GUILTY VA - Noah Thomas, 5, Pulaski County, 22 March 2015 #4

[JeannaT]

If they go to court today and plead guilty to the abuse and neglect charges, they can still be charged with murder or a higher level charge for what happened to Noah. Right? I would love the lawyers here to help me understand if there is any risk in the state adding charges later on.

Yes. They can not be FOUND guilty and then later charged again for basically the same crimes - that's double jeopardy. But they can plead guilty today - as I understand it - and then the case proceeds to a hearing by a judge. They won't plea and be sentenced and declared guilty at an arraignment.

 

[iamnotagolem]

I think he died Saturday, possibly while wearing his rain boots & coat and that's why that was included as missing. I wonder if at some point LE asked what his favorite things were and the parents realized he had his pokeman cards in his pocket when they tossed him in.

 

[iamnotagolem]

Often abused children display no signs of it at school. They thrive on the routine, order and kindness shown, so will be in their element there and be model students, enjoying the praise for doing things right and wanting to be helpful. If parents don't want any outside interest shown, they will ensure their child is clean and tidy. Its outside of school that sometimes things show. I remember collecting my children from their school and noticing that one child would come out of the classroom smiling, and would immediately would start to cry in the playground as soon as she was with her mum. I followed them a few days just as I was concerned, and noticed that the child would be crying all the way down the road, mother showing no kindness or interest in the day the little girl had just had. They wouldn't hold hands, the mum would be on her phone, ignoring the child. I reported it to the school and they said that they had their own concerns but had needed more information and what I told them had confirmed some things.

I guess this case is just a reminder that we can all use our eyes and instincts to pass information on, even if we think its nothing or we are being nosey - and perhapswe can prevent the next little Noah from happening.

I've never dealt with CPS in any capacity. I discussed concern for a child last year in my daughter's class w/her teacher, since she is a mandated reported. I asked if it'd be helpful if I filed a report, too. I found out that the child is assigned a caseworker, but still lives with the mom. They decided mom was just not sure how to parent to explain the neglect, so the teacher would send home a note to tell the mom to give the girl a bath. I still see her frequently, hair not brushed, dirty clothes, clothes don't fit. Oh and her mom is an RSO.

So I think even once a child is investigated by CPS there must be a large burden of proof before any real action is taken.

 

[Jillybean78]

I couldn't sleep last night. I just kept picturing Noah's infectious smile and perfect little dimples. My heart is broken. How in the world could someone harm such a beautiful, sweet, innocent child? Bless his little heart. I'm so sorry Noah. You did not deserve this. RIP sweet baby boy.

 

[YidArmyRach]

I'm wondering about the coat thing. If mom put him in the tank with the coat and boots on, and then later reported he went missing but did NOT mention the coat until asked to look for it, and then "discovered" it was missing, that's pure genius. I just don't give her credit for being that smart to fake that she didn't realize he was wearing a coat to wander around outside until looking for it and then later reporting he must have had it with him.

If what LE has said is true, that she initially reported him missing and then later when pressed further appeared to realize his coat was also missing and so his description was amended - it just seems to me that that is a evidence of innocence. Someone who disposed of a child in a septic tank on purpose would say he was wearing that coat. IMHO.

Her story was that he was watching cartoons - so not likely to be wearing a coat. I think she just got caught out.

She wanted LE to think he'd been abducted and taken far away - by saying he was a cautious child who didn't wander off, when witnesses say he was often outside on his own.
I think she was making up her story as she went along - that's why the first timeline changed. She needed to have been "asleep" for longer or at a certain time. Originally she said she saw him at 9am then went back to sleep, then that changed to not seeing him ....... what happened around 9am that she needed to not be awake for? Did they ask what cartoon he was watching and she couldn't answer? Did someone call at the house or pass by that morning, and not see the tv on through the window?

 

[Jillybean78]

I'm curious if any of Paul's co-workers have mentioned his behavior Sunday morning when he was dropped off at work?

 

[AnnaGrace]

I'm curious if any of Paul's co-workers have mentioned his behavior Sunday morning when he was dropped off at work?

I'm wondering if he was at work?

 

[vasportsmom]

I'm wondering if he was at work?

I don't think they would have risked lying about that. It was foolish of Ashley to allow him that alibi though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JeannaT]

Her story was that he was watching cartoons - so not likely to be wearing a coat. I think she just got caught out.

She wanted LE to think he'd been abducted and taken far away - by saying he was a cautious child who didn't wander off, when witnesses say he was often outside on his own.
I think she was making up her story as she went along - that's why the first timeline changed. She needed to have been "asleep" for longer or at a certain time. Originally she said she saw him at 9am then went back to sleep, then that changed to not seeing him ....... what happened around 9am that she needed to not be awake for? Did they ask what cartoon he was watching and she couldn't answer? Did someone call at the house or pass by that morning, and not see the tv on through the window?

If she wanted to maintain a story that he was watching cartoons and was somehow abducted from inside the home, she wouldn't have put the coat in the tank. To me, this little twist is so telling, and makes it look so true to me that he was indeed watching cartoons when she went to sleep, and then got up and went outside and fell in the tank. And then she had to amend her idea of what he was wearing when she realized the coat was also missing.

 

[vasportsmom]

Another WSer posted on my FB saying that Ashley has a "Billie Dunn" look. I think that Ashley expected to be able play LE as Billie did. Perhaps that explains why she allowed Paul the alibi.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[courtneyb]

I don't think they would have risked lying about that. It was foolish of Ashley to allow him that alibi though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unless dad was abusive to mom and she was scared. But, I don't really think so. She looks pretty devoid of emotion in her mugshot. And her reported behavior at the funeral... Disgusting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mamame]

Noah weighed 60 lbs. that's not light. I don't think the mom could have lifted him to put him where he ended up. JMO and doesn't really mean anything...I've just had this on my mind for a bit.

 

[Shelby1]

Unless dad was abusive to mom and she was scared. But, I don't really think so. She looks pretty devoid of emotion in her mugshot. And her reported behavior at the funeral... Disgusting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Curious as to what she did?

 

[silverkitty]

RSBM.

I think because 24 hours ago, everyone was chalking up Mom not being sociable to her being a misunderstood, tired, introverted wonderful, loving mom. Now, everyone who thought mom didn't keep a close eye on her kids bears responsibility for not turning them in before Noah was killed?

My how things change in a day.

Respectfully disagree. People were simply stating the *possibility* of a mother of two, one being a baby, falling asleep due to exhaustion not being a crime or even a heinous act, and that this precluded them from passing judgment GIVEN WHAT LITTLE WAS KNOWN AT THE TIME.

Forgive me but you have looked at this case with an insider's eye, albeit second hand. IMO you allowed what you "knew" about THIS mom to color how you dealt with anyone who would defend ANY mom who fell asleep with a school-age child in the house. And you're not the only one who appeared to judge those who declined to ascribe guilt until the facts came in.

While you helped satisfy some people's thirst for information even before you provided the "mother lode" (just after the arrests were announced and you totally dished about what you heard), there were those who felt every bit as awful about this boy's death as you, every bit as angry, confused, betrayed, and said so... but still the jabs just don't stop on this thread. Absolutely not just you. Also not very well hidden, and not terribly respectful of anyone else's views. JMHO

Ranting on... And not directed at you, courtneyb, or even anyone in particular, but I just don't buy the "seen this a million times, knew it all along" mindset. People who are that invested in BEING right versus GETTING IT right often miss vital information in the rush to judgment.

Nope, not sticking up for this particular couple, not my job and don't have all the facts. What I will stick up for is a justice system that is based on the accused being innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. I don't like witch hunts, I don't like trashing entire families or communities in a quest for "justice." Justice is seldom swift, but we ALL pray that the truth is heard in the coming days and weeks.

The whole "mom sleeping" thing? A lot of generational differences, I totally get that, as do others who didn't share the same view and simply stated the same. Look, I know from experience what abuse is, I'm also a nurse who has cried many tears over what we see in our line of work every single day. Trust me, I am *so* not a bleeding heart liberal kumbaya-kinda person it's beyond funny. I just think people should be judged on the facts of the case, which even LE don't have in full yet.

Sorry so wordy, sorry if feelings are hurt, not my intent. Just don't like to see posters turn on each other out of frustration or what have you. Agreeing to disagree works best if you don't keep rehashing. IMO JMO and so on.

 

[JeannaT]

I think we'll know the answers to this question very soon - of how he got into the tank - so there's probably not much value in musing about it but I'm still stuck thinking this through.

If she killed him accidentally or on purpose and had to dispose of his remains, that's not a bright place AT ALL to put him. Right there, anyone could see her doing it (although apparently no one did in fact witness how he got in the tank). Once he's in there there's no way to get him back out again. He will now be in there until someone drains the tank, which won't be long. Either during the search for him or months down the road when the bank is serviced.

Since she had a car why in the world would she hide him there - where the act of putting him in there was a public event, and she couldn't then access him to remove him and it's just a matter of waiting not all that long until he will surely be discovered?

I know people hide remains in their homes sometimes but usually those people don't have a good way to get the remains off the property, or in the case of very small children never report them missing.

 

[kaen]

If she wanted to maintain a story that he was watching cartoons and was somehow abducted from inside the home, she wouldn't have put the coat in the tank. To me, this little twist is so telling, and makes it look so true to me that he was indeed watching cartoons when she went to sleep, and then got up and went outside and fell in the tank. And then she had to amend her idea of what he was wearing when she realized the coat was also missing.

I am just not seeing how he could have fallen in the tank. LEOs would have searched the perimeter early on and if they found a disturbance they would have opened the tank. I can see no other scenario then they put him in that tank-- most likely in the nighttime. In the recent WV case of the child in the grease tank, the tank was uncovered/askew.

 

[courtneyb]

RSBM.



Respectfully disagree. People were simply stating the *possibility* of a mother of two, one being a baby, falling asleep due to exhaustion not being a crime or even a heinous act, and that this precluded them from passing judgment GIVEN WHAT LITTLE WAS KNOWN AT THE TIME.

Forgive me but you have looked at this case with an insider's eye, albeit second hand. IMO you allowed what you "knew" about THIS mom to color how you dealt with anyone who would defend ANY mom who fell asleep with a school-age child in the house. And you're not the only one who appeared to judge those who declined to ascribe guilt until the facts came in.

While you helped satisfy some people's thirst for information even before you provided the "mother lode" (just after the arrests were announced and you totally dished about what you heard), there were those who felt every bit as awful about this boy's death as you, every bit as angry, confused, betrayed, and said so... but still the jabs just don't stop on this thread. Absolutely not just you. Also not very well hidden, and not terribly respectful of anyone else's views. JMHO

Ranting on... And not directed at you, courtneyb, or even anyone in particular, but I just don't buy the "seen this a million times, knew it all along" mindset. People who are that invested in BEING right versus GETTING IT right often miss vital information in the rush to judgment.

Nope, not sticking up for this particular couple, not my job and don't have all the facts. What I will stick up for is a justice system that is based on the accused being innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. I don't like witch hunts, I don't like trashing entire families or communities in a quest for "justice." Justice is seldom swift, but we ALL pray that the truth is heard in the coming days and weeks.

The whole "mom sleeping" thing? A lot of generational differences, I totally get that, as do others who didn't share the same view and simply stated the same. Look, I know from experience what abuse is, I'm also a nurse who has cried many tears over what we see in our line of work every single day. Trust me, I am *so* not a bleeding heart liberal kumbaya-kinda person it's beyond funny. I just think people should be judged on the facts of the case, which even LE don't have in full yet.

Sorry so wordy, sorry if feelings are hurt, not my intent. Just don't like to see posters turn on each other out of frustration or what have you. Agreeing to disagree works best if you don't keep rehashing. IMO JMO and so on.

I'm very sorry you feel that way. And we will just agree to disagree, on the fact that you are judging me pretty harshly yourself. No need for an explanation. We will just disagree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JeannaT]

I am just not seeing how he could have fallen in the tank. LEOs would have searched the perimeter early on and if they found a disturbance they would have opened the tank. I can see no other scenario then they put him in that tank-- most likely in the nighttime. In the recent WV case of the child in the grease tank, the tank was uncovered/askew.

The fact is, the tank MUST have been disturbed. Whether he fell in, was placed there, etc., the tank MUST have been disturbed. This was not a tank that had undisturbed ivy and spiderwebs growing across it. Someone - either Noah, or whoever placed him in the tank did disturb the lid.

 

[iamnotagolem]

I think we'll know the answers to this question very soon - of how he got into the tank - so there's probably not much value in musing about it but I'm still stuck thinking this through.

If she killed him accidentally or on purpose and had to dispose of his remains, that's not a bright place AT ALL to put him. Right there, anyone could see her doing it (although apparently no one did in fact witness how he got in the tank). Once he's in there there's no way to get him back out again. He will now be in there until someone drains the tank, which won't be long. Either during the search for him or months down the road when the bank is serviced.

Since she had a car why in the world would she hide him there - where the act of putting him in there was a public event, and she couldn't then access him to remove him and it's just a matter of waiting not all that long until he will surely be discovered?

I know people hide remains in their homes sometimes but usually those people don't have a good way to get the remains off the property, or in the case of very small children never report them missing.

Septic tanks are only cleaned out every few years. His body would decompose and could be very little left by the time it was cleaned out for scheduled maintenance. The other thing is short of the pumping getting clogged during the process, I very much doubt they guy pumping would be looking for a body in the septic tank during a normal cleaning, so if it was pumped and didn't clog then his remains would have stayed there.

In spite of that, I do not know how they chose the septic tank. I just can't even fathom, granted having one of my babies dead would kill me and can't imagine hiding or disposing of their body in any way.

 

[vasportsmom]

The fact is, the tank MUST have been disturbed. Whether he fell in, was placed there, etc., the tank MUST have been disturbed. This was not a tank that had undisturbed ivy and spiderwebs growing across it. Someone - either Noah, or whoever placed him in the tank did disturb the lid.

Yes, someone must have disturbed the lid and sod so the question becomes is it more likely that Noah replaced it after falling in or that whoever put him there replaced it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk