Found Alive IN - Richard Landers, 5, LaGrange, 29 July 1994

[xlurker]

I am not saying the grandparents should have taken him.

 

[EGirl]

No mention of the Dad, but with the Mom having developmental disabilities their son (the father) may have also had them. This could explain why the grandparents had been caring for the child and were given temporary custody.

After 5 years the Mom has a new husband, a developmental disability, and is living in a car. The judge said he did not know if she could deal with the child, but they had to give her the chance. I'm not saying they were right in taking him, but I can see how it would be hard to hand him back to his Mom.

http://www.startribune.com/local/186372571.html?refer=y

The link doesn't say she was living in a car?

It says:

In her own home, remarried and working a job, Harter sought to regain custody.

"We had a number of hearings, and during the last one the judge said, 'I don't know if the mother can handle the situation, but we have to give it a try,'" Muntz said. "The judge ordered the child returned to the mother for a trial period. The grandparents went to the bank, drew $5,000 out of a home equity line and stopped for breakfast at a local restaurant."

 

[epiphany]

Rocking the Cradle: Ensuring the Rights of Parents with Disabilities and Their Children

Executive Summary

Snipped

The goal of this report is to advance understanding and promote the rights of parents with disabilities and their children. The report provides a comprehensive review of the barriers and facilitators people with diverse disabilities—including intellectual and developmental, psychiatric, sensory, and physical disabilities—experience when exercising their fundamental right to create and maintain families, as well as persistent, systemic, and pervasive discrimination against parents with disabilities. The report analyzes how U.S. disability law and policy apply to parents with disabilities in the child welfare and family law systems, and the disparate treatment of parents with disabilities and their children. Examination of the impediments prospective parents with disabilities encounter when accessing assisted reproductive technologies or adopting provides further examples of the need for comprehensive protection of these rights.

Snipped

These parents are the only distinct community of Americans who must struggle to retain custody of their children. Removal rates where parents have a psychiatric disability have been found to be as high as 70 percent to 80 percent; where the parent has an intellectual disability, 40 percent to 80 percent. In families where the parental disability is physical, 13 percent have reported discriminatory treatment in custody cases. Parents who are deaf or blind report extremely high rates of child removal and loss of parental rights. Parents with disabilities are more likely to lose custody of their children after divorce, have more difficulty in accessing reproductive health care, and face significant barriers to adopting children.

http://www.ncd.gov/NCD/publications/2012/Sep272012/default_page#519b53ee_cbb9_41a1_ad54_92dffab513b1

 

[xlurker]

You are right but in other articles they say she was living in a car. http://www.aikenstandard.com/articl...ficial-abducted-ind-boy-s-mother-lived-in-car It seems like all the articles have little pieces of information, but not the whole story. It's a sad situation all the way around. My concern would be for the child and I think my view is a little off because of dealing with a person who was abusive to me that I had to hand a 2 year over to for visitation. That sort of leaves a bad feeling for what is fair.

 

[epiphany]

Snipped

"I'm not sure that they (the grandparents) ever had legal custody," said John R. Russell, who spent several months investigating the disappearance with the LaGrange (Ind.) County Sheriff's Department.

The mother and stepfather were unemployed and lived in a car, Russell recalled.

"These people (the grandparents) were nice people. It was wrong for them to do it, but I can understand why," he said. "But I also didn't think the child would be in any danger at all with them."

http://www.startribune.com/local/186463061.html?page=1&c=y

So, then it's okay for Grandma and Grandpa to abscond with the child?

Snipped

Indiana attorney Richard Muntz has worked with Lisa Harter in her 19-year search and told the Star Tribune that child welfare services stepped in because she has some developmental disabilities and the grandparents had temporary custody.

http://www.startribune.com/local/186463061.html?page=1&c=y

 

[epiphany]

According to NY Daily News, Russell, quoted in my post above [...lived in a car] was "a road deputy for the La Grange County Sheriff's Department."

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/boy-abducted-5-found-indiana-article-1.1238079

 

[singers]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...grandparents-age-pictured-13-years-later.html

Seems like he stands by his grandparents, he didn't want to live with his mother and had lived with his grandparents since he was 6 months old.

Having raised a kid for 5 years, why would you give him back to anyone? The court made a bad decision. Grandparents did the right thing. Just awful for a 5 year old kid to be forced to leave the only parents he knew.

Also as a mother if someone else had raised my kid for 5 year and I had been incapable for that time I wouldn't believe that I would have the right to take him. The grandmother had been the real mother for 5 years.

 

[twall]

~snip~
But an attorney for Landers' mother refuted claims that she was homeless. Attorney Richard Muntz said Landers' mother, Lisa Harter, spent only three days living in a car and it was with Landers' biological father, Richard W. Landers Sr.

She had divorced Landers' father by the time the grandparents obtained custody after Harter, who has mild developmental disabilities, moved into a group home that could not accommodate children, Muntz said.

Landers Sr. told the News-Sun in Kendalville, Ind., that Harter filed for divorce in 1990. He also said that he gave his parents temporary guardianship for one year because he didn't have a job.

After a while, Harter moved into an apartment and gained custody of her son on weekends, and she filed a petition to expand her custody rights when she remarried.

"The judge gave her custody on a trial basis, and before she could get him, that's when they left," Muntz told the AP late Friday.

http://www.wane.com/dpp/news/indiana/Missing-Ind-boy-My-grandparents-were-in-the-right

 

[tlcya]

I am happy that this young man appears to have had a happy childhood and wish he and his young family nothing but the best. I am not putting too much stock in his statements on FB that his grandparents did the right thing. This child, had he been returned to his mother after the grandparents had had physical custody of him for so long, would have had a tough row to hoe.

It would have been difficult to adjust to being in mom's custody.

We have no idea what this child was told about his parents, his mother in particular, and what information was given to him at the time grandparents bolted with him. What slant was information about the custody battle given when it was discussed with him? Betting the grandparents vilified mom to validate their decision to go outside the law to "win" at all costs.

I hope the damage done to this man's relationship with his mother can be repaired. I have my doubts that it can, after all these years and after the grandparents spend all these years coloring his view of his mother, who only appears to have wanted to be given a chance to raise her child and have entrusted the wrong people with his care when she needed help.

 

[Marilynilpa]

While I think it is wrong for grandparents to abduct a grandchild, I also believe there are extenuating circumstances to be considered.

Given that Richard/Michael is apparently happy and has a close relationship with his grandparents, I believe that should count for something.

The charges against the grandparents were dropped in 2008, and I think it would be a waste of time and taxpayer's money to reinstate the charges and prosecute them now. JMO.

 

[Marilynilpa]

I am happy that this young man appears to have had a happy childhood and wish he and his young family nothing but the best. I am not putting too much stock in his statements on FB that his grandparents did the right thing. This child, had he been returned to his mother after the grandparents had had physical custody of him for so long, would have had a tough row to hoe.

It would have been difficult to adjust to being in mom's custody.

We have no idea what this child was told about his parents, his mother in particular, and what information was given to him at the time grandparents bolted with him. What slant was information about the custody battle given when it was discussed with him? Betting the grandparents vilified mom to validate their decision to go outside the law to "win" at all costs.

I hope the damage done to this man's relationship with his mother can be repaired. I have my doubts that it can, after all these years and after the grandparents spend all these years coloring his view of his mother, who only appears to have wanted to be given a chance to raise her child and have entrusted the wrong people with his care when she needed help.

BBM

But Richard/Michael was 5 years old when his grandparents fled with him, and he was old enough to remember what his parents were like. So his own memories of his parents probably colored his opinions as much as anything his grandparents might have told him. JMO

Here's a comment by his wife:

'His "grandparents" didn't follow the law, but they did what was right. Sometimes, our US laws don't help or protect the people they should. He was 5. He remembers his birth parents and what they were like,' it said.
'He had been living under his grandparents care since he was a 6 month old baby. He was where he wanted and needed to be to be safe and become the man he is today, my husband and best friend.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ge-pictured-13-years-later.html#ixzz2Ho2sfl4P

Another interesting bit of info:

The then-5-year-old boy's mother and stepfather were unemployed and lived in a car, Russell recalled.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_...ng-in-car-before-indiana-boys-1994-abduction/

 

[tlcya]

BBM

But Richard/Michael was 5 years old when his grandparents fled with him, and he was old enough to remember what his parents were like. So his own memories of his parents probably colored his opinions as much as anything his grandparents might have told him. JMO

Here's a comment by his wife:

'His "grandparents" didn't follow the law, but they did what was right. Sometimes, our US laws don't help or protect the people they should. He was 5. He remembers his birth parents and what they were like,' it said.
'He had been living under his grandparents care since he was a 6 month old baby. He was where he wanted and needed to be to be safe and become the man he is today, my husband and best friend.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ge-pictured-13-years-later.html#ixzz2Ho2sfl4P

Another interesting bit of info:

The then-5-year-old boy's mother and stepfather were unemployed and lived in a car, Russell recalled.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_...ng-in-car-before-indiana-boys-1994-abduction/

BBM if he had been living with his grandparents since he was 6 months old, I have to assume his parents must have resided with his fathers parents. I think they were very involved with raising him. I do not dispute that.

From the many sometimes contradictory bits and pieces that have come out on this story I surmise (perhaps incorrectly) that when the young man's decided to divorce his mother, she was left with nowhere to go but a halfway house (due to her developmental disabilities) that did not welcome children and the child was left with the grandparents while she tried to get her life in order.

also BBM this info regarding homelessness was refuted by mom's lawyer and the fact that the judge in the custody case ruled in favor of the mother regaining custody on a trial basis.

I don't see a judge returning a 5 year old to live in a car. The judge's ruling tends to lend more credence to mom's lawyer's statements that mom and stepdad had housing and an appropriate atmosphere for the boy to live.

Again. I get it. Grandparents may well have been doing what they thought was best, and maybe they even did, but they broke the law. They decided they knew better than the judge and simply took their ball (grandson) and ran not home, but away.

Their actions were wrong. I am not screaming for their incarceration over here. Simply stating a fact. They were wrong when they kidnapped this child. If their concerns were founded in fact they should have continued to fight in the right forum - court.

 

[Trident]

I wonder how the mothers feeling the grandparents are somehow justified would feel if they were in this mother's shoes. I have nothing but censure for the people who stole this woman's child.

BTW, I wonder if they gave their own son visitation with the child?

 

[Marilynilpa]

I wonder how the mothers feeling the grandparents are somehow justified would feel if they were in this mother's shoes. I have nothing but censure for the people who stole this woman's child.

BTW, I wonder if they gave their own son visitation with the child?

If I were in the mother's shoes, living in a car with my child's step-father, I hope I'd be strong enough to put my child's needs ahead of my own and allow him to continue living with the grandparents who had raised him all of his life. JMO

 

[tlcya]

A mother has revealed her joy at learning that her son, who was abducted by his paternal grandparents in 1994 when he was just five years old, is alive, married and expecting his first child.

For nearly 20 years, Lisa Harter knew nothing of the whereabouts of her son, Richard Landers Jr., after his grandparents vanished from their trailer in Wolcottville, Indiana with the young boy.

[snip]

Minnesota officials say the grandparents, now using the names Raymond Michael Iddings and Susan Kay Iddings, verified Landers' identity.

Authorities said they do not know what they had told him about their swift departure from Indiana 18 years ago. But when he was five and caught in the middle of the custody battle, he said he wanted to live with his grandparents, the Star Tribune reported.

[snip]

But in 1994, when she was living in her own home, working and remarried, she began fighting to regain custody of her son. However, the grandparents were upset about the court proceedings.

Just days before Landers' mother was due to take him for a one week visitation in July 1994, he disappeared without a trace.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ents-1994-living-Minnesota.html#ixzz2HoTubg97
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

for those who may have missed this info

 

[Marilynilpa]

BBM if he had been living with his grandparents since he was 6 months old, I have to assume his parents must have resided with his fathers parents. I think they were very involved with raising him. I do not dispute that.

From the many sometimes contradictory bits and pieces that have come out on this story I surmise (perhaps incorrectly) that when the young man's decided to divorce his mother, she was left with nowhere to go but a halfway house (due to her developmental disabilities) that did not welcome children and the child was left with the grandparents while she tried to get her life in order.

also BBM this info regarding homelessness was refuted by mom's lawyer and the fact that the judge in the custody case ruled in favor of the mother regaining custody on a trial basis.

I don't see a judge returning a 5 year old to live in a car. The judge's ruling tends to lend more credence to mom's lawyer's statements that mom and stepdad had housing and an appropriate atmosphere for the boy to live.

Again. I get it. Grandparents may well have been doing what they thought was best, and maybe they even did, but they broke the law. They decided they knew better than the judge and simply took their ball (grandson) and ran not home, but away.

Their actions were wrong. I am not screaming for their incarceration over here. Simply stating a fact. They were wrong when they kidnapped this child. If their concerns were founded in fact they should have continued to fight in the right forum - court.

But I know, from personal experience, that judges aren't always correct. A judge granted custody of my niece to her parents - my sister and brother-in-law. Within five months, my niece was removed from their custody after she was found wandering the streets alone at night. She was six years old. She was fortunately found by a policeman and returned home to her parents, who were passed out from drugs and didn't even know she was gone. She'd been gone over an hour. I was able to regain custody of her, thank goodness, but the things she went through while with her parents caused her a lot of emotional problems that she didn't have before living with them. It took quite a while to undo the damage caused by the judge's "wise" decision to place her with her parents.

So yes, what the grandparents did was legally wrong, but I can understand why they may have been afraid to trust the system and took matters into their own hands. JMO.

 

[tlcya]

I hear your point friend and will agree that judges are not always right in every ruling. And I really don't think we are all that far apart. I have not railed at the system for dropping the charges against these grandparents and I will not rail to see the charges reinstated.

On the flip side, I don't think you are campaigning for these grandparents to be given a parade or a medal so really we can come away agreeing that what they did was wrong in the eyes of the law but probably came from a sincere desire to care for their grandchild.

But in those small areas we seem to still be at odds on, I am agreeing to disagree on this case with someone whose thoughts I continue to value

 

[Marilynilpa]

I hear your point friend and will agree that judges are not always right in every ruling. And I really don't think we are all that far apart. I have not railed at the system for dropping the charges against these grandparents and I will not rail to see the charges reinstated.

On the flip side, I don't think you are campaigning for these grandparents to be given a parade or a medal so really we can come away agreeing that what they did was wrong in the eyes of the law but probably came from a sincere desire to care for their grandchild.

But in those small areas we seem to still be at odds on, I am agreeing to disagree on this case with someone whose thoughts I continue to value

BBM

I feel the same about you! Thanks.

 

[katydid23]

I'm sorry, but there isn't a 5 year old alive that can make that 'choice'. His grandparents had YEARS to mold him.

Maybe it was in his best interest, but the courts should have decided that.

You don't think that 5 yr olds should be able to say that they donb't want to want to live in a car with their stepfather and mother? What about 5 yr olds that are neglected or mistreated? Can they voice an objection?

Should a 5 yr old go visit family and friends and sleep in a cozy bed and have a kitchen and room of their own but then be sent back to live in a car on the streets, and NOT expect the child to voice an opinion on the matter?

I agree that the courts should have decided this. It was obviously not the right course of action for the grandparents to take. But I understand their motivation.

ETA: I just now caught up with this thread and read the articles saying she was not actually homeless at the time she was trying to regain custody.

So that does shed a new light on the situation. I knew I would have a really hard time sending my grandchild to live in a car with my DIL and her new husband.

But if she truly had a good stable environment, then that would be a different matter.

 

[twall]

While I think it is wrong for grandparents to abduct a grandchild, I also believe there are extenuating circumstances to be considered.

Given that Richard/Michael is apparently happy and has a close relationship with his grandparents, I believe that should count for something.

The charges against the grandparents were dropped in 2008, and I think it would be a waste of time and taxpayer's money to reinstate the charges and prosecute them now. JMO.

The state of Indiana won't prosecute them for the interference with custody charge since the statute of limitations has run out but they could be facing federal charges (more than likely for kidnapping since they took the boy across state lines from Indiana to Minnesota). One of the articles I read said there is an ongoing investigation in Minnesota that will be forwarded to the United States Attorney General’s Office for review of possible federal charges.