Kyron Horman -- Missing 6/4/10 #2

by carolirvin July 23, 2010 10:40 PM EDT

What everyone would like the stepmother to admit is that she murdered the kid and disposed of his body. That is the only "information" that she is likely to have. She has a legal right not to incriminate herself and she is exercising that legal right. If a friend of hers is telling her that she is correct in exercising that right, that's rather to be expected. Neither of these women is presently violating the criminal or civil laws and the other parents threatening to sue the friend are being badly advised (if any lawyer advised them of this non-existent lawsuit). I really wonder if the police have sat down with these parents and explained the slim likelihood of the child's being found alive at this point. If he were alive, someone would have to be feeding him wherever he was hidden and we know none of the suspects are doing so. The only realistic way he is alive is if the person who took him was NOT the stepmother, but someone who wanted a little boy. He would have been kidnapped but not for ransom. The police do not appear to be pursuing that angle so it appears they believe someone close to him made him disappear and for it to be this long, that person must be a murderer. Much as I hate the idea of CCTV cameras everywhere, (like England has) if we had those at the school, we would know for sure whether someone else nabbed him at the school or not. and/or whether the stepmother dropped him off at school or not. That is the kind of "information" which is sorely needed in this case but the probable murderer will not be the one supplying it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
by tandemduo280 July 23, 2010 6:32 PM EDT

Think of "lack of cooperation" as "right to remain silent", and you'll be closer to the truth. Certainly, Law Enforcement can subpoena a party to testify under oath in court. But that would require them to be forthcoming with whatever evidence they have, something they have been reluctant to do. The complete lack of transparancy by the investigation is what has led to this standoff, and all the rampant speculation that has gone along with it.

Truth is, after seven weeks and upwards of $400,000, LE hasn't produced a single shred of evidence.

Maat wrote:Thanks! I think I might just like it here.

LottieM wrote:Final comments of the night for me....

Well, that question and answer session was a complete failure! Are the reporters censored or just brain dead?........

Calypso wrote:Scaredmonkeys.com is confirming the cousin of Dede Spicher, Jonesr, is legit. http://scaredmonkeys.net/index.php?topic=8300.320

http://www.katu.com/news/local/99146044.html

(snipped)

Spicher declined to answer questions from reporters Friday as she raced out of her house and into a waiting car driven by her father. Her father, who identified himself as a sheriff’s deputy with the Klamath County Sheriff’s Office, also declined to comment on the accusations from Kyron’s family.

LottieM wrote:Final comments of the night for me....

Well, that question and answer session was a complete failure! Are the reporters censored or just brain dead? Or, what's in the koolaid in Portland? haha

sitemama wrote:Desiree is either lazy or lying for sympathy. I'm sure Kyron was with Kaine for the entire week, Sunday thru Friday. That means he didn't sleep in that bed since Saturday nite, and Sunday would have been the last day he played with his toys. My God woman, don't you clean your house sometime during the week.

That bed should have been made Sunday morning when he got out of it, unless you knew you were not going to see him again, and this was a sympathy strategy.

Even CA had made the beds in her house when news media went in shortly after they knew Caylee was missing.

Who goes almost a full week without making beds and picking up toys. We have to pick up toys every day. And, I have taught all my kids that a warm bed is easier to make up than a cold one, so make it up as soon as you get out of it.

awaiting justice wrote:KH, I get your point and agree.. I wud have also liked to see what questions were emailed... What questions are LE avoiding..

Maat, Welcome! your posts are intriguing...

Calupso,

thanks for sharing that article/post...

It completely makes sense.. I agree that if in fact Kyron is alive, the only likely chance wud be that someone took him for their own.. To love him and take care of him.. (warped, and sick, but not someone intending to hurt him)
I do think that the other possibility of Kyron being alive is that someone like:

the pig Ken Parnell who stole Steven Stayner, or

the pig Michael J. Devlin who stole Shawn Hornsbeck or

the pig Brian David Mitchell, who stole Elizabeth Smart from out of her bed, or

the pig like Phillipe Garrido who stole Jaycee, ...only to name a few....or

Above are only a few names of pigs who kept their victims alive...

most of the above were high risk abductions where children were taken from places where imo the perp, committed ultimate high risk abductions where there was a great chance he was going to get caught bit lucked out... In most of the cases I have cited, the parents blamed....

I think there is a strong possibility that Kyron is no longer with us as many crimes we have known about are the ultimate high risk abduction where you almost have to think the pig did in fact hope to get caught or at least not care.. these caases wud be like:

the pig who stole Jessica Lunsford, where we know PIG Cooey took her out of her bed and after molesting her for days on end, buried her alive where she was found dead...

the pig who stole Polly Klaas, from under her sleeping mothers nose, (friends were witnesses so the blaming of the family was much less) where pig Richard Allen Davis killed her after he tormented her for days before killing her and

the pig David Westerfield took Danielle Vandam under her sleeping parent's nose and mollested and killed her, or

the pig Scott Eby, took little Riley Fox from her her slumber (where the father was wrongfully changed and convicted)

or the pig Alejandro Avila, who stole Samantha Runion right out from her mothers eye, and molested and killed her.....


These are just a few extremly high risk abductions where in almost EVERY CASE, the PARENT WAS BLAMED, and in one case THE PARENT WAS WRONGFULLY CONVICTED.....


I woinder if LE have asked themself, why it seems so impossible to them, that someone wud enter into a school and take a child??? How many examples do they need to see, before they will EVEN CVONSIDER it possible.. How can they so quickly rule out the possibility? Do they not see that in every mentioned case, it took the victim to be found (dead or alive) for the LE in these cases to let the parent off the hook.....of course in one case, they even had the remaons but planted a shoe (of the father) at the scene so to help confirm their suspicion.. of course they were wrong!

WHat is wrong with LE??? How dare they instill potential fals e hope on many parents in that community, and taint the image of a step mother, who has only been described as a loving, present, mother????? WHat justice are they serving by doing this...?

How many more victims need to lose their little lives in vain while their most loved is accussed???????

To think that LE has the support of the media and most of the community almost makes me hurl... Arent reporters supposed to be impartial? Arent LE supposed let evidence lead to the perp? Arent ppl supposed to be innocnent until proven guilty... There is something terribly wrong with the system....

sitemama wrote:KJ, Desiree's comments will be shown on Dateline Monday nite when she takes the reporter into his room at her house, not Kaine's house. I'm sure she was not in tuned to what went on at Kaine's house. She didn't even come to pick up Kyron on the week-ends that she was to have him, Terri always made the 4-1/2 hr drive to her house, and then 4-1/2 hours back home.

I don't know about the world loving this woman, but I sure don't even like her. She is treating Kaine like a puppet and she is pulling his strings. They seem to be more of a couple than she and Tony do.

sitemama wrote:Desiree is either lazy or lying for sympathy. I'm sure Kyron was with Kaine for the entire week, Sunday thru Friday. That means he didn't sleep in that bed since Saturday nite, and Sunday would have been the last day he played with his toys. My God woman, don't you clean your house sometime during the week.

That bed should have been made Sunday morning when he got out of it, unless you knew you were not going to see him again, and this was a sympathy strategy.

Even CA had made the beds in her house when news media went in shortly after they knew Caylee was missing.

Who goes almost a full week without making beds and picking up toys. We have to pick up toys every day. And, I have taught all my kids that a warm bed is easier to make up than a cold one, so make it up as soon as you get out of it.

sitemama wrote:Desiree strikes me as a very selfish, self-centered woman. She has had different hair-does every time I have seen her. The last time Kyron was at her house, she did not know it would be his last time to sleep in his bed, or play with his toys. Any normal mom would have made that bed as soon as he got up, and would have picked up his toys before he left to go home, whether Terri drove all the way to get him, or if Desiree actually did take him home or at least half way. And what lazy mom does laundry, and then doesn't put it up. Maybe Tony actually did the laundry, because she is too much a lady to do household chores, but left Kyron's clothes for her to put up. Did she put hers and Tony's clothes away?

sitemama wrote:Hey Lottie, maybe Tony the cop did something to him as HE didn't want the kid full time. Cops work strange hours, he could have driven there and got Kyron. He would have no problem getting Kyron to leave with him, remember they were going to go fishing. Maybe it's only Kyron that is fishing. LE should check all water between his school and Tony's house.

Frequently Asked Questions About the Grand Jury System

What is the purpose of the grand jury?

The primary function of the modern grand jury is to review the evidence presented by the prosecutor and determine whether there is probable cause to return an indictment.

The original purpose of the grand jury was to act as a buffer between the king (and his prosecutors) and the citizens. Critics argue that this safeguarding role has been erased, and the grand jury simply acts as a rubber stamp for the prosecutor.

Since the role of the grand jury is only to determine probable cause, there is no need for the jury to hear all the evidence, or even conflicting evidence. It is left to the good faith of the prosecutor to present conflicting evidence.

In the federal system, the courts have ruled that the grand jury has extraordinary investigative powers that have been developed over the years since the 1950s. This wide, sweeping, almost unrestricted power is the cause of much of the criticism. The power is virtually in complete control of the prosecutor, and is pretty much left to his or her good faith.

Does every jurisdiction use a grand jury?

The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires a grand jury indictment for federal criminal charges. Only about half the states now use grand juries.

What is the typical term of a grand jury?

In virtually every federal jurisdiction, there is at least one grand jury sitting every day. Generally, most federal indictments involve grand juries that sit for five days a week for a period of one month. For cases involving complex and long-term investigations (such as those involving organized crime, drug conspiracies or political corruption), "long term" grand juries will be impaneled. Such "long term" grand juries typically sit fewer days each week, and their terms can be extended in six month increments for up to three years. The schedules vary among the states that still have grand juries.

How are grand jurors selected?

In most jurisdictions, grand jurors are drawn from the same pool of potential jurors as are any other jury panels, and in the same manner. The pool generally consists of names culled from various databases, such as national voter lists, motor vehicle license lists and public utilities lists.

Does anyone screen grand jurors for biases or other improper factors?

No. Unlike potential jurors in regular trials, grand jurors are not screened for biases or other improper factors.

How independent is the grand jury?

The grand jury is independent in theory, and although the instructions given to the grand jurors inform them they are to use their judgment, the practical realities of the situation mitigate against it.

The grand jury hears only cases brought to it by the
prosecutor. The prosecutor decides which witnesses to call. The prosecutor decides which witnesses will receive immunity. The basic questioning is done by the prosecutor on a theory he or she articulates. The grand jury members are generally permitted to ask questions at the end of a witness's testimony. The prosecutor generally decides if he or she has enough evidence to seek an indictment. Occasionally the grand jurors may be asked whether they would like to hear any additional witnesses, but since their job is only to judge what the prosecutor has produced, they rarely ask to do so.

The prosecutor drafts the charges and reads them to the grand jury. There is no requirement that the grand jury be read any instructions on the law, and such instructions are rarely given.

Why are grand jury proceedings secret?

Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provide that the prosecutor, grand jurors, and the grand jury stenographer are prohibited from disclosing what happened before the grand jury, unless ordered to do so in a judicial proceeding. Secrecy was originally designed to protect the grand jurors from improper pressures. The modern justifications are to prevent the escape of people whose indictment may be contemplated, to ensure that the grand jury is free to deliberate without outside pressure, to prevent subornation of perjury or witness tampering prior to a subsequent trial, to encourage people with information about a crime to speak freely, and to protect the innocent accused from disclosure of the fact that he or she was under investigation.

Why can a grand jury witness talk about his or her testimony?

In the federal courts, the witness is not sworn to secrecy, and may disclose whatever he or she wishes to whomever he or she wishes. The witness exemption was adopted in part because it was thought that requiring witness secrecy was unrealistic and unenforceable, and in part to allow the witness to rebut rumors concerning his or her testimony. There is a basic revulsion in the United States about secret testimony.

Are there any other exceptions to grand jury secrecy?

At one time, the defendant in a criminal trial was never given access to the grand jury testimony that resulted in the indictment. By the 1980s, in most jurisdictions, if a witness who testified before the grand jury was called to testify at the eventual trial, the defendant was given a copy of that witness's grand jury testimony to use for possible impeachment. Some jurisdictions also give the defendant a list of everyone who testified before the grand jury, and several give the defendant a full transcript of all relevant grand jury testimony. In the federal system, no such list is provided, and the grand jury transcripts of only those persons who testify on behalf of the prosecutor at trial are given to the defendant.

Who must testify before a grand jury?

A prosecutor can obtain a subpoena to compel anyone to testify before a grand jury, without showing probable cause and, in most jurisdictions, without even showing that the person subpoenaed is likely to have relevant information. In the federal system the prosecutor is not required to demonstrate any relevance. The person subpoenaed to testify then is compelled to answer questions unless he or she can claim a specific privilege, such as the marital privilege, lawyer/client privilege, or the privilege against self-incrimination.

Can a lawyer be called to testify about his or her client?

A lawyer might be called; but the lawyer/client privilege shields him or her from being compelled to testify about a conversation with a client unless the conversation related to an ongoing or future crime or fraud of the client.

Can a lawyer accompany his or her client inside the grand jury room?

In the federal system, a witness cannot have his or her lawyer present in the grand jury room, although witnesses may interrupt their testimony and leave the grand jury room to consult with their lawyer. A few states do allow a lawyer to accompany the witness; some allow the lawyer to advise his or her client, others merely allow the lawyer to observe the proceeding.

What is a grant of immunity?

A grant of immunity to a grand jury witness overcomes the witness's privilege against self-incrimination, and the witness is then required to testify. The prosecutor is prohibited from using that testimony or leads from it to bring charges against the witness. If a subsequent prosecution is brought, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving that all of its evidence was obtained independent of the immunized testimony. In practice, it is difficult to successfully prosecute someone for criminal activity they discussed in immunized testimony unless the prosecution had a fully prepared case before immunity was granted.

Many states grant the witness "transactional immunity,"
barring prosecution for a transaction discussed in the immunized testimony regardless of whether there are independent sources of evidence.

Can a witness refuse to appear before the grand jury?

Not without risking being held in contempt of the court that issued the subpoena to compel their testimony.

What happens if a witness is found in contempt?

A witness who refuses to testify without legal justification will be held in contempt of court, and is subject to incarceration for the remaining term of the grand jury. A witness who testifies falsely may be separately prosecuted for perjury.

If the grand jury refuses to return an indictment, can the prosecutor come back and try again, or is that barred by double jeopardy?

Double jeopardy does not apply to the grand jury. In practice, however, it is uncommon for a prosecutor, having failed once, to try again without good reason. The Department of Justice requires the prosecutor to obtain permission of the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division to present the case again.

Can a grand jury target offer evidence of his or her own?

For the most part, the subject of a grand jury investigation has no right to testify unless subpoenaed, nor any right to compel the grand jury to hear certain witnesses or evidence. Often, however, if a target requests an opportunity to testify, he or she will be permitted by the prosecutor to do so but without a grant of immunity.

The prosecutor may refuse to present evidence submitted by a target. In federal grand juries, exculpatory evidence need not be presented, although in many states exculpatory evidence must be submitted for the grand jury's consideration. Prosecutors have the right in federal grand juries to introduce hearsay and to otherwise utilize evidence that would not be admissible in a regular trial.


Is there a judge in the grand jury room when testimony is being taken?

No. Normal rules of evidence do not apply to a grand jury investigation, and a judge is generally needed only to rule on privilege issues or issues relating to contempt.

What protection does a target have against witnesses lying to the grand jury, or against the use of unconstitutionally obtained evidence?

None. The target's only redress is to challenge the evidence at trial. One of the reasons a witness may assert the Fifth Amendment is that he or she does not know if the prosecutor has presented witnesses who have lied. The witness cannot risk testifying contrary to those witnesses, for fear of being charged with perjury if the prosecutor does not believe his or her testimony.

The reliable sources, including people who have been interviewed by investigators, told KGW investigators said that there was probable cause to arrest Terri in connection with Kyron's disappearance, and for solicitng someone to kill her husband but the choice has been for the investigation to continue.

Justice4all wrote:Investigation focuses on holes in Terri Horman's story

by Colin Miner, KGW staff
kgw.com
July 24, 2010

PORTLAND -- As the probe into the disappearance of Kyron Horman enters its eighth week, investigators are focusing their energy on how his step-mother, Terri Horman, spent a few key hours the morning he vanished.

A missing 7 year old and they are getting around to this NOW? They should be embarassed to say that. 8 weeks.

There are gaps in what she had told investigators she did that day, including a key portion of time that she said she took daughter Kiara for a ride, according to reliable sources, including people who have been interviewed by investigators.

I don't know if that would be considered a GAP, it seems like it is more of time, unsubstantiated, by a witness, who saw Terri.

She told investigators that she drove Kiara around a series of rural roads for an hour, saying she was trying to calm her down because she didn't feel well. Meanwhile, she told some of her friends that Kiara had an earache.

Where are these details being "leaked" from? What, Who is the source?

Investigators have been comparing where she said she was with what they have been able to establish about her movements that day.

There are some things she did that day that were confirmed.

REALLY?

She went to the gym for about 45 minutes that morning and arrived home about 1 p.m. to post pictures from the science fair on her Facebook page.

Surveillance video from stores she said she was at, along with roads she claims to have traveled, were being studied to test the veracity of where she said she was for a portion of the morning.

Good, perhaps, if she is innocent, they can direct their focus towards someone else.

Meanwhile, these sources say that some of Terri's friends have not only been the subject of searches, they have been interviewed by investigators and, in some cases, took polygraphs.

The reliable sources, including people who have been interviewed by investigators , told KGW investigators said that there was probable cause to arrest Terri in connection with Kyron's disappearance, and for solicitng someone to kill her husband but the choice has been for the investigation to continue.

Speculation? Gossip? Fear tactics used by the investigators? Like the police would give a person who is being interviewed that much detail on an ongoing investigation? Wouldn't that be like tipping your hand on a poker table??

Terri Horman has not been charged with any crime though law enforcement officials have made it clear she is the focus of the investigation.


http://www.kgw.com/news/Horman-kyron-missing-gaps-portland-kiara-99181214.html

Justice4all wrote:Investigation focuses on holes in Terri Horman's story

by Colin Miner, KGW staff
kgw.com
July 24, 2010

PORTLAND -- As the probe into the disappearance of Kyron Horman enters its eighth week, investigators are focusing their energy on how his step-mother, Terri Horman, spent a few key hours the morning he vanished.

There are gaps in what she had told investigators she did that day, including a key portion of time that she said she took daughter Kiara for a ride, according to reliable sources, including people who have been interviewed by investigators.

She told investigators that she drove Kiara around a series of rural roads for an hour, saying she was trying to calm her down because she didn't feel well. Meanwhile, she told some of her friends that Kiara had an earache.

Investigators have been comparing where she said she was with what they have been able to establish about her movements that day.

There are some things she did that day that were confirmed.

She went to the gym for about 45 minutes that morning and arrived home about 1 p.m. to post pictures from the science fair on her Facebook page.

Surveillance video from stores she said she was at,along with roads she claims to have traveled were being studied to test the veracity of where she said she was for a portion of the morning.

Meanwhile, these sources say that some of Terri's friends have not only been the subject of searches, they have been interviewed by investigators and, in some cases, took polygraphs.

The reliable sources, including people who have been interviewed by investigators, told KGW investigators said that there was probable cause to arrest Terri in connection with Kyron's disappearance, and for solicitng someone to kill her husband but the choice has been for the investigation to continue.

Terri Horman has not been charged with any crime though law enforcement officials have made it clear she is the focus of the investigation.

http://www.kgw.com/news/Horman-kyron-missing-gaps-portland-kiara-99181214.html