WA WA - Sky Metalwala, 2, Bellevue, 6 Nov 2011 - # 6

[Chewy]

warning "rant here" I'm so sick of hearing about how reckless mothers are actually taking the fall for their other kids that killed the baby. I mean I've thought it too at times and it just goes to show how ridiculous we've gotten in this country. That we actually need to come up with other excuses no matter how much we see moms who "wanna party and don't stop even when their baby is dead" "get drunk and pass out while watching THREE small children including a SICK 10 month old" and "leave their 4YEAR OLD and 2! 2! TWO year old home alone or in the car for hours"

These are just the things these women have gotten CAUGHT doing. Those of us who are mothers know damn well how close many of us have come to hurting our kids with just an accidental oversight even as the most devoted moms. Maybe outwardly we presented well but at home I'm sure I'm not the only one who had a few heart stopping moments.

If this is the kind of thing these women did PUBLICLY with their children, then god knows what they did at home when no one was around.

This woman is responsible for her child being gone. Just like the McCaans are. I'm sick and tired of hearing about missing children and parents feeling persecuted for not keeping an eye on them.


Grrrr

To think we'd rather accuse a child of manslaughter than recognize what is staring us right in the face is pretty telling.

 

[Skagirl]

I understood he owns a small business of some kind, and seem to recall him saying he had to take time away from it to take the children somewhere to eat. It must have been a nightmare to try to run a business and attempt to appease her "problems" at the same time. The economy taking a nosedive in the past few years wouldn't help either.

MOO

Here's a quote from SM when he was on Nancy Grace:

Metalwala: All I can say is, Julia did not take care of M. Soon as M woke up, I had to rush home from work and take care of M throughout the day until it was nighttime for us to come back home.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1111/10/ng.01.html

You can tell from all the pictures of M, that Julia seems to really dote on her. But if you believe SM's quote, then even with all that love, Julia still had issues doing what was necessary to take care of her daughter. And she seems to not really like her son, so how well has she been taking care of him?

 

[BritsKate]

I suppose anything is possible. But it's strange, in so many of these cases where mom is the obvious suspect, I see a lot of people going straight to accidental drugging deaths or selling the child, hiding him or her, while I always go straight to physical abuse leading to death or intentional smothering, strangling, drowning, etc.

I really think most of the parents of these missing kids don't accidentally kill them. I think they either intentionally do so or it resulted from extreme physical abuse.

I read that we have about 2000 fatalities of children per year, due to abuse and neglect. More than one third of the deaths in 2009 were due to multiple forms of maltreatment, which I suppose would be abuse and neglect. A third or so were due to outright neglect and around 25% due to physical abuse alone: http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/factsheets/fatality.cfm

But most of those cases are reported in some manner quickly to the authorities. These cases we are discussing are not reported. Why? I kind of feel like the reason is that in most of these cases, the children were murdered intentionally or died as a result of intensive physical abuse and the parents do not want to be charged with murder. So they hide the body, the evidence and refuse to talk.

I couldn't agree more and wanted to thank you for your post. Unfortunately until societies hold mothers as accountable for killing their children as fathers I think maternal filicides are likely to continue rising. For every Casey Anthony that makes prime time news are also the Ka Young, Stacy Barker, China Arnold, Shakara Dickens and many, many others who do not become household names.

Motherhood is sacred. A mother purposely killing her child is against our laws of nature but it happens more often than statistics can even determine. Nearly every filicide case I have followed people are desperate to explain how a mother could violate a bond so precious. A mother must be crazy, have been beaten, been sexually violated, suffering from PPD or must be covering a murder for someone else.

Substance abuse, sexual abuse, domestic violence, prior contact with CPS, known abuse of the victim, mental illness or a criminal record are only prevalent in about half of one study of maternal filicides though (many differences occur between psychotic and non-psychotic).

The same paper also breaks down means of filicide. Beating, neglect and smothering top the list for non-psychotic filicides with no reported cases of overdose. (Based on competency evaluations conducted of 55 filicidal mothers from 1974-1996 by the Michigan's Center for Forensic Psychiatry.)

JMHO

 

[pharmchick]

Wait...on site composting? Back that truck up. Shut the front door. Dont love to hear that.

The building I live in in Seattle also advertises "on site composting," which turns out to be a big green bin next to the normal dumpster you can put compostable materials in to separate them from trash and recyclables... Although its nowhere near as fancy as that complex, so you never know. I don't even want to let my mind go there!

I feel like the Bellevue police are taking this one very seriously, and it's gotten very personal to them. Major Mike looked so exhausted to me during the presser today. I'm really impressed with how LE is handling this one... although I wish it were legal to physically shake suspects until they answer questions!!!! Why isn't JB in touch with LE EVERY SINGLE DAY to get answers about her son? :furious:

 

[cluciano63]

Here's a quote from SM when he was on Nancy Grace:

Metalwala: All I can say is, Julia did not take care of M. Soon as M woke up, I had to rush home from work and take care of M throughout the day until it was nighttime for us to come back home.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1111/10/ng.01.html

You can tell from all the pictures of M, that Julia seems to really dote on her. But if you believe SM's quote, then even with all that love, Julia still had issues doing what was necessary to take care of her daughter. And she seems to not really like her son, so how well has she been taking care of him?

I know it is a quote but I think we still can't post the child's name...if you are able to change it to just "M"....anyway I am not a mod, lol

 

[~n/t~]

Here's a quote from SM when he was on Nancy Grace:

Metalwala: All I can say is, Julia did not take care of M. Soon as M woke up, I had to rush home from work and take care of M throughout the day until it was nighttime for us to come back home.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1111/10/ng.01.html

You can tell from all the pictures of M, that Julia seems to really dote on her. But if you believe SM's quote, then even with all that love, Julia still had issues doing what was necessary to take care of her daughter. And she seems to not really like her son, so how well has she been taking care of him?

Where was he in the 2 weeks that nobody saw Sky? I'm very confused about the whole custody arrangement.

We keep hearing how she kept the kids from him. Then we hear (as posted above) that she would call him to care for the kids. So which is it?

 

[BritsKate]

Where was he in the 2 weeks that nobody saw Sky? I'm very confused about the whole custody arrangement.

We keep hearing how she kept the kids from him. Then we hear (as posted above) that she would call him to care for the kids. So which is it?

Relatively certain that SM's quote was in context to when he and JB were still cohabiting. He has not, according to MSM, seen the children since January.

A 'reintegration style' visitation agreement was apparently in the works at mediation but nothing had gone into effect yet to my knowledge.

 

[~n/t~]

warning "rant here" I'm so sick of hearing about how reckless mothers are actually taking the fall for their other kids that killed the baby. I mean I've thought it too at times and it just goes to show how ridiculous we've gotten in this country. That we actually need to come up with other excuses no matter how much we see moms who "wanna party and don't stop even when their baby is dead" "get drunk and pass out while watching THREE small children including a SICK 10 month old" and "leave their 4YEAR OLD and 2! 2! TWO year old home alone or in the car for hours"

These are just the things these women have gotten CAUGHT doing. Those of us who are mothers know damn well how close many of us have come to hurting our kids with just an accidental oversight even as the most devoted moms. Maybe outwardly we presented well but at home I'm sure I'm not the only one who had a few heart stopping moments.

If this is the kind of thing these women did PUBLICLY with their children, then god knows what they did at home when no one was around.

This woman is responsible for her child being gone. Just like the McCaans are. I'm sick and tired of hearing about missing children and parents feeling persecuted for not keeping an eye on them.


Grrrr

To think we'd rather accuse a child of manslaughter than recognize what is staring us right in the face is pretty telling.

I'm sick and tired of them getting away with it if they murdered their children and making money off it.

 

[Miziree]

Where was he in the 2 weeks that nobody saw Sky? I'm very confused about the whole custody arrangement.

We keep hearing how she kept the kids from him. Then we hear (as posted above) that she would call him to care for the kids. So which is it?

I believe he was talking about when they were together, not since the split up..MOO

 

[Skagirl]

I think the quote that I used from Nancy Grace was about when SM and JB were still together and the son hadn't been born yet.

 

[Adrienne37]

Where was he in the 2 weeks that nobody saw Sky? I'm very confused about the whole custody arrangement.

We keep hearing how she kept the kids from him. Then we hear (as posted above) that she would call him to care for the kids. So which is it?

He was referring to the time when they were still together as to him coming home to take care of M. The last time he saw either child was in December 2010.


~jmo~

 

[Miziree]

Dad has not seen Sky or M. since December 2010. They had a meeting several days before Sky went missing to work out when Dad could see Sky and M. (the court doc. show the kids may have been home alone during this) The mom called back on Friday and said she did not want to agree with it that she felt like they ganged up on her. (this is the day she cut her hair and bought shoes) Then Sunday Sky goes missing. I'm not sure where the links are if someone can help with those that would be great!!
We really need a timeline

Sky's parents had reached a tentative agreement for visitation after a 12-hour mediation session last week. But Biryukova backed out of the agreement on Friday, two days before she reported Sky missing.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/11/09/national/a123848S20.DTL#ixzz1dYb3dFur

Court documents show Biryukova left both her children unattended for several hours last Tuesday when Biryukova attended a lengthy divorce mediation session with Metalwala.

http://www.king5.com/news/local/sky...g-child-focuses-on-mothers-car-133628458.html

 

[hollyblue]

I agree, but from what LE is saying, they have bigger fish to fry right now than simple neglect. They're waiting til the "dust settles" on the missing baby case before pursuing the lesser charges.

It bothers me to a point when the media keeps pressuring Johnson/LE by asking "when" they are going to bring her in. (Every time) We don't know what the profilers are advising on how to handle it. She's not going anywhere, and she apparently has succumbed to the realization---at the least---that she won't be getting custody now. Has stated she wants SM to have the children over strangers. That's a HUGE change from her demeanor in the tapes, 11 hour mediation, and then calling wanting to revoke it, imo. Maybe she was only using the children to hurt SM and use them for her meal ticket per se. ?? Is there a monetary differential if she has sole custody?

Actually, I don't think she cared for the children at all, except as a pawn and prop. She only needed MM for that...not two. Along with the OCD, any other mental conditions, and the failing economy.....it was too much.

These two have been together for a very long time....and knew each other well before the marriage. IMO, there's a lot more to their past and the depth of their relationship. Attached at the hip more or less. Married in a kitchen? because of deportation? IMO, JMO, etc.

 

[hollyblue]

Wait...on site composting? Back that truck up. Shut the front door. Dont love to hear that.

I don't know if it's law in WA, but back in the 80's I lived in a complex that did not allow children, (mostly single adults) permanently anyway. There were no playgrounds or anything for children at all except for the pool. On the JB's apt complex website I didn't see anything mentioned about facilities or recreation...or even the mention of children, yet they mentioned pets. Could it be she was keeping the children hidden because of this? TIA

 

[BritsKate]

It bothers me to a point when the media keeps pressuring Johnson/LE by asking "when" they are going to bring her in. (Every time) We don't know what the profilers are advising on how to handle it. She's not going anywhere, and she apparently has succumbed to the realization---at the least---that she won't be getting custody now. Has stated she wants SM to have the children over strangers. That's a HUGE change from her demeanor in the tapes, 11 hour mediation, and then calling wanting to revoke it, imo. Maybe she was only using the children to hurt SM and use them for her meal ticket per se. ?? Is there a monetary differential if she has sole custody?

Actually, I don't think she cared for the children at all, except as a pawn and prop. She only needed MM for that...not two. Along with the OCD, any other mental conditions, and the failing economy.....it was too much.

These two have been together for a very long time....and knew each other well before the marriage. IMO, there's a lot more to their past and the depth of their relationship. Attached at the hip more or less. Married in a kitchen? because of deportation? IMO, JMO, etc.

RBBM

In my opinion (and experience) if your child is being abused you do anything and everything humanly possible to limit the contact the abuser has. Very telling she so readily recommended custody be given to SM.

As for your question it would depend on the agreement - there was likely a temporary order in place dictating child support, alimony, insurance requirements, etc. Child support is usually (in final court orders) either an amount agreed upon by both parents or a percentage of the non-custodial parents wages which would vary state to state. Custodial timeshare is taken into account. (I think anyway - I missed out on law school but acted pro se for my divorce and relocation )

 

[SheWhoMustNotBeNamed]

Very basic timeline below. Not including anything after Sky disappeared. Anything else that should be added? Anything wrong?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

2003 - Solomon and Julia are married

October 2009 - Sky is born
December 2009 - Sky left in the car alone for 55 minutes while parents shopped at Target

March 2010 - Solomon files for divorce
March 2010 - Julia files for protection order against Solomon
2010 (Unknown dates) - Julia involuntarily committed to mental hospital

2011
Tuesday, November 1 - 12 hour mediation, kids left alone, tentative custody agreement reached
Friday, November 4 - Julia backs out of custody agreement

Sunday, November 6 - Sky disappears

 

[princesspjs]

I can imagine a mother with two kids - one favored, one not so much - that she leaves alone for 12 hours and returns to find the favored child has caused the death of the less favored one. I can imagine her hiding that.

WOW! I hadn't thought of that scenario with this case! Great theory!

 

[Irish_Eyes]

This guy was like her only love. She's been with him since they were teens. And it does seem that she is a very dependent person, possibly because of her reported illness, or possibly that's just the way she is.

Was this some kind of Munchausen type thing? Was she hoping that if she staged this disappearance she and SM would somehow be brought together by this tragedy?

We haven't seen her on the media, at all. She's not a fame hound like ICA. I think it's possible that's because she only wants attention from one person: SM. Maybe she had hoped that by keeping the children away from him he would be forced to have to come back to her if he wanted to see them....and maybe this mediation session just made it clear that wasn't going to happen....and then maybe she watched that L & O episode, and saw the way the parents stood by each other and loved each other, and ended up hugging together at the end, and maybe she thought that could be them....

 

[gitana1]

Because this keeps getting lost:

http://www.king5.com/news/local/sky...g-child-focuses-on-mothers-car-133628458.html

They keep saying court documents state this. They must be talking about the court documents associated with the recent CPS (juvenile dependency) hearing regarding M's custody, right? But those documents are sealed. And that's slightly different from what other reports state, such as she admitted to leaving the kids alone for significant periods and LE knows whether they were left alone during mediation but won't say. Hmmm. I can certainly imagine LE telling the court, though, if she admitted to leaving the kids alone during mediation.

I really think Sky has been dead for awhile. I don't think it happened during mediation. I get the sense that when confronted with what she did with the kids during mediation, she had someone who admitted to watching M but not Sky, and she likely told that someone that Sky was with another person, on a play date or something, but when the other, supposed caregiver was questioned, they denied caring for Sky during mediation, so Julia, when confronted with that, had to admit to leaving him alone. I mean she couldn't admit to not needing child care for a dead baby, right? That's my sense. We'll see.

I couldn't agree more and wanted to thank you for your post. Unfortunately until societies hold mothers as accountable for killing their children as fathers I think maternal filicides are likely to continue rising. For every Casey Anthony that makes prime time news are also the Ka Young, Stacy Barker, China Arnold, Shakara Dickens and many, many others who do not become household names.

Motherhood is sacred. A mother purposely killing her child is against our laws of nature but it happens more often than statistics can even determine. Nearly every filicide case I have followed people are desperate to explain how a mother could violate a bond so precious. A mother must be crazy, have been beaten, been sexually violated, suffering from PPD or must be covering a murder for someone else.

Substance abuse, sexual abuse, domestic violence, prior contact with CPS, known abuse of the victim, mental illness or a criminal record are only prevalent in about half of one study of maternal filicides though (many differences occur between psychotic and non-psychotic).

The same paper also breaks down means of filicide. Beating, neglect and smothering top the list for non-psychotic filicides with no reported cases of overdose. (Based on competency evaluations conducted of 55 filicidal mothers from 1974-1996 by the Michigan's Center for Forensic Psychiatry.)

JMHO

BBM. Yeah, anything but a vicious mother who actually murders or beats to death her own kid. Even though it happens all the time and sometimes, the very mothers who do these things look nice, had clean kids, lived middle class lives, etc. But the key is that motherhood is sacred and we cannot bear to think of anyone violating that trust so horribly.

I don't know if it's law in WA, but back in the 80's I lived in a complex that did not allow children, (mostly single adults) permanently anyway. There were no playgrounds or anything for children at all except for the pool. On the JB's apt complex website I didn't see anything mentioned about facilities or recreation...or even the mention of children, yet they mentioned pets. Could it be she was keeping the children hidden because of this? TIA

No, because they were only "hidden" for the last two weeks. Before that, neighbors saw them. I put "hidden" in quotes cause' I think one of them wasn't hidden, but dead.

 

[gitana1]

RBBM

In my opinion (and experience) if your child is being abused you do anything and everything humanly possible to limit the contact the abuser has. Very telling she so readily recommended custody be given to SM.

As for your question it would depend on the agreement - there was likely a temporary order in place dictating child support, alimony, insurance requirements, etc. Child support is usually (in final court orders) either an amount agreed upon by both parents or a percentage of the non-custodial parents wages which would vary state to state. Custodial timeshare is taken into account. (I think anyway - I missed out on law school but acted pro se for my divorce and relocation )

In WA it's the same as CA. It's based on a complex algebraic formula that no lawyer can solve, so we use computer programs that solve the equation for us. Child support is based on custodial time share and income of both parties, for the most part. The less he has of custody, the more he is going to pay.