Lie Detector Tests & Corruption: A public figure speaks out

[gitana1]

You make some very valid points, Gitana. Thank you for taking the time to explain your thought processes that have led you to believe that TH is involved in Kyron's disappearance.

Based on your professional experience, do you suppose the reason TH did not contest the RO might be due to her possible involvement in trying to hire a *hit man* to kill her husband - since that was the reason KH moved out, filed for divorce, and sought the RO in the first place (and maybe her refusal to contest the RO has nothing to do with any alleged involvement in Kyron's disappearance)?

IOW - perhaps the MFH plot is/was true, and in order to have the RO lifted, wouldn't TH have had to testify regarding the MFH allegations, and wouldn't the LS have been called to testify as well?

I'm not defending TH when I ask this, just speculating on the possibility that perhaps the MFH allegations might be factual, but at the same time maybe TH had nothing to do with Kyron's disappearance. I think it's entirely possible that TH may have had a conversation with the LS 7-8 months ago regarding a hit on KH. I think it's also obvious that she abandoned the idea (since KH is still very much alive).

IMO, this scenario could explain her refusal to contest the RO, and could also explain some of her other behaviors that have seemed odd, illogical, etc.

Again, I'm not defending TH, nor am I defending any involvement she may have had in an alleged MFH plot. But I'm not yet ready to believe that she's involved in Kyron's disappearance, even if it comes out that she was indeed involved in a MFH plot against KH (a plot that was never carried out, for one reason or another - maybe she came to her senses & changed her mind?).

I understand completely why many people suspect TH in Kyron's disappearance - especially if the MFH is true. I understand the obvious logic that if someone would try to hire a hit on their spouse (if true), who knows what they're capable of?

In my mind, though, it's possible that she may be guilty of one (attempting to solicit the murder of her husband) without necessarily being guilty of the other (kidnapping/custodial interference or murder of a child).

This is a tough case. All I want is the truth to come out - and, if possible, for Kyron to come home.

MOO

Yes, it's possible, IMO. That would be one bad coincidence. A woman tries to have her husband killed and then her stepson goes missing but she has nothing to do with that. Who would believe her at that point?
It reminds me of what I tell my brothers-in-law (teens): "You hang around creeps and they will finger you if they get caught doing something wrong. You commit a crime and you could become a suspect in anything else that happens in your area, even if you had nothing to do with it. Protect your reputation."

 

[Steely Dan]

1Chump - at what point should LE stop looking at other avenues and focus on the person they believe did it? I understand checking other avenues for suspects and I believe that it should absolutely be done in every case but there is a point where those avenues have been checked and only one suspect remains.

In the KC case I believe all avenues were checked before focusing solely on KC. In the KH case I'm not so sure but I'm assuming LE has a lot more than it's letting on.

 

[gitana1]

Because of my legal experience, I see everything from a "legal" point of view. The best example of this would be Kaine's statements in the RO

"I believe respondent is involved in the disappearance of my son Kyron who has been missing since June 4, 2010. I also recently learned that respondent attempted to hire someone to murder me,'' Kaine Horman wrote in his petition. "The police have provided me with probable cause to believe the above two statements to be true."

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/07/judge_releases_restraining_ord.html

We know LE does not have "probable cause" because Terri has not been arrested for anything. At the very least, if they had probable cause to arrest Terri for the MFH, they would do it.

My opinion and my opinion only.

Respectfully snipped for space.

LE may have probable cause but that does not equate to enough to win a conviction. The state would send it back to LE if they felt there was not enough to convict. And if they arrested TH with probable cause but not enough to get a conviction, the clock would start ticking and the matter would have to be dismissed if TH asserted her speedy trial rights and LE did not have enough by the time the trial was to begin. That would be an exercise in futility and a huge waste of taxpayer money during a recession. So it is simply not true that the lack of an arrest proves there is no probable cause to arrest.

 

[Curious Me]

Here is some information I put together on polygraphs from my point of view, a pharmacist with decades of experience.

The polygraph is not designed to consider medications/street drugs/otc/underlying disease states/menopause/social attitude/anxiety and a plethora of other factors. Nor is the polygrapher!

The polygraph does not detect deception - it detects changes in pulse, heart rate, blood pressure. I think it's a sham!!! used to bully and to enhance interrogation. moo mho

If interested, try reading what I have put together and please note (click on the link): there is a very interesting video giving two sides of the poly at the end of my comment. The 2nd half of the video is very interesting. at least to me. moo

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Does failing the lie detector tests mean anything?

Thank You so much for your post and link.

 

[stmarysmead]

If Terri is innocent, she is a very unlucky woman.

Most children, after their parent leaves an exciting event like that, would run to chat with a friend, or go stand with his best buddies. Would Kyron have just found a lonely corner to stand alone, so quiet he would be totally unnoticed? He brushed against no one, made no comments, was just seemingly invisible? Why is it so hard to confirm that Kyron was still okay after Terri left? That is very bad luck.

Terri is also unlucky that with all the people there, apparently no one saw her, without Kyron, walking to the Truck and leaving.

Furthermore, Terri is unlucky that she chose THAT day to just drive aimlessly around to soothe Baby K for a long period of time.

And Terri is extremely unlucky that, by coincidence, her best friend's whereabouts seem to be unaccounted for around the same crucial time as her long drive. It's also unlucky that DeDe's employers could not reach her when they say they expected to be able to do so.

On the day Terri's stepson goes missing, how unlucky that both Terri and her best friend are "missing in action" just at the same time! What are the chances?

And, yes, Terri is unlucky that she chose NOT to bring home the science project, which was the main reason she told her husband she needed the truck that day. Why borrow the truck and not use it for the started purpose?

And Terri is unlucky that a Landscaper came forward to claim she tried to hire him to kill Kaine. Now, that is incredibly unlucky! How often do people pop up to make accusations like that?

Terri is unlucky (according to Kaine) in regard to taking polygraphs...whether they are good indicators of guilt or not.

Terri is unlucky that her friends came up with a hinky plan to give her several Bat Phones and that she decided to go along.

Terri is unlucky that Kaine's friend to whom she sent texts of a sexual nature in the short weeks after Kyron went missing...did not keep their correspondence confidential...and she is unlucky not to be able to keep this "activity" quiet.

She is further unlucky that the police see some similarity in this "flirtation" that gives credence to the unwilling Killer-for-Hire Landscaper.

What are the statistical odds any one person can have THAT much bad luck? At the worst possible time? And yet it all means absolutely nothing?

Whyever should we question the motives of LE to look closely at someone with all this coincidental "bad luck?" I believethey would be derelict in their duty NOT to do so.

 

[PaulaF513]

I respectfully disagree. In a situation where a husband's child is missing, his wife seems to be uncooperative with the investigation and the police have shown him evidence that she was trying to kill him, it makes complete sense to me.



BBM

What evidence do you have that he's an illegal?

He said, IIRC, that at the time he wasn't sure she was serious. Then when all of the excrement starts hitting the oscillating air moving device and it looks like she may have had a hand in Kyron's disappearance he may have come forward because with all of the new evidence he now believes she was serious.

JMO

I never said he was illegal. It was an example. I merely hypothesized a quid pro quo between him and LE. It could have easily been " tell us something to help us out and we won't fine you for working without a license"...

 

[Steely Dan]

I never said he was illegal. It was an example. I merely hypothesized a quid pro quo between him and LE. It could have easily been " tell us something to help us out and we won't fine you for working without a license"...

It's CIT that has been saying he's illegal. I just didn't pay close enough attention to your post.

 

[stmarysmead]

I guess "hypothesizing" is part of sleuthing.

I certainly hypothesized that Terri is the unluckiest woman that ever drew breath.

Others can hypothesize that Terri is being targeted so Oregon's Mr. Big can escape prosecution. We can hypothesize that school officials are pressuring LE to scapegoat Terri so that they escape accountability. We can imagine that the landscaper is an illegal and he is being threatened by LE so he will lie about Terri. I might come up with a theory that Kaine is Elvis' son and this is all about the Graceland inheritance. Anybody can point fingers and present a theory. And there is always a chance to be right.

Good sleuthers are like good writers...imaginative and willing to look at anything.

But, the test is...are there FACTS to strongly support the theory? Anything REAL? Substantial? Other than our hypothesis? In fairness, we should care about a foundation in FACTS and verifiable truth in our suppositions. There was an excellent post making the point that we should not want Terri convicted by innuendo. So true. Nor should we want LE or the case they are making...undermined by innuendo either.

There are no FACTS of corruption in this case. Just some Internet sleuthing hypothesis. That is a crucial distinction.

And disclaimer: I certainly cannot prove my hypothesis that Terri is the unluckiest woman ever to have drawn breath.

 

[nurseratchett]

For the sake of fairness, what if there was a discussion about killing KH. But the suggestion really came from the illegal alien "witness". Maybe Terri did complain or comment about KH, (why would they not allow the 911 call to be made public, if it was Terri's fault, they would imo, so....) and maybe he jokingly said he could kill him for a price. Is that a possiblity? Or, it could be totally fabricated by this person? He must not be a credible witness or they would have charged her with conspiracy to commit murder! Because they haven't and we have heard little about it since the news was first reported, I believe they don't believe it and went on a wild goose chase. Yet the public still does believe it apparently.

OK first, where is the info about the May 911 call coming from? Is there a link? I have seen this mentioned on other sites as well, yet the only link is that it was a comment made by a poster on either oregonlive or other media comment section. It has also been said that 2 911 calls were made from the school in the weeks leading up to Kyrons disappearnce. Never verified, simnply some commenters gossip.
Second, how do you know the LS is an illegal immigrant? He has a business license, and has lived here for some time as far as the only info I have ever read in MSM indicates.

 

[Aedrys]

If Terri is innocent, she is a very unlucky woman.

Most children, after their parent leaves an exciting event like that, would run to chat with a friend, or go stand with his best buddies. Would Kyron have just found a lonely corner to stand alone, so quiet he would be totally unnoticed? He brushed against no one, made no comments, was just seemingly invisible? Why is it so hard to confirm that Kyron was still okay after Terri left? That is very bad luck.

Terri is also unlucky that with all the people there, apparently no one saw her, without Kyron, walking to the Truck and leaving.

Furthermore, Terri is unlucky that she chose THAT day to just drive aimlessly around to soothe Baby K for a long period of time.

And Terri is extremely unlucky that, by coincidence, her best friend's whereabouts seem to be unaccounted for around the same crucial time as her long drive. It's also unlucky that DeDe's employers could not reach her when they say they expected to be able to do so.

On the day Terri's stepson goes missing, how unlucky that both Terri and her best friend are "missing in action" just at the same time! What are the chances?

And, yes, Terri is unlucky that she chose NOT to bring home the science project, which was the main reason she told her husband she needed the truck that day. Why borrow the truck and not use it for the started purpose?

And Terri is unlucky that a Landscaper came forward to claim she tried to hire him to kill Kaine. Now, that is incredibly unlucky! How often do people pop up to make accusations like that?

Terri is unlucky (according to Kaine) in regard to taking polygraphs...whether they are good indicators of guilt or not.

Terri is unlucky that her friends came up with a hinky plan to give her several Bat Phones and that she decided to go along.

Terri is unlucky that Kaine's friend to whom she sent texts of a sexual nature in the short weeks after Kyron went missing...did not keep their correspondence confidential...and she is unlucky not to be able to keep this "activity" quiet.

She is further unlucky that the police see some similarity in this "flirtation" that gives credence to the unwilling Killer-for-Hire Landscaper.

What are the statistical odds any one person can have THAT much bad luck? At the worst possible time? And yet it all means absolutely nothing?

Whyever should we question the motives of LE to look closely at someone with all this coincidental "bad luck?" I believethey would be derelict in their duty NOT to do so.

Brilliant post!!!! The thanks button wasn't enough. And I wanted to add, What pervert or child molester has ever been lucky enough to have all of the above direct suspicion away from them? I think that is what has bothered me the most. I've never seen a case where there are so many suspicious things about one person that takes away from the real predator. It's usually just luck on a few things here and there that make the predator slip through the cracks, not the greatest patsy of all time just happening to fall into their lap or delivered to them on a silver platter. TH is just the gift that keeps on giving if a sexual predator was involved. The LDT is just another lucky portion here for the predator - the patsy can't even pass an LDT among the other things you've listed. It's like it was Christmas in June for this predator, if there was one. My mind is open to it, but it just doesn't seem very likely to me.

 

[gardeness]

Okay. I see your point. But aren't there at least two plausible reasons for surprise?

One, she did nothing wrong.

Two, she did PLENTY wrong...but never thought the Murder-for-Hire story would come out.

So how does his leaving unexpectedly, and it coming out of nowhere to Terri...make Kaine "suspicious?"

Even if Terri is innocent, learning that police believe your wife tried to hire someone to kill you is a very traumatic, frightening event for a spouse. Compound that by learning this at a time when your child is missing.

Is it so hard to understand Kaine's reaction or why he left?

"Suspicious" in what way?

What I question is why Kaine wouldn't have confronted Terri himself about the alleged MFH, whether in person or over the telephone, before filing for divorce.

IMO, it will be very disappointing if LE caused a divorce based on a flaky conversation between TH and the LS.

 

[eyes4crime]

If Terri is innocent, she is a very unlucky woman.

Most children, after their parent leaves an exciting event like that, would run to chat with a friend, or go stand with his best buddies. Would Kyron have just found a lonely corner to stand alone, so quiet he would be totally unnoticed? He brushed against no one, made no comments, was just seemingly invisible? Why is it so hard to confirm that Kyron was still okay after Terri left? That is very bad luck.

Terri is also unlucky that with all the people there, apparently no one saw her, without Kyron, walking to the Truck and leaving.

Furthermore, Terri is unlucky that she chose THAT day to just drive aimlessly around to soothe Baby K for a long period of time.

And Terri is extremely unlucky that, by coincidence, her best friend's whereabouts seem to be unaccounted for around the same crucial time as her long drive. It's also unlucky that DeDe's employers could not reach her when they say they expected to be able to do so.

On the day Terri's stepson goes missing, how unlucky that both Terri and her best friend are "missing in action" just at the same time! What are the chances?

And, yes, Terri is unlucky that she chose NOT to bring home the science project, which was the main reason she told her husband she needed the truck that day. Why borrow the truck and not use it for the started purpose?

And Terri is unlucky that a Landscaper came forward to claim she tried to hire him to kill Kaine. Now, that is incredibly unlucky! How often do people pop up to make accusations like that?

Terri is unlucky (according to Kaine) in regard to taking polygraphs...whether they are good indicators of guilt or not.

Terri is unlucky that her friends came up with a hinky plan to give her several Bat Phones and that she decided to go along.

Terri is unlucky that Kaine's friend to whom she sent texts of a sexual nature in the short weeks after Kyron went missing...did not keep their correspondence confidential...and she is unlucky not to be able to keep this "activity" quiet.

She is further unlucky that the police see some similarity in this "flirtation" that gives credence to the unwilling Killer-for-Hire Landscaper.

What are the statistical odds any one person can have THAT much bad luck? At the worst possible time? And yet it all means absolutely nothing?

Whyever should we question the motives of LE to look closely at someone with all this coincidental "bad luck?" I believe they would be derelict in their duty NOT to do so.

stmary- I don't necessarily agree with the views you have regarding Terri, but I do appreciate the hard work you put in to formulating such an excellent post. Comprehensive and articulate, well laid out and filled with information. Thanks for all your hard work! :yes:

 

[GrainneDhu]

BBM

I am one person who believes that if Terri had not secured an attorney she would have been arrested long ago. moo mho

For me, this case was moving along parallel lines with the Riley Fox case here in Illinois. Riley is a 3yo girl found raped and murdered and thrown in a creek. Her father, Kevin, was the one and only suspect. The drive by LE to arrest him was intense and focused. Kevin didn't get an attorney because as he said, I'm innocent. He failed lie detector tests (so he was told) and finally, after hours of interrogation, falsely confessed to the crime. Kevin was arrested on the eve of an important election here in Illinois. moo

Kevin was vindicated of the crime years later when LE finally tested the DNA found in Riley. This only happened because Kevin's brother went to a criminal defense attorney and asked for help. Kevin and his x-wife just won millions in a lawsuit against LE. moo

While following Kyron's case, I began to experience the same exasperation and alarm as I did in the Fox case. Very similiar! Sickening similar. Another recent case here in Illinois is that of Jerry Hobbs. Almost the same as the Fox case.

Thank goodness for good criminal defense attorneys!

It happens, LE can get caught up in their own frenzy - they can have tunnel vision just like any of the rest of us. LE are not perfect, they are human. moo mho

In the Kevin Fox case, LE was so intensely focused on him that they overlooked a pair of sneakers discarded very near Riley's body. Those sneakers were prison issue shoes and had the name of a registered sex offender who lived in the same neighbourhood on them.

As it turns out, the name of the man whose DNA matched that found on Riley.

I don't think LE in that case was motivated by evil (although their behaviour amounted to that). I think they just found Kevin Fox's story so unbelievable that it seemed crystal clear to them that he was an evil, child raping murderer. Which, to them, justified anything they did in order to protect the community from him.

LE was just as convinced that Kevin Fox was guilty as many people are now convinced that TMH is guilty.

 

[gitana1]

In the Kevin Fox case, LE was so intensely focused on him that they overlooked a pair of sneakers discarded very near Riley's body. Those sneakers were prison issue shoes and had the name of a registered sex offender who lived in the same neighbourhood on them.

As it turns out, the name of the man whose DNA matched that found on Riley.

I don't think LE in that case was motivated by evil (although their behaviour amounted to that). I think they just found Kevin Fox's story so unbelievable that it seemed crystal clear to them that he was an evil, child raping murderer. Which, to them, justified anything they did in order to protect the community from him.

LE was just as convinced that Kevin Fox was guilty as many people are now convinced that TMH is guilty.

Yes, but just because they got it wrong in Fox's case does not mean they are wrong in this one. Sometimes LE is convinced someone is guilty because they are.

 

[Steely Dan]

In the Kevin Fox case, LE was so intensely focused on him that they overlooked a pair of sneakers discarded very near Riley's body. Those sneakers were prison issue shoes and had the name of a registered sex offender who lived in the same neighbourhood on them.

As it turns out, the name of the man whose DNA matched that found on Riley.

I don't think LE in that case was motivated by evil (although their behaviour amounted to that). I think they just found Kevin Fox's story so unbelievable that it seemed crystal clear to them that he was an evil, child raping murderer. Which, to them, justified anything they did in order to protect the community from him.

LE was just as convinced that Kevin Fox was guilty as many people are now convinced that TMH is guilty.

LE mistakes happen. Many of them have been discussed on this board a lot. However, IMO, they are few and far between on serious crimes when the total number of serious crimes are taken into account. I'd be generous if I said I believed 3% were wrong.

In most of these wrongful convictions it can be seen pretty early on and it's pretty obvious that there is some kind of reason for it. TH may not be guilty but right now her actions seem to warrant a close look at her. I hope that if evidence pointing in another direction comes up they won't ignore it.

Somebody said (hypothetically) that there may be a RSO unaccounted for on that day and they never may have checked. We don't know that. They very well could have checked on all the RSOs in the area.

I would think TH's lawyer, who is privy to the evidence, would be talking about it. JMO

 

[2goldfish]

In the Kevin Fox case, LE was so intensely focused on him that they overlooked a pair of sneakers discarded very near Riley's body. Those sneakers were prison issue shoes and had the name of a registered sex offender who lived in the same neighbourhood on them.

As it turns out, the name of the man whose DNA matched that found on Riley.

I don't think LE in that case was motivated by evil (although their behaviour amounted to that). I think they just found Kevin Fox's story so unbelievable that it seemed crystal clear to them that he was an evil, child raping murderer. Which, to them, justified anything they did in order to protect the community from him.

LE was just as convinced that Kevin Fox was guilty as many people are now convinced that TMH is guilty.

also in the fox case there was evidence of a break-in. alone this might not have been such a serious muck up on LE's end, only there were several other break ins done the same way that night on that street. that should have caused LE to at least raise an eyebrow and consider an actual intruder instead of torturing Mr Fox IMO

this is why I say yet again, in Kyron's case we do not know what LE knows! there could be TONS of evidence of someone other than TH being involved (accomplice or other), there could be none at all, we just dont know.

 

[ami]

* Gresham Police, Fairview Police, Troutdale Police, Portland Police, Port of Portland Police, Clackamas County Sheriff’s Office, Clackamas County DA MCT, Multnomah County DA’s investigators, Washington County District Attorney’s Office, Washington County Sheriff’s Office, Gladstone Police, Oregon City Police, Milwaukie Police, Canby Police, Lake Oswego Police, West Linn Police, Vancouver Police, Hillsboro Police, Beaverton Police, FBI, DEA, ICE, Secret Service, DOD Defense Criminal Investigative Services, Oregon DOJ, Oregon State Police.

IMO those are some serious Law Enforcement agencies. FBI; DEA; ICE: Secret Service.
Any misdirection one agency might erroneously take, would surely be redirected with the assistance of the multitude of these other agencies including the State and Federal Agencies.


This list does not include search and rescue resources.

Thanks so much for writing that. IMO it doesn't matter if each of these agencies was directly involved in pointing to Terri or had only peripheral involvement - I cannot fathom that LE could be going in such a wrong direction that they've endangered not only Kyron but all of the other children in the area by not chasing the real perp - and none of those agencies would have stepped forward to redirect. Even if they weren't leading the investigation, they were asked to help in this case by LE - we assume LE was willing and actively wanting their skill and that the other agencies didn't show up unwanted and unannounced - and yet any of their non-Terri evidence was rejected, hidden, covered up or ignored. That sounds pretty unlikely.

 

[liz b.]

Yes, but just because they got it wrong in Fox's case does not mean they are wrong in this one. Sometimes LE is convinced someone is guilty because they are.

But the poster gives us an excellent example of tunnel vision, of focusing solely on one person. And this led to not focusing on other salient issues...IMO

All JMO

 

[gliving]

Somebody said (hypothetically) that there may be a RSO unaccounted for on that day and they never may have checked. We don't know that. They very well could have checked on all the RSOs in the area.

I would think TH's lawyer, who is privy to the evidence, would be talking about it. JMO

SBM

Mr Houze would not speak up if it would hinder LE's search for a RSO. Why would he tip off the offender that LE was on to him. Better to keep quiet in hopes it clears his client.
It could very well be that Mr Houze's own investigation has led LE to a perp.

 

[1Chump]

1Chump - at what point should LE stop looking at other avenues and focus on the person they believe did it? I understand checking other avenues for suspects and I believe that it should absolutely be done in every case but there is a point where those avenues have been checked and only one suspect remains.

In the KC case I believe all avenues were checked before focusing solely on KC. In the KH case I'm not so sure but I'm assuming LE has a lot more than it's letting on.

IMO, LE should NEVER stop looking at other avenues and focus on one person until a conviction. Even when EVERYTHING points to that one person, they should never stop looking. Because the minute they focus on one person and one person only, they put blinders on. Those blinders only allow them to see evidence that points to that person's guilt. They miss evidence that may cause a jury to find reasonable doubt.

It is not that the "defendant" is not guilty. It is about being able to make the jury see reasonable doubt. When LE has blinders on, they stop looking at the case from a defense point of view. They will not investigate other leads. They are sure those leads are false which they probable are false. However, by not investigating them, they open the door for the defense. The defense will make the argument that they focused on the defendant and did not consider other possibilities. If any of those other leads results in a witness testifying to another suspect, the State is really in trouble. Because if they had not had their blinders on, they would have considered the possibility, investigated it, and proved it was not a lead. But they decided they did not need to do that because they were sure they had the right person.

IMO, most defendants are represented by overworked and underpaid public defenders who do not have the time, the knowledge, and/or the resources to properly prepare a defense. As a result both the prosecutors and LE have become complacent. They cut corners, they do not thoroughly investigate, they focus on who they think is guilty because they know the chances of the public defender putting on a great defense is slim. Then they got a defendant who has the great defense attorney and the resources to put that complacency on trial and juries find reasonable doubt.

IMO, if they were never complacent to begin with, it would not matter if the defendant had a public defender or a great defense attorney...their case would stand the test of both.