Deceased/Not Found CO - Aarone Thompson, 4, Aurora, 2003 *A. Thompson guilty*

[mysteriew]

Info on the search by Necrosearch
http://www.coloradoan.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060129/NEWS01/60129001/1002

 

[Michelle Read]

Aarone's dad to return to home~

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4434620,00.html

 

[TB-Calgary]

This whole situation frustrates me! As a Christian I understand the need to "do unto others" but I can not even fathom this pastor speaking up for these two! How about speaking up for the little angel that was taken from this world, by one or both of them and then them using resources on a fake runaway/abduction. I am so sick and tired of this....the pastor should be defending the child not the parents......he should be councilling the parents on telling the truth, so that this little angel can be laid to rest properly.

Sorry for the rant...I am just so sickend by the reality of how life is not precious anymore. That childen continue to be harmed in unspeakable ways but the ones that are suppose to treasure and love them the most!

TB
JMO

 

[mysteriew]

I would love it if someone would ask this pastor, about his stand on this family. And questions like, did the family attend that church? Did the family ever seek out the pastor or church prior to Aarone's disappearance, Did the postor ever go to the family home prior to Aarone's disappearance? I think we all can guess about how involved the pastor was before the disappearance, but I would love to see it made public. Then maybe someone could ask him what he is basing his opinions on their innocence on.

 

[AdoraBlue]

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4434620,00.html



Phillips said police have treated the couple like criminals, even though they haven't been charged with anything. "You should always be innocent in America until proven guilty," he said.

Why, why do people go around spouting this off? The presumption of innocence attaches at trial, not during the course of an investigation. Shades of Jackie Peterson, among others, IMO.

I'm almost willing to bet that this move back into "their" house is a first step geared toward their getting the rest of the children (aka their meal tickets) returned to them and apparently Catholic Charities must be going right along with this. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

 

[strach304]

I applaud LE and the judge for keeping the children out of their custody simply because it's best to err on the side of caution in the kids best interest. I am afraid though that this case will never be resolved without her body and forensic evidence. As we've seen in so many cases recently involving children being murdered by family the stakes here are just too high, if one of them snapped and killed this innocent small child then surely they might do it again and by that time it's too late. We would all be sitting here saying that it could've been prevented and they shouldn't have got the children back, etc.

I don't understand myself all the support these people are getting and yet noone has come forward to say they saw the child alive and well anytime within the time frame that LE believes she's been gone. The inmate's statement and the info from the children aren't enough to prosecute.

 

[Ang50]

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4434620,00.html



Phillips said police have treated the couple like criminals, even though they haven't been charged with anything. "You should always be innocent in America until proven guilty," he said.

Why, why do people go around spouting this off? The presumption of innocence attaches at trial, not during the course of an investigation. Shades of Jackie Peterson, among others, IMO.

I'm almost willing to bet that this move back into "their" house is a first step geared toward their getting the rest of the children (aka their meal tickets) returned to them and apparently Catholic Charities must be going right along with this. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Sorry, but you're wrong, at least legally. You are presumed innocent until proven guilty. And that proving happens at trial. Innocence attaches at every stage - even prior to trial - until the jury pronounces you guilty.

If police were allowed to decide that someone was guilty, and then go about their investigation, then they'd be biased from the start. When LE is investigating a crime, they are to be doing it to uncover the truth, not to decide who is guilty. That is not their job. Plus, that is the kind of "tunnel vision" and conclusory deciding that leads to false convictions and allows the real killers to escape justice.

However, on Websleuths - I am more than happy to decide someone is guilty LONG before a trial - that's my privilege - and anyone else's on here. But it's not a privilege that LE is allowed.

 

[AdoraBlue]

I am not a constitutional scholar by any means, but I don't think I am completely wrong about the presumption of innocence attaching at trial. Over the years, I have heard several "talking head lawyers" say something to this effect.

If LE presumed every suspect to be innocent, it would be pretty hard to complete an investigation. However, if have stuck my foot in it, I will be glad to have learned something new and furthered my understanding of the law.

 

[Bobbisangel]

In this case LE has reason to believe that this little girl is no longer alive and hasn't been for quite awhile. Evidentally some of the children have verified this belief and there doesn't seem to be anyone that can prove that this little girl has been alive for quite awhile. I don't think that LE are looking at this couple as innocent until proven guilty. I think they are trying to build a case against them in order to take them to trial. How could LE presume them innocent until proven guilty when they believe that they are guilty of murdering her?

I think it would be hard to presume a person innocent if there is evidence pointing to the person. It's LE's job to gather evidence against the person that they believe committed a crime in order to present the evidence to the prosecutor so the criminal can be charged and taken to trial.

If there is no evidence then I think LE has to keep an open mind and presume innocence and look at the case from all angles and at everyone that could be involved.

 

[docwho3]

In this case LE has reason to believe that this little girl is no longer alive and hasn't been for quite awhile. Evidentally some of the children have verified this belief and there doesn't seem to be anyone that can prove that this little girl has been alive for quite awhile. I don't think that LE are looking at this couple as innocent until proven guilty. I think they are trying to build a case against them in order to take them to trial. How could LE presume them innocent until proven guilty when they believe that they are guilty of murdering her?

I think it would be hard to presume a person innocent if there is evidence pointing to the person. It's LE's job to gather evidence against the person that they believe committed a crime in order to present the evidence to the prosecutor so the criminal can be charged and taken to trial.

If there is no evidence then I think LE has to keep an open mind and presume innocence and look at the case from all angles and at everyone that could be involved.

Sounds reasonable. You probably already know all I am about to say but it makes me feel better to sort of remind myself of the following:

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal expression but in practice I suppose people investigate and go where the evidence leads them and once evidence points to someone then an investigator must begin to treat that person as more of a person of interest until they are finally named as a suspect (if the evidence warrants) or cleared by the evidence. At least under the current system in the USA you aren't taken out to a wall and shot just by being in the vicinity of a crime when it happened. The crime must be investigated and if the evidence warrants it you must be charged with the crime and the evidence brought to court and you must be proven to be guilty to either a judge or jury's satisfaction before you can be named guilty and punished.

Sometimes when we (the generic we) discuss innocent until proven guilty we think of the thoughts in the investigators heads or something and forget that in some countries you could be shot just for being nearby when a crime occurred.

 

[AdoraBlue]

Thanks for your input Bobbi and Doc.

Strictly layman's opinion here: Perhaps the concept of "presumption of innocence" can be/is confused/construed with a suspect's legal rights, i.e. Miranda rights, etc. And as far as I know, there is no presumption of innocence during a grand jury investigation, so I would think that would apply to the law enforcement phase of investigation.

I know that it is very important that the jury receives the presumption of innocence instruction. LE just has to know how to legally pursue evidence/suspects.

All JMO and, again, if I am partially or completely wrong, I would appreciate anybody's input here.

Bye now.

 

[Michelle Read]

boy, things like this just piss me off! The Thompsons are still receiving State funded support for the children they no longer have custody of!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11233610/

 

[mysteriew]

One of the other kids ran away from their foster home.
They aren't identifying which kid or what age he was. http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4467894,00.html

 

[strach304]

I'm sad to say if they can't charge these people they will get those kids back it's only a matter of time and how much time I don't know. This is one case where LE is doing everything they can to protect these children so if and when they are returned to their parents and something happens it won't be because they didn't try or consider them in danger. How frustrating this case must be for them.

 

[AdoraBlue]

http://www.9news.com/acm_news.aspx?OSGNAME=KUSA&IKOBJECTID=4cc23773-0abe-421a-01c3-f166f175a3f6&TEMPLATEID=0c76dce6-ac1f-02d8-0047-c589c01ca7bf

ARAPAHOE COUNTY - Aaron Thompson and Shely Lowe faced a judge Wednesday afternoon for contempt of court.

Their original contempt of court hearing took place last month but was postponed until Wednesday.

The couple is accused of breaking a judge's gag order on a custody hearing by talking with the media.

For several months, Thompson and Lowe have been trying to regain custody of eight children who were removed from their home after the disappearance of 6-year-old Aarone Thompson.

Aurora Police believe the girl was killed nearly two years ago and say Thompson and Lowe are persons of interest in the case.

Wednesday's proceedings were closed.

 

[AdoraBlue]

http://cbs4denver.com/crime/local_story_040083857.html

CBS4) AURORA, Colo. Investigators in the Aarone Thompson case are considering possible fraud, identity theft or auto theft charges against the young girl's father and his girlfriend, CBS4 reports. The apparent strategy would be to seek charges against Aaron Thompson or Shely Lowe or both in hopes of putting pressure on the couple to talk with detectives about Aarone's disappearance.

Aaron Thompson reported Aarone missing last November. Police said after a short search that they believed she had been dead up to a year and a half earlier. Aaron Thompson and Lowe were named persons of interest in the case.

Sources close to the case told CBS4 cars confiscated from the couple's home during the initial investigation were not registered to them. The home has been released by police but the cars have not.

Investigators also reportedly found what they believed to be evidence of fraud related to fake drivers' licenses possibly being used by Lowe.

Sources said the detectives will eventually recommend to the district attorney whatever charges are appropriate based on the evidence. Nothing was believed to be imminent or firm with the possible charges.

The attorney for Aaron Thompson, David Lane, said Wednesday night "you're never likely to get a confession to murder by filing lesser charges."

Thompson and Lowe are also trying to regain custody of their 8 children. Hearings on the custody fight have been taking place behind closed doors under a gag order.

 

[ShowerSinger]

Thanks for the update AdoraBlue!
I don't care if they charge them with jaywalking...these two need to be in prison---not just city jail, though it's a good start. Let their cell peers get some answers out of them. And yes, they have obviously commited these "lesser" crimes, but that deserves punishment too, and a chance for LE to get more for evidence for the state. Maybe there are even federal charges to consider. This precious child is GONE! AND, these two know which one of them did this, and where she is now!
Throw away the key on them.

 

[strach304]

I have wondered if it was Shelley that caused the death why the father wouldn't cooperate and try and get a deal on an accessory after the fact charge by testifying against her. Any body have any ideas or info on how much time he'd be looking at and if the DA would be willing to cut a deal with him in exchange for info of where the body is and testimony against her?

They are either very sure that LE can't build a strong case against them or he was as much at fault for her death in legal terms is what I mean. I think these two are just like the Hollands and I'd like to see them all in jail for life. Opinions about the father? What keeps these two from turning on each other?

 

[Reader]

I have wondered if it was Shelley that caused the death why the father wouldn't cooperate and try and get a deal on an accessory after the fact charge by testifying against her. Any body have any ideas or info on how much time he'd be looking at and if the DA would be willing to cut a deal with him in exchange for info of where the body is and testimony against her?

They are either very sure that LE can't build a strong case against them or he was as much at fault for her death in legal terms is what I mean. I think these two are just like the Hollands and I'd like to see them all in jail for life. Opinions about the father? What keeps these two from turning on each other?

I think both the father and Shelley are involved, much like the Holland case or the Nixzmary Brown case in N.Y.City. They can't say anything about the other one without telling their own involvement, so both have probably agreed to keep quiet and hope that the police cannot find enough evidence to charge them with her murder. Hopefully, they will be disappointed in that strategy, and I really hope the police are quietly building a case.

If they are arrested on other charges and are away from each other's influence, I'm thinking the father might turn on Shelley and take a deal. He seems to be the weak link. I think the abuse/murder happened during the day when she was with Shelley. From the looks of the last picture, she obviously was not thriving well in that home, she looks emaciated and downtrodden. The father probably just got scared and she talked him into helping to get rid of Aarone's body.

This case has touched me so much and I really hope these two can be brought to face what they have done and to pay for it. Aarone should not be a forgotten child.

Here is an entry I wrote about Aarone some time ago, thought I would post it to get her some more attention now:

http://nvfc.us/blog/?p=71

 

[chicoliving]

The woman at the center of the Aaroné Thompson case is in Denver County Jail on traffic-related charges.

Shelley Marie Lowe, 33, is serving a 10-day sentence on charges she failed to appear in court on a traffic charge, Denver County Sheriff's officials said. She was booked into jail last Tuesday.

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_3599621