GUILTY NH - Abby Hernandez, 14, North Conway, 9 Oct 2013 - #15

bessie

Verified Insider
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
31,771
Reaction score
1,605
Arrest made in AH disappearance
Gorham man charged with 'knowingly confining Hernandez'
UPDATED 4:35 PM EDT Jul 28, 2014

NORTH CONWAY, N.H. —An arrest was made Monday in the disappearance of New Hampshire teen AH who had been missing for nine months before her return home last week, the New Hampshire Attorney General's Office said.

Nathaniel E. Kibby, 34, of Gorham, New Hampshire, was charged with one count of felony kidnapping for knowingly confining Hernandez on Oct. 9, 2013, in Conway, New Hampshire, with a purpose to commit an offense against her.
LvZGuIZ.jpg

Nathaniel E. Kibby, 34

Read more: http://www.wcvb.com/news/arrest-made-in-abigail-hernandez-disappearance/27185334#ixzz38o8kFPo6
Thread #1
Thread #2
Thread #3
Thread #4
Thread #5
Thread #6
Thread #7
Thread #8
Thread #9
Thread #10
Thread #11
Thread #12
Thread #13

Hollye's key points map: Key points
Hollye's full map: Full map


NH - Abigail Hernandez, 14, North Conway, 9 Oct 2013 **MEDIA THREAD **NO DISCUSSION**

AmandaReckonwith's Case Archive
 
Abby Hernandez's dad speaks out for the first time over her mysterious disappearance and return
By Will Payne In North Conway, New Hampshire
Published: 07:43 EST, 5 August 2014 | Updated: 08:33 EST, 5 August 2014

The father of kidnapped Abigail Hernandez has spoken for the first time since his daughter mysteriously returned home and said, ‘I’m desperate for answers. I’m as much in the dark as anyone else’.

Ruben Hernandez is overjoyed that Abigail is finally back with her mother, unharmed, nine months after she disappeared on her way home from school.

But he says he is as baffled as everyone else about the way she suddenly went missing, days before her 15th birthday and then suddenly came home.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rious-disappearance-return.html#ixzz39YJGMchL
 
Verification Process for Professionals and Insiders


If you would like to add youself as an expert in a certain field or as an insider to a case, please send an email to wsverify@xmission.com.

If you do not wish to be identified as an expert in a certain area, we ask that you refrain from answering questions that are specifically directed to those that have been verified as specialist in their area and that you do not claim to be a professional in any area.

If a member posts with "expertise" please check to make sure they are on this list. If not, please do not take their post as professional information, but rather just as another opinion; much as you would with any member of the general posting membership.

[...]

If a member wants to post as a professional (a lawyer, shrink, and so on) or as a local/knows the people involved then they must email us at the following email.

wsverify@xmission.com

Please include:

The case
Your Websleuths name
Your phone number and a good time to call
Your real name
Location (City and State)
In the subject line please put your user name and which case you are asking to be verified on

All info will be kept strictly confidential.

Thank you!
 
Thank you Bessie, for your effort and circumspection.
 
Looks like I missed a detailed lawyer convo. Thanks to you all, I understand why the judge ruled the way he did and also why the state wanted to move the container and mobile home!
 
has the prosecution made a direct claim yet that they allege she was held in the shipping container?

i have not seen it but there are several news sites claiming it (msm).
 
Liljim, the only thing I remember hearing is Jane Young saying in court that they were investigating and/or are very interested in one section of the shipping container. I do not recall her alleging that was the place of captivity. I did see it being stated as fact though in some MSM, the way some MSM outlets in NH still say the judge's order is pending on whether the state can move the trailer. In other words, some of the reporting doesn't seem all that accurate.
 
tlcya said:
Having been schooled quite thoroughly on this now ruled upon issue I bid you all goodnight. Because really the only reason I can see for quoting a post of mine from prior to that decision at this point would be an effort to patronize.

I am afraid that today of all days, my big girl panties are not nearly big enough for that.

The court decision simply did not inform my choice to quote your post, which I then considered an active part of an active discussion. Although the court granted Kibby's motion on due process grounds, that is not to say that Kibby made only a due process argument. My intentions were good :).
 
has the prosecution made a direct claim yet that they allege she was held in the shipping container?

i have not seen it but there are several news sites claiming it (msm).

Based on Kibby's latest hearing, I believe that no such claim has been made by the prosecutor.
 
Thank you Not Without Peril, yesterday was a rough day in real life. Today I have a fresh pair of

big+girl+panties!!.jpg
 
I agree, about the container. The press is doing a lot of loose interpretation of the known facts about the container.

What Young and officials have said about the container and what press is saying are very different.

While arguing, Young described the container, saying it is split into three areas: “a front section, a middle section that takes up the bulk of the container and a third section that I will not go into details because the investigation is ongoing.”

http://abcnews.go.com/US/details-alleged-kidnappers-shipping-container-secret/story?id=24868893

that statement does suggest that LE believe that the third section may be involved in some illegal activity and that they are still investigating that aspect. Whether that possible illegal activity is related to the current charges and Abby's case or some other thing that was unrelated is a mystery because officials are not revealing why their focus seems to be there. JMO
 
Based on Kibby's latest hearing, I believe that no such claim has been made by the prosecutor.

IIRC, the prosecutor mentioned in the first hearing that the court was aware of one of the rooms in the storage container. That implies that some assertion was made by the prosecution to the judge, perhaps in getting a search warrant, that has not (yet) been articulated in a formal charge against Kibby.
 
For all we know that "mystery section" is his grow room. I would be surprised if there was a ton of evidence in either of those places at this point. If Abby had clothing there, then surely he dumped it by now. I cannot imagine that they will find much more other than that Abby has been in that trailer at some point. This case is unusual in that he dropped her off and she gave a false description of kidnapper which gave him a ton of time to clean up the "crime scene".

I know people here were very supportive of giving Abby time and not pressuring her to tell her story right away, but this is exactly why it cannot wait. I understand the instinct to protect a traumatized child, but the longer that goes on, the more time the perpetrator has to get rid of evidence. A victim in this situation is simply going to have to go through one more ordeal - telling LE what happened - before they get to "relax".
 
I will agree that the needs of the investigation are often at odds with the needs of the victim in a situation such as this. I cannot agree that it is fact that Abigail provide false info to authorities or is in a state of chill and relaxation. JMO

ETA and yes people here at WS are very supportive of victims. We as members want justice for them but WS has a specific mission in that it is dedicated to not re victimize any victim, and especially minor ones.
 
I will agree that the needs of the investigation are often at odds with the needs of the victim in a situation such as this. I cannot agree that it is fact that Abigail provide false info to authorities or is in a state of chill and relaxation. JMO

ETA and yes people here at WS are very supportive of victims. We as members want justice for them but WS has a specific mission in that it is dedicated to not re victimize any victim, and especially minor ones.

I cannot think of any other explanation. That does not mean that Abby is not a victim. I can think of many reasons why someone in her position would provide a false description of her kidnapper, and all of them would still keep her 100% a victim. That is not being "unfriendly" to the victim; it is simply stating a fact in this case that resulted in the current suspect having an entire week to clean up.

I can think of reasons why a victim would be uncooperative that would still keep them firmly within the victim category. Obviously something broke down at some point and that is why Kibby was not arrested for an entire week. I used to be able to come up with even more explanations, until I saw that they actually gave him his guns back on the 24th. That is something that LE never would have done if this guy was in any way a blip on their radar.
 
I will agree without reservation that the sketch published by LE bears no resemblance IMO to Kibby.

Meeting you in the middle Fireweed :)
 
I will agree without reservation that the sketch published by LE bears no resemblance IMO to Kibby.

Meeting you in the middle Fireweed :)

I was getting this impression that LE were not buying it either, but went ahead and released it anyway. What really sealed it for me was when Jane Young only gave his age the next day as an after thought. I do not think that LE ever thought that etch-a-sketch man was a real person. I think it was just their method of getting Abby to slowly open up to investigators.
 
IIRC, the prosecutor mentioned in the first hearing that the court was aware of one of the rooms in the storage container. That implies that some assertion was made by the prosecution to the judge, perhaps in getting a search warrant, that has not (yet) been articulated in a formal charge against Kibby.

In the portion of yesterday's decision quoted by the Boston Globe, the court treats the container and the trailer collectively, suggesting that the state's theory is that Hernandez was held in either the trailer or container or both the trailer and container:

"f the mobile home and the crate are removed, the defendant will not be able to investigate the ability or inability of others to hear sounds from inside the structures, the effect the stream has on that ability or inability, what can be seen inside the structures by others on the outside, what could be seen by anyone from the inside of the structures, and what effect the tree canopy may have on what others may have been able or unable to hear[.]”

The Daily Mail reported that investigators asked one of Kibby's neighbors "whether he thought Kibby could have dug a tunnel from his trailer to the container." This suggests that the state has at least entertained a scenario in which Hernandez traveled from the trailer to the crate. Perhaps the state hoped to develop its "tunnel" theory after removal of the trailer and crate from their current locations.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
166
Guests online
2,219
Total visitors
2,385

Forum statistics

Threads
589,947
Messages
17,928,048
Members
228,010
Latest member
idrainuk
Back
Top