GUILTY MI - Charlie Bothuell, 12, Detroit, 16 June 2014

[BetteDavisEyes]

Looks like the hearing is in a break. I have to run some errands and will be back later.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Def. lawyers were trying to get her to say she failed to turn over discovery! (objection/sustained)

Answer, psychologist evaluation December, 2011, homeschooling 2012. Dr. cannot say when he started being homeschooled.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Does ODD include child who is spiteful, speaking of revenge, other negative behaviors.

This is not directly related to Charlie. Just in general.

Charlie was not diagnosed with ODD. The score on Dad's Vanderbuilt report scored ODD and ADHD. Only ADHD was diagnosed.

Apparently bio-Mom didn't fill out a form.

Could Charlie have made this up to be spiteful and get back at his step-mother?

No, Nazer says he was not diagnosed as ADHD or ODD in 2014 evaluation.

Full psychiatric was not done because there was no problem with his behavior.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

2011 was diagnosed with being obese at 95% range

At Children's hospital he wasn't over 95% and not considered obese. He should not have been given that regimen of exercise. It was one of the components of torture.

Nazer goes over the same information of child torture she gave yesterday.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Charlie was hit with pipe on his chest multiple times, also on buttocks, and exercise regimen.

Psychological abuse: isolation, home-schooling, lack of social interaction, deprived of proper nutrition, food and water in basement. Lost too much weight earlier and deprived of food. Also denied lotion for eczema, bathroom. He had to pee in drain and was constipated.

Disclosures from KidsTalk tape. (objection by other defense... sustained)

Charlie needed 20 minutes a day of exercise and nutritional counseling.

BMI: 98.3% in 2009
Weight table and BMI tables

98.9% was his height in 2008.

More arguments. Not making much sense. Smith is jumping over percentiles for BMI and weight, 20 minutes of exercise... way too much kerfuffling around IMHO.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

On to social interaction.

How does she know Charlie had no social interaction? Charlie said so.

How did she test her hypothesis? Huh?

Did she critically assess he had NO interaction.

Arguing over little vs. none. Goes by what Charlie said. No interaction.

Charlie said he was homeschooled for 2 years, had little social interaction, he had nothing to do. He had no friends.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Nazer didn't talk to custodial father, step-mother, other relatives to find out how much time he spent with other relatives, went to the mall, took a plane trip? He went to Florida for a funeral? Trip to Las Vegas.

Smith accusing doctor of not investigation through family interviews.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Nazer said if she knew, she would still consider the 10 days in the basement.

Smith: Charlie went to a cousin's house for a BBQ.

Couldn't this open the door a crack for her about his being in the basement for 11 days?

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Smith is still making everything Charlie said about conditions in basement as a lie.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

LOL! Judge Holmes asks for the NEXT relevant question!

More discussion of the fact that to believe Charlie's story, she has to believe him.

I feel sorry for Charlie when he has to testify.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

JMHO, it would have been so much better if there had been more interviews prior to this doctor getting her information. She really needed to do some one-on-one herself.

Now, Smith accuses Charlie of starting fires. Objection - no proof!

Her job was not to do the psych. assessment. The Vanderbilt guide should have had the answers to that.

We are talking hypothetically, of course. Starting fires in halls of apartment?

Wouldn't change her opinion concerning abuse.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Dr. Nazer: Charlie would have to recant his story, but that might not change her opinion.

Holmes telling Smith he is asking her to speculate.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

More yadda yadda of the same ilk. Lots of coulds and woulds, not a lot of straight testimony.

JMHO, Charlie's alleged abuse is one issue. The question of the fact that the abuse might have caused his behavior or his behavior caused the abuse aren't in play here. Many children with physical or behavioral disorders are frequently abused.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

I'm taking a little break until something major arises.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Dr. Nazer: Charlie's excessive weight loss was detrimental to his health.

On to more irrelevant questions.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Smith: Would giving Charlie food and drink by the police contaminate the evidence?

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Answer: Taking Charlie to McDonald's would improve his hydration. She doesn't know if Charlie asked for the food.

Break: Resume at 1:30

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Smith continues by asking about the food Charlie ate. They can't use the interviews for some reason so they are hypothetical. Smith names the types of food and drink he had.

She doesn't know how much of these items he ate and on what basis.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

She says it's not the most nutritional. She points out he wasn't provided w/food and he had to sneak upstairs to get it. Hypothetically!

Smith asks if child put in room for ten days and allowed to eat, wouldn't that be ok? Nazer says that the keeping him in his bedroom 10 days would be abuse, removing him from social contact. Then, Smith asked how many days can a child be placed in a room before it is abusive. Nazer said she'd never seen studies and it would be unethical to do so.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

If Charlie busted through the door right now and said he lied about it all?

She'd have to look at why they recanted... take it in context of the case.

Final question, according to Smith.

Re-direct!

Ms. Goldfarb: Tries to ask questions and loud speaking objection, sustained.

She gets to my point, if a child were ADHD and ODD does that mean you can beat them with a pipe, send them down to a basement? No

Is it appropriate to isolate a child with ADHD and/or ODD. NO

Would it add to the abuse. Children with disorders are more prone to abuse. (I said so).

Physical injuries, were consistent with his injuries. Were they severe at the time they were inflicted? (Objection/Ask differently)

Based on the photographs, can she figure out how severe they were. (Objection/overruled) She can only tell there was a break in the skin.

If a child is rescued from being held captive somewhere, would you expect him to be smiling? (Objection sustained)

Newly asked, a smile could be consistent with a child being glad to be out.

EVERY QUESTION WAS OBJECTED TO. Judge denied request to re-cross.

We are done with Dr. Nazer.