Blink On Crime Kyron Horman Investigation Exclusive: DeDe Spicher Interview Yields Allegations Of Illegal Steroid Use Terri Horman Took To Police
A Blink On Crime Exclusive: DeDe Spicher speaks for the first time about her ordeal in the Kyron Horman investigation- continued ©
S. Christina Stoy, Editor In Chief- Blink On Crime
DeDe Spicher and Terri Moulton Horman
In the first part of blinkoncrime.com’s exclusive interview with DeDe Spicher, she revealed that after over 3 years of attempting to provide Multnomah County Sheriffs Office as well as Assistant Deputy Attorney Norm Frink with the necessary information they requested to clear her from any suspicion in the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of Skyline second grader Kyron Horman; she has finally been cleared after passing a polygraph as part of her requirement under an immunity deal that has been sealed with the court. Unofficially cleared, that is.
Spicher and her attorney Chad Stavley, who have since refused all local media requests, would very much like the Multnomah County Sheriff’s Office and current District Attorney Rod Underhill to clear her officially and publicly.
Spicher is adamant that law enforcement never had any reason to question her statements to them from the beginning, has cooperated fully for over three years and recently testified before the grand jury to prove she had nothing to hide. While she would like the public to know that any assertions to the contrary are untrue, and sometimes have been offered maliciously, her desire to speak out about her experience over the last three years is primarily to force investigative resources to review it’s progress- and hopefully adjust in a way to further leads in Kyron’s case.
As was proven not only by her recent polygraph, but also by the verification that no evidence ever existed to support investigator’s theory in the first place, Spicher had no information about anyone’s potential involvement in Kyron’s disappearance, let alone her own.
The continuation of our interview, which provoked some very interesting revelations long felt to be a possibility by many, was confirmed by Ms. Spicher as she says- told to her by Terri Moulton Horman are prompting new possible theories in the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of Kyron Horman. Two days after Kyron Horman’s eleventh birthday.
Stoy: So, in your estimation then, why do you think that detectives Herron and Kravfe were so sure that you were involved or knew who was.
Spicher: I have thought about this a lot, and I think there were a few reasons. I think because I was advised through a meeting Terri had with a family friend and attorney that she should assume that all of her communication was being monitored by law enforcement and anyone she had contact with. He told her to assume the house was bugged as well as vehicles, etc. I also believe you did an article a while back that pointed out her phone was in Kaine’s name. As this was a day or two after she was served with the restraining order, she was also told that
Stoy (interrupting): You bought a prepaid phone after June 28th and never had one before that? I had read that you or someone else purchased them the day of or the day after Kyron’s disappearance.
Spicher: No. I purchased one prepaid phone, after Terri shared the info from her meeting, in my own name, either June 29th or 30th. I think they were hung up on the fact that I came to her aid with no contact for so long so they just were convinced there had to be.
Stoy: ok, sorry, continue. So you are not saying that LE was suggesting that you were hiding some other number you had and that was how they were alleging that you HAD to have been in contact with Terri or some other person prior to and on June 4th and that escalated your “poi” status in your opinion?
Spicher: They did not say that to me specifically, but what they repeated over and over again, was that Terri and I had to have had some form of communication we were hiding. It never made any sense to me because I knew I only had my cell that I had forever until the end of June, and I knew I had not been in contact with Terri since her 40th birthday party in March. So I would ask- well then I guess that means that you don’t have any contacts you can’t verify from either of us so why am I even in this “interview”?
To my recollection they never shared with me or answered any of my questions in response when something they kept hounding me about seemed absurd and conflicting with their theory.
Stoy: Which was?
Spicher: At first, I think that they really believed I was involved, and at some point I think they were talking more “accessory after the fact” because I got the impression ( although they did not share it with me) that Terri’s cell phone activity that day was nowhere near where I was, and my vehicle never left, nor did I. They would not verify that they located the ceramics/glassware artist [pottery artisan] I told you about and still have not.
Stoy: So in your opinion, you were clearly the linchpin of this case, they [LE] believed you held the key to solving it and/or implicating Terri exclusively at that point, they no longer entertained your involvement per se?
Spicher: I honestly don’t think I could say that I ever believed that they stopped treating me as some sort of suspect. I never felt that way, but yes, absolutely they 100% believe that Terri is responsible and I definitely believed we all had to be interviewed and scrutinized or whatever, but I really thought up until the meeting with Norm Frink that they [LE] would abandon that theory quickly because if they were positive I was the key, and I knew I was not, that would also eliminate Terri, who I did not and do not believe, but have no proof, was involved or knew anything.
Stoy: Right, so if you had nothing, and they felt you were the only nexus, it had to mean that they had no independent evidence of anything or anyone else so they would start in another direction?
Spicher: Right, but every interaction I had with them following and including the request to participate in the sting against her, made me believe they never did. To get back to the why question you asked me- my final thought on that is that they kept pointing out that I was the person to tell everyone not to speak to them without attorneys in the beginning. I would ask like who do you mean, because that would have been my opinion across the board for any situation, but it was definitely based on what was getting out about how they were going about this. I was scared and it turned out it was good reason. I also would point out to them that I did not think that was or should be the basis for suspicion because if it was, it seemed to me that I was told that several staff members at Skyline had hired counsel, and Kaine was the FIRST to have one between he and Terri and I had told her at least a week or so before that she should.
Stoy: Why do you think she did not immediately take your friendly advice? Your Dad was LE, and I presume she knew that. People can say what they want, but I know many members of law enforcement in different jurisdictions and agencies. I have worked with them or contributed analysis to cases with them privately [I cannot and would not ever include that in anything I choose to write on] and I can tell you that I do not know one of them that if they were the focus of a criminal probe or internal investigation they absolutely do not agree to an interview without a representative. In fact, Herron is or was the President of Mulnomah County Police Union or was, if I recall correctly. So to that end, I find that a pretty hypocritical reason for suspicion of anyone.
Spicher: (laughs) Interesting. I am not sure that I knew that. The reason Terri didn’t get an atty before the RO was because she was told by LE that if she did, she wouldn’t be privvy to any of their investigative discoveries, she would be out of the loop in finding Kyron.
Stoy: Have you had a desire or opportunity to review any sort of past events regarding the MCSO, I guess I should add, that involve anyone in this case or investigation you have had contact with?
Spicher: No, do you mean like any other detectives or that sort of thing?
Stoy: Have you ever met with or been interviewed with any other agencies or detectives?
Spicher: I believe I either met or just said hello to the guy you mentioned in that recent article of yours while he was at the house. Both Kaine and Terri were there at the time as well.
Stoy: Bobby O’Donnell?
Spicher: That’s it, yes, him. Why did you ask me if I am aware of any sort of events- should I be?
Stoy: Well, I think that tangentially if I were you I would be considering just about everything as it related to what you have been through, and I am aware of some what I will refer to as “stuff” but what I don’t want to do prior to the completion of our interview process is temper any of your responses with anything I know peripherally if that’s ok with you. If you wish, once I publish the continuation which will have that sort of information, I would invite you to comment on it for the record if you choose- are you ok with that?
Spicher: yes, that’s fine and probably a good idea.
Stoy: back briefly to the “sting request against Terri- On that issue- the request they extended to you outside the presence of your attorney and that they asked you not to tell Chad, as you think back , considering you have had no communication with Horman for over three years did you believe they thought it would work? What did your attorney say when you told him?
Spicher: I can’t and won’t address any conversations I have had with my attorney, but to answer your question as to my opinion, I really don’t know for sure, I knew that I did not, and thought it was really, really odd- that was my first reaction. After more thought, and other conversations, I don’t see how they thought it would work, or why they were still seemingly convinced after I had just passed the poly, etc, Terri was still their suspect and responsible. What is your opinion on it?
Stoy: I think I may reserve my thoughts on that for my piece. Again, not wanting to temper your opinions as we move along here and I think that could happen if I did. Is that ok with you?
Spicher: Sure, thank you.
Stoy: I would like to move on to another subject for discussion. I would just like to confirm for the record that I have never prior to this interview, asked you any questions about your potential knowledge of steroid use by yourself, or by Terri or Kaine Horman. Is that correct?
Spicher: Correct, ok.
Stoy: Did they ask you this?
Spicher: Who is they? You got a lot of pronouns flying around (laughs).
Stoy: Fair point, you’re right. The good news is, as English, or should I say proper English is my second language (laughs) I use an copy editor. Allow me to rephrase please. Did anyone in law enforcement at any time ask you about steroids or other illegal injectable supplements sometimes used in weight training or body building in your interviews in this case?
Spicher: Your question was did they [le] ask me anything about steroids or anything injectable ever?
Stoy: (laughs) now who’s throwing around the pronouns?
Spicher: (laughs) touche’ . I was asked about it very vaguely in the beginning, I told them I had never used them, that I did not believe Terri ever did because she and I had similar views against using them and while we were on different supplement regimens when I was training for a marathon in 2008 I still remembered her to be knowledgeable about legal and effective nutritional supplements. I had no reason to believe she had ever used any kind of steroids. I can’t say conclusively she never did but it would shock me.
Stoy: Why shock you?
Spicher: Because a few years back I recall Terri telling me that Kaine was what she referred to as “juicing” and that his behavior had become very aggressive and well, impatient or overeactive with the kids and she had discussed it with him and he ignored her.
Stoy: So for the record, when you say juicing you are referring to illegal steroids, not my Omega specials I make, correct? That was the only question they ever asked you and did not ask any follow up questions like how long ago, etc, etc. And so would you characterize the way law enforcement asked that question and their reaction to your response as disinterested, or having nothing to do with the case?
Spicher: I was never asked about Kaine’s use of steroids by either detectives or the grand jury. But yes, that is what she told me. I actually had forgotten all about it until she refreshed my recollection when I stayed there with her. To the best of my memory I was asked just what I said, I answered as I just said and was never asked any follow up question nor was it mentioned again to me by law enforcement . I don’t think I ever really understood what they did or did not think in terms of my information was important to the case, but yes, they were disinterested from my perspective as to it was the only time I was ever asked about it over the course of three and a half years and so my assumption is they still are. But that is my assumption.
Stoy: Understood, you are referring to the time you stayed at the Horman home late June 2010 through early July 2010 following Kaine’s service of the restraining order and her exclusive use of the home? Spicher: I am not sure about the exclusive use part, I didn’t really know anything about how that sort of thing worked and I think for some reason I want to say Terri was not allowed to show anyone.
Stoy: Ok. Tell me everything you know about that. But, I would like you to see if you can provide me your recollection from what you were told about steroid use PRIOR to your conversations about it that refreshed your memory. By the way, who else knows about this, if you know.
Spicher: Terri’s attorney Stephen Houze.
Stoy: How would you know that?
Spicher: Because I helped her load them up, what appeared to me to be syringes in a box and deliver it to her attorney’s office, she said, at his request. She also located some cancelled checks for what she said was Kaine’s payment for steroids. I don’t remember who they were made out to but it was not to cash.
Stoy: ok, understood, we will get back to that. I want to try and focus on what she told you those “few years back.” Do you recall what year, even ballpark.
Spicher: I want to say, but can’t be sure, it was after her competition in 2005, and I am tempted to say it was around the time they got married or shortly thereafter- I am just not going to be much help in remembering this if you are asking me to extract what I remembered from then on my own.
Stoy: Nope, that’s what I am asking, your fine, I don’t want to lead you but let me ask you a few things that may help. Do you remember where you were during the conversation.
Spicher: I remember it was either the one and only time I ever had lunch with Terri, or it was during a time she called my cell, Terri had a lot of drama, and so I was in a Home & Garden Show class and I recall I was saying things out loud to let he know I was not free to talk really or respond as she was talking, so I was saying things like… I don’t know, we should probably touch base on that when I am done here, or sounds good that we chat on it later.
Stoy: The brush up the other party is not getting, like that?
Spicher: Yes, she was not getting it and so I was kind of 50% paying attention. It was either during that call or at the lunch. Other than that, I am not remembering the timing so well.
Stoy: But you would say a few years before Kyron went missing so based on that 2007 or 2008? Do you remember if they were married at the time?
Spicher: Again, we were friends for a good number of years but not close friends, I almost felt like if she was calling me or talking to me about it she had no other option at the time.
Stoy: Got it. What did she say
Spicher: She said that Kaine had been aggressive with her and impatient with the children and she attributed that to his “juicing”. She confronted him and she felt he did not listen to her. She told me that she then called a detective and turned in Kaine’s seller. The member at the gym, I used to know the name but I really can’t recall because I was in the early morning crowd and this guy was more afternoon, I presume when they were there or they saw him. I had stopped going to the same gym as them ater the first year or two I met them there.
Stoy: So she called a detective to turn in the seller Kaine was buying steroids from? Wasn’t she concerned about the fact that buying them is also illegal and that Kaine could face charges?
SPicher: She told me that she contacted a detective and said she would be willing to turn over information about someone selling steroids but only if she could do so anonymously and without saying who was buying them, etc.
Stoy: So it was your understanding that she was trying to work out a scenario that would stop Kaine’s use without him ever knowing it was her by turning in that person? Sort of like… she gets approval to remain anonymous, she gives the tip and then one day comes home and says… “Hey honey, guess what I heard at the gym.. you better stop that or you could be arrested for it, etc?
Spicher: Yes, something like that. Except and again, we have discussed it at one or both these occasions, but that did not work out. The detective called her again directly and she was upset that there was further contact. From what I recall, I think that was the tone of what she was telling me.
Stoy: Understood, so you are thinking that it may have been why she was sort of wired about it and not hearing you try to go about your day, but insisting and venting like she was upset by it.
Spicher: Yes, I think so.
Stoy: Do you think she could have called you because your Dad was law enforcement and she might need that sort of advice. I don’t think so because she did not ask for any. So then what? Did Kaine find out?
Spicher: I just remember there was some sort of investigation of the guy, and I really don’t know if Kaine ever found out about it or knows to this day. If the seller or anyone was arrested or anything else at the time I do not remember, that was how much I paid attention to it then until Terri reminded me of it.
Stoy: Ok. Now, why is it that Terri was discussing it with you when you were staying at the house with her in your view?
Spicher: Because after the restraining order was served and I guess she realized where Kaine was headed, it was sort of like- if he was going to badmouth her, in her estimation it was false, but anyway, that Kaine had skeletons in his own closet sort of thing. She told her lawyer [Houze] and she said he instructed her to bring the syringes and the cancelled checks to his office. We did.
Stoy: So was Terri saying that Kaine was using steroids behind her back and she found this or that she knew and was having sort of the same reaction as last time, or she just learned once he was out of the home or what? Was she suggesting this to you like it had something to do with Kyron’s disappearance?
Spicher: I got the impression she did not know, or at least did not know when the last time he was using them was, but it gets fuzzy for me there because it is my belief up until the time the RO was served, in my opinion she would have tried to protect Kaine from le finding out so I don’t know if she told le, but it would surprise me. Terri was always very family centric. She would protect her family unit, and that is why she did the turning in thing, this would seem the same to me until he made those murder for hire allegations.
Stoy: So did you get the impression from her that she thought that her allegation of Kaine’s steroid use had anything to do with Kyron’s disappearance?
Spicher: No, not at all.
Stoy: Nothing like, maybe this happened as some sort of retribution against her for turning someone in previously or against Kaine if they thought he was involved because after all she says he was the one buying it back then?
Spicher: No, she told me she had no idea who was responsible for Kyron’s disappearance or why, and the only possibility she came up with after the fact because of his past behavior and the fact that he showed up at her door demanding $10,000 she had no idea what he was talking about, that it was the landscaper. He was the only person acting like a criminal at the time.
Stoy: Have you ever seen a text of hers involving the custody situation after the fact, after the Rudy Sanchez Estrada “sting” and she called police twice that day/evening that ended with “mark 1 for the FBI.”
Spicher: I may have, if I did I don’t remember it specifically.
Stoy: She specifically said the FBI, who has only ever assisted in this case, and who has no jurisdictional presence in Kyron’s case, I was just wondering if you had any thoughts on that.
Spicher: No, I don’t have any idea what she meant.
Is it possible that illegal steroid use or sales and the recent public outing there was an ongoing Federal Investigation with the emphasis on police and gym members that included persons familiar to the Horman’s contributed to the circumstances involving the disappearance of Kyron Horman?
Has it been excluded by having more law enforcement investigating themselves?
Roid Rumors and Boys In Blue.. Coincidence Or Clue?
It is no secret that Oregon has seen it’s share of corruption allegations in recent years. The very public and very disturbing account of it’s Governor Neil Goldschmidt’s involvement with a 14 year old girl earned Willamette Week’s Nigel Jaquiss a Pulitzer in 2005 for breaking the story a year earlier. As a strong argument for the trickle down effect, Goldschmidt’s former driver Bernie Giusto- who became the Multnomah County Sheriff following the debacle, was forced to resign his position when a State agency declared they would be removing his police certifications due to his lack of “moral fitness” outlined in the now infamous Giusto Report. A former Sheriff, Bob Skipper, was then appointed to take his place, but after two attempts could not pass the required certifications. The current Multnomah Sheriff Dan Staton, who has since won an election, was appointed in his place. Several current MCSO officers assigned to Kyron’s case were interviewed for the Giusto report.
In fact, Bobby O’Donnell was the lead investigator in Kyron’s case for the first 18 months who according to his own words in his interview was the unfortunate subject of an allegation involving his own very messy divorce.
MCSO Sgt Brett Ritchie stated in a police interview that O’Donnell was seen waving a gun and threatening his life [Ritchie] after he began dating O’Donnell’s ex wife. Laura O’Donnell was granted a restraining order against him that later became an agreement between the couple.
The lead investigator in the case of a missing child openly threatened a ranking officer and that incident was never investigated outside of Ritchie being told to stay away from O’Donnell. O’Donnell’s deposition and his motion to quash it are the subject of a hearing scheduled for Friday September 13, 2013.
There is no question the agency tasked with the investigation into the disappearance of Kyron Horman has had several and more recent embarrassing entanglements.
In another investigative piece by the Willamette Week, it exposes the egregious overtime paychecks that members of the prosecutors and investigators assigned to Kyron’s case have received during the early months following Kyron’s disappearance.
It is unclear how Multnomah County ever had jurisdiction in the investigation of Kyron’s disappearance. According to the Skyline School’s filed safety and response plan, the Portland Police Bureau is the agency of record.
Multnomah County’s former woes might have paled a bit in comparison if only by the difference a year makes to public memory, to that of their fellow neighboring officers in Canby, located in Clackamas County.
After several investigations into the selling and possible use of anabolic steroids a Canby Police officer, which were repeatedly stalled due to his caption tipping other’s off in the alleged ring , Officer Jason Deason was arrested along with Canby Landscape Supply Owner William Traverso, Brian Casey Paul Jackson were arrested. The investigation was believed to be ongoing and Traverso, Deason and Jackson all cut deals for quick prison stints that shocked fellow officers and the public alike. The specifics of which were sealed by the court. It is now known that the Federal Bureau of Investigation continued to require the ongoing cooperation of it’s criminals turned informants to pursue federal indictments against possible targets in law enforcement and members of the bodybuilding set- to include acquaintances of Kaine and Terri Horman.
Presuming the confirmed allegations are true- is it possible that ‘a few years back’ Terri Horman unwittingly set off a state turned Federal investigation into the buying, using and selling of human growth hormone and anabolic steroids? How could this be connected, if it is, to the timing of Kyron’s disappearance even if she had?
“… Jackson, through a plea deal on state charges in 2009 where he admitted to selling anabolic steroids to Canby police officers in uniform, had been working with the FBI on an ongoing investigation when they confronted him with the knowledge that he was found deceptive on a polygraph designed to indicate if Jackson’s participation was far more extensive then he originally admitted to…”
“…Jackson, with his attorney, began cooperating with federal authorities shortly after his arrest. He identified his source for steroids as Vancouver resident Rainbow “Bo” Wild Keepers, 39, a competitive bodybuilder and photographer. Agents ran Keepers’ name in federal databases and discovered that an Arizona man had tipped off the Drug Enforcement Administration years ago that Keepers was his source of steroids. Keepers was never charged…”
On June 3rd, 2010, approximately 24 hours before Kyron Horman’s disappearance, Jackson was arrested on a Federal warrant following a sealed indictment issued the day before after failing a polygraph and refusing to help the FBI further.
From the Indictment:
Between June 2, 2005 and May 2008, in the District of Oregon, BRIAN CASEY PAUL JACKSON, defendant herein, did knowingly and unlawfully distribute human growth hormone for use in a human, to a person with the initials B.W., whose full name is known to the grand jury, in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sction 333(e)(l).
It has since been revealed that the initials BW stand for Bradley Worden. Worden owns a few businesses, all relating to wholesale gym equipment or nutritional products. Worden has never been charged.
Between June 2006 and June 2007, in the District of Oregon, BRIAN CASEY PAUL JACKSON, defendant herein, did knowingly and unlawfully distribute human growth hormone for use in a human, to a person with the initials N.W., whose full name is known to the grand jury, in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sction 333(e)(l).
The identity of the person with initials NW is unknown.
Between June 2, 2005, and December 2007,: in the District of Oregon, BRIAN CASEY PAUL JACKSON, defendant herein, did knowingly and unlawfully distribute anabolic steroids, Schedule illcontrolled substances, to a person with the initials G.P., whose full name is known to the grand jury, in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 84l(a)(l) and
841(b)( 1)(E).
The identity of the person with the initials G.P is unknown.
Between June 2, 2005, and June 2007, in the District of Oregon, BRIAN CASEY PAUL JACKSON, defendant herein, did knowingly and unlawfully distribute anabolic steroids, Schedule III controlled substances, to a person with the initials S.B., whose full name is known to the grand jury, in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Sections 84l(a)(l) and 84l(b)(1)(E).
The initials S.B. refer to Steve Beaudoin, a former work associate of Jackson’s and current Oregon State safety officer.
According to assistant U.S. Attorney Jane Shoemaker, Jackson sold Beaudoin at least 50 pills of the steroid Winstrol, an injectable steroid called Deca Durabolin, Sustanon and, in June 2007, 100 pills of Anavar on one to two occasions. Shoemaker also said Jackson sold Beaudoin $500 worth of human growth hormone. Investigators discovered the sales through witness interviews and Jackson’s computer records, Shoemaker said.
From Buff To Puff
In contrast to Jackson, although Traverso also sold to Deason and other members of law enforcement, William ‘Jake’ Traverso, a former competitive bodybuilder and “Mr. Oregon” cooperated extensively with the FBI by identifying other law enforcement officers he sold steroids to, and got a lenient sentence of 15 days in jail, 30 days home detention and 24 months probation, with no federal charges.
In a letter submitted to a Clackamas County judge Monday, FBI Special Agent Christopher Frazier said that Traverso has discussed his drug distribution activities in detail. “The public safety employees identified by Traverso included law enforcement officers, corrections officers, fire and rescue personnel and university public safety officers,” Frazier wrote, “Several spin-off FBI public corruption investigations were initiated as a result of these allegations, and are ongoing.”
Traverso, Deason and Jackson were cooperating with the Feds simultaneously, and in a very public way. Although Deason had been similarly employed by the Canby Police under Chief Greg Kroeplin, at least one of the raids on Traverso- Deason’s client, was by Deason’s Canby fellow officer James Murphy.
John Hingson, Traverso’s attorney and past commentator on the Horman case, sparred with then ADA Norm Frink as well. Hingson unearthed the report that included Murphy had been demoted following Deason’s arrest and his credibility was called into question. Murphy worked the graveyard shift with Deason. The report also revealed that both Deason and Officer James Murphy, who was one of the few to initiate an investigation into Deason’s steroid abuse, were put at risk when they were scheduled to work side by side as the only two officers on that shift.
“…Hingson obtained a 2009 report written by private detectives the City of Canby had hired to investigate the steroid scandal. Among their findings: Murphy had been demoted from detective to officer for alleged dishonesty…”
Chief GregKroeplin resigned prior to release of a scorching memo outlining the city’s findings they had outsourced properly to two retired Oregon detectives, which would have resulted in his termination.
Murphy, still employed by Canby Police, is apparently looking to renew the agencies stint for bad press.
On October 13, 2011, six months after former Willamette Week journalist James Pitkin featured his Lord of The Flies article outlining Murphy’s internal investigation led to his demotion for dishonestly, he arrested a freelance sports reporter while taking pictures of him exiting the Canby Police Headquarters on duty and entering his personal vehicle.
Andrew Millbrooke filed a Federal lawsuit in 2012 against The City of Canby, Officer James Murphy and his captain Bret Smith for excessive force and wrongful arrest which took place after Murphy used his cruiser to follow Millbrooke who was on foot. In a police report from another officer in the case, Millbrooke tells him he is a freelance journalist trying to expose corruption and drug use by Officer Murphy. The suit is pending. A review of the declarations by both Mr. Smith and Mr. Murphy do not include the details of the investigative report commissioned by The City Of Canby discussing Mr. Murphy’s prior demotion. Mr. Murphy also had a recent court decision regarding improper procedure [See Bonneau].
With pending motions to release the employment files of some Canby police officers to include Murphy, the charges against Traverso were dismissed this past May due the state delaying the case over 23 months.
Traverso, Deason and Jackson are all currently on probation. Traverso is awaiting trial on recent charges involving watermelon theft.
As the Federal Bureau of Investigation is listed as an investigative partner to MCSO in the Kyron Horman investigation, it is their policy not to release files where they are not the lead agency of record or during an ongoing criminal investigation .
Requests for comment from Kaine Horman through his attorney Brett Engel regarding the allegations that he has either purchased or sold illegal steroids have not been returned at the time of this publication.
However, in an article published to include a quote from Kaine Horman it seems that Kaine confirms Ms. Spicher’s assertion that Terri Horman did not use illegal steroids, but rather nutritional supplements and had moved past those very quickly after her bodybuilding competition.
“…Kaine said he noticed a sharp shift in her behavior, saying she became self-centered and short-tempered.
“She’s not eating a lot of food, she’s exercising twice a day, she’s up at 4 o’clock in the morning, she’s not sleeping at night so we get just general irritable behavior towards everyone around her,” he said.
He said she consumed over-the-counter stimulants, such as fat burners, in high doses. In four months between January and April, she shed 62 pounds, dropping from 185 to 123 pounds, he said.
At the end of April, with her muscles bulked up and skin glistening with a bronze tan, she competed in the Emerald Cup bodybuilding competition in Bellevue, Wash…”
S.Christina Stoy, Editor In Chief, www.blinkoncrime.com was able to independently confirm Ms. Spicher’s account of alleged steroid use and ensuing investigation of a gym member as told to her by Terri Horman.
The source, an associate of Terri Horman, DeDe Spicher and Kaine Horman who declined to be identified, went on to say that at the time it was “… really common knowledge who was using steroids and who was selling them…” “… was not aware previously that Terri Horman claimed to have instigated contact with law enforcement to turn in the seller…” The source declined to identify the seller and could not say for certain if he was charged and likely would not away- given the request not to disclose the source’s name on the record.
Reached for comment, Terri Moulton Horman Attorney Stephen Houze declined to comment based on his policy of not speaking publicly when a client has pending legal matters.
A request for comment to Mr. Bunch, Terri Horman’s divorce attorney has not been returned by the time of this publication.
More Questions Than Answers..
Following several hours of interviews with DeDe Spicher, the woman who was not a close friend to Terri Horman but ultimately was the closest to her in the early days of the investigation- are we left with more questions than answers about what could have happened to the little boy whose 11th birthday was 2 days ago?
Spicher concedes that anything she discussed as told to her by Terri Horman in some minor instances may only be verifiable by Horman herself- and she is not talking… Yet.
She also points out that ultimately everything she told me she shared with investigators as far as “truthfulness” was confirmed by a polygraph – to include the question “Was she withholding any information from investigators?”
She was not.
Although limited, Spicher’s accounts in many instances confirm sparse information heard early on from Terri herself. Not the least of which was that although widely criticized for not speaking out publicly, she was told by investigators not to under any circumstances- and when she broached the possibility of retaining counsel was told that she would then be cut off from any information as to the investigation process to find Kyron Horman.
Through Spicher, Horman also confirmed that out of concern for Horman’s “spacieness” which she defined by walking into a room and staring off, not remembering, etc, Terri Horman called his pediatrition Thursday June 3rd and made an appointment for Friday June 11th. His last day of school. Horman also told Spicher that Kyron had wondered off or got lost while in his teacher Ms. Porter’s care once before when following a fellow student out of class.
Initially, prior to learning Kyron had been marked absent not very long after she left the building, that was Horman’s first thought. Those hopes grew into panic with that revelation that he had been missing for hours.
Spicher says Terri was adamant that she never had a sexual relationship with the now infamous landscaper Rudy Sanchez Estrada Spicher agrees that her friend had the propensity to be flirtatious but she never knew her to be sexually promiscuous. Outside of the fact that she says at Kaine’s request to occasionally include an additional female in the bedroom, to which Spicher declined, she was not aware that the Horman’s had a swinger lifestyle.
To her knowledge, there were other women that were asked to participate in a threesome with the couple that did not say no some years ago, but had no current knowledge and she herself was never involved with Horman sexually.
In her take, the addition of a 3rd female was an expression of control on Kaine’s part in the relationship.
Terri explained the landscapers “sexual accosting” , previously reported exclusively by www.blinkoncrime this way:
“… She said she had Kitty on her hip and he came up behind her and was kissing her neck and put his arm around her and when she verbally resisted with concern that Kitty was in her arms he sort of grabbed her and she spun around and broke free…”
Spicher adds that on more than one occasion she tried to bring that up during meetings with DA Norm Frink and investigators. One one occasion, as suggested by her Father, a former Klamath County Marine Officer, at their own expense The Klamath County Sheriff and his first lieutenant had agreed to meet with Frink, Spicher and her father on DeDe’s behalf to sort of provide character backgrounds and family history he felt would be helpful in clearing her.
“… This came up in the first interview I had with Mr Frink and I told him she had made that call. Later in the interview when he was trying to push more of my buttons, he tells me that call never happened (implying Terri had lied to me). I told him okay, that’s what you’re telling me, but I recall it differently (implying he was lying to me right then). He got very angry about that and insisted it was “fact”. I said okay, whatever. Much later, like one of the last times I met with Mr Frink, the Klamath County Sheriff and his 1st Lieutenant flew up on their own dime to meet with Mr Frink & Keith Krafve to see if they could help by offering their opinion of my character, and that it didn’t seem unusual to them at all that I would go help Terri, that it is very consistent with how my family has always been. At that meeting, I retold the story of Rudy sexually accosting Terri (her words), but said I wasn’t sure about the 911 call. That totally infuriated Mr Frink. I told him I was trying to believe him and simply not certain about what I could remember on that point.
The DAs office behaved very strangely toward the Klamath Co Sheriff and his Lt. They tried everything they could to keep us separated and even insisted that they (the DAs office) drive them back to the airport, despite the fine fact that we (Dad & I) had picked them up and brought them in, and would definitely be seeing them again in the near future. It was just weird, to all of us…”
I asked DeDe if she used the term called 911 in every exchange. She had. I asked her if she got the impression that the reason Frink was so sure it never happened was because there was no 911 call on the record about it – could it be that maybe she reached out to that former law enforcement person she contacted on the steroid issue and it was actually a dispatch call versus a trackable 911 call issue.
Spicher says she got the impression that Frink was suggesting that the “accosting” as described by her friend did not happen, but could not be sure except to say that Frink seemed to become irate when she brought it up on every occasion. Spicher felt Sanchez Estrada was the only person behaving like a criminal and that supported the accounts she was given.
I asked DeDe if Terri mentioned ever paying Sanchez Estrada for work at the Horman home. She said she did not recall Terri ever saying anything other than she had no idea what he was talking about when he came to the door and asked for $10,000 so she slammed the door in his face and called 911.
Stoy: So did she think it was some sort of extortion attempt now that she had mentioned him to investigators and they told her that they had interviewed him?
Spicher: She thought that he was dangerous from her past experience.
Stoy: Did you think it was odd that with a brand new John Deere tractor parked outside that TH was hiring a landscaper? I was able to confirm through other sources that he cleared some blackberry or blueberry bushes similar to Ms. Von Klevelen, and the tractor does not have a UCC lien on it, meaning it was not financed.
Spicher: No, it wasn’t. Kaine bought it. It was Terri’s job to manage the inside of the house as well as the entire property. I knew that when Kaine would travel he would come up with this project lists for her to complete by the time he got home. I mean, like cleaning the gutters, cutting the grass, washing all the windows, that sort of thing. To the best of my recollection Terri and Kaine did not have bank accounts together- he controlled everything he made.
Stoy: With a baby, 7 year old and teenager and hubby out of town? How was she managing that? No wonder he was suggesting that she was pouring through money like water or something like that, she was probably hiring help. I am not even sure I think a woman by herself at that property with a baby should be on the roof by herself anyway.
Spicher: No, Terri had to pay any support money or whatever to the household expenses and I have surmised Kaine gave her some sort of allowance which she probably blew through pretty quickly on frivolous things like food and clothes for her children. I have never known Terri to be frivolous with money. I know of at least two times when the projects she was supposed to accomplish were impossible for her to manage. One was the windows so I believe she hired someone that time and as I recall her parents paid for that. I believe the other was the landscaper.
Stoy: Is it a fair question for me to ask how you feel about Kaine, from your tone I am sensing you are not a fan.
Spicher: I have tremendous compassion for Kaine- he lost his child- what can one even say about that? But no, he is not someone I would want to be friends with today and I was cordial to him whenever I was around him but he was very controlling and was pretty mean to Terri about her weight from Kitty, things like that- I am not going to have anything in common with that.
Stoy: Did Terri ever mention anything about conflicts with Desiree Young, whether they were between her and she or Kaine and Desiree?
Spicher: Not that I recall, but I also never heard her speak of Desiree negatively at any time previously or when I stayed with her [Terri].
Stoy: That is saying a lot because right after the sting Ms. Young was pretty accusatory pretty quickly- and I do note that was based on information from law enforcement. Similar to some of the things both she and Kaine said publicly about you. Are you angry about that?
Spicher: O my no. That poor woman is going through hell and acted on information that I was told, lie or not, was given to her and Kaine. I have nothing but compassion for her and I wish I could shoulder some of her pain because I can.. I have nothing but compassion for all of Kyron’s parents and any anger I have over how I was treated, what I went through would never be directed at them. I really pray that Kyron will be found, I choose to put my energy into hope for that.
Pending Matters
Through Attorney Bunch, Terri Horman makes the claim that both law enforcement and Kaine Horman have been perpetrating the dissemination of inaccurate information involving the circumstances of Kyron Horman’s disappearance.
In a recent filing, set for hearing this Friday, Bunch pens a scathing reply to Deputy O’Donnell’s motion to quash, and accuses the county of improper ex parte communication.
Early this afternoon, a source within the Multnomah County Courthouse speaking on the condition of anonymity has confirmed that on behalf of Multnomah County, a motion has been filed to limit certain documents or discoverable information related to Mr. Horman and Bobby O’Donnell of the MCSO.
A hearing is scheduled before Judge Kantor for this Friday September 13, 2013
Jacqueline Beaufort, Ellie Sanders – research and contributing editors to this article.
Jason Mateos- contributing editor, copy.
Related Posts
Related Posts:
4,398 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
@ NelMel, in what way would you like Kantor to slow it down? Specifically, how can he protect Kiara’s best interest? He HAS to factor in all the family dynamics, including the investigation, what was an uncontested restraining order, and Terri’s silence.
What would you like to see him do? I ask this with respect.
Gosh, not my place to answer, but would love to see Kantor get to the bottom of the origin of the allegations by RSE, instead of blocking the truth.
Amys Sister says:
December 28, 2013 at 3:18 pm
Thanks to grasshopper and also VW, I was able to review some things in more detail- thank you both.
I have realized that at almost every turn in this case, I approach developments with an eagerness and veracious need to see some item or piece of information that will bring a modicum of clarity.
I just really don’t subscribe to the concept that an entire multi-million dollar criminal investigation of a STILL missing 7 year old child, conducted by a bevy of under-trained and inexperienced lawmen could really culminate by a man who does not speak or understand English well enough to be deposed without an interpreter for EVERY QUESTION AND EVERY ANSWER over a “non specific” threat that has been uncorroborated and dismissed by a grand jury by some means.
And.. may have a questionable citizen status.
Can that really happen?
Oh and does everyone realize that RSE got the date wrong entirely?
He said that 15 minute “final meeting” ( which btw is also in conflict with his testimony that was not included) took place in August or September.. and could have been the year 2009.
What in the Hell is he and Engel talking about considering that declaration.
So Kantor is sponsoring the inability for a witness to impeach HIMSELF?
Yeah, I am not even kidding.
B
January says:
December 27, 2013 at 3:31 pm
respectfully snipped-
What I have learned by reading/posting here is that Blink has a ton of vetted info that she cannot share publically. When she can, however, she does immediately. Her slowly released, yet rock-solid facts have helped me to form my own personal opinion regarding this case. I also believe that as Blink vets and/or receives credible information her opinion evolves, which helps us all open our minds beyond what we might have thought originally.
Going back to the beginning of all Blink’s Kyron threads is helpful and very interesting, however, to pull quotes from way back and post now, isn’t always helpful. Unless the person doing so also pulls every post Blink has made since that time WRT new information etc.
Regarding “learning from the Powell case” WRT Terri having supervised visits? I can’t wrap my mind around how Powell was getting his supervised visits at his home. They should have been at a controlled environment, such as at a DSHS facility. I do believe that visits between Baby K and Terri (grandparents too) could be often and extremely safe.
—-
Hello january thanks for weighing in and for finding my posts both interesting (sometimes) and frustrating- (always) I agree BTW
On the Powell case- I agre with your thoughts in part but unable to go so far as to assume Kiara would have been safe- IDK if she would have that is why I think it is imperative for TH to participate in the full process to whiich all parents are subjected- full NH evaluations etc- Kaine also would be subjected to the same standards as my previous link described
-Even when all appropriate evaluations have taken place and all seemingly appropriate safeguards have been set up- a tragedy can still occur as with The p. case or as with the latest sad New york case of the father throwing the 3yearold son from a building then- jumping himself with no other motive- than to punish the mother…
–
IRT Blinks past posts Blink has said that she is a big fan of “the record” I only pull posts which are pertinent to the topic of conversation- I have always done this not only on Kyrons threads but on all cases going back to Caylees case and Morgan Harrington case.
It is never done in an effort to confuse only to progress the conversation…IMO sometimes progression only happens thru review.
Blink is here to weigh in IRT the evolution of her thoughts – as to the whys whens of any new revelations- for me to post all of the posts therefore would be pointless- as she is here to expand on any point she finds necessary.
the archives are open to anyone for further review anyone can go back to supply a past post to illustrate a different arch of that evolution of her thoughts…
It is no different than someone posting a question to Blink regarding some past tidbit to see if her thoughts have changed and why or to ask if she is now able to expand on some fact/opinion/source she kept underwraps at the time….
IOW, going back – is often the way we move forward it may help to Blink to open up to revisit long ago info/points as you said
“Blink has a ton of vetted info that she cannot share publically. When she can, however, she does…..I also believe that as Blink vets and/or receives credible information her opinion evolves,”
-It may just allow her to expand on new info or release new facts or opinions- it often has on the other cases which I have followed.
It also allows for a better understanding of that evolution to which you mentioned is so important, as many just dont have the time to delve into the archives to follow that journey
Blink has put safeguards in place on Kyrons threads she requires anyone who pulls a quote to link to the thread in which it appeared so that anyone reading may go back and see the context of the quote IRT the conversation taking place at that time–
FYI this is something she has only asked for in Kyrons threads- which seems to point to her understanding of the vast archives of kyrons threads and of her long journey of evolving thoughts/opinions…it also seems she understands the need for everyone to gain an understanding of this journey of evolution- while keeping the record intact as to context
She IMO has always understood the importance of review as a means of progression.
Thanks for allowing me to further explain my thoughts and feelings January and thank you for sharing yours- I dont think my thoughts will necessarily change your view as to the merit of review and thats ok.
AJMO Peace
OT tension break attempt at humor:
Blinks response to Grace-
“Me in Blood Gracie
B”
yikes this is a tough room- LOL
- I actually thought my last post to January was going to be short- I edited it and everything… hit send and THUD its “war and Peace” yet again… can you imagine if I were required to pen my posts in Blood— can anyone say exsanguination ..
AJMO
Peace
LOL LOL. What an entirely necessary gaffaw Mom3.0- I thank you!
B for blink, lol, not Blood.
B
AmysSister says, What it all boils down to, though, is did she or didn’t she? How long do we give investigators to say publicly that they simply don’t know or they are ‘this’ much sure and why? Do we hold them accountable for the public’s perception of Terri Horman? She certainly contributed to that herself in some ways. We can’t hold Kaine accountable… freedom of speech, under the circumstances, etc…
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AS- That he can’t be held accountable for his many many accusations of Terri in local and national media? Yu consider that an example of free speech? LE has tried to protect themselves by publicly declaring that T has cooperated and is not a suspect or person of interest in Kyron’s disappearance, and I don’t remember them ever officially mentioning the MFH publicly. They’ve left it to K and D to spread the poison.
AS- free speech is not covered by making a criminal allegation against someone. Was he prompted by LE? Of course we know he was- however, that is not a defense.
There are plenty of laws on the books regarding defamation that require him to not have acted in malice or with intent to embarass. It does NOT matter whatsoever if he HIMSELF did not take independent steps to verify the information because if he just repeated it, which we know at least in the DDS press conf he did not, he was literally told to say what they did, he is still responsible for the intention, and the outcome, especially if untrue, but not exclusively.
Lastly- morally, as a Mother, I absolutely hold Kaine responsible for NOT hiring an independent criminal consult, a Private Investigator, or for seeking a counter opinion to the one’s he was getting as in my view, a good Father would.
Now he says LE told him what to tell Kiara about TMH? I will say again, he told her her Mother was deceased, and he needs to be held accountable for the effects that will have on this baby.
B
graceinthehills- thank you for addressing Roses point IRT SZ scenario-
You have again said what i would say so much better than I could have ever hoped- without it getting lost amidst my lack of editing skills-
IRT Blink and your exchange I found Blinks responses very informative and your questions well thought out as well.
Thanks again
AJMO
@Grace, just a suggestion. It’s easier to follow posts for me at least
if rather than your recent adoption of the style of Me
Blink paragraphs, if you just put her in quotes followed by your response.
We already know copied quote with B at the end
are her, & unquoted following is the poster’s comment.
You write so well, & the new choppiness doesn’t feel like you.
grasshopper says:
December 27, 2013 at 8:04 pm
visited the file room today. my last trip was dec 18 and NONE of this was in there at that time. I know Max posted some before it was officially public but here is the whole lump going back to beginning of dec. 63 pages of docs and 2 pages of listing at the beginning. includes part of K’s deposition and RSE’s deposition and a bunch of other stuff and an order signed by Kantor.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10147993/Horman%20court%20filings%20dec%201%20to%20dec%2027.pdf
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Whoa!
Thanks grasshopper for hitting the file room again.
Kinda like receiving a late Christmas gift — I know what I’m doing tonight … sitting down with a cuppa hot chocolate & looking forward to reading thru all 65 pages of new material in your dropbox.
Thanks to vw as well… I so appreciate reading @ northwest blogspot too for all the latest.
We are so fortunate to have both of you as “boots on the ground” there in Portland making trips to file room and
courtroom.
VLH … great post!
I’m not in your area, but I do share many of your questions when it comes to some of the legal-ese and intricacies of this case(s).
I sometimes feel like a hamster in a wheel – just trying to keep up with all that is happening with all the many individual players in this case. Then trying to figure out the how’s & why’s of why some particular move is being made by each side.
http://www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=A112960&s=OR&d=24149
What exactly were the 2001 Amendments to ORS 109.119 referred to in
“Grandparents petition for reconsideration of our decision in this case. O’Donnell-Lamont and Lamont, 184 Or App 249, 56 P3d 929 (2002). All members of the court agree that we should allow the petition and modify our former opinion to state that the 2001 amendments to ORS 109.119 are fully retroactive. Five members believe that we should remand for further proceedings in the trial court; five members believe that we should not remand.”
The appeals Court in 2002 had castigated the Trial Court essentially pointing out the Trial Court was completely off in merely using Vien’s personal subjective “best interests” vote for custody to grandparents without evaluating Dad qua Dad on his own merits. The Appellate Court went out of its way de novo to take testimony Dad was fit, and if so the natural parent retains custody.
The legislature’s 2001 Amendments apparently allowed a Trial Court relying on Vien to throw a fit natural parent’s rights out the window.
So my question is what were those Amendments exactly (anyone with Lexis Nexis). Second what legislator proposed them? Third was it McKnight & Vien’s Legislative Committee that proposed them first? (That is, werethey subjected to an opportunity for publication and public comment before passage (I suspect not, & resultant complaints were why McKnight Vien’s 2002 Legislative group was appointed to revisit. my url to that Group’s existance above.) It is really something when the Legislature appoints a psychologist to a Legislation working group (in 2002 & 2011 if not more) that an Appellate case Ruling (in 2002) referred to directly, by name, as doing a shoddy eval.
TY too, Grass. & to Sammy for re-highlighting.
Oh Blink, I skim read the docs and saw that 2009 and thought it was me who was confused. This man’s testimony is highly guarded. Now we know why. It falls apart. It is revelations such as this that cause me to speculate in the direction of TH’s innocence, because there does not seem to be the foundation of the allegations made against her. It is not that I want to prove her guilty or innocent, I’m just looking for the truth.
Totally agree, and we are all confused because the testimony is incongruent to the facts and to some of the pleadings?? I can’t help but sense this is where Houze was trying to go.
B
@Grass….good job! You got the one, too, that I don’t think Olive or others linked to. The Engel’s Response to Emergency Hearing as opposed to the Affidavit that “support” said Response.
The one you didn’t get up, Yet?, is the ORDER by Kantor, “adjusting” the motion to postpone the custody. I’d never seen anything like that. I put it up on my blog.
There’s a fine line, I think, between Kantor, with his pen, making the language more precise as opposed to affecting outcome. If you know what I mean.
It was in the second file. They were too fast getting the docket for me so had to go sit down with that Tome of files. It was misfiled in the Part 2 of 3. Now I know why Kyle thumbs backwards when he goes in. There was another one, IIRC, that I think was behind that Order and scribbled on by Judge K. I clipped it too, but she didn’t make the copy and I found out too late. It might be the Order Denying Motion to Strike Pleading. Keep an eye out if you are there next week. I know I have to be there on the 1st as I have an, ummmh, early speeding-ticket trial…it was my new boots I hadn’t gotten used to yet!
LOL.
All very interesting MBS, TY. She will have served 2 terms at the next election, but will not be 65. However, the Governance System is a judge must retire early so Gov can appoint successor to run as an incumbant, as he did with her. So imo she needs to at keast start a 3rd term. Also, What it boils down to (though I skim read slapdash) is if she retired at 60, she’d have to work for free 35 days a year for 5 years. At 65, not so (plus pension would be higher.) interesting Judge’s PERS contributions of 7% are a gift from the legislature. Makes sense for leadership legislators moving to OR Appeals Court to have gifted themselves tho.
However now I think she’s done far more to OR custody law legislatively since the late 90s than anything she’s done from the bench. I almost wonder if the grandparents were represented by a Legal Aid attorney while she was its Director. the ones in that precedent-setting custody case I posted above, that the Appeals Court overturned, then unOverturned by applying 2011 Amendments retroactively to discard a fit father’s custody rights.
erose says:
December 28, 2013 at 4:01 pm
Gosh, not my place to answer, but would love to see Kantor get to the bottom of the origin of the allegations by RSE, instead of blocking the truth.
_____
Okay, that’s a fair answer. How should Kantor go about doing that? Why would he believe there are other origins to the allegations other than RSE and Terri had lunch and that conversation occurred?
Under normal circumstances, had the sting not happened, Houze would cross RSE on the lunch and the relationship between the two of them.
Why would Kantor simply allow information in regarding an ongoing investigation? What part of Houze’s argument gives him enough to do that?
not erose, but the sting happened. It is tied to the alleged lunch, they cannot be parsed. Both parts are not part of an ongoing investigation if they have been dismissed as to the possibility of criminal charges or indictment- I would offer that ship sailed and nobody has bothered to ask the question.
B
VLH hello I read your post and Blinks response with great interest-
This might help;
here is a link which helped me to apply the words with the definitions in a more “lay” way… I found it interesting and informative- the A_Z seems to coincide with Oregon but may differ on certain details please KIM- AS I have not researched all from a-z perhaps someone more knowledgeable will weigh in on any pertinent differences, wheres the bat signal for Lea Conner?
ajmo Peace
http://www.divorcesource.com/ds/newjersey/the-burden-of-proof-in-divorce-cases-3992.shtml
Snipped:
Preponderance of the Evidence – This is the standard of proof in civil cases. To prove a case by a preponderance of the evidence, the evidence as a whole must show that the fact sought to be proved is more probable than not.
Clear and Convincing – In order to meet the clear and convincing burden, the evidence presented must show with reasonable certainty the truth of the ultimate fact in controversy.
Prima Facie – To make out a prima facie case, evidence that is good and sufficient on its face must be presented. The evidence will be presumed true unless disproved by some evidence to the contrary.
Presumption – An inference in favor of a particular fact.
Rebuttable presumption – In the law of evidence, a presumption which may be rebutted by evidence.
Effect of Presumption – A presumption discharges the burden of producing evidence as to a fact (the presumed fact) when another fact (the basic fact) has been established.
The Quantum of Evidence Necessary to Rebut a Presumption – The contradicting evidence must be strong enough so that after its admission, reasonable men would differ as to whether the presumed fact could be found.
Burden of Proofs in Divorce Isuues – A to Z
Adultery – The party alleging adultery has the burden of proving their case. Proof of adultery may be established by circumstantial evidence. Opportunity and inclination to comment adultery will satisfy that burden.
Alimony Modification – The party seeking modification of an alimony award has the burden of demonstrating a change of circumstances warranting relief from support or maintenance obligations.
Annulment – Plaintiff has the burden to produce evidence that is clear and convincing.
Ante-Nuptial Agreement – The party seeking to enforce an Ante-Nuptial Agreement must bear the burden of proving that there was full financial disclosure to the other party and then the Court will place the burden on the person who can most easily fulfil it. The burden of proof to set aside a pre-marital agreement shall be upon the party alleging the agreement to be unenforceable.
Cohabitation – There is a rebuttal presumption of changed circumstances arising upon prima facie showing of cohabitation. Once cohabitation is shown, the burden of proof, shifts to dependent spouse to show there is no actual economic benefit since because of the cohabitation.
Constructive Desertion – The elements of a cause of action for divorce based upon desertion must be established by clear and satisfactory proof, and in cases where desertion is charged to be constituted by denial of matrimonial intercourse, clear and convincing evidence must be presented.
Custody Modification – The party seeking modification of an initial custody determination must show by a preponderance of evidence a change of circumstances warranting modification, even though it could reasonably be concluded that a child would benefit from joint custody
Exclusive Control of Evidence – A party who has almost exclusive control of evidence will be required to carry the burden on that issue
Fraud – Fraud is never presumed but must be clearly and convincingly proved through the use of direct or circumstantial evidence by the party who asserts it.
Gifts Exempt from Equitable Distribution – The burden of proof is upon the party attempting to establish that a gift is not subject to equitable distribution.
Marriage – The burden of proving the marriage is upon the plaintiff, and must include proof that the plaintiff was legally in a position to enter into a valid marriage.
Marriage Presumption – The last of two or more marriages is presumptively valid.
No Fault Divorce – The plaintiff must testify that eighteen (18) months or more of separation exist and that there is no reasonable prospect for reconciliation, the burden then shifts to the defendant to overcome the presumption.
Parenting Time (Visitation) – The parent seeking parenting time has the burden of proving the right to parenting time.
Paternity – There is a presumption of paternity if a child is born during a marriage.
Reformation of Property Settlement Agreement – Clear and convincing proof is required to justify reformation of a marital contract.
Rehabilitative Alimony – Competent evidence must shown before the court can enter a rehabilitative alimony award; otherwise, such an award would be complete conjecture.
Removal of Children from Jurisdiction – The burden is upon the parent seeking to remove a child from a state.
Risk Assessment – The person seeking the risk assessment has the burden of proof by a preponderance of evidence.
Service of Pleadings – There is a presumption that the facts in a sheriff’s return of service are true. The opponent must establish by clear and convincing evidence that the facts are not as stated in the sheriff’s return of service.
Stock Options – The owner and participant in an employer provided stock option program (ISOP), has the burden of proving that they are not subject to equitable distribution.
Termination of Parental Rights – The burden of proof in a proceeding to terminate parental rights is by clear and convincing evidence.
Visitation Out-of-State – The party opposing the proposed out of the State of New Jersey visitation has the burden of showing that the visitation is not in the best interest of the children.
Visitation Termination – Evidence that a certain aspect of visitation poses a threat to a child’s welfare must be shown by a preponderance of the evidence.
my 2 posts with urls to 2 appeals cases Vien was cited in are way back, still in mod
(no complaints) , but are needed to make sense of later comments.
O my Stars I know. I have a very bad habit of wanting to review and learn and holding those posts till I can, I apologize.
B
Have read most of the docs (thanks for posting Grasshopper) and when I saw Engel broach the ’15 minute meeting’ I couldn’t believe it.
Houze is correct that it was the plaintiff’s attorney who brought the meeting in.
At this point Kantor was right not to allow it but that may change pending Houze’s argument and specifically, as Blink has pointed out a couple of times, because there may not even be a current MFH investigation.
referring to Rose posted
12/28 at 1:05 am. case footnoting Vien critically.
12/28 at 1:57. case overturning the overturning by
an evenly divided Court due to Legislature.
Would that they could. Here is my lay interpretation. The DA is the only entity that has control over the timing to “bring it on.” No right to a speedy trial without an arrest. So if he had a case, we would see a case. Apparently he is on a path to protect the investigation without releasing information to further the investigation.
This means to me that TH could be in her situation in perpetuity. The civil cases, both civil cases, seem to be fishing expeditions for the DA to try and get information they can further weave into their scenario, because what other explanation do we have of their involvement.
TH made several statements to police before lawyering up. It was reported that there were timeline gaps and her story didn’t mesh. This could be an indication of guilt, or it could be an innocent person whose story was misconstrued. (Note: wrt her timeline, Albertsons and the dry cleaners were originally omitted in the media.) Anything she says, at this point, even a seemingly innocuous will be used by the DA in the context of proving her guilt. They are not out for the truth, they are out for the conviction.
VLH says:
December 27, 2013 at 10:15 pm
snip>
Ok…so, at this point, why would my attorney not say to LE “ok, bring it on. You have nothing”.
I agree with Engels argument that Terri’s choice to remain silent should not interfere with Kaine’s ability to make his case.
grasshopper says:
December 27, 2013 at 1:31 pm
@Mom3.0
never forget that in court at least, T is presumed innocent.
Ghopper I havent forgot – still for Civil cases divorce/custody the threshold is different – burdon of proof etc.
not only that she has never been charged with any crime. Houze has said she is innocent but there is no appropriate occasion to to expound on this in a divorce.
I was not speaking to the criminal case there is no case there as you said she nor no one has been arrested charged indicted…
you wrote:
iEngel is IMO way out of bounds to presume T is guilty and “accuse” T’s team of trying to prove her innocent.
he is not way out of line as it pertains to the cvil cases the RO and working to protect Kiara-
snipped:
Preponderance of the Evidence – This is the standard of proof in civil cases. To prove a case by a preponderance of the evidence, the evidence as a whole must show that the fact sought to be proved is more probable than not.
Clear and Convincing – In order to meet the clear and convincing burden, the evidence presented must show with reasonable certainty the truth of the ultimate fact in controversy.
Prima Facie – To make out a prima facie case, evidence that is good and sufficient on its face must be presented. The evidence will be presumed true unless disproved by some evidence to the contrary.
Presumption – An inference in favor of a particular fact.
Rebuttable presumption – In the law of evidence, a presumption which may be rebutted by evidence.
Effect of Presumption – A presumption discharges the burden of producing evidence as to a fact (the presumed fact) when another fact (the basic fact) has been established.
The Quantum of Evidence Necessary to Rebut a Presumption – The contradicting evidence must be strong enough so that after its admission, reasonable men would differ as to whether the presumed fact could be found.
end snip from http://www.divorcesource.com/ds/newjersey/the-burden-of-proof-in-divorce-cases-3992.shtml
You:
in your “anybody might be guilty” category,
grasshopper that is a gross mischaracterization of my thoughts and posts.
I have taken great care to convey my actual thoughts and Id sincerely appreciate it if you would take the same care as to refrain from mischaracterization. thank you
You asked:
do you believe there is as much possibility that Kaine, Desiree, Tony, some school staff member, some LE member, some stranger is guilty, as you do that T is guilty? oh yes, forgot dede. although she passed her poly, LE still won’t publicly clear her.
As I said all logical possibilities/paths are still viable. As I said even those that have no perp but just have little kyron wandering off and getting lost stung by a bee- etc. Do i think all possibilities are equally probable? IDK I dont claim to know
desiree and kaine nor Tony have not been cleared publicly either and they passed their polys too it seems
You wrote:
Usually when you talk about guilt, you only mention T as possibly guilty, not the bios or TY or the school staff, all prominent players in this drama.
I have mentioned all these possibles respectfully it may seem like I only speak to the possibility of terris guilt or involvement not being ruled out because I am conversing with persons who refuse to acknowledge that this possibility hasnt been ruled out…
You wrote in part:() by me
As someone recently mentioned, they (Tony Desiree and Kaine)have NEVER asked whoever has Kyron to return him. They have only pointed fingers at T. so they are complicit in the disastrous “investigation”.
Grasshopper, terri has never asked for those who have Kyron to return him either has she? FTR many times parents of missing children do not speak directly to the perp only to their child- which Kaine and Desiree have both done- does that mean terri who has never doent wish to have Ky home?
ever since Timothy Kings parents pleaded with the perp to bring him home safely so he could eat his favorite dinner of KFC- the pleading to the perp strategy has been questioned add to that some LEO feel this only adds to the pleasure for the perp- so I dont fault any of the parents of a missing child for what may or may not be said to a perp or to their child- they do the best they can
You wrote:
I don’t believe BunchofHouzes told Terri not to talk to press because of the sexting. after all that was a private exchange that was never intended to be public.
Youre entitled to your opinion, but it seems this played a big part as to why TH was without internet etc for so long.
you wrote:
The only time she talked to media that I recall was when Pitkin went to her house and encountered her in the yard. Rather then run into the house and slam the door she did speak briefly with him. of course K, D, and TY talked to press even before sting.
—She spoke also on news site blogs and to friends who relayed info- so i would think all of these factors played a part in any situation where a lawyer would advise his client to “shutup” on all fronts….
Thanks for the info on trust and lawyers
You wrote:
It sounds like if you were in T’s position you would not trust Houze and Bunch to proceed properly. Take a look at this.
I wasnt speaking to trust You asked what i would do in her situation i respectfully gave you an honest answer- the fact remains Houze is terris employee if she didnt want to NOT fight the RO she could have She is the one who decides what advice is best as a parent of a baby–. if she wanted to not withdraw her bid to custody/visitation she could have done this also-
She relied on a criminal attorneys advice in a custody civil/family case- – was it the best thing to do as it pertains to regaining custody and visitation? that was the discussion -
it seems not
because it will now be harder with the passage of time
snipped: from earlier link
Parenting Time (Visitation) – The parent seeking parenting time has the burden of proving the right to parenting time.
Custody Modification – The party seeking modification of an initial custody determination must show by a preponderance of evidence a change of circumstances warranting modification, even though it could reasonably be concluded that a child would benefit from joint custody
You wrote:
What about Kyron? I know people are saying this. None of this has to do with Kyron.
I am on these threads FOR KYRON and for KIARA- and I have already said they are getting lost in all this never ending adult drama-
You wrote: I realize you still believe T might know where Kyron is, maybe even hope she does to justify all this.
Grasshopper- please stop telling me what i believe and dont believe I am speaking to any possibility that has not been ruled out-
I am not trying to justify anything and my God my only hope is that Kyron is found safe and sound- that Kiara is well protected that james is ok that Terri Kaine and Desiree and Tony can all be ok and anyone who did harm to this child whether it is the school- parent- friend- LE- steroid user SZ etc etc is found and held accountable.
You wrote:
I don’t think she does know. I think evidence would have been discovered by now.
we are not privy to the investigation or the evidence not to any perp or POI
You wrote: Even if she did know, it was still the job of LE to figure out what happened, come up with evidence. No point in going over all that again.
Thats what I said GH- IRT LE there is an investigation we have no idea who has or has not been eliminated as a POI or a suspect- we dont know
all possibilities remain viable until then
thanks for the discussion sorry for the length and delay hope I addressed all points
Thank you to VW and to you for the docs-
AJMO
Peace
@Erose/Blink
Oh Blink, I skim read the docs and saw that 2009 and thought it was me who was confused. This man’s testimony is highly guarded. Now we know why. It falls apart. It is revelations such as this that cause me to speculate in the direction of TH’s innocence, because there does not seem to be the foundation of the allegations made against her. It is not that I want to prove her guilty or innocent, I’m just looking for the truth.
Totally agree, and we are all confused because the testimony is incongruent to the facts and to some of the pleadings?? I can’t help but sense this is where Houze was trying to go.
=========
Saw that right away. First “August or September” then “2009″. You would think that those dates would be indelibly etched.
But her is another inconsistency, if you will. Sanchez is questioned strictly, at the end, about his “inability” to make the original Depo ….. the “perpetuity depo” is obviously on Houze’s mind here.
Why doesn’t Houze call for a sanction due to the game Engel’s was obviously playing?
Did you all catch, too, that Engel’s refered in his questioning to the “restaurant” to jog Rudy’s recollection?
How would Engels know it was a restaurant that they met at? I didn’t…and i’m pretty well-read with the blogs, online sleuths, etc. LOL
Because it was mentioned earlier in the deposition that was not included in the exhibit.
B
a helpful review mentioning those 2001 legislative changes
http://www.kramer-associates.com/mkgrandparentsrightsaftertroxel.pdf
Amys Sister says:
December 28, 2013 at 3:18 pm
@ NelMel, in what way would you like Kantor to slow it down? Specifically, how can he protect Kiara’s best interest? He HAS to factor in all the family dynamics, including the investigation, what was an uncontested restraining order, and Terri’s silence.
What would you like to see him do? I ask this with respect.
===============================================================
My phrasing on Kantor might not have been clear. I think he can actually speed things up, not slow things down.
Yes, he has to factor in the family dynamics. One “dynamic” is right there in plain site. KH thinks he’s above the law and can just keep “his” child from her mother, without a custody agreement, without criminal charges against TMH, without this RSE dude producing evidence that TMH ordered a hit, etc.
The investigation? What investigation? (That’s snark, yeppers) A family court judge in my county would look at an ADA sitting next to KH’s divorce attorney and do a Glinda Good Witch: “You have no power here.” There is no criminal case against TMH. In my county’s family courts, none of the judges would put up with this “can we sorta show up but not have any influence but have influence, pretty please your honor?”
I can only go by my gut, concerning what I have seen in the most icky-ickiest child custody brawls in my county in another state.
First, there is no proof of a MFH, no MFH prosecution, no MFH victim, no sign that a MFH plot was ever hatched. In seconds, it seems that the sting in July, 2010 produced the target, TMH, calling the cops on the cops. If that’s not qualifying for Keystone Cops, whew! There is only vague recollection by RSE that TMH said stuff. And that stuff isn’t even clear to RSE himself. A judge in my county in Family Court would not be dealing with that subject at all, and would not allow RSE’s deposition to be considered, pondered, reviewed, or used to line a litter box, BECAUSE IT IS NOT A CHARGE at the moment against TMH. In the eyes of this court, TMH has done nothing wrong. At all.
Second, here, our Family Court judges heavily, heavily favor joint custody unless one parent is literally attempting to stab someone in the court room, or is the true mastermind behind 9/11. Drug rehab? The parent has supervised visitations. Arrested and awaiting trail for a violent crime, such as armed robbery? The parent has supervised visitation via the county jail, and, if convicted, via prison. Had an affair and texted so much icky sex stuff and nasty photos that all of Verizon’s network in the Canadian Maritimes exploded? So? Adult’s sexual affairs — cheating — long ago in my state, ceased to affect child custody decisions unless the new boyfriend or girlfriend on the side turned out to be an abuser.
Child custody is not a hearing where our judges allow too much grandstanding. They visibly cannot stand grandstanding.
Concerning the attempted character assassination of TMH, if the sexts are still brewing on the sidelines and the plaintiff is going to toss them back onto the desk, the FC court judges here would not allow them. Period. If they were solely about ICKY SEX TALK!! between two consenting adults, a judge would never allow sexts as “evidence” of anything. The character of a mother expressing clearly adult sexuality is no longer a matter that can cost her her children in my state, because healthy, adventurous and even aggressive ADULT female sexuality can no longer portray a mother as unfit.
Next, the entire case of Kyron! If a child of one person in Family Court here was missing without a trace, and neither parent had been arrested for that event, a Family Court decision cannot remove a child from the custody of a parent who (a) has not been arrested, (b) has no history of abusing the other child who was not abducted and (c(c) who has subsequently had sex with the Philadelphia Eagles. That parent might be repulsive in terms of personal image (“she’s fat!!”) but the bottom line is that it does not matter if the entire community hates her…personally. If no crime has been determined, no charged filed, no arrest made….sorry, oopsie, Daddy cannot just take “his” kids from the mother.
Can’t happen here. Fathers and mothers get into HUGE trouble for trying to do that. County sheriffs are kept fairly busy in this area on custody violations, after there are court orders on custody, but, in the case of a man or woman just taking the kids and leaving and not allowing the other parent to see the child(ren), that takes about six months (at the most) in court to resolve. The mother files a petition in Family Court for custody determination, and shows up for the hearing. The father can stand there until he’s blue in the face, call his wife a slut, show the court sexting transcripts that are all about OMG SEX and “prove” to the court that his wife wants him dead. Good luck with that (gavel slamming down). Joint custody.
I do not know Oregon family law, but I cannot for a second imagine that Oregon allows one parent to take the child(ren) and refuse to let the other parent see the child — based on hearsay, no arrests, and no evidence. In my state, and specifically in my county since I’ve walked a few women through the FC process as a volunteer, KH and his posse of lawyers and DA peeps would not be allowed to take over the courtroom, and the judge would not have let further comments from any LE official to occur in future custody hearings.
That is how it would play out here.
Something is very, very wrong with the Horman case in Oregon. I truly hope that naïve people who have never been through a child custody hearing do not think for one second that it’s now totally okay to just take your child from your obnoxious, ugly, fat spouse and leave and never let the other parent see their child again.
Oh, and my county’s CPS would have been crawling all OVER this situation with Baby K a long, long time ago. They don’t need a judge’s order to investigate child neglect. All they need is one anonymous phone call and they are compelled to investigate. It might seem unfair, but in TMH’s situation, if she was in my state, a friend of hers could call CPS anonymously about KH’s treatment of Baby K, and CPS is required by state law to investigate KH. He could of course sit there an lie through his teeth as they interviewed him, but one question that CPS would ask would be — “where’s the custody agreement for this child? What do you mean you don’t have one and have just not allowed the mother to see her?”
Uh, oh. KH would be in trouble. BTW, a basically trained child protective worker here knows that KH would need a custody agreement in place, and that his “suspicion” based on “probable cause” from 2010 was not much to write home about. AT this point, no matter what some shrieking DA might say or do, CPS in my county would be calling the shots on behalf of Baby K.
SO I ask…why hasn’t this happened in Oregon, for cryin’ out loud?
I seem to have missed the latest gh link to reports, will go back and look for them. Thank you GH & VW for all your work.
**************
I wanted to add this to my last post, it seems to me, that Kyron’s case has become all about two things, money and saving face. (You have no idea how much I hope I am wrong.)
What IF Terri IS innocent? If some perp walked in and confessed tomorrow to kidnapping/murdering Kyron. What would be the consequences of people involved in this case? How will people explain the money spent in pursuit of Terri? How will people come to terms with thinking the separation of mother and daughter was justified? If we take the people who have accused Terri since the beginning, how would they look, and perhaps more importantly, what would they have to lose?
Starting here:
How would MCSO look?
How would PPS look?
How would Frink look?
How would Underhill look?
How would Meisenheimer look?
How would Kantor look?
How would Rees look?
How would O’Donnell look?
How would Tony Young look?
How would Desiree Young look?
How would Kaine Horman look?
How would Facebook look?
How would all those hater groups look at themselves in the mirror?
Scary, scary thought. I’m tellin’ ya this case needs to be moved to some other jurisdiction somewhere. I’m thinking more and more that this case doesn’t resemble the Ramsey case nearly as much as it does the dingo one. What that poor woman went through…..I’d have never thought it could happen here.
There are times I just hope Terri is guilty as hell, because the alternative really, really sucks…..and it means the perp has gone free and most probably if not for the internet fodder on this case he probably gets off on, is ready to strike again. (gives me chills)
IMO, KH’s “case” is an alleged conversation in a restaurant. What LE and KH’s team are all too anxious to limit is the exculpatory evidence (as alleged by Houze) of the sting. To me that is not full disclosure of the truth, if the truth is what they are seeking. In a criminal case, isn’t it incumbent upon a prosecutor to provide the defense with exculpatory information? I guess if you’re playing divorce court, it doesn’t count. See how eff’ed up this is?
Amys Sister says:
December 28, 2013 at 7:03 pm
I agree with Engels argument that Terri’s choice to remain silent should not interfere with Kaine’s ability to make his case.
@Amys Sister wrt ” Amys Sister says:
December 28, 2013 at 7:03 pm
I agree with Engels argument that Terri’s choice
to remain silent should not interfere with Kaine’s
ability to make his case.”
In my opinion the only thing interfering FOR YEARS with
Kaine’s ability to make his case were those stays his Counsel
advocated for so he wouldn’t be forced to admit there was
nothing behind his RO. Why the rush, now, Engel?
(I bet there’s some new precedent-setting case soon to
issue from OR Appeals Court.)
Bumping
Rose says:
December 28, 2013 at 1:05 am
Grace, Are you thinking that Kyron was taken to a car by a man and returned to the school, on the very day he disappeared?
Also Engel’s statement makes no sense to me legally.
Terri’s speech does not affirmatively make Kaine’s case.
Kaine’s speech, and his witnesses are put on to make Kaine’s case.
Then it’s her Counsel’s job to rebut him. So her taking the fifth hamstrings her,
and only helps him. This is just another example of where Engel
inflames the public with assbackwards grandstanding imo.
—-
As for Rudy, he’s so imprecise, detached, and erroneous, if there was any other evidence,
I can’t imagine Engel putting him on. And after all his depo revealed Engel lied to the
Court wrt his unavailability. Maybe Engel didn’t have a translator when they talked.
Thank you NelMel! I know far less about family courts than you do!
don’t know if anybody has made that anonymous call, but Charlene Woods has attended most hearings and is well informed on this case. Wouldn’t she normally have started investigation into one parent preventing the other from seeing their child, given her position?
all the dead ends in the custody situation are based on the mythical criminal investigation of T. This is the bullet proof vest that repels inquiry, only it certainly appears there is nothing inside that bulletproof vest. The fact that Messeinheimer and particularly Kantor fended off requests for facts/evidence regarding the MFH that justified the RO hints that the protected space is empty. again, this is not about Kyron. they are pretending that the shaky MFH non-case indicates T is guilty of disappearing Kyron but that does not follow.
Just been reading up on the discussions here. And, in deference to Blink’s skill in allowing all sides to be heard, they have been, IMO, focused on intelligent debate.
Blink, I do think that this is the only place where both sides converge without angry outbursts and either “banning” or “flagging” posters who do not agree with you. Let alone stalking.
And that’s why your site still exists, even flourishes, with continued insight into the case. Insight that, if we all continue to put our noggins to it, might help us find out who is amongst us that may harm another child in our city.
Could we, right now, look at what we actually KNOW now that we didn’t even 6 months ago, and at least agree on that…i’ll start….i’ve got at least ten NEWER truths:
1. Kaine Horman lied about TMH being a (most days) drunk while he took care of the children as the primary caretaker.
2. Rudy Sanchez has almost no recollection of the time and place of the “MFH” place let alone the contents of that meeting and did not have an interpreter there.
3. The “perpetuity” depo and subsequent diversion was not founded in Rudy not being available for a future trial.
4. TMH’s parents were willing to pay for some or all of TMH’s legal expenses. They may or may not have the “intent” to recover those expenses, if indeed spent.
5. Early reports support the sightings of Kyron up to mid-morning at Skyline.
6. The DA’s office, Skyline, and the MCSO would have been held accountable for NOT finding Kyron if TMH had not become the ONLY suspect.
7. Kaine Horman nixed WW and potentially the Oregonian from any future “scoops” if they did not play by HIS rules, in July, 2010. Team players KGW and KATU were given interviews, etc. The Oregonian’s Lynne Terry was notified of DY’s doings.
8. WW stopped its investigative reporting of the case before the end of the summer, 2010. Not a word would they write about the case after that. The city’s only truly investigative newspaper.
9. MCSO, the DA’s office including Underhill, amassed thousands and thousands of dollars in personal overtime during the course of this case in which the ONLY apparent suspect was TMH.
10. TMH has still not uttered one word…yes, “on the insistence of her lawyers” according to a sworn deposition.
11. Desiree claims Kaine, himself, was having an affair before and after submitting TMH’s “sexting” to the public for their perusal. Kaine does not deny it.
and…
11. NO investigative “doors” opened in August, 2013 to solve this case. In fact, Dede was given a poly, passed and became part of the LE team…briefly…until she refused to participate in another “sting”.
I’d like to add that I now do believe that the SZ is a local. That he may be following this case closely.
I’d also like to suggest that TMH and her lawyers have known these truths and many more all along. And Houze, being a bright guy, has STILL insisted that TMH not say ONE WORD.
Why?? Perhaps he knows the Power and Tenacity of the DA’s office and what they will resort to if they are in danger of conceding this case publically?
I guess there will always be one side of a custody dispute who will not like Vien’s determination, however, I would never willingly agree to see any doctor with such dismal reviews.
snip>
Dr Vien performed the parental assessment in the custody battle over my son. I was very surprised by the results. I sought the assessment hoping to minimize court costs and reduce conflict. Dr. Vien failed to follow the ethical guidelines of his profession. He was dishonest. He contacted my former therapist, Susan Captein. He lied about what she told him. When I contacted her she promptly wrote a letter disavowing what Dr. Vien claims she said. He put words into her mouth disparaging my character.
He failed to include in his report important information that I had provided to him including: ….
http://www.alltherapist.com/dr-edward-vien-review.html
1.4 out of 5
http://www.healthgrades.com/provider/edward-vien-3gxbq/patient-ratings#TopOfMain
1 out of 5
http://www.wellness.com/reviews/3887535/vien-edward-w-psyd-psychologist
Seems out of touch with current research. Biased towards the almighty $$$$ and who holds the largest purse or wallet.
http://thedochelps.com/doctor/edward-vien-sxxupzzszsxupzmxpszs/reviews
In 2007, even the ‘most respected’ custody evaluator (Dr. Ed Vien) in Oregon would not acknowledge PAS. I was well-read on the subject. I documented a CLEAR PATTERN of ALIENATION via photos, voice recordings and incidences. This occurring over 4 years of the sick and insecure mother’s alienation attempts. This was shocking that the most respected psychologist employed by the Oregon courts (paid for by me, of course) would not acknowledge PAS in a case of such solid evidence. After 100 hours of documentation…I presented Dr.Vien a 3-ring binder documenting most of the PAS. I hired the best evaluator and got nothing. These evaluators are ‘mini-gods’ who dont like to be instructed on how to address PAS. The judges revere them.
http://april25.weebly.com/justins-story.html
@NelMel. I bow.
Specific comments coming after 3 pm Sunday.
Keep in mind that NY, Conn, Mass, Minnesota, Michigan,
NJ, Ill, DC, VA, & other States who lead wrt family Court processes,
differ intensely from OR. I’ve learned that from this case wrt family-relevant
laws & their applications, competencies of
local law school grads, government & regulatory processes,
cps procedures, etc.
Wrt law & msw grads (the latter most often staffing cps, but I bet
not an employment requirement in OR) ,
NY has always been a stellar leader, like Mass, Ill, Mich.
@Grass. Your energy is beneficial affirmatively to the forward-looking case.
NelMel says:
December 28, 2013 at 9:12 pm
(snipped)
Oh, and my county’s CPS would have been crawling all OVER this situation with Baby K a long, long time ago. They don’t need a judge’s order to investigate child neglect. All they need is one anonymous phone call and they are compelled to investigate. It might seem unfair, but in TMH’s situation, if she was in my state, a friend of hers could call CPS anonymously about KH’s treatment of Baby K, and CPS is required by state law to investigate KH. He could of course sit there an lie through his teeth as they interviewed him, but one question that CPS would ask would be — “where’s the custody agreement for this child? What do you mean you don’t have one and have just not allowed the mother to see her?”
Uh, oh. KH would be in trouble. BTW, a basically trained child protective worker here knows that KH would need a custody agreement in place, and that his “suspicion” based on “probable cause” from 2010 was not much to write home about. AT this point, no matter what some shrieking DA might say or do, CPS in my county would be calling the shots on behalf of Baby K.
SO I ask…why hasn’t this happened in Oregon, for cryin’ out loud?
————————————
@NelMel – I appreciate your post – you said it very well – and great question! I have had many years of professional and personal experience with Oregon CPS and, basically, my expectations of what would happen here are not that different from what you described. Even though case loads are high and mistakes do happen, I don’t think those facts answer your question. So, what does?
Right now I’m thinking either (1) a phone call was never made by anyone to trigger an investigation of Baby K’s treatment or welfare, or (2) someone called but didn’t give enough information to open a case, a contact may or may not have been made and no follow up done, or (3) one or more complaints were made but someone of greater authority said no to an investigation on the grounds it was unnecessary because (insert whatever version of an LE/DA story you want here).
In other words, I think our process is not so different – I think we are generally a bit less effective than what you described, but it should have happened, and knowing why it didn’t could be very revealing. Unfortunately, I don’t think that’s information we can get unless someone directly involved wants to anonymously contribute it.
@ Rose – can’t remember if I copied it or not, but as I recall, the judges who work the 35 days a year “free” do get the same health benefits as if they were full time employees. There is also nothing to keep them from teaching, writing articles or a book, etc., for an income during that time.
After you retire, you can work in a PERS type job but your hours are limited. You can work any number of hours at a job which is not in the PERS system. In some states, like Kentucky, you cannot collect through the state retirement program AND Social Security too, even if you paid into it. However, in Oregon you can draw from PERS and SS both, when otherwise eligible.
Contrary to rumors that surface every so often, I think most of us in PERS are not getting benefits which are the same or higher than when we were working. However, I can tell you the overtime issue is a big one. I had friends who withdrew with much bigger benefits than I did because they took on extra paid duties like coaching. Significant overtime in a PERS system job can pay off big time when figuring your retirement benefits – and SS as well since they look at your highest paid years.
Not saying there’s a plot simply to create opportunities for overtime money, but IMO it could be a factor in decisions about how and who did what and when within an investigation or any other sort of project.
@Truth…missed #24
And that …. too! Yes. In the Australian case she actually went to prison…because she didn’t show the “appropriate” feelings after her baby’s death.
You know….I went to a dinner party with well-read, intellegent folks about a year ago and they, even, thought P Ramsey and Chamberlain guilty of killing their children. Such is the power of the press and the mythology that survives even after mothers are acquited and DAs apologize.
Beyond popular mythology, ultimately, there is no motive:
“There had always been a sense of unreality in the conviction of Lindy Chamberlain, a Seventh-day Adventist pastor’s wife and respected member of the community, for cutting the throat of her nine-week-old baby. To this day, nobody has ever advanced a plausible motive.”
IMO…in our case, Engel’s is trying to “create” a motive by bringing up the notion of TMH knowing that “step-siblings” should not be separated after a divorce….and that TMH “knew” that little-known fact. In fact, TMH did not even know that Kaine could take Kiara and it would not be against the law….that night of the sting.
Again, the DA, via Engels, is trying to solve the criminal case by inserting the MFH “hire” and trying to connect it, via the public and courts, to the subsequent disappearance of Kyron.
And we wonder why TMH is being instructed not to talk?
Xactly. Why would TMH be under that notion in the first place when she was divorced twice and it was not an issue, and Kaine was also divorced and the only time it came into play was when DY filed for a RO, and indicated that KH was also close to her son from a prior marriage. The precedents for alleging she had knowledge of that in the first place are non-existent. The president for Kaine wanting to take Baby Kitty from her for whatever reason were- as evidenced by his situation with DY.
Reminder: KH says he never had any knowledge of DY and TMH discussions regarding Kyron. Really?
B
the errors in RSE’s depo sound like no one from mcso or the DA has chatted with him since 2010, or he’d have the year & month down at least. Don’t you think he just went his merry way since June 2010 & thought all of this was behind him?
1. I question if he was represented for his gj appearance in the first place, and certainly does not appear he was prior to “the sting.” That might be the documents LE has in their possession he references.
2. We know their is a second gj that was empaneled as opposed to the sitting grand jury hearing testimony in July 2010. So what does it mean he was only called before the first? No true bill. It is the only way it became necessary for Staton/Underhill affidavits about “new investigative avenues from information they had before”. Otherwise, they know they cannot use evidence in a prior gj that resulted in a no true bill. It must be new, been unknown as to relevance at the time, or it is in the circular bin with the rest.
3. I sure would like to know how that translates to LE duty to inform an alleged victim of it’s outcome given their continued a valid FAPA order that Kaine continued to provide sworn affidavits for.
4. It was O’Donnell who showed DY the alleged “emails”. Kaine knows this, and even though it is arguable that his intent on the Dr. Filly show when he responded to DY that often what TMH wrote in emails was not the “actual activity” going on, I would submit that providing that data waives privilege when she was clearly prompted to go public with them with the specific intention of embarrassment and tainting a jury pool. Does everyone remember the original press conf the day after the gj (imo, voted no true bill) with O’Donnell and Underhill requesting public’s help? Something to the effect of … we want information that has not been influenced by the media coverage…
The victim rights “angle” does not usurp privilege in an ongoing investigation and as Rees stated, O’Donnell acted out of scope. Btw- does O’Donnell know DY’s prior treatments for any issues that could resurface under this kind of duress before such a decision? How did he know if the chalk and stalk would be the worst of it considering Ms. Young is married to an individual who keeps firearms in the home? (ETA BY BLINK: I am referring to Bobby O’Donnell, not Detective Young)
That would be the cop who threatened a superior officer on the job, and according to an original restraining order, made terroristic threats to a LEO in public.
That continues to blow my mind. He provided the impetus for every action and reaction in this matter to date, it was likely already disposed as potential for a criminal indictment long ago, and yet this woman, a victim of that individual’s actions that are not legal le tactics once it materially interferes with the parental and children’s rights to have a relationship free of interference and alienation is not subject to a deposition for a now inactive criminal probe that Rees absolutely knows will not result in criminal charges and cannot be connected to Kyron’s disappearance??? Did I miss the Marshall law ordinance in Portland?
5. What happened to cause Judge Kantor to void the FAPA order prior to the requested 21 day hearing this time? Why isn’t that on the record? What really happened to cause DY to withdraw her suit? It all come down at the same time- what became known that prompted the withdrawal and simultaneous removal of the stay?
Could it be that BunchofHouze was prepared to present it’s evidence that LE as well as Kaine Horman is perpetuating and disseminating erroneous information regarding the circumstances of Kyron Horman’s disappearance?
I realize I am likely mostly repeating myself. What I ( and many of you) have suspected from nearly the beginning, is coming full circle in a venue that does not lend itself currently to doing much but strengthening that green curtain.
The plaintiff’s entire case rests on an individual’s word that cannot be cross examined in court ( per last ruling, had they moved to the temp hearing). The allegations first utterances we are aware of were to an individual who cannot be deposed citing “part of an ongoing criminal investigation” which is not. The Judge asks in open court what the statute of limitations for mfh are, without so much as taking the litmus test as to whether or not the instant allegation is meeting a statute or ever will. On the record.
The answer to that question changes everything in this case and I believe we will see discussion of that very notion next week.
ps. Did I mention I am still on the floor (erose, lol) that every question and answer during RSE deposition utilized an interpreter and that the transcript does not reflect that? Why would his counsel sign off on that? Cause he has immunity and it does not matter. Kantor effectively has given him immunity in the instant matter for the time being as well.
B
2001 legislative bills introduced wrt parenting visits & custody
http://members.peak.org/~jedwards/antifa.htm
love the commentary on bill 154
Perhaps this site does a legislative custody summary yearly.
it is clear from the fathers’ site commentary the Judiciary Chair has the power to push or bury a bill, which mostly seem poorly written.
In the House that Judiciary Chair been Kyron’s former ADA’s father, Barker….
McKnight advertises for a secretary!
Job appls close tomorrow
http://agency.governmentjobs.com/oregon/default.cfm?action=viewJob&jobID=778278&hit_count=yes&headerFooter=1&promo=0&transfer=0&WDDXJobSearchParams=%3CwddxPacket%20version%3D'1.0'%3E%3Cheader%2F%3E%3Cdata%3E%3Cstruct%3E%3Cvar%20name%3D'CATEGORYID'%3E%3Cstring%3E%3C%2Fstring%3E%3C%2Fvar%3E%3Cvar%20name%3D'PROMOTIONALJOBS'%3E%3Cstring%3E0%3C%2Fstring%3E%3C%2Fvar%3E%3Cvar%20name%3D'TRANSFER'%3E%3Cstring%3E0%3C%2Fstring%3E%3C%2Fvar%3E%3Cvar%20name%3D'FIND_KEYWORD'%3E%3Cstring%3E%3C%2Fstring%3E%3C%2Fvar%3E%3C%2Fstruct%3E%3C%2Fdata%3E%3C%2FwddxPacket%3E
—-
more McKnight
http://books.google.com/books?id=WrrsVQWYPb8C&pg=PA209&lpg=PA209&dq=maureen+mcknight+legislature&source=bl&ots=I57UUjLso5&sig=cY2Qly3WPS3V_LFMTTuVfpO8l5M&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Tma_UpG4NYnMsQSRsYLoDA&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAg
Government legislative committees she cited in 2008 election:
“PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Oregon Chief Justice’s Family Law Advisory Committee; Governor’s Domestic Violence Council; Oregon State Police’s Violence Against Women Act Advisory Board; Oregon Family Law Legal Services Commission-staff; Oregon Dept. of Justice child support policy workgroups and legislative committees; Oregon Law Commission workgroups” http://oregonvotes.org/pages/history/archive/may212002/guide/np/mcknm.htm
http://www.osbar.org/_docs/leadership/elections/judicial/08may/mcknight.m.pdf
2008, does not include 2011-12 legislative committee
—
2012 talk at City Club. about 40:30 she refers to a one family one judge model whereby all cases (ie criminal, civil, divorce) would be adjudicated by the same family court judge (ie, her) http://pdxcityclub.org/content/domestic-violence
—-
I don’t understand KH’s intentions and what he thought would come from telling baby K her mother was dead. (regardless if LE told him to say this, as a father, did he ever think of the consequences of saying this?) When she grows old enough, of course she will inquire further about her missing brother. Even if KH thought TH would be charged and convicted of Kys disappearance, possibly sentenced to life and or death, the fact still is that her mother IS alive. How did he plan on dealing with that day once it came? Did he really think baby K would never grow up and learn the truth? I just don’t understand his intention and/or thought process. All I can say is he will deal with one dysfunctional teenager once she finds out the truth if this lie isn’t corrected soon.
Blink said: Now he says LE told him what to tell Kiara about TMH? I will say again, he told her her Mother was deceased, and he needs to be held accountable for the effects that will have on this baby.
In one set of Vien McKnight committee minutes (don’t remember if I put it in urls above,
she predicted some version of joint custody bills will continue to come up yearly in the legislature.
(the legislative comm. chair had mentioned the 2009 one had failed, once again.)
@Blink. It was pretty clear RSE Counsel had to be coached by Engel during the depo re
procedures (basics on how a defense Counsel objects).
Would love to see his criminal experience.
It would be interesting to know whether RSE has ever been an informant in other investigations (drugs, for example.
Definitely.
Occurs to me I wonder if the DEA agent was the acting interpreter.
B
Blink says, Did I mention I am still on the floor (erose, lol) that every question and answer during RSE deposition utilized an interpreter and that the transcript does not reflect that? Why would his counsel sign off on that? Cause he has immunity and it does not matter. Kantor effectively has given him immunity in the instant matter for the time being as well.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Before we saw that portion of RSE deposition, I was wondering what form it would be in. Should the spanish words be included as well as their translation? It’s likely that Thayne confers with his client in spanish. So whenever Thayne came in and instructed his client, surely it was in spanish. I assume Houze’s questions were in English, translated into Spanish and RSE answers in spanish translated back to english. I was very surprised to see that it’s all english. Did RSE speak anything in english during the deposition. Since the entire case rests on his allegations, understanding of word meanings is critical. No language translates exactly into another language, so what was really said? I guess all K’s team cares about is hanging onto Baby K so accuracy is not that important.
another question for you court savvy types. My understanding of a witness is somebody who is telling the truth independently, neutrally. That truth is apt to be helpful to petitioner or respondent but still it is supposed to stand on its own, right? So why, at the last hearing, did RSE’s attorney sit not in the front bench as Kavanaugh when she came representing Skyline staff, or how Rees is now forced to do (spectator section) even tho judge calls for his opinion, but at the Engel Rackner bench next to Kaine? Is it proper for this witness’s atty to be seen as a member of petitioner team?
I appreciate all the posts and realize many have strong opinions on how judges would rule in a similar case in their own jurisdictions, but, imho, unless you ARE the judge, and have heard from all the witnesses, including expert witnesses, and considered all the evidence, one can never predict how a judge will ultimately rule. I have seen custody case rulings that I would have never expected. Someone said earlier in this thread that Judge Kantor genuinely cares about children. If that is true, he may be the most appropriate judge for this case.
AJMHO.
@erose says:
December 28, 2013 at 6:43 pm
Splendid response to VLH.
I was going to respond as well, but you’re words are much more explanatory. I was simply going to say, Terri Horman has to either be charged or granted immunity to tell her side of the story to the DA. She cannot walk into the DA’s office and tell them the same story she’s already told them…..I didn’t do it. They are attempting to build a circumstantial (important word) case against her, and they have a lot at stake. TMH and her attorneys cannot fight charges when there aren’t any, they have to wait for the DA’s office to “bring it on”.
VLH, I too though have questioned the early on silence of her attorneys in regard to public statements of her innocence. But, from what I understand, this is how Mr. Houze works, he saves his words for court, where they will count. Which he is now loudly declaring her innocence. Other than his lone comment to the media about this being a witch hunt, I don’t know if anything more he could have said would have lessened the public’s outcry for her head, because of the fodder that was being fed them through the media via the bios via the DA’s office. What good would it have done had she been on the top of the Empire State building shouting her innocence? Someone probably would have called her looney and shouted out she had a bomb.
I had to laugh out loud a couple of years ago, Roseburg’s Sears store closed down. Do you know that the hater craters blamed it on Terri Horman moving back to Roseburg? Not kidding, they did. Good grief, who are these people?
*************
@NelMel says:
December 28, 2013 at 9:12 pm
Excellent. I think you should email your post to Kantor’s office. Seriously.
KH’s whole case may not rest on this one witness. Isn’t he going to call three or four more witnesses?
Yes, but there is no question he unilaterally severed the relationship based on what he says LE told him. So wrt to custody- it is his entire case.
B
@ Blink, I don’t think Kaine will ever be held legally accountable for publicly stating his wife is a suspect in Kyron’s disappearance and wanting him killed. Maybe it rises to the level of defamation but that is incredibly difficult to win in a lawsuit.
It’s not about my personal opinion on the matter and I cannot judge whether what he did was wrong because all the facts on the matter aren’t public yet. Do I see this becoming a matter in a court? Not really but that’s just my opinion. I for sure see MCSO and DA being taken to court by Terri/Houze if charges aren’t brought against her but I would be surprised if they went after Kaine.
The issue of defamation may be raised by Houze in this civil suit but to what effect if Terri won’t speak to the matter? She cannot share how it has affected her personally, only that it’s served to sever her relationship with her baby but that all started with an uncontested RO. Kaine can argue back that it was due to LE information, and that is obviously the angle he’s taking.
I do agree, and so many of us have said for years, that a PI should have been hired but how can the court or Vien blame him for trusting LE? That would be an admission LE is liable and they likely won’t do that without a court stating that as a fact first. LE has that privilege.
You say: “Now he says LE told him what to tell Kiara about TMH? I will say again, he told her her Mother was deceased, and he needs to be held accountable for the effects that will have on this baby.”
If true and proven, this will absolutely weigh heavily. That is the line, IMO. Kaine’s beliefs based on LE info, the RO, those things legally make sense. To tell a child her living mother is dead? That is unforgivable.
erose says:
December 28, 2013 at 5:27 pm
Oh Blink, I skim read the docs and saw that 2009 and thought it was me who was confused. This man’s testimony is highly guarded. Now we know why. It falls apart. It is revelations such as this that cause me to speculate in the direction of TH’s innocence, because there does not seem to be the foundation of the allegations made against her. It is not that I want to prove her guilty or innocent, I’m just looking for the truth.
Totally agree, and we are all confused because the testimony is incongruent to the facts and to some of the pleadings?? I can’t help but sense this is where Houze was trying to go.
B
________
That date issue is troubling. Engle opened the door to the meeting in his own deposition (stupido) so even if the sting can’t be discussed at least this issue with date can be, thereby showing RSE is a weak and confused witness.