Email sent to 490 people who were at Skyline School on 6/4/10

[SurfieTX]

FWIW, there were 213 names on the email; however, the list did not include the students at school that day. I'm not sure if the number of students plus the number of people on the list equals 490 or how LE arrived at that specific number.

 

[Etilema]

FWIW, there were 213 names on the email; however, the list did not include the students at school that day. I'm not sure if the number of students plus the number of people on the list equals 490 or how LE arrived at that specific number.

That makes sense. In was reported that 490 people "were at ... the school" (http://www.katu.com/news/local/111702724.html).

(BTW, the copy of the list that I found online seems to have 211 names.)

 

[miabellamoure]

To prosecute a case with no body, they have to have some viable evidence that there IS a body. In other words, they have to have proof that the person is dead and a reasonable suspicion that they were murdered. How is that email going to prove that?

It's a very good article, but it doesn't address the fact that as far as we know, there is no evidence proving Kyron is dead, or that Terri killed him. IF they are holding any such evidence and allowing the parents to go on believing he is alive, then that would be beyond cruel and unethical.

Respectfully, I do not believe that there needs to be proof that the person is dead to proscecute such as a body, forensic dna, etc. It could boil down to pieces of evidence (texts, emails, fb postings, cell phone pings, etc) when put all together leave no other conclusion.

I also do not feel it would be unethical for LE to not disclose all their suspicions to the parents of any missing child even when they really do believe a homicide has occured.

Cruel...cruel is what the murderess committed against an 8 year old child.

jmo

[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_conviction_without_a_body[/ame]

"The United States case of People v. Scott 176 Cal. App. 2d 458 (1960) held that "circumstantial evidence, when sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis, may prove the death of a missing person, the existence of a homicide and the guilt of the accused."

 

[ami]

when sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis

Yeah, as far as we're aware of the evidence, this seems to be a likely direction for LE.

You know what guys, this is really terrible. I read back (and watched) several Shawn Hornbeck reports and on some level I was praying that Kyron was damaged but alive. Capable of becoming a beacon to other missing children, becoming an advocate for long term searching. I think it's not going to happen, but it's so heartbreaking all over again to talk about this as a "no body" case and assume he's gone.

 

[Allusonz]

MOO i can see that this could work 2 ways

One being that they have acccounted for indivuals etc which would help them move forward

Conversely if they get a percentage that states there was someone else there it will help the defense

I personally am sticking to the opinion that there is a someone they are trying to confirm if they were / were not there and whom remembers

again MOO

 

[scandi]

Snipped

Cruel...cruel is what the murderess committed against an 8 year old child.

jmo

It has simply galled me that whoever was involved in his going missing can stay strong enough 6 months later to have not cracked.

 

[jadejazzkayla]

It has simply galled me that whoever was involved in his going missing can stay strong enough 6 months later to have not cracked.

We can only hope his name is on the list.

If le is not onto him. or if they are and he doesn't know it, he will go on his merry way possibly preparing to do it again - if he hasn't already.

 

[Jo in Calif]

It has simply galled me that whoever was involved in his going missing can stay strong enough 6 months later to have not cracked.

There are so many of them that don't crack.
Terri thinks to much of Terri to crack.

 

[weeds]

To prosecute a case with no body, they have to have some viable evidence that there IS a body. In other words, they have to have proof that the person is dead and a reasonable suspicion that they were murdered. How is that email going to prove that?

It's a very good article, but it doesn't address the fact that as far as we know, there is no evidence proving Kyron is dead, or that Terri killed him. IF they are holding any such evidence and allowing the parents to go on believing he is alive, then that would be beyond cruel and unethical.

I wonder if they are actually getting prepared for something like custodial interference in the 1st degree which is a Class B felony in the state of Oregon.

There is a custody arrangement in place and it was obviously 'interfered with.

"(a) Causes the person taken, enticed or kept from the lawful custodian or in violation of a valid joint custody order to be removed from the state; or
(b) Exposes that person to a substantial risk of illness or physical injury."

The penalty in the state of Oregon for a class B felony is 'up to' ten years in prison and 'up to' 250k fine.

At least I was thinking some kind of abduction charge. That would allow them to save the Murder charge (sorry) for when (if) they find the body. This would allow them to prosecute Terri and have plenty of time to build their case while Terri was behind bars, eliminating double jeopardy concerns.

I think the custodial interference charge would be a lot easier to prove and would explain a lot. Through process of elimination I believe it is possible for the ADA to prove Terri is responsible for Kyron's disappearance. It would appear at least on the surface that is what they are trying to do. I think a murder charge at this point would be almost impossible to prove unless they know a lot more than what they are letting on.

Law was part of my curriculum in post secondary (and that was in Canada) but I am no lawyer so this is all JMO...

 

[cluciano63]

Custodial interference would still require someone seeing her taking him away, wouldn't it, same as kidnapping? I mean, she is saying she left him where she was supposed to leave him, people saw him there. Right now, it is a leap to say she took him away if they can't prove it. So to charge her with anything, I still think they need someone to say she took him away, and if they were to get that, go for kidnapping charge.

 

[kappy50]

There are so many of them that don't crack.
Terri thinks to much of Terri to crack.

you know Jo..I absolutley 100% agree with you here. If she does , many go down with her that would not..jmo...

 

[weeds]

Custodial interference would still require someone seeing her taking him away, wouldn't it, same as kidnapping? I mean, she is saying she left him where she was supposed to leave him, people saw him there. Right now, it is a leap to say she took him away if they can't prove it. So to charge her with anything, I still think they need someone to say she took him away, and if they were to get that, go for kidnapping charge.

I respectfully disagree.

"(b) Exposes that person to a substantial risk of illness or physical injury." A school filled with people and as "chaotic" as it was, did not walk Kyron to the class room to turn over Kyron to the teacher. She left a seven year old child with nobody looking after him by himself.

It was Terri who asked the teacher to take Kyron to see the exhibits. At that point it was Terri's responsibility to look after Kyron until he was turned back over to the school.

The only reason I used custodial interference instead of kidnapping is because I was not sure about parental abduction laws in Oregon.

I would also contend that he was seen leaving.

"Portland Public Schools spokesman Matt Shelby said two teachers saw Kyron with his mother and thought the two left school together. He said it was not uncommon for parents to pick up kids this way, so no suspicions were raised."

http://www.king5.com/news/local/NW-Portland-second-grader-still-missing-Saturday-95689114.html

"It was not uncommon for parents to pick up kids this way, so no suspicions were raised." When I read that, I thought that they saw them outside the school together. At least it is my impression of it. I mean if they saw them in the gym together, why would they think they left together?

The requirements to prove custodial interference is not the same as kidnapping. The ADA does not have to prove that Terri took Kyron, only that she left him vulnerable, which she did. "Exposes that person to a substantial risk of illness or physical injury."

I'll give you an example. A person wants to run into the store really quick and leaves the baby in the car, because she was sleeping. The car gets stolen. That's custodial interference. That person who left the child in the car left the child unattended. and something bad happened.

In this day and age, there is no reason to be leaving children at that age unattended. There are just to many sick people out there. Anyone can say what they want, but as far as I'm concerned, Terri Horman is responsible for Kyrons disappearance because at the very least, she did not make sure he was left with an adult to look after him. Terri left a seven year old child alone.

The student that saw Kyron, (the very last person to see Kyron) his statement was retracted. I believe it was because of the time.

 

[jadejazzkayla]

I respectfully disagree.

"(b) Exposes that person to a substantial risk of illness or physical injury." A school filled with people and as "chaotic" as it was, did not walk Kyron to the class room to turn over Kyron to the teacher. She left a seven year old child with nobody looking after him by himself.

It was Terri who asked the teacher to take Kyron to see the exhibits. At that point it was Terri's responsibility to look after Kyron until he was turned back over to the school.

The only reason I used custodial interference instead of kidnapping is because I was not sure about parental abduction laws in Oregon.

I would also contend that he was seen leaving.

"Portland Public Schools spokesman Matt Shelby said two teachers saw Kyron with his mother and thought the two left school together. He said it was not uncommon for parents to pick up kids this way, so no suspicions were raised."

http://www.king5.com/news/local/NW-Portland-second-grader-still-missing-Saturday-95689114.html

"It was not uncommon for parents to pick up kids this way, so no suspicions were raised." When I read that, I thought that they saw them outside the school together. At least it is my impression of it. I mean if they saw them in the gym together, why would they think they left together?

The requirements to prove custodial interference is not the same as kidnapping. The ADA does not have to prove that Terri took Kyron, only that she left him vulnerable, which she did. "Exposes that person to a substantial risk of illness or physical injury."

I'll give you an example. A person wants to run into the store really quick and leaves the baby in the car, because she was sleeping. The car gets stolen. That's custodial interference. That person who left the child in the car left the child unattended. and something bad happened.

In this day and age, there is no reason to be leaving children at that age unattended. There are just to many sick people out there. Anyone can say what they want, but as far as I'm concerned, Terri Horman is responsible for Kyrons disappearance because at the very least, she did not make sure he was left with an adult to look after him. Terri left a seven year old child alone.

The student that saw Kyron, (the very last person to see Kyron) his statement was retracted. I believe it was because of the time.

bbm...



i disagree that kyron was seen leaving the school. if he was seen leaving the cops would say they have a witness who saw kyron leave the school.

 

[weeds]

bbm...



i disagree that kyron was seen leaving the school. if he was seen leaving the cops would say they have a witness who saw kyron leave the school.

My apologies because we are going off topic and it's my fault. I'll try to reply in a way that brings us back on topic.

What you said has always been a sticking point for me. You bring up a very valid point. I keep asking myself where would the teachers have seen Kyron and Terri together that would create the impression that they left together? Maybe it's just me, and I'm reading to much into it. I then ask myself, if I was LE and knew they left together would I tell the public? You remember that comment? "Investigators say it’s part of their effort not to taint witnesses’ memories" I wonder if that has anything to do with it?

You could be completely right. I have no idea. Nobody really does have an idea I don't think, with the exception of maybe LE.

The original point I was trying to make is maybe the list is more significant than we think. The list maybe to support other charges besides the all talked about murder charge (ie; process of elimination). If that's the case it is possible that the list holds more value (ie; Terri was there I saw her).

http://www.katu.com/news/local/100455014.html

 

[cluciano63]

That quote from the school admin. person was not exactly saying he saw them leave together...just that he saw them together, and once he heard Kyron was missing, he thought that, is how I took it...which of course is what he would have to say, pretty much...

No witness to Kyron leaving the school, is my feeling.

 

[loves2bmom]

I would agree that the School admin did not see her leave with Kyron based on the link above. However, I do think there is some merit to Desiree's interview (or slip) that he was seen outside by someone. What I can't figure out is why LE wouldn't put out a description if that's the case. It could be like Weeds said here that they don't want to put the info out because they would be giving the power of suggestion to some other witnesses. They want independent recollections. This case really has gotten to me I tell you. I've been emotionally invested before (Scott Peterson case) but not to this level.

 

[cluciano63]

I kind of think that the bit about people by a white truck was just something LE had heard and had to try to find out if it had any validity, i.e more people who saw such a thing, or possibly, someone else with a white truck coming foward to say it was him or her and grandpa, or whatever.

 

[wvjules]

I thought I recall Desiree saying that Kyron was seen by a white truck? It is one of the interviews posted on here somewhere. Now, where she heard that is a different story.

 

[cluciano63]

She said it, and then Kaine interrupted to say that it was not a definite sighting...so who the heck knows...

 

[Bethlamb16]

I was just at a school event for my son last night. There was probably at least 400 people if not more. I honestly couldn't tell you who I saw or didn't see for the most part. There are few exceptions like people I talked to but in another week, I probably couldn't remember them unless someone reminded me. Last night I couldn't help but think about Kyron and the science fair and how difficult it would be to reconstruct who was there and who wasn't and if I would have noticed a child being taken away and thought it was out of place. It really was a zoo and I imagine most school events are like this. After last night I do believe that Kyron may have been taken by someone that had an opportunity and went for it. We all keep saying how hard it would be but really, whenever someone is abducted it seems unlikely that they could be taken from that place so easily but it happens and unfortunately, it happens all the time that a child or even an adult just vanishes and unless we find out what happened that is how it appears. I am still on the fence about TH and wouldn't be shocked if she did it but I am even more convinced that it is very likely someone besides her had the means and opportunity and went with it.