FL - Shannon Dedrick, 7 mo., Chipley, 31 Oct 2009 #2

[tlcya]

Her fingerprints would be accessible via a national database in minutes. And if she refuses to come into the police station in Chipley to be fingerprinted, hoping to force police to scour the home for her fingerprints (which she may have carefully wiped off everything she could think of), then that refusal, combined with her undisputed function as babysitter to the child, and past conviction, should be plenty to declare her an official suspect and arrest her and fingerprint her.

There would have been no need for SB to wipe down the trailer and remove her fingerprints. As the babysitter that neighbors claims to have seen frequently at the trailer you would expect her fingerprints to be there, all over the place. The absence of her fingerprints would be more of a red flag than LE finding them there.

 

[NewMommy09]

Wait, Paul Baker was 6? Why the H#77 have i been thinking 3 1/2?
I'm braindead.

I was thinking the same thing. I think it's because the picture of him on the Charley Project site is from when he was 3????

ETA: Nope, he's listed as being 3 to 3 and a half when he went missing at multiple sites. Bad reporting on him being 6?

 

[doggies]

IMO, the most telling part of this is that LE released this info to the media. They obviously feel (or know) that they're on the right track. If LE was simply pursuing a lead (they call them rumors) then the media wouldn't have heard a word. They WANTED this info out there.
All of this is thanks to East Coast, I have no doubts.

 

[pinkpuddytat]

I refuse to watch Nancy Grace. I saw the YouTube video of her interview with Elizabeth Smart right after it happened. She should have been fired.

 

[Texas Mist]

not new 'news' but at least baby Shannon's story is being kept out there!! there was so little yesterday that I'm glad to see continued interest by the press!!

<snip>

Updated: Wednesday, 04 Nov 2009, 10:51 AM CST
Published : Wednesday, 04 Nov 2009, 10:51 AM CST

CHIPLEY, Fla. - The baby sitter of a missing infant sent a letter to Gov. Charlie Crist months before she disappeared asking him to save the child from her drug-abusing parents.

The Florida Department of Children and Families says it investigated 7-month-old Shannon Dedrick's mother and father after the August complaint, and workers have had "a lot of involvement" with the family.



http://www.fox10tv.com/dpp/news/florida/DCFInvestigatedMissingBabysParents

 

[elepher50]

Does anyone know if SB served any of the 10 year sentence she was given?

Served some time - would have to find the link again - too much going on. She was given some time off for time she had already spent in jail.

 

[not_my_kids]

Okay, I have to get a baby her shots, but I shall return and I hope to read all kinds of juicy info about SB and her being served a warrant or two.
The miracle of a safe recovery, that would be even better.

 

[doggies]

No, NMK and New Mommy. I think the original story said 4, not 6.
http://www.freewebs.com/scmissingunidentified/scmissingchildren.htm
Edited: Paul Baker was 3, not 4. His sister, James and Susan's daughter, was 6. Sorry for the typo.

 

[doggies]

Dang it, I have to go now, too. Can't wait to get home and back to all of you.

 

[Dear Prudence]

I was thinking the same thing. I think it's because the picture of him on the Charley Project site is from when he was 3????

ETA: Nope, he's listed as being 3 to 3 and a half when he went missing at multiple sites. Bad reporting on him being 6?

Yep, just a mistake. Paul was 3 1/2 but his sister was 6 when he disappeared. She was removed from the Baker's custody and it was her injuries Susan was convicted for I believe.

 

[elepher50]

On the fourth day of the search for her, the investigation continued to include baby sitter Susan Baker, who said Tuesday in a News Herald interview she "loved that child" and tried to have the state intervene with the family.

http://www.nwfdailynews.com/news/child-22268-case-family.html

 

[NewMommy09]

No, NMK and New Mommy. I think the original story said 4, not 6.
http://www.freewebs.com/scmissingunidentified/scmissingchildren.htm

Dang, that link is blocked for me here at work. It must have been a different story somewhere that said 6.

 

[Texas Mist]

:Welcome-12-june:

pinkpuddytat!!​

 

[mycroft]

Mycroft - I'm still catching up. On page 5. I will try to look at my temp files but I have to admit - I have no idea how that is done?

Salem

Thanks. What kind of browser are you using? Someone here can surely guide you. When I found what I think was the right link I got a message telling me that the item I requested was no longer available.

I think that LE has known all along about this angle, and that it's some damn lousy reporting that the local press didn't catch this angle before we did, even after the woman came forward. I hope they were suppressing this info at the request of LE and only now released it because we had already figured it out and put the info out there.

I also wonder whether that reporter confirmed that Tabitha is her niece or is just basing that on the internet material that we found, because my impression is that Tabitha is not her niece, and has admitted as much online. Am I wrong there? He even says she didn't return his calls and neither did Baker.

 

[pinkpuddytat]

There would have been no need for SB to wipe down the trailer and remove her fingerprints. As the babysitter that neighbors claims to have seen frequently at the trailer you would expect her fingerprints to be there, all over the place. The absence of her fingerprints would be more of a red flag than LE finding them there.

True, though having them very fresh at certain locations would have been highly suspicious, e.g. if hers were the top layer prints on the exterior doorknob, when supposedly she hadn't been there in the past day or two.

But all the more reason LE should have had her prints on Day One as a matter of routine. No need to declare her a POI, much less a suspect. Just need to get prints from everyone known to have been in the home in recent months, so that prints that don't match that list of people can be investigated as possible abductors. So they *should* have had her prints on Day One, and run them for ID confirmation and criminal record as a matter of routine. So they should have known on Day One if this was the same Susan Baker. And they probably did, and have been watching her every move, as well as every move of anyone else coming and going from her property.

 

[CA Mom]

I think it's such a shame that today is DAY 5 and LE is just beginning to investigate the SB connection! So much info on SB is PUBLIC RECORD, easy to find.....how could they not see this possibility from the DAY 1! Unreal!!! God bless baby Shannon.

 

[NewMommy09]

http://www.nwfdailynews.com/news/child-22268-case-family.html

As always with these cases of missing persons, I find it both eerie and (God forbid) telling that SB is referring to baby Shannon in past tense. This is one of the most telling things a person can do in a case like this, IMO. However, it's not foolproof. People get emotional and don't think straight, etc. I'm sincerely hoping this one of those times.

Baby Shannon, WS is pulling for you to be found safe and unharmed little sweetie.

 

[gitana1]

Does anyone know if SB served any of the 10 year sentence she was given?

My understanding is that SB was sentenced to time served. But, I saw nowhere how much time she was in jail. It can't have been long.

IMO, the most telling part of this is that LE released this info to the media. They obviously feel (or know) that they're on the right track. If LE was simply pursuing a lead (they call them rumors) then the media wouldn't have heard a word. They WANTED this info out there.
All of this is thanks to East Coast, I have no doubts.

Did LE release this info? I haven't followed all the links. I know someone here yesterday reported the find to LE but then someone here also reported it to a news agency. I'm not sure the last move was a great one. Well-intentioned, however, I think LE was on this and was investigating and I don't know that media involvement was a help to their investigation. Someone else posted that a picture of SB mysteriously disappeared from a news article, before we reported this find to the media. They may have asked that it be removed and kept that one news org in their confidence as they investigated SB. Now, however, she will know they are on to her. She can cover her tracks.

On another note, if SB took the baby from the parents' home in the night, I think we can have hope. Why would she steal the baby just to kill it? I'm not buying a serial killer slant yet. I think instead, if SB is involved and is who we think she is, that she wants kids, or thinks she does, but it abusive when she has custody of them. So, the baby may be alive but needs to be found asap!

 

[Kimster]

Glad to meet all of you!!!​

 

[3dogmom]

On Susan Bakers Myspace...Check out her favorite Television shows:

CSI - CSI Miami - Law and Order - Crimmal minds - Judge Judy - Judge Mathis - Peoples court