OH - Annabelle Richardson, newborn, found in shallow grave, Carlisle, 7 May 2017 #2

[BlackCloud]

Because she volunteered to tell them the baby was alive for 5 minutes, cried, gurgled etc.

She said she might have killed it a little, might have hurt it a little.

If I remember well there's a video where she seems to tell them without any coercion.
But we don't know what happened before cameras were turned on....

 

[BeckyF]

Her confession was not coerced.

LE are legally allowed to lie in order to get a confession

Exactly why people should get an attorney before talking to law enforcement. IMO they put words in her mouth and she was just agreeing with what they said. This is the tactic they used on her and they are experts on it. She was used to being compliant to please Mom. JMO.

 

[Hoosgirl]

As I read, and re-read all these texts between the two, I'm wondering. Aren't these conversations that normally would be face-to-face between a mother and a daughter?

This just gets me as to why these were all done In text versus face-to-face.

And it also makes me wonder, what was face-to-face in addition to all of this if anything.

That is what I want to know. But we never will.

Oh my gosh, yes. My first thought when I saw the text about the doctor email with pregnancy info was dhe texted this instead of waiting to talk face to face????

 

[osu]

When I was 17 and in high school, I was accused of a crime that I didn’t do. A kid that I barely knew was arrested for drugs at the football game, assaulted an officer in the process and then told LE that I had sold the drugs to him. I barely even knew the kid and I didn’t do hard drugs.

Two detectives came to my school, pulled me from class, sat me down in the principals office and questioned me for well over an hour trying to get me to admit to it. I told them “No way! I didn’t do it. Give me a lie detector, whatever”, there was no way in hell I would ever admit to doing something, even a “little bit”, that I knew that I didn’t do. This was way back in 1974. I was never questioned again about it and my parents were never notified of the incident.

Reid Technique or not, I just can’t understand how someone could admit to doing something if they knew in their heart that they truly didn’t do it?

JMO

 

[dixiegirl1035]

I agree 100%, if you have just learned that your daughter has become sexually active I think these things are totally appropriate to say.

If you already suspect that your daughter is pregnant though... coupled with daughter suspecting (*knows*) that she is pregnant, then these comments would not be taken as supportive.

In that particular context, I agree with Mariposa, These are not the words of a parent telling a teenaged daughter that she would be supportive of an unplanned pregnancy.

I feel like this may have been a veiled message - It can go on my insurance, but you need to take care of this. No college. Get a job. No joke. You will be responsible. Your life will be over.

Take care of this.

And she did.

Can someone refresh my memory. This post makes me think of some legal implications on such.

What day did she go first to the doctor, and what day did she turn 18?

 

[iluvmua]

Exactly why people should get an attorney before talking to law enforcement. IMO they put words in her mouth and she was just agreeing with what they said. This is the tactic they used on her and they are experts on it. She was used to being compliant to please Mom. JMO.

At 18, you would think she would know to get a lawyer or ask for one.

Jmo.

Guilt or innocence, she should have called for one

 

[iluvmua]

Can someone refresh my memory. This post makes me think of some legal implications on such.

What day did she go first to the doctor, and what day did she turn 18?

April 26 and she turned 18 on March 9th

 

[iluvmua]

When I was 17 and in high school, I was accused of a crime that I didn’t do. A kid that I barely knew was arrested for drugs at the football game, punched a cop and then told the cops that I had sold the drugs to him. I barely even knew the kid and I didn’t do hard drugs.

Two detectives came to my school, pulled me from class, sat me down in the principals office questioned me for over an hour trying to get me to admit to it. I told them “No way! I didn’t do it. Give me a lie detector, whatever”, but there was no way in hell I would ever admit to doing something, even a “little bit”, that I knew I didn’t do. This was way back in 1974. I was never questioned again about it and my parents were never notified of the incident.

Reid Technique or not, I just can’t understand how someone could admit to doing something if they knew in their heart that they truly didn’t do it?

JMO

Especially since LE was not even accusing her of anything.

They seemed pretty pleasant to her imo

 

[legalmomma]

When I was 17 and in high school, I was accused of a crime that I didn’t do. A kid that I barely knew was arrested for drugs at the football game, punched a cop and then told the cops that I had sold the drugs to him. I barely even knew the kid and I didn’t do hard drugs.

Two detectives came to my school, pulled me from class, sat me down in the principals office questioned me for an hour and half trying to get me to admit to it. I told them “No freaking way! I didn’t do it. Give me a lie detector, whatever”, but there was no way in hell I would ever admit to doing something, even a “little bit”, that I knew I didn’t do. This was way back in 1974. I was never questioned again about it and my parents were never notified of the incident.

Reid Technique or not, I just can’t get over how someone could admit to doing something if they knew in their heart that they didn’t do it?

JMO

It happens all the time with juveniles, those with intellectual disabilities, many... They want to please. As an attorney I see it all the time. As a juvenile I also was in your position only it was an interrogation at my high school over graffiti which I didn't know a thing about but my best friend did it. My parents were not called. My gymnastics coach was there, laughing at the inquisition. Yes. It happens every day. ALWAYS ask for an attorney even if innocent and know nothing. Enough reasonable doubt here for several of the charges, especially aggravated murder and involuntary manslaughter.

 

[dixiegirl1035]

At 18, you would think she would know to get a lawyer or ask for one.

Jmo.

Guilt or innocence, she should have called for one

I never knew to do such until I started following here and following trials in my 50s.

And I also learned to say

number one am I being detained number two am I free to go
number 3 May I have a lawyer.

But that was in my 50s.

Children today are more knowledgeable, but if they aren't exposed to crimes and getting away with stuff, then they have no idea and don't follow ID channel or Forensic Files Etc. I'm not sure how it is for children now

ETA, her mother and father sure should have known such before her second pulling by law enforcement MOO.

 

[BlackCloud]

When I was 17 and in high school, I was accused of a crime that I didn’t do. A kid that I barely knew was arrested for drugs at the football game, punched a cop and then told the cops that I had sold the drugs to him. I barely even knew the kid and I didn’t do hard drugs.

Two detectives came to my school, pulled me from class, sat me down in the principals office questioned me for over an hour trying to get me to admit to it. I told them “No way! I didn’t do it. Give me a lie detector, whatever”, but there was no way in hell I would ever admit to doing something, even a “little bit”, that I knew I didn’t do. This was way back in 1974. I was never questioned again about it and my parents were never notified of the incident.

Reid Technique or not, I just can’t understand how someone could admit to doing something if they knew in their heart that they truly didn’t do?

JMO

Very interesting story....I think stories like this are not uncommon all over the world (it's not just an American thing...)

 

[MyBelle]

Yup. Not one of my pets was just tossed into a dirt pit. And all are buried in my backyard. All with blankets or soft towels.

Maternal instinct wants your baby to be protected. For their bodies to be warm and covered. Beyond reason. Most moms of a dead child think of their child being cold or alone in their grave.

Even Caylee was wrapped in a blanket by her murdering mother. Because there had been some sort of bond before she decided to get rid of her.

BBM. I don't believe the maternal instinct exists in all women. An example is BSR's mother. After birth, a baby usually bonds with the primary caregiver and that can isn't just limited to women. Whatever bond BSR has with her mother has been incredibly unhealthy for quite some time. BSR was busily starving herself so it is a given she was also starving her unborn baby. I think we all agree there is nothing "protective" about starvation.

In Ohio, BSR needed a parent's permission to have an abortion early in her pregnancy. I think her eating disorder and depression kicked into high gear when she learned the harsh truth from the OB and discovered it was too late to have a legal abortion. The placenta was nutritionally starved and maybe that was her intent to try to trigger an interruption in her pregnancy.

If the baby had been born alive, I think she would have taken it to the nearby police station under the Safe Haven Law and never said another word to anyone.

JMO

 

[Hope4More]

Here's what I don't understand... I can understand being talked into any of those things, if I was dazed from the exertions of giving birth, etc., and honestly couldn't remember 100% of what I did.

What I can't understand being "talked into", is "lighting the baby on fire". You think that'd be pretty memorable; no? Not exactly the kind of thing you'd have to think much about? I mean, fire hurts (former smoker here); and you know it can do damage; and it's super bright and memorable in the bargain. If she didn't try to cremate the baby at any point, why'd she say so to police?

Here's how the Reid interrogation method works:

LE: we know what happened and we have evidence to prove it. What you told us doesn't match the evidence. And we can prove it.

LE: we know you're actually a really good person, and I'm sure you have a perfectly understandable reason for what you did. But unless you tell us the truth about what you did, we can't do anything for you.

LE (specific to this case, and deliberately choosing what they believe from the 1st interview is a vulnerability they can use to make Skylar break):

We know what you want is to give Anabelle a proper burial. And your dad has told us that too, that it is very important to him. To all of you.

To do what's right for your daughter, you need to tell us the truth.

LE: So what about that fire?

SR: what fire? No. No. No. No. No. No. I did not. No. No. No.

LE: We can prove it. Tell us the truth or we'll be forced to keep poking into your daughter's remains, sifting through them, who knows when you'll be able to bury her? What about that fire?

SR: No.

LE: We know there was a fire. Your daughter's bones were charred. We can prove it. It happened. That isn't the question.

LE: But we also know you're a good person who loved your daughter and who wants to do the right thing for her.

LE: so we know you didn't just throw her into a fire to get of her or anything like that. You wanted to cremate her, right? Which is normal. And then you could keep some of her ashes with you forever, right? Because you loved her?

LE: We're not going to judge you, we just need you to tell us how you set her on fire. How high did the flames go? Before you stopped and put them out.
----
Watching that interrogation made me heartsick and angry. The question for me wasn't and isn't why did Skylar tell LE she set her baby on fire if it wasn't true. Skylar the pleaser was trying to please, but since the fire never happened, that was rather difficult.

My question is how in the world could the LE interrogating her believe the fire story that yes, they most definitely coerced out of her?

 

[geevee]

As I read, and re-read all these texts between the two, I'm wondering. Aren't these conversations that normally would be face-to-face between a mother and a daughter?

This just gets me as to why these were all done In text versus face-to-face.

And it also makes me wonder, what was face-to-face in addition to all of this if anything.

That is what I want to know. But we never will.

I have wondered that myself, they seem to have a very curious relationship.

 

[BeckyF]

I never knew to do such until I started following here and following trials in my 50s.

And I also learned to say

number one am I being detained number two am I free to go
number 3 May I have a lawyer.

But that was in my 50s.

Children today are more knowledgeable, but if they aren't exposed to crimes and getting away with stuff, then they have no idea and don't follow ID channel or Forensic Files Etc. I'm not sure how it is for children now

ETA, her mother and father sure should have known such before her second pulling by law enforcement MOO.

Exactly! Why would she know such a thing at 18? I certainly didn't at 18. She had never been arrested and did not know how to interact with law enforcement. Her Dad didn't even think of it in the 2nd interview. JMO.

 

[Mariposa]

It happens all the time with juveniles, those with intellectual disabilities, many... They want to please. As an attorney I see it all the time. As a juvenile I also was in your position only it was an interrogation at my high school over graffiti which I didn't know a thing about but my best friend did it. My parents were not called. My gymnastics coach was there, laughing at the inquisition. Yes. It happens every day. ALWAYS ask for an attorney even if innocent and know nothing. Enough reasonable doubt here for several of the charges, especially aggravated murder and involuntary manslaughter.

This this this. False confessions are a true phenomenon even if many say they can't imagine how anyone would make a false confession.

I really can't believe that Skylar (or more specifically her parents) didn't get an attorney before the second questioning. I don't know if she's guilty or not or how the jury will land but I think the adults in her life did her a real disservice as to not getting counsel at that point.

 

[iluvmua]

Here's how the Reid interrogation method works:

LE: we know what happened and we have evidence to prove it. What you told us doesn't match the evidence. And we can prove it.

LE: we know you're actually a really good person, and I'm sure you have a perfectly understandable reason for what you did. But unless you tell us the truth about what you did, we can't do anything for you.

LE (specific to this case, and deliberately choosing what they believe from the 1st interview is a vulnerability they can use to make Skylar break):

We know what you want is to give Anabelle a proper burial. And your dad has told us that too, that it is very important to him. To all of you.

To do what's right for your daughter, you need to tell us the truth.

LE: So what about that fire?

SR: what fire? No. No. No. No. No. No. I did not. No. No. No.

LE: We can prove it. Tell us the truth or we'll be forced to keep poking into your daughter's remains, sifting through them, who knows when you'll be able to bury her? What about that fire?

SR: No.

LE: We know there was a fire. Your daughter's bones were charred. We can prove it. It happened. That isn't the question.

LE: But we also know you're a good person who loved your daughter and who wants to do the right thing for her.

LE: so we know you didn't just throw her into a fire to get of her or anything like that. You wanted to cremate her, right? Which is normal. And then you could keep some of her ashes with you forever, right? Because you loved her?

LE: We're not going to judge you, we just need you to tell us how you set her on fire. How high did the flames go? Before you stopped and put them out.
----
Watching that interrogation made me heartsick and angry. The question for me wasn't and isn't why did Skylar tell LE she set her baby on fire if it wasn't true. Skylar the pleaser was trying to please, but since the fire never happened, that was rather difficult.

My question is how in the world could the LE interrogating her believe the fire story that yes, they most definitely coerced out of her?

What they are doing is perfectly legal.

They do this all the time to get people to break down and confess.

 

[Jewels53]

Day 5 Part 4

 

[Jewels53]

Day 5 Part 5

 

[Jewels53]

Day 5 Part 6