Will the real TH please stand up?

[tragco]

Yes, I am not convinced of Terri's guilt, but the real TH, if innocent, would see her child in a supervised setting IMO. These death threats are real, but there are protections for a parent to see her child without fear. This is her baby girl!! I would be going crazy not hugging her, kissing her, listening to her, smelling her sweet smell.

This does put a big question mark in my mind as to who the real Terri is.

Still, she needs to do what her lawyers advise her to do. Maybe they are telling her that these visits are recorded and any little thing she might do that wasn't perfect could be brought into court?

 

[Calliope]

I just happen to believe her attorneys have told her that she can fight for visitation now and risk losing her child forever.

 

[SmoothOperator]

Calliope, are we sure that her attorney advised her not to contest the restraining order? It's possible that once he explained to her the penality for lying under oath in a civil case--or that her testimony could be used against her in the criminal case, that she CHOSE not to testify. Or maybe all along she has not wanted to discuss the MFH in a public forum

Not meaning to argue your point, but the above just occurred to me....

Hi citigirl! Reading your post has got me thinking alot about Terri's decision making vs. Houze's decision making.. Does anyone off hand know what date Houze was retained by Terri? If not I suppose I'll go digging but if anyone knows offhand TIA..

 

[wondering1]

Hi citigirl! Reading your post has got me thinking alot about Terri's decision making vs. Houze's decision making.. Does anyone off hand know what date Houze was retained by Terri? If not I suppose I'll go digging but if anyone knows offhand TIA..

It was first reported on July 1st.

 

[OneLove]

I think I missed a press conference where Kaine said that Terri drank herself to sleep at night. I'm wondering how long that had been going on and how a hangover affected her the next morning. Also, I'm not a Terri supporter, but MC taking a pic of Kaine's address on the RO with his cell phone does seem like a preplanned setup. Terri may have a lot of info to come in the future through her attorneys. I don't believe there's any way she's going to just give up her child.

I am not a qualified diagnostician, but I have worked professionally with many personality disordered folk. It is fairly common for narcissistic people to walk away from people in their lives when they no longer "serve" their purposes or contribute to an image they want to project. IF Terri just happened to be Narcissistic Personality Disordered, I can easily see her giving up her child. Just imagine, now she is virtually single and childless again, and with a little work, she can get back in circulation and get all the attention she might want and need. That's a big IF; I don't know about her mental health status.

Of course, that is just one scenario. Again, I don't diagnose, just worked therapeutically as a social worker.

 

[SmoothOperator]

Hi citigirl! Reading your post has got me thinking alot about Terri's decision making vs. Houze's decision making.. Does anyone off hand know what date Houze was retained by Terri? If not I suppose I'll go digging but if anyone knows offhand TIA..

Sorry to have to quote myself... But I went ahead and dug around[this info was much easier to find than I anticipated]

~snip~
PORTLAND, Ore. - Terri Moulton Horman, the stepmother of missing 7-year-old Kyron Horman, has retained prominent criminal defense attorney Stephen Houze, a source confirmed Wednesday.

Terri’s retention of Houze comes after her husband, Kaine, filed for divorce and obtained a restraining order against her on Monday
~end snip~

[this article was posted June 30]
http://www.katu.com/news/local/97546039.html#idc-cover

So, if it was confirmed BY June 30th(Wednesday) that she had infact retained the services of prominent criminal defense atty Stephen Houze and we had Kaine and baby K leaving the Sheltered Nook residence on the 26th(Saturday) and officially filed for divorce and RO on the 28th(Monday) then we can deduce that Houze was retained more than likely Tuesday, June 29th[or somewhere in that very close proximity of time]...

Okay.. Now that I've thoroughly answered my very own inquiry EVERYONE else can just disregard my original inquiry of Houze's date he was retained.. lolol

Carry on...lol

 

[jadejazzkayla]

It was first reported on July 1st.

Houze was retained by terri on wednesday june 30. let me know if you need a link.

 

[SmoothOperator]

Do you believe that because you are projecting the way YOU would think in this same situation, or do you know something specific about Terri that leads you to believe this?

I am not a qualified diagnostician, but I have worked professionally with many personality disordered folk. It is fairly common for narcissistic people to walk away from people in their lives when they no longer "serve" their purposes or contribute to an image they want to project. IF Terri just happened to be Narcissistic Personality Disordered, I can easily see her giving up her child. Just imagine, now she is virtually single and childless again, and with a little work, she can get back in circulation and get all the attention she might want and need. That's a big IF; I don't know about her mental health status.

Of course, that is just one scenario. Again, I don't diagnose, just worked therapeutically as a social worker.

Hi onelove. I, myself have posted about your EXACT Observation/Opinion that you posted about ^Above^.. And IMO you are "dead on" with your "assessment"[and yes I do realize it is an opinion, nonetheless an opinion I feel is quite accurate]

Below is a snippet of a post where I describe similar observations as yours above[and yes I do take into consideration your career because my sister is a LCSW and I can wholeheartedly vouch to her having dealt with a wide range of personality disorders as well as emotional and psychological disturbances and illnesses among many other areas of the human psyche]

Originally Posted By SmoothOperator
on 8/15/2010
~begin snip from my previous post~
First I do indeed believe she is or has sociopathic tendencies and possibly psychopathic.[tho am more convinced that sociopath is more appropriate]
Secondly yes she has lost alot[just as was listed in the opening post of this thread]and its wondered what if anything she really has left to lose? I very much think that Terri having sociopathic ways still sees that at the point that she presently is at[with ALL of her life that she knew 3mos ago are all long gone]its IMO that Terri still very much believes that she build her life back, possibly even better than it was, as she'll be starting with a "clean slate"[please understand that tho this sounds completely insane to us, but remember IMO we are not dealing with someone logical or emotionally sound and quite possibly a socio path] So what does she have to lose? The number one thing that I think Terri has to have in order to "rebuild" this delusion of a new life she has in her head, and thats her freedom. Her not being locked up. IMO she will not break
~end snip of previous post~

IMO this quite likely is similar to what Terri could be thinking. We have seen that there are definitely signs of pathological behaviours such as lying, manipulating, conniving, deceiving. Any or ALL of these at any given time that Terri deems necessary for these behaviours to serve a purpose for her. IMO it is quite obvious that Terri has a "one track" mindset and IMO that one track is 100% solely serving the purpose for what is in HER, AND HER ALONE'S best interest..
IMO these are the most dangerous type of ppl. Everyone around her are just the "little people". Nothing more than "stepping stones" to get her where she needs to be. They are as disposable as easily as they are used and manipulated to serve her immediate agenda at the time she is in need of their "services" to her and for her. IMO she has no prob with baby K not being around[don't get me wrong I believe when she was first taken it was very much a bone of contention[so to speak] but more so of "how dare Kaine take her from ME!] Not in a heart ripped from her chest type of way that all of us mothers know that we would be feeling if our babies were to be taken from us[ESPECIALLY if we were innocent as many contend that Terri is].. Just as she is not even taking advantage of the time that could be being spent with her 16yr old son[who no doubt is having a very rough time given all that he has/is going thru]but her being within minutes of him she is in NO way "mothering"[as in comforting, loving, reassuring, and just downright being a momma and holding her son in her arms to reassure him that she is there and that she loves him]. NO! NONE OF THAT IS TAKING PLACE!

And IMO WHY none of that is taking place is because that serves no purpose FOR Terri. And IMO that is Terri's sole motivation.. TERRI, HERSELF, AND WHAT BEST BENEFITS HERSELF! jmo on all that!

 

[OneLove]

Hi onelove. I, myself have posted about your EXACT Observation/Opinion that you posted about ^Above^.. And IMO you are "dead on" with your "assessment"[and yes I do realize it is an opinion, nonetheless an opinion I feel is quite accurate]

---- snipped------

And IMO WHY none of that is taking place is because that serves no purpose FOR Terri. And IMO that is Terri's sole motivation.. TERRI, HERSELF, AND WHAT BEST BENEFITS HERSELF! jmo on all that!

Thanks, SmoothOperator. I did not know that Terri was not seeing her older son, but that sure adds quite alot to the picture. Poor kid. I cannot fathom what it must feel like to be in his shoes, especially as concerns his mother's leveraging him in exchange for money from a previous stepfather that was no longer in his life at all. Yes, I do know this man had adopted him, but if it is true that Terri had manipulated him into doing so, AND subsequently denied him a parental relationship after the divorce, I still call it schmucky, for the kid's sake more than anything else.

When do you think Terri will show responsibility for taking care of herself AND the children she produces?

 

[SmoothOperator]

Thanks, SmoothOperator. I did not know that Terri was not seeing her older son, but that sure adds quite alot to the picture. Poor kid. I cannot fathom what it must feel like to be in his shoes, especially as concerns his mother's leveraging him in exchange for money from a previous stepfather that was no longer in his life at all. Yes, I do know this man had adopted him, but if it is true that Terri had manipulated him into doing so, AND subsequently denied him a parental relationship after the divorce, I still call it schmucky, for the kid's sake more than anything else.

When do you think Terri will show responsibility for taking care of herself AND the children she produces?

My personal answer for this is quite simple[but yet I always seem to feel it necessary to further even my simple answers with a detailed account of the reasons that led me to my opinion/answer... lol..Go figure:crazy:]

So my simple answer is that from this point forward, NEVER will Terri take the full responsibility for the children she has brought into this world, nor will she take "responsibility" for her true actions that have led her to this present point in her life(i.e. the affairs[alleged] which led to the broken homes that she drug her poor son thru which IMO IF J**** were truly having some real issues with behaviours, acting out, failing grades[was said this way why she sent him away] I believe the instability[driving drunk with this child and we all know that when a person gets "caught" receiving a DUI 99.95 of the time it IS NOT the first time they drove drunk, rather that there were many previous incidents of driving intoxicated[with&without her young son] prior to her having been "caught" DUI] that Terri was/had provided for this child throughout the extreme important formative years of this boy were the main basis for those issues.

Then the choices that she made[i.e, attempting to have her daughter's father murdered, and plotting, planning, and executing the "disappearance" of her daughter and son's brother{and yes it is my opinion that we will eventually see the proof that these allegations are infact TRUE}] I do not see Terri EVER TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE CHOICES AND DECISIONS SHE HAS MADE[and more than one of those being the jury, judge, and executioner of a perfectly innocent, defenseless, and helpless little boy that called her "mom"].. IMO she does not see these things as "her fault" for having done..

IMO she is of the mindset that alleviates her of ALL RESPONSIBILITY ENTIRELY. By blaming Kaine[as its been alleged that she has done many times before of course for much less severe of issues{i.e. claiming it was Kaine's fault her son was sent away, just for one example}]
IMPO Terri fully believes that "It is ALL Kaines fault" that ALL OF THIS HAS HAPPENED, including "disappearing" Kyron... "If Kaine had not cheated on me, NOT taken me granted, not hurt me then I would NOT have had to attempt the MFH and the eventual "disappearance" OF HIS ONLY SON"... IN TERRI'S MIND IT IS ALL KAINE'S FAULT! jmo..

 

[Morag]

...(snip) I did not know that Terri was not seeing her older son, but that sure adds quite alot to the picture. Poor kid. I cannot fathom what it must feel like to be in his shoes, especially as concerns his mother's leveraging him in exchange for money from a previous stepfather...(snip)

That is not what happened. He adopted the child of the woman he loved, and he loved the child.
And from what I have read recently, J does see his mother, Terri.
When you adopt a child, that is your child, no less than if you fathered him.

 

[OneLove]

That is not what happened. He adopted the child of the woman he loved, and he loved the child.
And from what I have read recently, J does see his mother, Terri.
When you adopt a child, that is your child, no less than if you fathered him.

Here are the questions:

Did he adopt out of abiding love for this child, or because his wife was repeatedly asking him to do so because it is what SHE wanted? Do you KNOW the answer to this, personally, as in from a personal relationship with the stepfather at that time, or is your above answer hearsay? At this point, even if I knew TH personally AT THAT TIME, and she told me it was HIS idea and out of love, I would not automatically believe her. Everything she says or has said in the past is "on the table" at this point.

When you adopt a child, that child is LEGALLY your child, no less than if you fathered him/her. It cannot be said that the child is LOVED no less than if you fathered him/her; that is an entirely personal matter and depends on many factors. I have seen it both ways in families with a mixture of adopted and birthed children. I have also seen people adopt out of pure love, and seen people adopt for reasons that had nothing to do with love. We see lots of things in social services, and there are certainly technical reasons for adoptions. Some people even have babies just in an attempt to stay out of jail, for petes sake.

 

[Morag]

Here are the questions:

Did he adopt out of abiding love for this child, or because his wife was repeatedly asking him to do so because it is what SHE wanted? Do you KNOW the answer to this, personally, as in from a personal relationship with the stepfather at that time, or is your above answer hearsay? At this point, even if I knew TH personally AT THAT TIME, and she told me it was HIS idea and out of love, I would not automatically believe her. Everything she says or has said in the past is "on the table" at this point.

When you adopt a child, that child is LEGALLY your child, no less than if you fathered him/her. It cannot be said that the child is LOVED no less than if you fathered him/her; that is an entirely personal matter and depends on many factors. I have seen it both ways in families with a mixture of adopted and birthed children. I have also seen people adopt out of pure love, and seen people adopt for reasons that had nothing to do with love. We see lots of things in social services, and there are certainly technical reasons for adoptions. Some people even have babies just in an attempt to stay out of jail, for petes sake.

I don't know the answer to any of these questions, but I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt to these people whom I do not know, particularly for the child's sake, who wouldn't want himself described as "leveraged."

 

[krowdkat]

That is not what happened. He adopted the child of the woman he loved, and he loved the child.
And from what I have read recently, J does see his mother, Terri.
When you adopt a child, that is your child, no less than if you fathered him.

Respectfully, do you have a link that Terri has been seeing J? I only ask because I thought the RO was worded in such a way that she wasn't allowed contact with her "children" which would technically mean J as well. I realize that J did an interview of sorts (just remember reading it) were he indicates that TH doesn't have access to computers or phones or some such. I thought that someone had just told him that info. TIA for linky to Terri visiting with J as I have not read that one.

 

[Morag]

Yes, there's a link out there somewhere, or I wouldn't have known about the visits. If I find it, it will be posted. Incidentally, Kaine could not have gotten an RO forbidding TH from seeing her own son. Perhaps his father could have, or a social agency, but that hasn't happened.

 

[Calliope]

Here are the questions:

Did he adopt out of abiding love for this child, or because his wife was repeatedly asking him to do so because it is what SHE wanted? Do you KNOW the answer to this, personally, as in from a personal relationship with the stepfather at that time, or is your above answer hearsay? At this point, even if I knew TH personally AT THAT TIME, and she told me it was HIS idea and out of love, I would not automatically believe her. Everything she says or has said in the past is "on the table" at this point.

When you adopt a child, that child is LEGALLY your child, no less than if you fathered him/her. It cannot be said that the child is LOVED no less than if you fathered him/her; that is an entirely personal matter and depends on many factors. I have seen it both ways in families with a mixture of adopted and birthed children. I have also seen people adopt out of pure love, and seen people adopt for reasons that had nothing to do with love. We see lots of things in social services, and there are certainly technical reasons for adoptions. Some people even have babies just in an attempt to stay out of jail, for petes sake.

The point remains, once he adopted J --- he's his son. The biological father agreed to give up his parental rights, and this man agreed to adopt the boy. I personally don't get where so many think Terri has this power over everyone she encounters. Both were grown men capable of making their own decisions.

 

[Calliope]

Respectfully, do you have a link that Terri has been seeing J? I only ask because I thought the RO was worded in such a way that she wasn't allowed contact with her "children" which would technically mean J as well. I realize that J did an interview of sorts (just remember reading it) were he indicates that TH doesn't have access to computers or phones or some such. I thought that someone had just told him that info. TIA for linky to Terri visiting with J as I have not read that one.

The RO wouldn't have anything to do with J.

He did say in that same interview that he talks to her.

 

[Calliope]

He's seen her a few times and talks to her regularly on the phone.

"I think she's really lonely," J said. "She's not supposed to leave the house."

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/08/terri_horman.html

 

[Morag]

Respectfully, do you have a link that Terri has been seeing J? I only ask because I thought the RO was worded in such a way that she wasn't allowed contact with her "children" which would technically mean J as well. I realize that J did an interview of sorts (just remember reading it) were he indicates that TH doesn't have access to computers or phones or some such. I thought that someone had just told him that info. TIA for linky to Terri visiting with J as I have not read that one.

Here it is- I knew it was one of the recent oregonlive articles;

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/08/terri_horman.html

(Thanks, Calliope, for finding it so quickly!).

 

[wondering1]

The point remains, once he adopted J --- he's his son. The biological father agreed to give up his parental rights, and this man agreed to adopt the boy. I personally don't get where so many think Terri has this power over everyone she encounters. Both were grown men capable of making their own decisions.

there are a million men and women out there who have gotten hoodwinked for *LOVE* by predators. How many people have had their credit cards maxed and have to give 1/2 of everything they've worked hard for to some loser who has no conscience. Where I live (a community property state) people, mostly women, do this by design. It's not a crime to be naive and smitten. It IS criminal, or should be, to manipulate someone with sex/love/promise of a future just so you can move on with their forced legal support. It's disgusting, and I would bet the farm that's what happened in this case.