FL - NW FL Authorities seek help identifying daycare

This is definately frustrating and sad. I hope she is found soon.
 
The snip below is from MorenoI's link upthread. This really stands out to me.

"It looks as though that camera was used for multiple purposes; it documented injuries like bite marks from kids and it was used to take photos of a Christmas program," Wilkinson said.

The camera could have belonged to the day care center, to someone who had a child at the center or to someone who worked at the center, he said."

I don't think most facilities document biting, other than a written report of the incident. Just seems "off" to document injuries for a child that is being abused by someone who uses the same camera...
 
why isn't this getting more coverage?? I've not heard of it anywhere other than here. GRRR!
 
The girl wearing the Christmas dress is (for all we know) a random girl at the daycare. I didn't see any articles anywhere that said she is the girl they're looking for.

There are several different misspellings of that brand. But I found a sweater on Etsy: http://www.etsy.com/listing/69454962/1980s-kenneth-too-gray-sleeveless and the label says "Keneth too!"

I figured out one way they could solve it. The kids in the "group of kids" photo are about 4 to 5 years old. They would be about 9 to 10 years old now. Print out the original photo (unedited) extra large. It would be blurry as anything, but useable. Then have a friendly young officer take the photo around to every elementary school in the city. Keep the photo in a folder and don't let anyone make any copies of it. Go into the 4th and 5th grade classrooms and say "This photo is from when you all were little kids. I want you to look at it and tell me if you know anyone in the photo." Also, the officer could quickly show it to the K-1-2-3 teachers, to see if they recognized anyone. And all the kids (and teachers) could take a look. There are about 90 schools to go to, at 5 or 6 a day, this would take about 3 to 4 weeks. And if just 1 kid said "Hey, that's me" or "That's my sister", then that would be the clue they need.
 
Ugh, the camera appears to be a Sony MVC-FD90 Mavica. It was released in 2000. This is an old, old camera. It uses Sony's MemoryStick media, but its primary storage is floppy disks. My worry: whoever took these pictures may have bought it second-hand in the first place. Authorities say the pictures were from the last 5 years. I don't think this camera was in production in 2006.

I agree 100% about the camera, it's from 2000. I even got the manual for it and yes, it's copyright 2000:
http://esupport.sony.com/US/perl/model-documents.pl?mdl=MVCFD90

Digital cameras in 2005/2006 were vastly better and used modern (CF) memory cards and cost way less.
 
I agree 100% about the camera, it's from 2000. I even got the manual for it and yes, it's copyright 2000:
http://esupport.sony.com/US/perl/model-documents.pl?mdl=MVCFD90

Digital cameras in 2005/2006 were vastly better and used modern (CF) memory cards and cost way less.

Would a daycare center be more vigilant about their expenses and register a warranty on a device? I wonder if they've tried matching the serial number to Sony's warranty database.
 
I have not heard anything about the dress.

I am quite sure that this dress may be helpful for a few reasons.

A) It's not a real common brand (KT Kids/Kenneth Tool Kids) and not a real common dress. I do not know how much more common it is in Florida, but I know it's not at all common online.

I can not help but think that this information about the dress is a CRITICAL find. If you have not already contacted police with this tip, I think you should.

I found a couple of things:

* The most common spelling for KT is Keneth Tool, note that is Keneth with one N and not two. Yes, there seem to be a few misspellings with two, but if you do a google search you get alot more hits with the one N version.

* There is a Myspace site with a shop calked KT Kids based out of Florida, in a town called Brookeville, but I don't think it is the same shop.

* In a forum a mother was trying to hunt down the brand K T Kids by Keneth Tool, she says "DH's grandmother got this adorable outfit for Jayden and I'd like to see what else this brand has but she lives in Florida and she doesn't remember where she bought it".

* I found a photo of the dress with tags so that the logo is clearly visible. This may be of help to someone. I hope it is OK to upload it.

So, this is an unusual brand, with an unusual name, and the orgin could be somewhere based in Florida. I really think that this might be an interesting lead for the police.
 

Attachments

  • KT kids.jpg
    KT kids.jpg
    19.7 KB · Views: 21
I thought it seemed obvious that this was a home-run daycare because of the sofa picture. What am I missing?

And I'm wondering why there is such focus on one particular dress ... I haven't read anything that states that is the child in question? Am I missing a link?
 
The snip below is from MorenoI's link upthread. This really stands out to me.

"It looks as though that camera was used for multiple purposes; it documented injuries like bite marks from kids and it was used to take photos of a Christmas program," Wilkinson said.

The camera could have belonged to the day care center, to someone who had a child at the center or to someone who worked at the center, he said."

I don't think most facilities document biting, other than a written report of the incident. Just seems "off" to document injuries for a child that is being abused by someone who uses the same camera...

Some states, (I don't now about FL) mandate that all children in state care or children whose care is being paid for by the state have their injuries documented more than just in writing. Or sometimes it's for insurance...meaning that if the center carries insurance they are definitely state licensed...just something to think about.
 
That's interesting. Not the norm in Iowa.. don't know about anywhere else My children have attended preschool and none of them ever had pics taken of the injuries even with insurance claims. My then 3 yr took a header into a table during the halloween party and had to have 7 stitches in the corner of his eye and eyebrow and there weren't any photos at the school or the ER. Their insurance did cover the ER visit and follow up visit for stitch removal though.

I'm sure other insurance companies have different policies though!
 
I thought it seemed obvious that this was a home-run daycare because of the sofa picture. What am I missing?

And I'm wondering why there is such focus on one particular dress ... I haven't read anything that states that is the child in question? Am I missing a link?

All the police need is to find the identity of any one of those kids and then they would know where this place is. If that dress is so unique and if the manufacturer is a local boutique perhaps if they located the boutique, then via receipts they can track down the people who bought the dress and find the name of the girl in that photo. Via the parents, then they can learn where that place is.

Police do this sort of tracking all of the time when they find tire tracks or with shoe prints. If the tire or the shoe is unique enough, the manufacturer may be able to provide a list of all of the people in a region who has bought it and through that list, they can narrow down the owner. It does not matter if the girl was the one who was the victim, the girls parents will know the identity of the place the photos were taken.
 
JMO, but I think they're dealing with the dress because the other kids outfits aren't festive and pretty much mundane.

We're dealing with a camera that got donated to a Thrift Store. For all we know the little girls dress was from a Thrift Store. Not everyone seel things on E-Bay or anywhere on line.

How about consignment? They may have purchased the dress at consignment. Heck, the dress may be a hand me down from a cousin or neighbor. If it's consignment they would have a name for the person that brought it there as they'll collect their money once all items sold.

LadL I agree with as well. A couch. A couch with quite a few blankies folded on it. Did these belong to the kids for use at nap time?

Why the heck would someone donate a camera that had child *advertiser censored* on it? Even if they thought they deleted it? It's possible the DayCare worker had no idea someone else was hurting the kids.
 
Has America's Most Wanted done a story on this yet? It seems like that would be a great way to hopefully get this case some more exposure and media attention.
 
My mom used to the HR person for our local goodwill stores.

The stuff they get donated is shipped to several stores all over the state of Iowa. Some of it may go out on the shelves of the store it was donated to but if they have more than 10 crate in back of the smaller stores a truck takes the overflow and holds onto it in a warehouse till winter time when donations are slower and then distributes it out to whatever stores need it.
 
Going out on a limb here, but maybe it's not child *advertiser censored* on the camera. It was stated that there are photos of bite marks on a child. Maybe the photos on the camera document evidence of sexual abuse, but the camera itself wasn't used in the abuse. If they find the daycare, they can find the child being abused. Does that make sense?
 
If LE KNOWS that the poster on the wall was distributed to day care centers, then it is highly unlikely that it would have been distributed to a home daycare center that wasn't a licensed facility. This still looks like a dingy little set up...boxes stacked behind the sofa, no bright bold, preschool colors. It looks a lot like someone's private home, outside of the pic with the children in it. That one clearly has two sets of double doors in the background.....which is most often found in 'activity centers' of churches.
Either way, it should be pretty simple to figure out all of the licensed day care centers in pensecola florida in 2005. DFS should have detailed records for each year on file. I really wonder why LE went public and not directly to the local daycare workers. It seems like--if this little girl is still missing and, presumably, still being abused wouldn't LE want to keep her abuser completely in the dark about their investigation??
All of that makes me worry that they've exhausted all other options and back channels and had no other place to go but to the general public. So worried and frustrated for this child.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
177
Guests online
2,512
Total visitors
2,689

Forum statistics

Threads
590,041
Messages
17,929,260
Members
228,044
Latest member
Bosie
Back
Top