NC - Zahra Clare Baker, 10, Hickory, 9 Oct 2010 - #11

bellyup said:

Okay I have to clean my floors....
But I am nearly convinced that AB doesn't have anything to do with her death or disappearance. After seeing that he was AGAIN at the house for the search today I just cannot imagine LE keeping him hanging around the search sites if they believe he was involved. It doesn't make sense and it would go against typical protocol. He was there for nearly TWO HOURS with them today. If they had strong suspicion that he was involved they would not want him privy to areas where he could hear or see things that would help in his defense.

I'm also as nearly convinced that LE has a 3rd party in mind as a potential suspect or likely a suspect that is in cahoots with EB. Perhaps based on things AB has told them, tips from outsiders or things they have found.

Click to expand...

I pretty much agree with you- I go back and forth on just what he knew and when but it is much easier to think he was unaware now than it was when LE was at his work site.

If he is suspect in the actual disappearance I'm with you I can't see LE letting him remain that close to the search and all the information on the directing the case is going.

Here is a better pic of the rottweiler...
http://s296.photobucket.com/albums/...hra Baker -NC-/?action=view&current=14-3.jpg

ynotdivein said:

sarx, any insights into the training of various types of sniffer dogs would be most appreciated. Specifically, are there dogs that are only used to sniff for blood, versus decomp? Do decomp dogs ever hit on blood from a living person? Also, are particular breeds used for different types of sniffing? Or can any dog get trained to do any kind of detection (bomb, drug, cadaver, etc.)?

TIA!

(And PS, to our many guests who are following Zahra's case--get yourselves registered and dive on in!)

Click to expand...

I'm not sarx but am a bit of a canine expert :blushing: Yes there are dogs that are trained specifically to only sniff for blood / fresh blood / dry blood / etc. Decomp dogs would not be likely to hit on blood from a living person (or even from a dead person) as they are trained to detect the odors and gasses associated with decomposing.

There are particular breeds used for different types of sniffing but it's not 100%s sometimes a "not typical" breed will show promise in training and become a successful "sniffer" . Breeds used as K-9's, SAR dogs, cadaver dogs, are typically hounds (of various types), GSD's, labs, goldens in some cases, and mixes thereof.

I was reading what some of you where saying in the last thread about her father possibly being abused and stuck here in the states.

My feelings are that he was working a job. He was the one making money. He claims he worked so much that he hardly saw his daughter. He could have taken Z and moved into another apartment far away from the abuser. There should be no problem supporting just himself and his daughter. I do not believe he was stuck with EB.

He committed crimes as well but because he was cooperating police have not arrested him. He reportedly ran a woman and child off the road too. And he made the horrific choice to pull Z away from her health care and family so he could be with some woman.

The father is a selfish man who did not consider his daughter in his choices nor did he do a darn thing to protect his daughter from that beast. I want his behind planted in a jail cell right along with her. He was a grown man who had a duty to care for his child and he failed in the worst way possible.

I go away go get groceries and nearly get killed by a punk brat with road rage:furious: and you all moved on without me! New thread and everything! Hmph. :snooty:

So about that attic thing...it's not possible for her to have been stashed away up there without the insulation being mashed down like crazy. The noise that she would have made would sound nothing like squirrels. The prosthetic would have thumped quite loudly on the floor if she had it, and her hopping if she didn't...again. Not squirrels.

I think whoever it was who said the rustling of vermin could sound a lot like boxes of drugs hit the nail on the head.

The article where dad refers to Zahra as 'the girl' could be shoddy writing as opposed to a quote...unless I missed it completely or read it wrong. It didn't look like he was directly quoted...just paraphrased. Again, I could be wrong. It's still messed up that NOW he'll take her back to her safe, happy home but not when she truly needed it, now that it's too late. Dad of the year! not.

I hate reading 'dead end' in regards to any investigation. It's chilling to realize it's going cold and may never be resolved. I really hope this is not the case with this one. They've got to know something solid. This can't end even worse!!

I know I had more on my mind after reading back a bit but I've forgotten it. I'm really irritated and flustered by mr road rage...so I'm taking off for a while to chill out til happy hour comes and i can respectably have a glass of wine. :banghead:

tehcloser said:

"I want to find her and take her home," Adam Baker told The Associated Press by phone, adding that he will return Zahra Clare Baker to the family's native Australia if she wants to go.

Baker said Friday he not spoken with his wife, 42-year-old Elisa Baker, and remains unsure if she had anything to do with his daughter's disappearance.

"Maybe," Baker told AP. "I'm still trying to figure it all out."

http://www.dailyrecord.com/article/...her-of-missing-NC-girl-says-he-s-cooperating-

Click to expand...

Why doesn't he go see EB and ASK her what she DID! Wouldn't this be the quickest way to figure out where Zahra is?

The conversation could be taped without EB knowing as long as AB agrees to it, I believe.

Just go ASK HER!

Salem

Salem said:

Why doesn't he go see EB and ASK her what she DID! Wouldn't this be the quickest way to figure out where Zahra is?

The conversation could be taped without EB knowing as long as AB agrees to it, I believe.

Just go ASK HER!

Salem

Click to expand...

There is no way LE is letting him visit her in jail.

westsidefox64 said:

Im learning so much here thanks for being patient with me .
If its a blood hound does that mean it couldnt be trained to be a cadaver dog? Are certain breeds of dogs trained for certain jobs? If so why?

Click to expand...

A bloodhound is likely to be a cadaver dog.

Tracking (live) are usually bloodhounds, GSD's and coonhounds.

Cadaver dogs are usually beagles and bloodhounds because they have such sensitive noses they can detect even in running waters.

Labs and other mixes are often used for SAR , live scent work, and some tracking.

Regarding the dad being back at the house while LE searched. There are many reasons to have him there. They could be staging a walk through...ie, where did you go and what did you do when EB said she was missing. Or having him there to see how he reacts to certain things. OR for all we know, he may be there pointing to stuff for them to look at...........none of these would "clear" him. I can see many reasons why you would want a suspect back at the scene.

nobodyspecial said:

I hate reading 'dead end' in regards to any investigation. It's chilling to realize it's going cold and may never be resolved. I really hope this is not the case with this one. They've got to know something solid. This can't end even worse!!

Click to expand...

I don't think it's close to a cold case just yet. I hate to see anybody get away with something like this, but it does happen.

distracted 1976 said:

Watched this on the news...the first dog is definitely a rottweiler.

Click to expand...

It would be strange for a rottweiler to be involved in cadaver search. Not completely unheard of, but I didn't see the video. Looks more like a coonhound or bloodhound to me.

kalekona said:

There is no way LE is letting him visit her in jail.

Click to expand...

I'm just curious...could they legally prevent that?

Salem said:

Why doesn't he go see EB and ASK her what she DID! Wouldn't this be the quickest way to figure out where Zahra is?

The conversation could be taped without EB knowing as long as AB agrees to it, I believe.

Just go ASK HER!

Salem

Click to expand...

It would be the quickest way, but if they suspect him in the least, or if he knows he's guilty, I don't think they would go that route.

ETA...but I wish they would give it a shot!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Soul125 said:

Here are some links to a photo of a search dog, not sure what kind of dog it is. Many other photos also.

http://s296.photobucket.com/albums/...Zahra Baker -NC-/?action=view&current=15.jpg

http://s296.photobucket.com/albums/...C-/?action=view&current=101210debrismound.jpg

http://s296.photobucket.com/albums/mm166/crankycrankerson/Zahra Baker -NC-/

Click to expand...

on my local news, they had video of the searchers and the dog...i think its a doberman(or some breed like it...black/tan and slim)

nobodyspecial said:

I'm just curious...could they legally prevent that?

Click to expand...

Absolutely.
The jail has complete control on who can and can not visit- and if the fact that they may be co-conspirators isn't enough, he has open warrants that they could use to deny a visit.

tehcloser said:

Regarding the dad being back at the house while LE searched. There are many reasons to have him there. They could be staging a walk through...ie, where did you go and what did you do when EB said she was missing. Or having him there to see how he reacts to certain things. OR for all we know, he may be there pointing to stuff for them to look at...........none of these would "clear" him. I can see many reasons why you would want a suspect back at the scene.

Click to expand...

If this was the case I think he'd be there for part of it but not all. Ie; they would have him to the walk through, gauge his reactions and then ask him to leave while they continued. Being around the LE for hours on end for all these searches if they believed he was involved would give him WAY too much information.

Thank you for the insights, bellyup! Glad to have you at WS. If you are a dog handler, please consider contacting site owner Tricia to become a "verified expert" in that field. Either way, appreciate your help here in understanding the search for Zahra...

quoting impatientredhead from last thread:
Just to play devils advocate here, the charges were for bad checks and claims made by the Brittany the subject of great creditability issues.

They had not been found guilty of any of these charges.

It would have worked in this case to use alleged charges to remove a child, but it is pretty sweeping power to have children pulled from a home because someone is accused of a crime and someone follows it up with a call to CPS.

In the microscope focus of this case it seems like a good idea, but I think when you step back from it and look at it from a wide angle it is not a standard you want set.

Click to expand...

quoting westsidefox64 from previous thread:

Does DSS have the right to go up to joe blow and say heres a cup we want a drug test without a court order?
Sorry if this is a stupid question but I honestly dont know the answer.

Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting that child removal should be automatic for anyone with any sort of pending charge -- plenty of corrupt local police/DAs would be happy to trump up phony charges for this purpose and then just drop them later for lack of evidence. But in this case, EB had several serious charges stemming from different incidents AND one of the calls to DSS came from a school official. Don't know the date of the DSS visit, but at some point she also had been a no-show for a court date on the serious charge of threatening BB and infant daughter with a weapon. She didn't just have charges pending, she had outstanding arrest warrants, and so did AB. It's also quite possible that she had some drug abuse diversions in her court records (which generally don't show up as convictions or in any form available to the media), and that should also change the criteria for how aggressively the DSS can investigate a child welfare complaint. Unfortunately it's extremely common in the US for serious drug offenders to end up with officially clean criminal records, because they were diverted to a "treatment program" and either completed it or the court never bothered to check whether they completed it.

As for westsidefox64's question, the answer is certainly no. But what I'm saying is that it should be a lot easier for a DSS worker to get such a court order, and that DSS workers should indeed seek and execute such court orders, in cases where there is quite a bit of concrete evidence of major problems in the home.

I'm just saying that there *are* some objective criteria that could be used to treat some initial child welfare investigations more aggressively (i.e. at least well beyond asking the child a few questions in the home and in front of the caregive who is suspected of abuse/neglect), without trampling on the rights of perfectly upstanding citizens whose lifestyle/religion/ethnicity/etc a particular DSS worker or supervisor may just be biased against. It makes no sense at all to handle an initial child welfare check exactly the same way for parents with spotless records and for parents with long lists of pending criminal charges, outstanding arrest warrants, or convictions (the last apparently not present in this case, but present in many cases).

bellyup said:

If this was the case I think he'd be there for part of it but not all. Ie; they would have him to the walk through, gauge his reactions and then ask him to leave while they continued. Being around the LE for hours on end for all these searches if they believed he was involved would give him WAY too much information.

Click to expand...

Do we know he wasn't there for just part of it? Or did LE want him to see what they carried out (or at other scenes) to scare him...............

I hate to use the word "game" but that's what it is really....and LE plays it well.