Why is Adam Baker not in jail?

[LyndyLoo]

Does someone like AB (or OJ Simpson, Scott Petersen, Casey Anthony) who is "perhaps" involved (giving AB the benefit of the doubt) in such a horrible, dark, unspeakable crime finds himself unwilling to just tell the truth of it all?

That what has happened is so despicable that he cannot ever say it out loud & to take the responsibility of what he has done (or allowed someone else to do) to his own child?

I wonder if AB will just deny his involvement to his own mother & family, to the public and even to himself & that in fact he begins to believe his own denial & lies?

Somehow I dont believe anybody who thinks with their higher brain would ever believe AB knew nothing..much less had NO a hand in this abuse and disposal..but unfortunately due to Judicial Requirements..They HAVE TO HAVE PROOF...and that just infuriates me..but thats the law at this point......:banghead:

TWO things that keep me going is that Murder has no statute of limitation..and just maybe something down the road will point/PROOF to HIM.. the other thing that sustains me is that he will eventually reap his rewards at a much HIGHER COURT..and burn in H3 double hockey sticks for his depravities!!..AB actually makes me ill to my stomach for what he put Zarah thru but her mother....I really wish I could get some sort of Forensic Atrology reading of AB's eventual downfall..!!!!..COurse I am being very selfish :sick:

 

[tlcya]

I am not sure which half of my brain (higher or lower) I think with but I do believe that AB was uninvolved with Zahra's death outside of acts of ommission (not being involved in her care, not being a parent, etc).

I think he did not want to see abuse, or convinced himself it wasn't "too bad". I hold him accountable for that. I think a higher power will also hold him accountable and I would not be at all disappointed if the law held him accountable as well.

 

[Caligram]

AB cannot just "uninvolve" himself with claims that he worked long hours every day. I would like to see his payroll records. If he worked such long hours, why so much debt, why pass bad checks? There is no excuse, none, for this pretense of why he didn't know about any abuse. One real caring look into his child's eyes may have revealed volumes, but AB elected to be blind and deaf to the needs of his own sweet,helpless dependent child. None of this, even working long hours,(highly unlikely) will excuse him from his parental responsibilities. He neglected to provide a safe place for Zahra after yanking her from the home and people who truly loved and cherished her. Zahra should have/could have/would have still been alive today had AB not traded sweet Zahra for a new wife style. You are a disgrace to mankind, AB.

IMO

 

[NoeticSoul]

I also believe he had to know not only the abuse, but the murder as well. And if he could accept that and not do anything, then in my opinion he is as guilty as the person actually inflicting the abuse, and ultimately the murder. MOO

Completely agree with this.

AB said that EB was mentally abusive towards him, throwing stuff, hitting him, and "running her mouth" ect. Curious... if he went through ALL of this turmoil and abuse, WHY ON EARTH did he leave Zahra in EB's care? (according to him) a KNOWN abuser? WHO would do that? Apparently he would and did. IF he was abused so severely himself, why didn't not seeing Zarha for TWO WEEKS send up a HUGE red flag? IMO because he knew Zahra was already dead. Sure would make BIG sense of the lighthearted 911 call.

AB jumped for "Joy" because he was not charged. (imo)
But he will be. He may not have murdered her. But he's culpable regarding SO MANY other things.

Should he walk away with no charges.. this will be the biggest injustice ever, of a murdered child.

all just moo

 

[Shear22]

Has AB ever explained why Zahra was being "homeschooled" and how that was being taken care of? I've only followed this case off and on, so please let me know if this has been answered.

I can't believe that AB could have not seen her for two weeks, lied several times to say he had seen her, called 911 about a fire with a ransom note for someone else's alleged missing daughter and not checked on his own and told her what was going on, called 911 to report his daughter missing and chuckled about how she stays in her room and broods, had his daughter murdered and dismembered in his own house with her body parts being discarded in different locations using two of his vehicles... all while he knew nothing. I don't buy it.

All of this brings me back to my first question. Why did AB take Zahra out of school? What did he think she was doing all day? IMO there had to have been a reason to keep Zahra out of school in the fall and whatever it was set in motion a series of events that resulted in Zahra's murder. AB was complicit in taking her out of school for what seems like no good reason. Why?

 

[Flakes]

Exactly. It isn't normal for any child to be in bed every early morning or late night, let alone a child who had battled cancer and could be suffering a relapse. He's admitting his own lack of compassion or fatherly instinct by not having gone into the room, given her a hug or a good night kiss. And back to the morning of the fire he was home, and not going into the room to make sure she was alright is totally inexcusable, imo. :maddening: MOO

See my bold italics in the above comment. I think that is something we have to be watchful of. He has not admitted that at all. This is the information that he has stated he's "unable" to discuss because of the the ongoing investigation. This is why I'm very eager to hear what evidence he gives at the trial. This may be pertinent information in the case. He has indicated that he absolutely DID see her alive and well in that 2 week period (in the 60 Minutes interview), but he refuses to elaborate on this (for the above stated reasons).

The question in my mind is: is this because of legal advice or at the request of the LE? Or is it convenient omission when the pressure is on and he realises he's looking negligent as a parent?

I realise we're all upset and bewildered by the suggestion that Adam could neglect his parental duties for this entire 2 week period from 24th Sept to the reported date of Zahra being missing, but I think we need to accept we may not be privy to all the information on this.

When I heard the announcement yesterday that Zahra's death was estimated "on the 24th or thereabouts" (my paraphrase), I have to say I thought it was strange; and wondered if this was a legal formality, or if giving this date served a purpose in the ongoing investigation of the case. That the comment stated "thereabouts", or something similar, indicates they can update that TOD if they need in the trial. It doesn't impress as being a definite time.

The thing that is most confusing for me with these contrary dates is WHY? Are they ignoring his information about seeing her healthy and well in that 2 week period? Has he not given them the evidence yet? Is his evidence not trusted by LE? Or are they deliberately providing that date to the press/public in order to weed out more information or put pressure on EB? I suspect there is some method in this, I am just not sure what it is.

I guess if anyone can answer these questions for me it might help – is the GD of short duration, purely to determine if enough evidence exists for a full trial to proceed? Do they hear witness statements at GD with cross-examinations? I gather this case was a 'secret' GD, so I presume it was of short duration. If it was short duration I doubt all the evidence could have been presented as this would take weeks to months. I also doubt the DA's office has the case fully researched yet. So perhaps the GD did not have adequate information to give an accurate TOD based on Zahra's whereabouts and activities in that final 2 weeks? Big questions for me.

 

[Flakes]

... unfortunately due to Judicial Requirements..They HAVE TO HAVE PROOF...and that just infuriates me..but thats the law at this point....

Again more legal questions from me. Different country, very different legal systems. I have appreciated everyone's tolerance and help so far

In Australia a person can be found guilty based on "circumstantial evidence" ie there is NO PROOF, but this person is the ONLY person that is seen to be capable of having committed the crime, as all other potential people are eliminated from the possibility. I have served on a jury with such evidence and we found the defendant GUILTY as charged.

In the US does this law not exist? Is a guilty charge only possible based on the existence of physical evidence?

 

[dar107]

Body Language Clues From Zahra Baker's Father

Snip:

"We know the words he said, but we wanted to know what his body language was telling us about him. We showed the video to body language expert Patti Wood. She saw what some people couldn't.

In the interview, Wood said she looked for what would be a normal reaction for people in Adam Baker's circumstance. "In this case, quite dramatically how calm his voice is throughout the interview," was one thing Wood noticed. She said his voice changed and he got irritated only when the reporter asked about Elisa Baker's many marriages. Wood said Adam Baker could be using the calm, restrained body language as a cover.

Wood also pointed out a moment when Adam Baker laughed during the interview. She said sometimes that's used as a cover, as well as anger."

 

[Mountain_Kat]

bbm
Could it be that he's in a lot of trouble for reasons other than his daughter's death? BBM "charges'' in this case could possibly be the outstanding matters regarding his 'overstay' in the USA and/or the fraud charges re worthless checks and the charges re running people off the road....."Worry" is about his own tail being caught on so many other charges as well.....

I don't think so, since he went on as if he were talking about Zahra's case specifically. But it isn't really so much about what he was going to say as it is the fact that he seemed to catch himself and quickly try to recover. It came across to me as man trying to portray himself as an innocent victim, realizing that he almost said something that would put doubt in the mind of the listener, and very clumsily trying to act like he was about to say something quite different.

All just my impression, of course.

 

[netsleuther]

I also believe he had to know not only the abuse, but the murder as well. And if he could accept that and not do anything, then in my opinion he is as guilty as the person actually inflicting the abuse, and ultimately the murder. MOO

While I am not sure if this is my belief as news comes and then more news comes but I would say I believe he might have known about the ransom much earlier than was reported and there might have been some pressure stopping him going to LE early.

Even though LE say EB done this alone but could there be a slight chance that the ransom was real for some time from when they moved house to when Z was reported missing?

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Completely agree with this.

AB said that EB was mentally abusive towards him, throwing stuff, hitting him, and "running her mouth" ect. Curious... if he went through ALL of this turmoil and abuse, WHY ON EARTH did he leave Zahra in EB's care? (according to him) a KNOWN abuser? WHO would do that? Apparently he would and did. IF he was abused so severely himself, why didn't not seeing Zarha for TWO WEEKS send up a HUGE red flag? IMO because he knew Zahra was already dead. Sure would make BIG sense of the lighthearted 911 call.

AB jumped for "Joy" because he was not charged. (imo)
But he will be. He may not have murdered her. But he's culpable regarding SO MANY other things.

Should he walk away with no charges.. this will be the biggest injustice ever, of a murdered child.

all just moo

Let's not forget his statement that he arrived home shortly before 2pm on Oct.9, started working in the yard, was told Zahra was missing, searched the house, searched the neighborhood, (and also apparently phoned the boss) all before making the 911 call at 1:58.

I'm not going to bother to sugar coat my words here...I say he's lying. Plain and simple. He never searched the house, never searched the neighborhood. And the reason he didn't bother to do that is because there was no need. He KNEW Zahra wasn't going to be found.

MOO, and all that jazz.

 

[netsleuther]

Let's not forget his statement that he arrived home shortly before 2pm on Oct.9, started working in the yard, was told Zahra was missing, searched the house, searched the neighborhood, (and also apparently phoned the boss) all before making the 911 call at 1:58.

I'm not going to bother to sugar coat my words here...I say he's lying. Plain and simple. He never searched the house, never searched the neighborhood. And the reason he didn't bother to do that is because there was no need. He KNEW Zahra wasn't going to be found.

MOO, and all that jazz.

Yeah I don't think anyone needs to sugar coat words. IMO LE already knew she was gone before he went to check on "a" job. i.e. after the fire but kept it from EB, not sure why though just some random thoughts today and I think the 911 call was just a procedure while AB may have been playing dumb towards EB.

FWIW I think EB running out all drama like was her put on but I think AB expected her to go search for Z after the FD left. JMO

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Body Language Clues From Zahra Baker's Father

Snip:

"We know the words he said, but we wanted to know what his body language was telling us about him. We showed the video to body language expert Patti Wood. She saw what some people couldn't.

In the interview, Wood said she looked for what would be a normal reaction for people in Adam Baker's circumstance. "In this case, quite dramatically how calm his voice is throughout the interview," was one thing Wood noticed. She said his voice changed and he got irritated only when the reporter asked about Elisa Baker's many marriages. Wood said Adam Baker could be using the calm, restrained body language as a cover.

Wood also pointed out a moment when Adam Baker laughed during the interview. She said sometimes that's used as a cover, as well as anger."

I know exactly the moment Wood refers to, because, to me, it was the single most disturbing reaction I've seen yet from AB. He says, "It looked like she was in bed. Something was in bed." The word choice, the odd face he makes after the statement, the almost dismissive laugh...makes my hair stand on end. Call me crazy, but it's almost as if he's daring the listener to question him.

 

[Lanie]

Was Adam Baker fooled? Are you kidding me? My understanding is he is a walking, talking man, not some bedridden guy in a vegetative comatose state. Have I missed something?

He works for a tree cutting company. IMO, that takes a little intelligence, at least enough intelligence to be able to comprehend when contacted by child social services over abuse of his daughter 3 or 4 times that something is not right in Bakersville. How am I supposed to believe a couple of teenage neighbors not only recognize abuse but also report it while the father of this child notices nothing?? So, a teenage girl is willing to stand up to EB, but big, strapping AB is not?

I am still stunned. I just KNEW when charges were filed against EB they would also be filed against AB. My brain just can't compute LE stating they have NOTHING, NOTHING on AB...

How is it conceivable not only was his daughter dead for 2 weeks, therefore not bouncing around the house like any other 10 year old would be doing, but was also dismembered in his bathtub basically right under his nose, and he is somehow clueless?

I don't believe it, not for a second. IMO, Helen Keller would have been more on the ball over this than Adam Baker appears to be, and I am thoroughly disgusted.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

See my bold italics in the above comment. I think that is something we have to be watchful of. He has not admitted that at all. This is the information that he has stated he's "unable" to discuss because of the the ongoing investigation. This is why I'm very eager to hear what evidence he gives at the trial. This may be pertinent information in the case. He has indicated that he absolutely DID see her alive and well in that 2 week period (in the 60 Minutes interview), but he refuses to elaborate on this (for the above stated reasons).

The question in my mind is: is this because of legal advice or at the request of the LE? Or is it convenient omission when the pressure is on and he realises he's looking negligent as a parent?

I realise we're all upset and bewildered by the suggestion that Adam could neglect his parental duties for this entire 2 week period from 24th Sept to the reported date of Zahra being missing, but I think we need to accept we may not be privy to all the information on this.

When I heard the announcement yesterday that Zahra's death was estimated "on the 24th or thereabouts" (my paraphrase), I have to say I thought it was strange; and wondered if this was a legal formality, or if giving this date served a purpose in the ongoing investigation of the case. That the comment stated "thereabouts", or something similar, indicates they can update that TOD if they need in the trial. It doesn't impress as being a definite time.

The thing that is most confusing for me with these contrary dates is WHY? Are they ignoring his information about seeing her healthy and well in that 2 week period? Has he not given them the evidence yet? Is his evidence not trusted by LE? Or are they deliberately providing that date to the press/public in order to weed out more information or put pressure on EB? I suspect there is some method in this, I am just not sure what it is.

I guess if anyone can answer these questions for me it might help – is the GD of short duration, purely to determine if enough evidence exists for a full trial to proceed? Do they hear witness statements at GD with cross-examinations? I gather this case was a 'secret' GD, so I presume it was of short duration. If it was short duration I doubt all the evidence could have been presented as this would take weeks to months. I also doubt the DA's office has the case fully researched yet. So perhaps the GD did not have adequate information to give an accurate TOD based on Zahra's whereabouts and activities in that final 2 weeks? Big questions for me.

BBM

Excellent questions, Flakes. We have Elisa saying Zahra died on Sept. 24, we have the furniture store employees saying they saw Elisa, Zahra and another woman on Sept. 25, and we have Adam Baker (in an early interview) saying that he "100% genuinely, saw her out of bed" on Tuesday, Oct. 5th. It's interesting that LE gives the time of death as Oct. 24 or shortly thereafter. My gut feeling is that they believe the furniture store clerks, but can't reconcile EB's cell phone pings in disposal areas if Zahra was alive on the 25th...so they are leaving those few days open as a possibility. What they don't seem to consider as credible is Adam Baker's statements about seeing Zahra up and about on Oct. 5th.

JMO

 

[TrixieBelden]

LE has said they dont believe she had help in killing Zahra. I have to wonder if they had arrested Joe Blow along with her if people would still be trying to hang AB??? If after this amount of time and energy that LE has put into finding the truth do you honestly think if they thought he had hurt one hair on Zahras head he wouldnt have been charged? I see the looks in the eyes of all the LE personel when they have spoke of this case. It touched them deep down in the core of thier being. They are not going to let a guilty person walk on this. I think AB was abused by EB just as her other husbands were. JMO

LE did not state they didn't believe EB had help killing Zahra-the statement was to the effect that there was no credible evidence to bring charges against anyone else at this time. Police Chief said they would continue to investigate any leads up until the time of trial. (this is my own paraphrasing). IMO that sends a not so subtle message to anyone else who may be involved....:twocents:

 

[Aedrys]

Was Adam Baker fooled? Are you kidding me? My understanding is he is a walking, talking man, not some bedridden guy in a vegetative comatose state. Have I missed something?

He works for a tree cutting company. IMO, that takes a little intelligence, at least enough intelligence to be able to comprehend when contacted by child social services over abuse of his daughter 3 or 4 times that something is not right in Bakersville. How am I supposed to believe a couple of teenage neighbors not only recognize abuse but also report it while the father of this child notices nothing?? So, a teenage girl is willing to stand up to EB, but big, strapping AB is not?

I am still stunned. I just KNEW when charges were filed against EB they would also be filed against AB. My brain just can't compute LE stating they have NOTHING, NOTHING on AB...

How is it conceivable not only was his daughter dead for 2 weeks, therefore not bouncing around the house like any other 10 year old would be doing, but was also dismembered in his bathtub basically right under his nose, and he is somehow clueless?

I don't believe it, not for a second. IMO, Helen Keller would have been more on the ball over this than Adam Baker appears to be, and I am thoroughly disgusted.

Awesome post, Lanie. The thanks button wasn't enough!

 

[WhyaDuck?]

In the eyes of the law Adam did not kill his daughter and therefore is considered a victim (according to our rules) in the death of his daughter.

This does not mean we can't discuss, Adam's inaction as far as the abuse of his daughter or we can discuss perhaps how you think Adam was fooled as well as CPS. We can do all of this without trashing Adam.

Adam has lost his daughter at the hands of someone he brought into her life. The hell he must being through is hard to imagine. We don't to pile it on by being mean.

It all depends on how you phrase something really as to whether it is trashing or not.

Reminder of Tricia's post.

(Falls at random.)

 

[raisincharlie]

JMO - yes Adam Baker knew his daughter was abused in that home and previous homes prior to her death.

 

[Nonni Brenda]

Hope I'm not putting this in the wrong place. Concerning the reason Adam isn't being charaged...Could it be that they are hoping that Elisa will be so mad about that that she will spill the beans on Adam? Just a thought...