IN - Couple charged with abandonment of adopted child after legally changing her age, Sept 2019 #2 *not guilty*

[AgeofAquaruis]

Here is an article claiming that adoptive mom tried to set Natalia up on a date with an adult male. By the way children who act inappropriate sexually (as has been alleged, who knows if any of it is true) could be acting out because they have been abused.
But of course the judge re-aged her so its all good. Again, how is court allowed to do that to a child?

"Maybe he saw on the message where Kristine tried to set me up with [Natalia]," Freddie said. "But I didn't take the bait. No reply from me. I just was like, 'Eugh. It gave me shivers to think that anybody would even remotely do that. I don't go there and I think people who do go there should have their balls chopped off. It's just really disgusting."

Celebrity News | Entertainment News | TMZ.com

Breaking the biggest stories in celebrity and entertainment news. Get exclusive access to the latest stories, photos, and video as only TMZ can.

toofab.com

The chickens are coming home to roost.

 

[Meloni88]

So Michael hasn't seen the younger boys in 8 years?? But JB is living with him now? Is he estranged from KB?

I haven't watched the programme yet. From the article I really feel for JB. Making him urinate on Natalia's bed. Good grief. The hatefulness of that malignant witch is just incredible. What a disaster of a family.

 

[jjenny]

Here is for Natalia's former neighbors so they maybe can get a clue before they complain about her "disturbing" behavior.

"According to Michael, his ex-wife even coached Natalia on how to introduce herself to people at her older age after her birth year was legally changed from 2003 to 1989. Mimicking her voice, he said, "Hi, my name's Natalia. I might look young, but I'm actually 23 years old and I'm dangerous. I've tried to kill people before.""

Celebrity News | Entertainment News | TMZ.com

Breaking the biggest stories in celebrity and entertainment news. Get exclusive access to the latest stories, photos, and video as only TMZ can.

toofab.com

 

[EmiliaRT007]

As soon as I read the title I knew it was NB. So odd and I don’t know who to believe. Y’all can watch Natalia on Dr. Phil. Back in 2019 or 2020 I believe. She claims to be 16 at the time. I do think it’s super strange.

After reading these posts I am really feeling some sympathy for Natalia because I wonder if she was kind of forced to lie about her age and say she was 23 and not 8. It’s just all around such an odd case.

 

[AliceInPain]

Their genius bio son ended up living in his dad's basement.

"Jacob, once on track to be a physicist, now lives in his dad’s basement and says he has a poor relationship with his mother. During an interview for the documentary, he refused to speak on anything that might get his mother in trouble. But Jacob forgot to turn off his mic."

ebm... Not able to read this in Europe (or watch the docu yet), what did Jacob say?

I think it was you who also pointed out how perfect her (Am.) English is, which would be unusual if an adult had learnt a new language. This is so true, I've only ever met one person (Somalian) in my entire life who learnt a new language (Swedish) as an adult and spoke without an accent. Actually freaked me out

Just looking at Natalia's pictures, from her visa/ travel documents in 2008 and throughout the years, you can see her face developing from a child to a young adult.

Really wish there was a way to overturn that age decision, she was 100% not 19 when she came to the US
Are there any articles or other official info on who exactly made that decision?

 

[jjenny]

As soon as I read the title I knew it was NB. So odd and I don’t know who to believe. Y’all can watch Natalia on Dr. Phil. Back in 2019 or 2020 I believe. She claims to be 16 at the time. I do think it’s super strange.

After reading these posts I am really feeling some sympathy for Natalia because I wonder if she was kind of forced to lie about her age and say she was 23 and not 8. It’s just all around such an odd case.

She has all her adoption paperwork including birth certificate making it clear that she was born in 2003. Her birth mother was verified by DNA and mother confirms she was born in 2003.
Barnetts went to court to "re-age" her using logic that "she isn't growing" which of course she is a dwarf, so she isn't growing like a normal person would.
The judge re-aged her based on that logic, and her interests weren't represented. Is that a solid logic? She wasn't growing thus she must have been 18? That's the basis for the decision to age her up by 14 years. So judge made her an adult overnight. When Barnett went on trial, prosecution couldn't present evidence that Natalia was a child, because US court made her an adult. So that is her legal age now. And apparently it only works one way. You can legally re-age someone based on the idea that if someone isn't growing they had to be 18 (even if that someone is a dwarf), but you can't age them back under no circumstance even if they have paperwork, birth certificate, and testimony of birth mother.
What exactly makes you confused as to whom you should believe?
By the way I definitely stopped growing years before I turned 18 (and I am not a dwarf, I am a little higher than average female). I just grow up quickly and was taller than my peers for a while, but I turned my final height around 15. So that logic doesn't work even for an average size person, let a lone a dwarf.

 

[EmiliaRT007]

She has all her adoption paperwork including birth certificate making it clear that she was born in 2003. Her birth mother was verified by DNA and mother confirms she was born in 2003.
Barnetts went to court to "re-age" her using logic that "she isn't growing" which of course she is a dwarf, so she isn't growing like a normal person would.
The judge re-aged her based on that logic, and her interests weren't represented. Is that a solid logic? She wasn't growing thus she must have been 18? That's the basis for the decision to age her up by 14 years. So judge made her an adult overnight. When Barnett went on trial, prosecution couldn't present evidence that Natalia was a child, because US court made her an adult. So that is her legal age now. And apparently it only works one way. You can legally re-age someone based on the idea that if someone isn't growing they had to be 18 (even if that someone is a dwarf), but you can't age them back under no circumstance even if they have paperwork, birth certificate, and testimony of birth mother.
What exactly makes you confused as to whom you should believe?
By the way I definitely stopped growing years before I turned 18 (and I am not a dwarf, I am a little higher than average female). I just grow up quickly and was taller than my peers for a while, but I turned my final height around 15. So that logic doesn't work even for an average size person, let a lone a dwarf.

Thanks for the clarification. After reading up on it a bit I’m thinking that the Barnetts are two sick shmucks.

 

[jjenny]

So this article talks how re-aging her protected Barnetts from CPS investigations and prosecution. She has become adult by a stroke of a pen.
And apparently what can be done can't be undone. One judge re-aged her (without her interests being represented, and her being hospitalized at the time) but the rest of them just says "what has been done can not be undone." and that appears to be it.

"Meyer also ruled in August 2020 that he cannot reverse the court-ordered re-aging of Natalia. As such, the four neglect of a dependent allegations after July 1, 2014, must be dismissed if the allegations are based on the argument that Natalia was a minor."

Cases involving Kristine Barnett, Michael Barnett filled with twists and turns

A 2012 court order changed Natalia Grace Barnett from an 8-year-old girl to a 22-year-old woman and shielded her adoptive parents from legal scrutiny.

www.jconline.com

 

[AngTxGal]

There were attempts made to over turn the re-aging but nothing worked.

"The Journal & Courier tracked down two attorneys who attempted to reverse Michael and Kristine Barnett's re-aging of Natalia in a Marion County court. The June 2012 hearing that changed Natalia's birth year was done without any legal counsel to represent Natalia's rights and interests. Speaking about the June 2012 hearing in this Sept. 26, 2019, J&C story, Lafayette attorney Michael Tromel said, "The Barnetts basically filed an ex parte petition, and this kid was not represented.""

J&C COVERAGE: Natalia, the Ukrainian orphan, and the Barnetts' fight to clear their names

The Journal & Courier documented the allegations and prosecution of Kristine Barnett and Michael Barnett since the charges were filed Sept. 11, 2019.

www.jconline.com

The process may be cumbersome and take time, but it isn’t impossible. People have issues with social security, adoption, name changes, mixing of identification with other people… it happens and it can be fixed.

As of 2019 Natalia was living with two adults who are paying for her expenses, as per the Dr. Phil show, and she says she is 16. She was a minor.
So Who counted her as a dependent for tax purposes?

If she was considered an independent minor- she would have been able to apply for federal loans or grants to pay for college. But, since she legally was robbed off all of her teen years being an independent minor she was always ineligible.
That is a huge civil rights violation. As an adopted person with physical disability, who appears to be bright, college and an education is how she will be able to care for herself financially. She was robbed of that opportunity.

The only reason it hasn’t been fixed is she hasn’t the knowledge or legal representation to get attention on the issue and get it done. So long as her credibility is in question- taking her case is risky.
Someone will take the chance, I hope

JMO

 

[jjenny]

The process may be cumbersome and take time, but it isn’t impossible. People have issues with social security, adoption, name changes, mixing of identification with other people… it happens and it can be fixed.

As of 2019 Natalia was living with two adults who are paying for her expenses, as per the Dr. Phil show, and she says she is 16. She was a minor.
So Who counted her as a dependent for tax purposes?

If she was considered an independent minor- she would have been able to apply for federal loans or grants to pay for college. But, since she legally was robbed off all of her teen years being an independent minor she was always ineligible.
That is a huge civil rights violation. As an adopted person with physical disability, who appears to be bright, college and an education is how she will be able to care for herself financially. She was robbed of that opportunity.

The only reason it hasn’t been fixed is she hasn’t the knowledge or legal representation to get attention on the issue and get it done. So long as her credibility is in question- taking her case is risky.
Someone will take the chance, I hope

JMO

She was not considered a minor when she was living with adults in 2019. She as considered an adult legally, since she was re-aged to be an adult in 2012. Judge re-aged her by 14 years making her an adult overnight. She has been a "legal adult" ever since, so she was never considered an independent minor. She is getting payments from the government because she is considered disabled adult, because of her severe dwarfism.
All I know that so far attempts to reverse her re-aging has been un-successful with courts ruling against them. There were several lawyers attempting to reverse the re-aging but they were not successful.
Since she is now actually an adult, it probably won't even make a difference now, since she is an adult either way. And I don't think one can civilly sue a judge for re-aging her in 2012? So even if she managed to overturn it now, what would it accomplish now?
She already missed on everything that a child is eligible for, such as free education and so on. I am also pretty sure she didn't get all the surgeries she needed for her dwarfism.

 

[AngTxGal]

She was not considered a minor when she was living with adults in 2019. She as considered an adult legally, since she was re-aged to be an adult in 2012. Judge re-aged her by 14 years making her an adult overnight. She has been a "legal adult" ever since, so she was never considered an independent minor. She is getting payments from the government because she is considered disabled adult, because of her severe dwarfism.
All I know that so far attempts to reverse her re-aging has been un-successful with courts ruling against them.

Legally she was not considered a minor in 2019, because of the legal reaging.

If she was actually born in 2003, then she was 16 in 2019. This means she was treated as an independent adult and housed as such beginning at the age of 9.
Changing her age from child to adult kept her from ever legally being a minor in the US.

The judge’s decision served to prevent legal action against her adoptive parents- any action they took that would be illegal to take against a minor.

And this decision served no benefit to Natalia, her interests were not considered.
Making such a decision without her being represented had a negative impact on her life.
This is my point- she was denied money from the government to pay for college.
That could be her legal argument to get docs to show her actual age- because she has been denied federal assistance for school.

Is that worth an attorney coming forward to represent her? It should be

Could it result in legal action against her adoptive parents? It could


JMO

 

[jjenny]

Legally she was not considered a minor in 2019, because of the legal reaging.

If she was actually born in 2003, then she was 16 in 2019. This means she was treated as an independent adult and housed as such beginning at the age of 9.
Changing her age from child to adult kept her from ever legally being a minor in the US.

The judge’s decision served to prevent legal action against her adoptive parents- any action they took that would be illegal to take against a minor.

And this decision served no benefit to Natalia, her interests were not considered.
Making such a decision without her being represented had a negative impact on her life.
This is my point- she was denied money from the government to pay for college.
That could be her legal argument to get docs to show her actual age- because she has been denied federal assistance for school.

Is that worth an attorney coming forward to represent her? It should be

Could it result in legal action against her adoptive parents? It could


JMO

As far as I can tell she couldn't even go to middle school or high school because of re-aging done by the court. I am not going to argue with you-if she wants to overturn the re-aging and there is a lawyer who can figure out how to do that, one would hope this lawyer came forward.

 

[cocomod]

The sad part is a couple of attorneys did try, and they failed to overturn the original decision. I am glad she has someone that cares about her. I am glad the documentary is treating her case better than I feared they would!

 

[Laughing]

The sad part is a couple of attorneys did try, and they failed to overturn the original decision. I am glad she has someone that cares about her. I am glad the documentary is treating her case better than I feared they would!

In one situation, a Tippeecanoe County attorney filed to overturn the decision -- in Tippeecanoe County where she lives.

Clever judge (and probably right) said hs court could not act on the Marion County order.

Mighty clever, then, to leave her in Tippeecanoe County....jmho

 

[jjenny]

In one situation, a Tippeecanoe County attorney filed to overturn the decision -- in Tippeecanoe County where she lives.

Clever judge (and probably right) said hs court could not act on the Marion County order.

Mighty clever, then, to leave her in Tippeecanoe County....jmho

She isn't just re-aged in Marion County, though.
So I don't get it. I don't get how a court can just re-age a child by 14 age, make that child a legal adult, without child's interests being represented, and then there appears to be no way to get that corrected.

 

[Laughing]

She isn't just re-aged in Marion County, though.
So I don't get it. I don't get how a court can just re-age a child by 14 age, make that child a legal adult, without child's interests being represented, and then there appears to be no way to get that corrected.

I expect that if a sufficient number of Indiana taxpayers contacted the governor as a group -- there might be a review? Or some sort of action?

Possibly including disability rights folks?

 

[Lizzysun]

Just finished watching the, I think, last episode of HBO/MAX "Curious Case..." Why in the world did the prosecution drop all charges with prejudice against Christine. I don't understand this at all.

 

[megs1477]

Just finished watching the, I think, last episode of HBO/MAX "Curious Case..." Why in the world did the prosecution drop all charges with prejudice against Christine. I don't understand this at all.

Legal pile of poo for lack of better term. The Statute of Limitations was up, they were not able to proceed with those charges because she was legally an adult and they could not get the Judge to reverse that decision. There may be other charges they could bring, but time is probably up on them as well.
This case has really bothered me since I watched it. How did so many people know something odd was going on and no one do anything? It blows my mind.

 

[Dawn Day]

She has all her adoption paperwork including birth certificate making it clear that she was born in 2003. Her birth mother was verified by DNA and mother confirms she was born in 2003.
Barnetts went to court to "re-age" her using logic that "she isn't growing" which of course she is a dwarf, so she isn't growing like a normal person would.
The judge re-aged her based on that logic, and her interests weren't represented. Is that a solid logic? She wasn't growing thus she must have been 18? That's the basis for the decision to age her up by 14 years. So judge made her an adult overnight. When Barnett went on trial, prosecution couldn't present evidence that Natalia was a child, because US court made her an adult. So that is her legal age now. And apparently it only works one way. You can legally re-age someone based on the idea that if someone isn't growing they had to be 18 (even if that someone is a dwarf), but you can't age them back under no circumstance even if they have paperwork, birth certificate, and testimony of birth mother.
What exactly makes you confused as to whom you should believe?
By the way I definitely stopped growing years before I turned 18 (and I am not a dwarf, I am a little higher than average female). I just grow up quickly and was taller than my peers for a while, but I turned my final height around 15. So that logic doesn't work even for an average size person, let a lone a dwarf.

I reached my adult height at age 12 and am above average height. That was such bull when it was asserted that people don’t stop growing until age 18

 

[AliceInPain]

I reached my adult height at age 12 and am above average height. That was such bull when it was asserted that people don’t stop growing until age 18

bbm Are you sure lol. Because I "stopped growing" at 12 too at 169 cm, ten+ years later having my first baby still the same height, then ten years after that my new doctor wanted to check my height, and I thought she was an idiot but lo and behold, I had grown 2 cm at some point in my 20s. I said "Oh my God, I've grown!" and she said "Of course you have" like it was normal.

So, if they really used Natalia's height and growth pattern to determine her age, shouldn't that be enough to have this decision questioned in a court somehow. It's not a scientific method to use at all, add to that she has a rare type of dwarfism, even less so. I hope she or her new family has a lawyer who's looking into what can be done.