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, I can only say that Terri did not contest the restraining order (which obviously trumps a non existent custody agreement) so if she knew there was no proof of MFH that is what she should have done. Her not doing that is not Kaine’s problem in a legal sense. It is up to Houze to take the ‘fake investigation’ up with LE in court.
I do not know how he can or will do that in this civil court but we shall see. Kantor has given Houze the ability to do so.
I don’t know that the court system in your community has seen anything like this. This court has to presume there is an investigation until Houze raises the issue.
As far as ‘taking over a courtroom’, to a certain degree I agree with you. Still, I’ve seen the DSS system do it over and over, tearing families apart and unfairly targeting one or both parents based on hearsay. Happens every day and I have no doubt it happens where you live, too.
On that subject, though, why hasn’t anyone called DCS anonymously? It could be because Kaine has done nothing wrong in the eyes of the law as the law stands today. It’s legal and easy to request a RO and legal and easy to contest one. Kaine did his part, Terri did not do hers.
I personally don’t care if it’s a man or a woman sexting a stranger after their child is missing and the rest of their family has left the house, it’s funky behavior under the circumstances and we’ll just have to agree to disagree on the matter. One important thing we learned recently is that more lies came out of that texting with MC about how much her attorney cost. I’m left wondering if Terri really struggles with speaking the truth.
Terri’s looks don’t have anything to do with anything so not sure why that’s an issue. I’ve always thought she was pretty, myself.
erose says:
December 29, 2013 at 12:47 am
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?
___
This is a civil case ATM. I do believe Kantor may find the lunch meeting can come in but the sting cannot and here’s why:
RSE testimony is not hearsay. He testified that Terri said these things directly to him before any investigation was happening.
If I’m in a custody battle I can have a witness testify to what my husband stated to the witness. If my husband shared with a friend he was using cocaine, murdered someone, or wanted me dead, I could bring that witness in to be heard.
My husband’s attorney can cross and show my witness to be lying or sketchy or whatever. My husband can take the stand and deny he ever said such a thing.
IMO, the sting is separate. It did not affect the lunch meeting in any way, which IMO only, can stand alone. Terri’s actions months later, knowing she is a POI, are separate from her frame of mind at the time she met with Rudy. If the MFH is in fact part of an ongoing investigation and contains sensitive matter the sting will probably not come in with the possibility Kantor will not allow RSE to he heard at all but if Kitty’s best interest is the heart of what is happening (and it is as agreed by all parties) I think it will be.
If it is shown (by Houze) that the MFH is no longer being investigated then Kantor has to allow it.
MOO. JMO.
I do agree, erose, for Terri this is effed up but so much of it has never been before so they’re using a platform not yet evolved to the situation. It’s ‘in the making’ so to speak.
Rose says:
December 29, 2013 at 8:40 am
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.
(snipped)
B
_____
Such a good post, Blink. You outlined it so my mind can see it better. I wasn’t able to float to the other side at any point.
The Seahawks are ready to play their way into being the Division champs (woot!) so I can’t give the full attention your post deserves.
@ Rose, excellent point. Really shows the lack of integrity this case may have going against it.
Thank you both.
@NelMel. Your brilliant post deserved thought & reinforcement, but I find myself in a vacuous phase post-kid activities today.
wrt “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.”
Actually by reviewing the decades of McKnight’s work & Vien’s & the legislature, imo OR “family law” does allow that. Judge’s discretion, evaluator’s collusion, certain catchwords “serious” “present” risk of psychological harm to child by a bio can kick it over to a psychological parent in the child’s formative years, aka a live-in girlfriend can trump a “disappeared” mommie.
OR case law has developed in a legislative vacuum.
imo Rackgel know they’re playing in a legal pool (leaving out cess in deference to vw) where if you call a parent a “serious” “present” “whatever” risk psychologically to their child, you win.
And if Vien’s appointment as evaluator did not go from McKnight’s lips to Kantor’s ears, I’m shocked.
I no longer see her as assigning Kantor under informal duress for some reason such as to win another term.
I see her leading this bandwagon, with Woods. My opinion.
The length of this case means I go refind info as if it were new, but at least I consistently reach same intuitions & conclusions after doing so. .
Opinion:
Comparing custody laws in NY to OR is like comparing AIDS treatment in the US or France to AIDS treatment in So Africa under Mbeki.
Not only is it comparing apples & oranges, it is a far more dramatic divide. In NY much of the legislature, and often the governor, are attorneys, often from leading schools. Fed by US Attorneys office So District and NY DAs Office (Morganthau).
Look at Oregon. Unimaginably, the House Judiciary Chair (Moawad’s Dad Barker) is not only not an attorney, he has merely a BS from Portland State in who knows what, and his career has been PPB police Lt & Union Pres. This is the person bringing custody legislation to a vote, or not. The good citizens serving in the legislature & putting forth legislation probably have the same or less Ed & Experience.
Due to a vacuum in OR attorneys practicing in Family Law from say one of the top 100 law schools with experience working in other States, McKnight clearly has had the leadership role committee-wise in custody legislative pies dating back decades, now seems the most prominant family court judge in the State, as well as the one who gives the CEU talks & trains the Bar. Shows how someone can rise to the top where there seems zero competition ftom 1979-1990s.
http://www.osbar.org/_docs/leadership/elections/judicial/08may/mcknight.m.pdf
She is someone who led a sheltered Catholic education (not knocking, son did same) followed by U OR Law School. The problem is, in her educational era, at U OR, there was no mature family law or custody guidance in the State.
Since graduation she has been an OR family law legislative & judicial lead.
NY though has had a mature codified family law for decades with numerous highly educated & trained attorneys in the State, the Legislature, and on the Bench.
I will say as a law sch grad, I feel there had to be a major difference in education in the 70s between U OR & so many other law schools. I’m not talking the Yales, Harvards, Georgetowns, or Chicagos. Education would have differed from U OR at U Tex, U Okla, U Mich, any U Calif school, U Wash, U Col and so on.
The point is not that McKnight has done badly. She has worked hard and fought good fights for the poor & disenfranchised, and is a glorious feminist it seems. But she has been culturally & intellectually isolated in OR wrt checks & balances on her own family law ideas & crusades & writings. That is also the problem with Woods. And with Kantor. No checks & balances from better-educated & trained peers to bring them up short when they go off the rails.
for people like Barker, McKnight, & Vien to be drafting & applying custody legislation as the State’s leading lights since the 90s is too inbred and provincial, & it has resulted in the ability for a Vien (cf the footnote in the case I cited where Appeals Court said he didn’t evaluate father as compared with expectations for a father–against himself), McKnight, or Kantor to be loose cannons to the detriment of either natural parent.
My take from McKnight’s youtube is she lacks self awareness and is brimming with self confidence based on both her judicial role &
power & the fact she’s legitimately done good in many areas.
—–
It will take outsiders, attorneys from out of State law schools, to clean up Portland/OR institutions & legislation, if that is even possible.
It is reflective of the paucity of attorneys in the OR legislature that Kitz is putting legislator Garrert on the OR appeals court after only 13 years in the Bar & no judicial experience. In NY he’d be in the DA’s Office another 10 years & need a lot more “credits.”
“Students should be sure they want to stay in the region, however, as Oregon is not a school of national prestige, and jobs will be hard to find as one looks further east. ” http://www.top-law-schools.com/university-oregon-law.html
meaning even east to Col or Ill.
and if I wanted Envir Law, I’d think GW or U VT.
It just seems to me the OR Legislature & trial courts wrt custody are a 3rd world country due to lacked of educated attorney leadership.
grasshopper says:
December 27, 2013 at 1:31 pm
@Mom3.0
It also sounds like you don’t believe you could ever end up in a position like the one T is in. That is why we are all so horrified by this. Not only has a woman’s life been destroyed without charges or evidence, a little girl psychologically damaged by being separated from her mother and told who knows what, but once the law is thrown out the window, as it has happened in this case, EVERY SINGLE PERSON is at risk.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
GH, what law is it that you think has been thrown out the window in this case?
grasshopper says:
December 29, 2013 at 12:47 pm
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.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Blink, are you saying that the deposition transcripts do not name the Spanish interpreter that was used?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Grasshopper says, 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.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No, GH, all U.S. court transcripts and depositions are in English so the second language, in this case Spanish, would not be included in the transcript. Yes, It is possible that RSE answered some questions with English. During the deposition, when off the record, Thayne may have advised his client in Spanish.
You ask how do we know what was really said? Our best indicators can be found in the transcribed questions and responses. Do the responses “follow” from the questions or do they appear to be non sequiturs and/or not make sense? From the transcripts I’ve seen, imo, they read like goal directed, logical responses. I would think that all the involved parties would be concerned with accuracy.
Btw, interpretation involves the spoken word; translation, the written.
No Grace, the interpreters name is provided, but the “real time” question/answer/interpretation/response/reinterp/rephrase/ etc, is not. Imo, the recorded transcript has more value, to include all.
B
re Nel Mel 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?
—–
Excuse me, but are we seriously advocating anyone or just a friend of teris to anonymously call cps on Kaine to falsely claim/allege child abuse or neglect?
That would be a big no no in my state.
Again a judge in Oregon need not be the one to ask for cps intervention and noone needs to make any false accusations
terri and her lawyers could have facilitated this by simply asking for a GAL- which would have required as part of the process a family services intervention to interview and evaluate.
If terri had fought the RO and if she had continued on with her initial request at custody and visitation – both she and Kaine would have had to submit to stringent parenting and MH evaluations and interviews w family services also
AJMO
Peace
@Grass,
Wondered about that, too. Why Thayne sat on Engle’s Bench.
Truly, based on what Engel’s has said in court about “finding” Sanchez without LE’s help, his remark about a brief interview to determine if he had truly, truly found the right guy, and his little “wild-goose chase” serving a “perpetuity” depo on Houze and Bunch….well, are we are watching some pretty dirty tricks being played out?
Why would Houze question Rudy about his intent to stay or not stay for the trial? We all know the answer to that.
I’m not sure what legally can be done, but Houze did not mention it at the hearing. Perhaps he has enough confidence that he will ignore the “MERITLESS” W-G chase and not get distracted…as he and Wagner did the suit.
What worries me more is the “finding” of RSE, the “interview” that House/Bunch were not privy to, and the pause (in perpetuity, if you will) while RSE goes to find a lawyer. I looked up Thayne…and he appears to be a upstanding guy. LDS mission and all. But two questions….
!. He’s not a criminal lawyer that I recall. Was it bankruptcy? Civil law suits? Why Thayne? Whose pick?
2. Why would RSE only NOW need a lawyer to represent him?
2a. How long did it take Kaine to get a lawyer, write up a divorce, a restraining order, get it to a judge, signed off and TMH served …… over the weekend, no less. 2.5 days?
Just can’t get past Rudy’s statement….”If it were up to me, I’d be out of this”. He had no need, it appears, to consider TMH’s so-called MFH plan serious at all.
Grasshopper, if you are interested, here is a great link that explains the certification of court interpreters in Oregon:
http://www.ojd.state.or.us/web/ojdpublications.nsf/Files/InterpreterCertificationPolicy.pdf/$File/InterpreterCertificationPolicy.pdf
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Blink, some may not realize that the interpreter is sworn in during these proceedings and can be charged with perjury if s/he fails to interpret truthfully.
Agreed entirely Grace- but I submit my only issue is that the depo is not reflected accurately on the transcript.
B
We live on the floor.
Amy’s sis I don’t understand how the sting is not relevant to the civil case
Rose I agree about dr e v. Rather say it now than later
LOL. Floor is More?
B
From blink in non-bold reviewing at erose request, please tell me my bad?
B
There would have been a parenthetical that the interpreter was sworn and that tells you a Spanish interpreter was interpreting the attorney’s questions into Spanish for the witness and the interpreting the witness’s Spanish into English for the attorneys and the record, Are you suggesting the court reporter should have put have put in a parenthetical for each question and answer? The record would read poorly and the court reporter would probably be accused of page padding, since we get paid by the page.
The landscaper’s bilingual attorney would have objected if he didn’t agree with the interpreter’s translation. I haven’t read the transcript. Did that happen?
The real time response and full depositions are not being provided to the public. Everything since the beginning of this case has been snipped and redacted to……..IDK what. Ya’ll tell me? OR needs a sunshine law, and after the last few weeks of fog, fog and more fog, I’m really feelin’ it! Seems fitting.
RSE testimony is key, and he has indicated Terri got her point across to him not with specific words but somehow with nonverbal meaning. So the ease and quality of his communication fluency with the interpreter is critical. Personally as a Judge I would reject this depo without the Spanish translations (written recording) of the interpretations.
I’ve watched translators in Courtrooms. Sometimes communication with less educated clients takes more than the literal word for word translation. RSE suggests this when he conveys he had difficulty understanding what the depo was about, and Engel probably had a Spanish speaker trying to tell him.
Did the interpretor give a straight translation of Engel’s sentence, word for word, one time, or did the interpreter have to rephrase a couple different ways/times to elicit his understanding? Did the interpreter have to get a little didactic to get the point of the question across? What did Thayne say in Spanish? Did he have to prompt or focus answers using Spanish? The answers can seem more responsive if he had “help” getting there.
I know we may assume there was a NTB since there was no indictment and apparently a new GJ was called, but can a NTB actually be withheld from the public? According to the rules (see below), “it must be indorsed “not a true bill,” which indorsement must be signed by the foreman and filed with the clerk of the court, in whose office it shall remain a public record.” A PUBLIC RECORD. Has anyone tried to find such a public record? Has any reporter mentioned this? What I would like to know is what crime/charges were covered by the NTB, if there was one. I have assumed it was MFH related since RSE testified and DeDe didn’t, but then why all the school people unless they were considering more than one crime at the same time?
Look at all the people we think testified – Skyline principal and staff including Mrs. Porter, RSE, friends, gym acquaintances, Andrea Lackey, school bus driver, and more – plus cell phone records, computer records, and whatever else was presented to the GJ. If all that led to a NTB AND (1) a new GJ can be called to consider the same questions only by court order, normally based on something significant and not presented to the first GJ AND (2) the minutes of any GJ that finds a NTB must be destroyed, then what could they be discussing? Wouldn’t it have to be new charges proposed by the DA or some major new witness or evidence? (If there were developments that big in the case, why bother with another GJ?)
Was GJ #1 excused for some other reason? The only other reason I can think of is because something happened with the composition of the jury itself. The way I read the following statute, if at least 5 members have not heard ALL the evidence and then voted to indict or present facts to the court, the jury cannot act, and they would need to begin again. If this happened, there would be no record of a NTB on file.
132.360 Number of jurors required to concur. A grand jury may indict or present facts to the court for instruction as provided in ORS 132.370, with the concurrence of five of its members, if at least five jurors voting for indictment or presentment heard all the testimony relating to the person indicted or facts presented. [Amended by 1973 c.836 §49]
132.430 Finding against indictment; indorsement “not a true bill.” (1) When a person has been held to answer a criminal charge and the indictment in relation thereto is not found “a true bill,” it must be indorsed “not a true bill,” which indorsement must be signed by the foreman and filed with the clerk of the court, in whose office it shall remain a public record. In the case of an indictment not found “a true bill” against a person not so held, the same, together with the minutes of the evidence in relation thereto, must be destroyed by the grand jury.
(2) When an indictment indorsed “not a true bill” has been filed with the clerk of the court, the effect thereof is to dismiss the charge; and the same cannot be again submitted to or inquired of by the grand jury unless the court so orders. [Amended by 1973 c.836 §54]
@Grass wrt “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?”
Imo many witnesses are neither independent nor neutral. That’s why there are different rules for how they can be questioned depending on whether the questioner is the attorney calling them or his counterpart, the other side. A witness just has to have some firsthand observation or knowledge that is relevant. So RSE’s attorney sat with Rackgel at their bench? Personally I find that strange. maybe he’s billing through them too. Need to find out who is paying him, RSE or Kaine flowing through Rackgel. Probably the only way to find out is through a Bar investigation.
It would make sense if Kaine were paying thru Rackgel, because then they could claim his client conferences were a Rackgel work product. It absolutely would go to his credibility & needs to be elicited by HofB.
Rose says, So RSE’s attorney sat with Rackgel at their bench? Personally I find that strange. maybe he’s billing through them too. Need to find out who is paying him, RSE or Kaine flowing through Rackgel. Probably the only way to find out is through a Bar investigation.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks for this Rose! Sometimes I wonder if I’m overly sensitive to such things. Right after this hearing I asked (rhetorically) who is paying Thayne. He was certainly welcomed by Rackgel in courthouse lobby with big smiles and handshaking. creepy to think RSE’s story is the one keeping T from baby K.
Another thing that probably means nothing but still seems strange: in court RSE is always referred to as Rudy Sanchez instead of his full name. We were told way back “then” that Rudy Sanchez was not his real name so why continue using it now?
Thank you Blink and all who responded to my question. It is very appreciated. I speak to large groups of people on a frequent basis, and although my job is not linked to education or social services, when I have side discussions with many of these people (after work) you may be surprised by how many people truly would like to understand the delays and issues of the civil case and the criminal investigation better.
*I would also like to please clarify* that when I asked why Houze & Co. hasn’t said “bring it on”, I was talking about fighting the RO, no visitation, accusations, etc. previously – or why I might make a decision it to not testify against RSE currently.
Again, thank you smarty pants’ for being understanding of these (common) questions.
Oh no! I meant to add this at the bottom of that last post, for reference –
VLH says:
December 27, 2013 at 10:15 pm
http://blinkoncrime.com/2013/09/11/blink-on-crime-kyron-horman-investigation-exclusive-dede-spicher-interview-yields-allegations-of-illegal-steroid-use-terri-horman-took-to-police/comment-page-84/#comments
Blink bolder part of my comment. Please do not attribute message to Amy’s or rose as hers. She only come ted on the floor
Not sure I get this, I apologize if I stranded more of us on the floor, lol
B
I meant to type bolded
Having auto correct problems can you tell. Sheesh
Mom3.0 says:
December 29, 2013 at 9:33 pm
(snipped)
Excuse me, but are we seriously advocating anyone or just a friend of teris to anonymously call cps on Kaine to falsely claim/allege child abuse or neglect?
—————————————————————-
No.
Well, Grass, if Rackner met Thayne in the Courthouse entrance lobby,
and escorted him to sit with her at her bench,
to me that meant either he was not familiar with the
criminal Courthouse, or she didn’t want anyone else
talkin’ to him, and it appears he was doin’ her a favor.
Shall we christen him “Bubba” for this trial’s purposes?
My impression was GJ1 was exploring the abduction, with RSE & the solicitation subsumed under that to show her propensity to commit murder within the family. At the time I thought the DA never asked for a vote or disposition but was making a record. If GJ2 was formed in response to “new evidence,” that alludes to a NTB from GJ1. Imo we don’t know anything except Rees & Woods are acting squirrelly as heck in the divorce case in regard to RSE, therefore I infer a coverup of some sort of their or mcso illegal and/or untruthful behaviors.
@Lc. Thanks for info
“The landscaper’s bilingual attorney would have objected if he didn’t agree with the interpreter’s translation. I haven’t read the transcript. Did that happen?”
There is evidence in the transcript itself Thayne did not know the proper form to object to a question in English during a deposition and had to be coached by Engel, as though he’d never represented anyone during a depo before.
——
Maybe you can fill me in. Say an ATF prosecutor or a DOJ prosecutor is comducting a depo in a criminal case with their key friendly witness, who speaks only Spanish & has limited education, in order to roll up his key testimony against criminal network members, and they absolutely want it to stand up in Federal Court. And he will have adverse attorneys of those charged criminal network members at the depo. Are you saying there would not be a bilingual Court reporter who would fluently type in Spanish as well as English to create a transcript of all verbal interactions during the depo?
IIRC vw, Thayne’s bio on his firm website termed him “specializing” in criminal & bankruptcy.
I did a post about how use of the term “specialize” in advertising was unusual.
@vw, RSE replied to Houze’ pepetuity-related questions more than once his reluctance if any was because he wanted to know “what this (depo) was about.” Therefore to secure his attendance,
Engel had to explain to his satisfaction was his appearance at the depo was to be “about.”
Can Houze depo RSE as to that conversation with RSE? (We need you to say x, y & z.) Not if
that explanation was solely made by a newly hired criminal defense attorney as translator.
Personally, I think any criminal attorney of RSE in any depo shoukd have had him respond
“Tomo El Cinco” to cada question. (sorry if verb errs; it’s been forty anos.)
@3.0. wrt “Excuse me, but are we seriously advocating anyone or just a friend of teris to anonymously call cps on Kaine to falsely claim/allege child abuse or neglect?”
I see no hint of that in NelMel’s or any other post. Rather, meritless parental alienation (Kaine had zero firsthand observations of his own) baring mother without a custody order of any kind should have, at the time, be phoned in to cps, and imo was required to be by certain professionals, such as DAs. CPS coukd’ve taken Kiara’s custody status to Court (IF the mfh accusation was deemed after cps investigation to have some substance), & Kaine woukd’ve walked out with a Temporary Custody order, or an Order to provide supervised visitation. That’s how it would’ve worked in other States, with other DAs. (Think Celis).
MockingbirdSings says:
December 30, 2013 at 12:09 am
I know we may assume there was a NTB since there was no indictment and apparently a new GJ was called, but can a NTB actually be withheld from the public? According to the rules (see below), “it must be indorsed “not a true bill,” which indorsement must be signed by the foreman and filed with the clerk of the court, in whose office it shall remain a public record.” A PUBLIC RECORD. Has anyone tried to find such a public record? Has any reporter mentioned this? What I would like to know is what crime/charges were covered by the NTB, if there was one. I have assumed it was MFH related since RSE testified and DeDe didn’t, but then why all the school people unless they were considering more than one crime at the same time?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Iirc that original Grand Jury was described as information seeking only, not looking to indict. Since what I know about Grand Juries would fit into a thimble, I am very interested in what you are saying. If it was informational only, would there be a record of it, and would that be public record? if it was NTB, the record would be destroyed but would there be a record of that NTB anywhere? seems like those are the only 2 options: information only or NTB.
i’ve just been clicking around the Multnomah county website trying to discover where Grand Jury records are kept but like any gov website it’s like exploring a MC Escher illustration. long trip to nowhere. Would Grand Jury records likely be kept in same File Room as the court filings or would they be in special place?
@MockingbirdSings says:
December 30, 2013 at 12:09 am
Good questions. IIRC, they (a judge) can have a GJ true bill (indictment) sealed. Does that also apply if a no true bill is issued? IDK.
Kaine Horman does not have an RO against Terri Horman. It was dropped. Does anyone here think that if there was a lick of evidence to back up that RO, it would have been dropped? I don’t.
There is in it’s replacement a civil no contact agreement ordered by the Judge. How does one fight that? Or can it be that this no contact agreement acts as a custody agreement until a custody agreement is in place? Why would Kaine be given fully custody even temporarily once the RO was dropped? All so confusing.
*************
@vw, RSE’s attorney is listed as a bankruptcy AND criminal attorney. So, IDK, maybe he started out in bankruptcy and ended up becoming a criminal attorney. ?
RE: grasshopper says:
December 30, 2013 at 2:49 am
Rose says, So RSE’s attorney sat with Rackgel at their bench? Personally I find that strange. maybe he’s billing through them too. Need to find out who is paying him, RSE or Kaine flowing through Rackgel. Probably the only way to find out is through a Bar investigation.
*******************
In general, court room seating is like a wedding ceremony – bride’s family to the left, groom’s family on the right. Each court has its own etiquette, of course, but it would have been far stranger if RS’s attorney decided to sit on the other side (and frankly, I don’t think TH’s counsel would have allowed it). Counsel generally try to get a seat at the table if they are are representing a client whose interests are the focus of the hearing. However, if there is not room or their expected participation is minimal, they may sit behind the table(s) or even in the gallery.
Additionally, transcripts do not include the foreign language component of a question/answer. The transcriber is not responsible for the translation: he or she just transcribes the question as translated by the translator and the subsequent translated response.
I woke up thinking about SZ this morning. Are we sure SZ is the same man that asked Kyron for help? Are we sure that man was not eventually identified and cleared?
Desiree Young asked (paraphrasing)”what was Kyron doing outside by a truck”? If DY had been told about an unidentified person asking Kyron to help him with something, she would have known what he was doing outside in the parking lot. Assisting someone. Blink says DY & KH have known since the beginning there is an SZ, if so why would she ask that question? Why no police composite of this person, if he had not been identified at some point? Did this man eventually get identified and has an alibi? If so, would he not be the last person to have seen Kyron, not Terri? Why does LE keep insisting that Terri was the last person to see Kyron that day?
None of this makes any sense, unless someone is covering up for someone else. If Kyron was last seen in that parking lot, near a truck similar to the Horman’s, which couldn’t have been the Horman’s because she was elsewhere, then Terri could not have been the last person to see Kyron.
This case drives me nuts.
@VLH
I am another Portland dummy
I like your post since I am not on every day I missed it before
All I can see is a lot of people seem to have their rights stepped on
First Kyron
Next Kiara
Terri
And even Kaine
I really appreciate those who keep us informed VW and Grasshopper And Blink
I appreciate all these posters and their thinking and research Views
Some how I think at some point this case will be worked out. But not any time soon
Blink says: Amy’s sis I don’t understand how the sting is not relevant to the civil case
___
Not so much relevant as inadmissible due to the ongoing investigation, which could be debated but is not up to the judge to do so.
Legally, can the lunch mfh meeting stand alone? Kantor has to decide that OR if Houze wants the sting meeting in he will need to show there is no ongoing mfh investigation.
So far, kantor has decided. He ruled for the purposes of the pending temp hearing the “last meeting” was off limits. They are linked, period. HouzeofBunch will be successful in either striking the testimony and witness, or allowing it to be in.
Legally, no. You can’t limit the respondents ability to cross examine a witness in part when the testimony is linked. It has to be impeachable.
B
@3.0. If Terri requested the GAL, she’d have to pay.
With no control over billable hours. It’s obvious why
neither bio requested one. And it’s getting obvious
why Kantor hasn’t.
Rose, I do not believe the payment issue is absolute as to who requests one, unless of course one wanted to be assured they got one. I agree in that instance the payment would be upfront and to be decided later, but in my jurisdiction, that would be assigned as to income shares- so Kaine would be paying or a joint account.
B
Rose says: (snipped) 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.)
_______
I don’t know. He was waiting to see if an arrest for Kyron’s disappearance or the recovery of Kyron would happen. Doing so didn’t really affect his ability to make his case since there was no case to be made at the time, especially since Terri didn’t contest the RO.
Now we’re in court. This is where the action will finally start to take place so I’m focused on the legalities, Kitty’s best interest, how the law is interpreted, what information regarding Kyron may come out of it, and whether or not LE had enough on Terri to navigate the entire situation the way they have (which may not even be broached at this time but I think Houze will have to if Terri wants to see Kiara).
Following that, I look toward how Houze moves forward. I sensed and posted long ago he was looking to see legislation changed and now that so much time has passed without an arrest of his client he is that much closer.
Blink could be writing new pieces about this case for years to come and I’ll be here reading and anticipating them.
Rose says:
December 29, 2013 at 1:30 am
Also Engel’s statement makes no sense to me legally.
Terri’s speech does not affirmatively make Kaine’s case.
____
Her speech does not make his case however it should also not prevent him from bringing in his evidence simply because she won’t verbally testify to refute it (ie… the MFH lunch meeting) I’m sure this issue will rear its’ head again.
I am surprised that in his deposition Kaine made no mention of the changing of the cards in school, or Kyron crying to go be with his mother when he was out of town, etc… That doesn’t bode well for him. If he wants to win he needs to show Terri was somehow unfit without relying entirely on investigative information.
Terri will not take part in the parenting evaluation or answer any questions so her entire civil case will rest on the merits of what Kaine and LE did wrong.
It’s a conundrum to be sure.
VW says: (snipped) 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. (snipped)
___
I believe the ‘meeting’ he was confused on was the sting, not the original MFH lunch date.
See page 38 of Grasshoppers link:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10147993/Horman%20court%20filings%20dec%201%20to%20dec%2027.pdf
@ VW, it was reported that Terri’s parents had no expectation of repayment by Terri per their own deposition.
I agree SZ was or is a local.
AS- it is within Engel’s response that a deposition held by the plaintiff yielded that information- but I did not see any inclusion of that testimony, just fyi.
B
Mom3.0 says:
December 29, 2013 at 9:33 pm
re Nel Mel says
December 28, 2013 at 9:12 pm
(snipped)
Excuse me, but are we seriously advocating anyone or just a friend of teris to anonymously call cps on Kaine to falsely claim/allege child abuse or neglect?
That would be a big no no in my state.
———————————–
Just to be clear, since I responded to NelMel also –
I have never known anyone on this site to recommend making any false claims about anything, and I’m sure no one is saying that now. I’m also sure Blink would not allow that in a post.
With that in mind, however, there are several things for us to keep in mind – state agencies don’t do the work of the parent for them. By that, I mean if you have an issue with the other parent taking a child and not allowing you to see the child, there are legal avenues you can follow regarding a welfare check and custody. The difficulty is that the court system can take months and months to work through. Police will do a welfare check on a child but if everything seems OK, they will not take the child for you because there is nothing illegal about a parent having a child with them if there is no existing custody agreement (to violate) or criminal activity going on.
It seems obvious that for one parent to keep a child away from another parent for no substantiated reason is not in the child’s best interest. However, it gets muddy with how you prove that is happening and the actual timeline. To a parent who is trying to see their child, it can feel like painfully slow motion toward any progress.
To me, depriving the child of the other parent seems like something from another century, although I know it isn’t that limited, and the damage to the child from that alone is worthy of a CPS investigation. The question is when would it become “investigation worthy” – after a week, a month, 3 months, a year? We all have a personal opinion, especially if we are parents, about what that period should be, but the law does not seem so clear.
Some states are better at resolving these issues than others, but I would be surprised if any state has it 100% adequately weighed in the best interest of the child. We are viewing an increasingly extreme case, IMO, which makes drawing conclusions using hindsight much easier – although there’s still no guarantee those conclusions are correct.
When you take a hard look at the laws and policies we have to work with, it becomes increasingly clear how important integrity, sensitivity, alertness, wisdom, and knowledge are for every judge, caseworker, parent, attorney, DA, and others who deal with children’s welfare issues.
So much for my 2 cents worth today – happy new year!
But Blink, it can be impeached if Terri would testify which is what Engel is saying when he says Terri’s refusal to talk shouldn’t prevent Kaine from bringing his evidence in, isn’t it?
Kaine is not preventing Terri from refuting the evidence. Legally, RSE can refuse to answer questions about the sting because it is considered investigative information… unless Houze can show it’s not.
AS- you know I heart you. That is just not accurate. You are forming opinion without merit or legal basis. How can one impeach testimony which is disallowed or exempted regardless?
B
@Amys. wrt “Her speech does not make his case however it should also not prevent him from bringing in his evidence simply because she won’t verbally testify to refute it (ie… the MFH lunch meeting) I’m sure this issue will rear its’ head again.”
Nothing about Terri’s inability to refute precludes Kaine, at the point of Engel’s saber-rattling, from fully and affirmatively presenting the testimony of RSE wrt all his interactions, speech & nonspeech, with Terri, with the exception of the final meeting, which Kaine et al do NOT want RSE to testify to. That’s why his
depo was fully sanctioned by Kantor.
Engel’s “blame the wife” speech reminds me of a mysogenistic husband who explains all his failures in life & disappointments by periodically railing at wife, blaming her:
” But for you (holding me back by existing, spending my money (on kids of course), not bucking up my ego enough, failing to do x y or z,
I would have been successful at……
(name anything–work promotions, savings, retirement, old age, child rearing, & so on).
@Amys. just to help
wrt “But Blink, it can be impeached if Terri would testify which is what Engel is saying when he says Terri’s refusal to talk shouldn’t prevent Kaine from bringing his evidence in, isn’t it?”
honest, that is not what Engel was saying.
So I shall venture and return my’lady.
B
Amys Sister says:
December 30, 2013 at 5:54 pm
VW says: (snipped) 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. (snipped)
___
I believe the ‘meeting’ he was confused on was the sting, not the original MFH lunch date.
Yes. I should have said, MFH-sting. Can’t remember if it was September, August? 2009?
This should really tell us something about his credibility, don’t you think?
What’s more, regarding the actual restaurant— Again, no interpreter, was not sure if “get rid of” or “kill” or any other words were used. So how can we believe TMH used those words, or “look like a mugging”?
If no interpreter was there how could she have conveyed (non-verbally) “look like a mugging” when Rudy had no English-speaking skills?
I would question, seriously, the interpretation of this restaurant meeting….second hand, via an interpreter, 3.5 years later, having had a brief “meeting” with Kaine’s lawyer prior to the deposition.
Question for you, and others……what would the depo look like if it had been Houze who had scoured the internet to find Rudy?
And why didn’t he?
The sting was June 26th 2010.
B
The language problem is never going to be solved to everyone’s satisfaction. Especially is this true where we have translators that understand Castilian Spanish, but not the dialects in the Spanish of Mexico, Central and South America.
Reading a contract written in Mexican Spanish is going to be different than Spanish written in Spain. Been there and done that.
Once the laws of New York were used as the model of laws elsewhere, except in the State of Louisiana where law is based not on English law, but French law. I don’t think that is happening as it once did because other states have taken the lead in some areas.
My little experiment of reading law relating to protection of children and youths in Virginia, North Carolina, Alabama,Arizona and Texas convinced me that laws could be written in convoluted language or simple straight forward language. Arizona wins for the most complex language and Alabama wins for the most straight forward within the group.
IMO when it comes to family law and procedures, legislative intent is often not conveyed well in the written bills. This means that someone or several someone’s must write rules and procedures to administer that law. Do these rules and procedures really carry out the intent of the law or do they contain things not intended? These rules and procedures should include those areas of when and who should be making the decisions based on a set of even criteria.
The legal protection of children is one of those areas. For example, the funds made available for services know as “Child Protection Services” may not provide for properly trained workers and do nothing about quality of training or performance. This includes people sitting on the bench as a judge and those supporting the actual investigations and reports.
Several posts hanging in chad land today. No biggy, just mentioning.
WHich T. Ruth- I am not seeing anything from you?
B
@Mom3.0 says:
December 29, 2013 at 9:33 pm
I don’t think that is at all what NelMel was advocating, but I will let her answer your question. I didn’t take the post that way in the slightest.