history of domestic violence documented with past injunctions and police records he was given joint legal custody with liberal visitation until he attempted suicide in front of his eldest child. He was then granted supervised visitation until he was convicted of a violent crime against a child.

His visitation rights to our children were finally suspended. He is allowed contact only through letters which I have to monitor (on the advice of a child psychologist) because he likes to tell our kids how it's my fault they cannot see him, my fault he's in prison, my fault we divorced, I never wanted them, he loves them more, is more fun, etc.

This is where the system truly breaks down for me. You have many people who claim abuse when it doesn't exist but for the ones who are living that nightmare resources and help are often unavailable because the victim isn't believed. Courts do not always simply take the woman's word for it...at least they certainly didn't in my experience.
Click to expand...

You are so correct!! Especially when the husband puts on a big act in front of everyone else, making it seem he is the kindest, sweetest guy in the world. No one else sees this abuse but the wife... not even the kids, most of the time. The verbal abuse can be as bad as the physical, making the woman feel that she is worthless and that she deserves this abuse, it's all her fault.

It's interesting to read these comments about this guy, that he is so cute and so believable, when it's entirely possible that he is merely putting on a front for the cameras. He didn't seem all that charming to me. Not saying he was responsible for Sky's disappearance, but there is always two sides to a story and I am not certain that his side is the whole truth just yet. And he did play a part in leaving the baby in the car in cold weather, he admits that. I am wondering if he cares as much for these children as he says he does. You just never know.
 
Whatever this husband did or didn't do, he isn't the one who claims to have been taking the child to the hospital and then leaving him alone in the car. The mother did that.
 
TxLady2 said:
You are so correct!! Especially when the husband puts on a big act in front of everyone else, making it seem he is the kindest, sweetest guy in the world. No one else sees this abuse but the wife... not even the kids, most of the time. The verbal abuse can be as bad as the physical, making the woman feel that she is worthless and that she deserves this abuse, it's all her fault.

It's interesting to read these comments about this guy, that he is so cute and so believable, when it's entirely possible that he is merely putting on a front for the cameras. He didn't seem all that charming to me. Not saying he was responsible for Sky's disappearance, but there is always two sides to a story and I am not certain that his side is the whole truth just yet. And he did play a part in leaving the baby in the car in cold weather, he admits that. I am wondering if he cares as much for these children as he says he does. You just never know.
Click to expand...

I had a student whose father was like this. He was such a charmer at back to school night and all of the other parents adored him. Later in the year I sat down with him at conferences and saw a completely different side. He was extremely controlling and very scary. He was from Pakistan as well.

ETA: I am in no way making any suggestion about SM- this is just a statement about a parent I knew.
 
I'm guessing since they have the car, we can rule out a death smell?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 61 more.
Total: 216 (members: 62, guests: 154)

Online statistics

Members online
62
Guests online
154
Total visitors
216
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,000
Messages
18,248,409
Members
234,523
Latest member
MN-Girl
Back
Top