Landscaper says Terri Horman wanted him to kill her husband!

[grandmaj]

Kimster put up a warning earlier. We are not sleuthing this Landscaper. That means where he might work, who he might be, what his name is, any of it.

 

[STEADFAST]

There is no basis for a federal prosecution. I have a highly experienced federal criminal defense attorney asleep on my living room couch. I woke him up, between snores by gently and repeatedly clearing my throat, to be absolutely sure of this.

LOL! Isn't that what the defense attorneys always say? :angel:

 

[SuziQ]

Also I will have to think about the statement Terri made to the gardener that Kaine had had an affair. True? Also the article states there's other people who can support the gardner's claims - who?

How does this all fit together is almost beside the point as I am starting to hope Kyron will be found soon ALIVE. Dare I hope?

What where? Can you post a link?

 

[eyes4crime]

Also I will have to think about the statement Terri made to the gardener that Kaine had had an affair. True? Also the article states there's other people who can support the gardner's claims - who?

How does this all fit together is almost beside the point as I am starting to hope Kyron will be found soon ALIVE. Dare I hope?

BBM
I would be shocked if Terri murdered Kyron - trying to hire a 'murder for hire' shows me she is NOT a hands on murderer. She wants Kaine out of her life, I think she has an obsessed hatred for him. moo mho

 

[marlap]

From this article:
http://www.kgw.com/news/local/Hormanprobelatest-97771724.html

On June 26th, the landscaper, who is cooperating with authorities and was wearing a wire, met with Terri and an undercover officer but Terri - perhaps suspecting something was up - cut the conversation short.

Later that day, Kaine was told that she had plotted against him and took their 19-month-old daughter and moved out.

Police records show that Terri made two calls to 911 that night. The first time, at 5:17PM, was recorded as being related to "threats" and the second time, at 11:39PM, which was recorded as a "custody" issue and was made after it was clear to her that Kaine and their daughter were not returning.

Okay...so the same day TH meets with the landscaper and undercover agent (and gets spooked and cuts the meeting short), she later calls 911 (when Kaine wasn't there) and says she's being threatened???

I can't help but wonder that she went from:

Plan A (hire a hitman plan)

TO

Plan B (pretend he's threatening her even though he's not really there) in order to set up a self-defense alibi so she can shoot him herself when he gets home.

 

[Emeralgem]

That's an interesting thought you've got there. It would make sense that if LE gave the go ahead to anyone, it would be the Oregonian. I think LE has been doing a lot of fence-mending after KH's behavior toward them.

Both The O and WW have every right to be miffed about what "the team" did on Thursday. It was like saying: If you act like journalists, we will punish you. If you act like our PR reps, we will reward you.

But despite the ill will it probably caused, I doubt The O would print anything that could jeopardize the return of Kyron or his safety. I do think Kyron is alive and with someone who cares about his well-being. If there was indeed a murder-for-hire request, the person who has Kyron might not have known about that.

BBM....IMHO..IF anyone cared anything at all about Kyron's well - being they wouldn't have him in their possession..JMO

 

[Donjeta]

Nora S is the parent who said Kyron was supposed to be on the talent show. http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/06/still_no_trace_of_kyron_horman.html

 

[Haeve]

I meant if you have any general questions about how ORS works. :angel: LOL, there is a search link on the ORS page I linked to. My Google-Fu is pretty good though. Would you like me to search?

Without revealing too much about my personal life, I'm not a legal professional (and not up on all that legal terminology or criminal law), but I am familiar with the process of creating and changing the ORS. If that cryptic statement makes any sense.

TITLE 16

CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS

Chapter 161. General Provisions

162. Offenses Against the State and Public Justice

163. Offenses Against Persons

164. Offenses Against Property

165. Offenses Involving Fraud or Deception

166. Offenses Against Public Order; Firearms and Other Weapons; Racketeering

167. Offenses Against Public Health, Decency and Animals

169. Local and Regional Correctional Facilities; Prisoners; Juvenile Facilities


ORS 161 seems to apply:


PARTIES TO CRIME

161.150 Criminal liability described. A person is guilty of a crime if it is committed by the person’s own conduct or by the conduct of another for which the person is criminally liable, or both. [1971 c.743 §12]


161.155 Criminal liability for conduct of another. A person is criminally liable for the conduct of another person constituting a crime if:

(1) The person is made criminally liable by the statute defining the crime; or

(2) With the intent to promote or facilitate the commission of the crime the person:

(a) Solicits or commands such other person to commit the crime; or

(b) Aids or abets or agrees or attempts to aid or abet such other person in planning or committing the crime; or

(c) Having a legal duty to prevent the commission of the crime, fails to make an effort the person is legally required to make. [1971 c.743 §13]


161.160 Exclusion of defenses to criminal liability for conduct of another. In any prosecution for a crime in which criminal liability is based upon the conduct of another person pursuant to ORS 161.155, it is no defense that:

(1) Such other person has not been prosecuted for or convicted of any crime based upon the conduct in question or has been convicted of a different crime or degree of crime; or

(2) The crime, as defined, can be committed only by a particular class or classes of persons to which the defendant does not belong, and the defendant is for that reason legally incapable of committing the crime in an individual capacity. [1971 c.743 §14]


161.165 Exemptions to criminal liability for conduct of another. Except as otherwise provided by the statute defining the crime, a person is not criminally liable for conduct of another constituting a crime if:

(1) The person is a victim of that crime; or

(2) The crime is so defined that the conduct of the person is necessarily incidental thereto. [1971 c.743 §15]

BBM. This is not specific to homicide just "crime" in general

Here is ORS 163.095:


163.095 “Aggravated murder” defined. As used in ORS 163.105 and this section, “aggravated murder” means murder as defined in ORS 163.115 which is committed under, or accompanied by, any of the following circumstances:

(1)(a) The defendant committed the murder pursuant to an agreement that the defendant receive money or other thing of value for committing the murder.

(b) The defendant solicited another to commit the murder and paid or agreed to pay the person money or other thing of value for committing the murder.

(c) The defendant committed murder after having been convicted previously in any jurisdiction of any homicide, the elements of which constitute the crime of murder as defined in ORS 163.115 or manslaughter in the first degree as defined in ORS 163.118.

(d) There was more than one murder victim in the same criminal episode as defined in ORS 131.505.

(e) The homicide occurred in the course of or as a result of intentional maiming or torture of the victim.

(f) The victim of the intentional homicide was a person under the age of 14 years.

(2)(a) The victim was one of the following and the murder was related to the performance of the victim’s official duties in the justice system:

(A) A police officer as defined in ORS 181.610;

(B) A correctional, parole and probation officer or other person charged with the duty of custody, control or supervision of convicted persons;

(C) A member of the Oregon State Police;

(D) A judicial officer as defined in ORS 1.210;

(E) A juror or witness in a criminal proceeding;

(F) An employee or officer of a court of justice; or

(G) A member of the State Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision.

(b) The defendant was confined in a state, county or municipal penal or correctional facility or was otherwise in custody when the murder occurred.

(c) The defendant committed murder by means of an explosive as defined in ORS 164.055.

(d) Notwithstanding ORS 163.115 (1)(b), the defendant personally and intentionally committed the homicide under the circumstances set forth in ORS 163.115 (1)(b).

(e) The murder was committed in an effort to conceal the commission of a crime, or to conceal the identity of the perpetrator of a crime.

(f) The murder was committed after the defendant had escaped from a state, county or municipal penal or correctional facility and before the defendant had been returned to the custody of the facility. [1977 c.370 §1; 1981 c.873 §1; 1991 c.742 §13; 1991 c.837 §12; 1993 c.185 §20; 1993 c.623 §2; 1997 c.850 §1; 2005 c.264 §17]

BBM

 

[RoughlyCollie]

It could very well be she passed him on to someone else. Kyron could be alive.
[snipped to save space]
I agree it's no reason for Terri to plan a murder, but maybe it didn't start out as a motive for money, but spite. Was she capable of placing Kyron in harm's way? There's no real logic to get rid of Kyron in a devious fashion...is there?

I am worried about 4 things, assuming Kyron is alive.

First, what kind of person could be persuaded to take Kyron, especially since Terri is not his parent or legal guardian? Unless Terri convinced the person that s/he was saving Kyron's life or mental health, this does not bode well for Kyron. Further, who would be convinced of that without positive proof? Any rational, reasonable adult would realize that this is a crime and report this to the police. How could it not be a crime? This is a defenseless child we are talking about.

Second, what kind of person would let this investigation continue? Do they plan to keep Kyron forever, even if just to save themselves from having to go to prison? If not, what has happened to him?

Third, how was Terri going to have Kyron reappear without running a huge risk of serving a lengthy prison sentence -- by magic, a black hole regurgitated him?

Fourth, if Terri intends for Kyron to never reappear, although he is alive, what the h*ll did she do with him?

It cannot be that easy to get rid of a child by handing him off to someone else, unless the middle class mother has contact with at least one criminal who will help her either directly or by finding another criminal.

I am a middle class mom with no connections to criminals and I cannot for the life of me figure out how to get rid of one of my kids without a criminal connection.

RC

 

[pinkpuddytat]

My opinion is that Kaine seems to be a husband that his wives know is going to take the children, maybe out of love or maybe for spite. It seems if both wives were so worried about that at one time, then Kaine must throw around the threat - "I'm going to take the kids and there's nothing you can do about it!"

I agree it's no reason for Terri to plan a murder, but maybe it didn't start out as a motive for money, but spite. Was she capable of placing Kyron in harm's way? There's no real logic to get rid of Kyron in a devious fashion...is there?

If her motivation wanting to get rid of Kaine was that she didn't care about him and just wanted his money, keeping Kyron around (even if living with his biological mother) would have meant a significant drain on whatever money was available after Kaine's death. There would have been some kind of child support order against any insurance proceeds, almost certainly involving keeping enough in escrow to guarantee long term payment (probably including college education). I haven't seen any evidence that Kaine had a particularly high income, and the modest little home suggests he didn't. It's therefore also likely that any life insurance policy he had wasn't huge (unless of course Terri had somehow persuaded him to take out a larger than usual one, in antipication of arranging his death).

 

[Dr.Fessel]

Hi, Dr. Fessell,

(bolding of your post by me).

Why? I mean, release his name and photo? We aren't a mob society, hopefully. I agree that this person should have reported Terri for asking him to kill her husband. But, now we are HERE, and assuming this man has some decency (he obviously did NOT kill Kaine; we really have no idea what type of conversation he had with Terri back then) maybe there is real concern that he be protected, also.

If Terri is as frightening of a human being as it is looking like right now, I would think everyone needs protection from her; especially this man who could be her ultimate downfall.

By, the way, Dr. Fessel, I truly enjoy your thoughts, your posts (I've read them mostly concerning HaLeigh) and your artwork. Please don't take this reply as an attack of any kind; just a different way of looking at this particular choice that the newspaper, and LE, and everyone else has made to protect the man and the investigation into Kyron. Poor baby, and his poor parents and step-father, and everyone who loves him.

ADDITION: As I was bolding parts of your post I realized that you make a wonderful point (bolded and underlined by me) about his face and name being released in case he was seen on June 4th or any other time in connection with Kyron. Not sure what to think about the wisdom in that, if this murder for hire plot isn't yet verified. Hard call.

My thoughts and opinions.

I would never take offense to someone pointing out where my argument might be going askew.

Noway does it to me all the time. LOL LOL

It is what makes WS great.

 

[Curious Me]

Actually the entire snip indicates LE contacted him first. It was a weird way to write it though.

http://www.kgw.com/news/local/Hormanprobelatest-97771724.html

The landscaper - whom Terri had hired to do work last November without Kaine's knowledge - came forward to investigators as they reached out to everyone that they could find who had had contact with the family. While he said he had no intention of carrying out the plot, he did believe that he would be getting something from Terri.

Could this mean the gardner responded through the questionaire sent out by LE? It sounds like he came forward because he had to not legally lie on some form of questioning.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

If her motivation wanting to get rid of Kaine was that she didn't care about him and just wanted his money, keeping Kyron around (even if living with his biological mother) would have meant a significant drain on whatever money was available after Kaine's death. There would have been some kind of child support order against any insurance proceeds, almost certainly involving keeping enough in escrow to guarantee long term payment (probably including college education). I haven't seen any evidence that Kaine had a particularly high income, and the modest little home suggests he didn't. It's therefore also likely that any life insurance policy he had wasn't huge (unless of course Terri had somehow persuaded him to take out a larger than usual one, in antipication of arranging his death).

Maybe both her's and Kyron's name was on the insurance policy?

 

[Ms Suzanne]

I don't feel and think LE agreed with any of this.The family press meetings and media stories.I think everyone needs to be on Gag orders now Including the family and media as it might jeopardize the investigation.All we just heard was allegations and rumors that I feel were not backed up by law enforcement.This has gotten WAY out of hand and very quickly.It's very sad.What a mess.Poor little Kyron.Where is he?

 

[GrainneDhu]

Ya know, NG really needs to re-think her holiday plans.

If she "bombshells" this on Tuesday, it somehow just won't feel the same.
:floorlaugh:

This is off topic but I have to tell you, it won't work any more. I am onto you, Emma Peel! When I see your name above a short post, I set down my soda before reading.

I WUVS your sense of humour!

 

[wondering1]

Could this mean the gardner responded through the questionaire sent out by LE? It sounds like he came forward because he had to not legally lie on some form of questioning.

I think you're on to something. I remember reading an article that struck me about how it described the number of responses they got, and from whom. It specifically referenced people who were present at the school for other reasons. Can't recall the exact wording -- maybe deliveries and/or contractors. Maybe it was from the WW giving us another head's up lol

I'll see if I can find the link

 

[WhyaDuck?]

Oh man - took the Boy Child to the park for a bit and I come back to find 6 more pages of thread.

Can we all agree to take our RL Breaks at the same time, hm?

 

[grandmaj]

We are not going there with her pics........ her FB is private! :nono:

 

[Donjeta]

The landscaper - whom Terri had hired to do work last November without Kaine's knowledge - came forward to investigators as they reached out to everyone that they could find who had had contact with the family. While he said he had no intention of carrying out the plot, he did believe that he would be getting something from Terri.

"She led him on," sources said.

http://www.kgw.com/news/local/Hormanprobelatest-97771724.html

What does this mean? What exactly was he expecting to get? A down payment? Money to keep quiet about the offer? A load of soil?

Wouldn't it be him leading Terri on if he had no intention to carry out the deed but went along with some kind of payment scheme anyway?

 

[citigirl]

I think you're on to something. I remember reading an article that struck me about how it described the number of responses they got, and from whom. It specifically referenced people who were present at the school for other reasons. Can't recall the exact wording -- maybe deliveries and/or contractors. Maybe it was from the WW giving us another head's up lol

I'll see if I can find the link

yes, it was "deliverymen"...