ACTIVE SEARCH SD - Serenity Dennard, 9, Children’s Home Society, Pennington County, 3 Feb 2019

[Confusion]

I'm living up to my name too well these days; this case is really confusing me. Could someone please tell me which of the "facts" I think I know are actually wrong? What I remember reading is: she ran out of the gym at about 10:45, and neither teacher could follow her because it would mean leaving other children unsupervised; the women dropping a child off saw her by the cattle guard at ~11:00 and informed staff; staff couldn't catch her and saw her run into the hills; when the woman came out from telling them SD was out there, she was gone; she drove up and down the road and saw no sign of her. Probably other things I'm forgetting.

The only way I can make all of the reports work together is if: SD ran out of the gym and the staff member she was with called another staff member and said what happened. That person saw SD go out the door, but couldn't get to her fast enough; SD ran and ended up going into the hills. The staff went inside to get dressed for the weather and inform others what was happening, and during that time SD came back as far as the cattle guard, which was about the time the women came to drop off the other child. SD saw her go in and assumed someone would be coming out after her shortly so she ran again. There I hit a snag. Would she have gone back into the hills, somewhere on the property or down one of the roads? Going down the road makes the most sense to me since I'm sure they would have found her by now if she was on the property and I don't think she would have made great time going into the hills a second time. No matter how I look at it, it feels like somebody picking her up is the most likely option. Unfortunately, if it were someone wanting to help her, I'm sure someone would have been told where she is by now.

Back to my original question, have any of the things I remember been proven wrong? If she had left and come back, could she have left again and still been far enough away not to be seen by them searching for her? TIA for any clarification.

 

[SassynOz]

As a parent with a child currently in one of these facilities, and as someone connected with a large network of adoptive families, at least one of whom has intimate knowledge of this family, I can pretty much assure you that neither of her adoptive parents picked her up to take her back home. When your child enters the program you sign paperwork stating that you may remove them anytime you want. There is generally a plan, and a list of goals to be met, and most parents in their right minds (and these parents from what I understand are definitely in their right minds) are not going to voluntarily remove their child unless they suspect abuse or neglect. In those cases, they can simply tell the facility they are taking their child, and go pick them up. These are typically voluntary placements, not court ordered. In fact, as an adoptive parent who has had to do this three times now, I have never heard of a case where the child was court ordered to be there except when their behavior was so dangerous that the family begged the courts to place them. Even that is a real challenge, and not what I understand happened in this case.

Right you can remove your own child at any time. No reason to snatch her. Her parents seen devastated .

 

[Auntie Cipation]

@Confusion , how would your scenario change if

staff couldn't catch her and saw her run into the hills;

was just literary license? My opinion only...

 

[Steleheart]

BBM

As a parent with a child currently in one of these facilities, and as someone connected with a large network of adoptive families, at least one of whom has intimate knowledge of this family, I can pretty much assure you that neither of her adoptive parents picked her up to take her back home. When your child enters the program you sign paperwork stating that you may remove them anytime you want. There is generally a plan, and a list of goals to be met, and most parents in their right minds (and these parents from what I understand are definitely in their right minds) are not going to voluntarily remove their child unless they suspect abuse or neglect. In those cases, they can simply tell the facility they are taking their child, and go pick them up. These are typically voluntary placements, not court ordered. In fact, as an adoptive parent who has had to do this three times now, I have never heard of a case where the child was court ordered to be there except when their behavior was so dangerous that the family begged the courts to place them. Even that is a real challenge, and not what I understand happened in this case.

Yes. I have seen noting untoward in this family in my private sleuthing and that's all I will say. They seem wonderful.
There could be other adults - That was my feeling re pre-planning. We just don't know and neither can we sleuth/ discuss them.

However an impulsive run seems more plausible sadly. Dogs and handlers are a team and sometimes subtle clues can be missed. Snow, other conditions - all too often we see that searches cannot be perfect and sometime later a person is found by hikers and hunters.

Such grief.

 

[SkipperKey3]

@Confusion , how would your scenario change if was just literary license? My opinion only...

No, I don't think so. This would be a totally inappropriate place for there to be any literary license, especially one that would change the direction of the initial search - was she heading north along the road or west into the hills? That's too big of a detail to relegate to literary license.
At some point early on they referred to having done a "line search". To me, this makes sense if she headed west into the hills, because across the street where she would have headed is a large copse of trees among the hills. Such a coordinated search effort would seem to me to be one of the first things to try to locate her - following her last known direction in rugged terrain. Unfortunately, it didn't turn up anything.

 

[ilovechili]

That's a slightly different take on the events. I had thought only a person who was there dropping off a child actually saw Serenity outside. And they had reported that she was last seen heading north on S Rockerville Rd. But this indicates a staff member was the last to see Serenity, and actually saw her cross the road and head up into the hills, running.
Unfortunately, that extremely lessens the possibility that she was picked up, since she didn't stick to the road. I would think that their initial comment that she was trying to get to family in Sturgis isn't really likely, either, as she knew the road to the north and would have gone that way, rather than simply up into the hills.
So what happened once she was in the hills? Did she keep running for awhile? Did she initially think it was fun being outside, but soon got disoriented and cold? At that point, she could have wandered anywhere. Sadly.

As usual in so many cases recently, stories change and different media outlets contradict the other. Initially it sounded as though it was the above, later it sounded as though the person driving into the facility saw her and went in to inform someone. At first that person sounded as if they were dropping off a child but then another article made it sound as if dropping off "someone" (I thought maybe even an employee--or a child). So many different versions. Like when they called 911. At first it was almost immediately, now it is said it was not. It was close to two hours...

Without insinuating anything or accusing anyone, I sometimes wonder why it is wondered at all that not all people believe the "facts" in cases. For one because they are all over the place and contradictory, as are media articles. The director of this facility has changed his initial statement of when 911 was called. Fact.

 

[PayrollNerd]

I’m sure they’ve checked all vehicles and storage areas. I remember years ago two little kids were missing. It was two days later before they were found in the trunk of a car in their yard. The sad part was, the car is the first place their family looked but they didn’t pop the trunk. It never occurred to anyone that two kids so little could figure out how to open it. Serenity, please send us a sign sweetie! We need you home with your family!

 

[SkipperKey3]

As usual in so many cases recently, stories change and different media outlets contradict the other. Initially it sounded as though it was the above, later it sounded as though the person driving into the facility saw her and went in to inform someone. At first that person sounded as if they were dropping off a child but then another article made it sound as if dropping off "someone" (I thought maybe even an employee--or a child). So many different versions. Like when they called 911. At first it was almost immediately, now it is said it was not. It was close to two hours...

Without insinuating anything or accusing anyone, I sometimes wonder why it is wondered at all that not all people believe the "facts" in cases. For one because they are all over the place and contradictory, as are media articles. The director of this facility has changed his initial statement of when 911 was called. Fact.

And the truth may dispel such supposed contradictions, to some extent. For example (and all of this is just supposition), early on somebody said that the door Serenity left the gym didn't go directly outside, but to a hallway. So the initial staff member didn't see her actually go outside, just that she left the gym. When she gets help, they begin looking inside, not outside. Then whoever was there to drop off somebody, comes in (or back in, if it was the person who was reportedly left in the car that actually saw Serenity) to report that she was seen outside by the grate heading up the road. The staff member looks outside and see Serenity then turn from the road up the hill. (There is a slight ditch right across from the driveway and grate, according to Google Maps, but going up the road a few yards it levels out so that it is possible to go up the hill.) That staff member runs outside but the building isn't right by the road. Serenity disappears up the hill. The person from the car goes back to their car and drives up and down the road to see if Serenity has doubled back to the road with no success. By the time that staff member gets to the road and the point where Serenity ducked up the hill, she is nowhere in sight. She goes back and enlists others to help retrieve her and bring her back. No panic yet that she won't be found. They go over to the hillside and head up the hill, but after looking for awhile, don't see her anywhere. That's when they head back and report that they can't find her. That's when LE is called for their assistance. The temperature is 12 degrees and falling, with a brisk wind which makes the wind chill much lower, and now they are panicked for Serenity. All of that takes time, so the one and a half hour lapse (it wasn't a full two hours) is because they went after her and didn't think that they wouldn't find her. It was only after they came back in that LE was called.

Is this the way it happened? It fits most of the facts, although perhaps not perfectly. And you are right, MSM, as much as we rely on them, sometimes puts their own spin or understanding on events that actually are somewhat inaccurate or misleading.

 

[ilovechili]

Thanks PM, I must have missed that map. I would "assume" the workers saw them and asked if they had seen her, but I wonder why the sheriff wanted to talk to them to try to get a better timeline?

I think because it assisted in the timeline of when the workers were out looking for her. The Sheriff's Department knew the 911 call time. Once they talked to the car that dropped someone off and the people cutting wood who talked to the "worker", the next thing I recall was an admission/correct by the director that 911 was not called right away and in fact they searched the building and grounds first... Which I still fail to understand if a worker saw her run and head into the hills...

I am not accusing anyone, I am just saying what was reported does not all fit together and much is contradictory.

In the recent article, I would like to know what ten business's videos were taken and what 20 some tips came from a forensic computer search... I thought there was little in the area (businesses) and that she would not have unmonitored computer access in a home such as this or so those familiar with these types of homes have said--that these children are never not monitored 24/7.

Just wanting answers like anyone else. I hope there is a miracle in this case. If she did head into the woods, a good outcome is unlikely.

 

[Monkey boy]

I think you have something....make the most sense

 

[human]

And the truth may dispel such supposed contradictions, to some extent. For example (and all of this is just supposition), early on somebody said that the door Serenity left the gym didn't go directly outside, but to a hallway. So the initial staff member didn't see her actually go outside, just that she left the gym. When she gets help, they begin looking inside, not outside. Then whoever was there to drop off somebody, comes in (or back in, if it was the person who was reportedly left in the car that actually saw Serenity) to report that she was seen outside by the grate heading up the road. The staff member looks outside and see Serenity then turn from the road up the hill. (There is a slight ditch right across from the driveway and grate, according to Google Maps, but going up the road a few yards it levels out so that it is possible to go up the hill.) That staff member runs outside but the building isn't right by the road. Serenity disappears up the hill. The person from the car goes back to their car and drives up and down the road to see if Serenity has doubled back to the road with no success. By the time that staff member gets to the road and the point where Serenity ducked up the hill, she is nowhere in sight. She goes back and enlists others to help retrieve her and bring her back. No panic yet that she won't be found. They go over to the hillside and head up the hill, but after looking for awhile, don't see her anywhere. That's when they head back and report that they can't find her. That's when LE is called for their assistance. The temperature is 12 degrees and falling, with a brisk wind which makes the wind chill much lower, and now they are panicked for Serenity. All of that takes time, so the one and a half hour lapse (it wasn't a full two hours) is because they went after her and didn't think that they wouldn't find her. It was only after they came back in that LE was called.

Is this the way it happened? It fits most of the facts, although perhaps not perfectly. And you are right, MSM, as much as we rely on them, sometimes puts their own spin or understanding on events that actually are somewhat inaccurate or misleading.

Makes total sense

 

[human]

I think because it assisted in the timeline of when the workers were out looking for her. The Sheriff's Department knew the 911 call time. Once they talked to the car that dropped someone off and the people cutting wood who talked to the "worker", the next thing I recall was an admission/correct by the director that 911 was not called right away and in fact they searched the building and grounds first... Which I still fail to understand if a worker saw her run and head into the hills...

I am not accusing anyone, I am just saying what was reported does not all fit together and much is contradictory.

In the recent article, I would like to know what ten business's videos were taken and what 20 some tips came from a forensic computer search... I thought there was little in the area (businesses) and that she would not have unmonitored computer access in a home such as this or so those familiar with these types of homes have said--that these children are never not monitored 24/7.

Just wanting answers like anyone else. I hope there is a miracle in this case. If she did head into the woods, a good outcome is unlikely.

The only thing that makes sense is that perhaps someone came down tbe road and took her.

It makes perfect sense that they searched inside first.

Kids in school have computer access. There are educational programs that are purchased.

Schools have filters that block all kinds of content. There are words that make content inacessible. Older kids may be savvy enough to beat the computer gates, but I doubt that a nine year old could.

I cannot imagine a facility that allows unregulated electronic access

 

[ilovechili]

And the truth may dispel such supposed contradictions, to some extent. For example (and all of this is just supposition), early on somebody said that the door Serenity left the gym didn't go directly outside, but to a hallway. So the initial staff member didn't see her actually go outside, just that she left the gym. When she gets help, they begin looking inside, not outside. Then whoever was there to drop off somebody, comes in (or back in, if it was the person who was reportedly left in the car that actually saw Serenity) to report that she was seen outside by the grate heading up the road. The staff member looks outside and see Serenity then turn from the road up the hill. (There is a slight ditch right across from the driveway and grate, according to Google Maps, but going up the road a few yards it levels out so that it is possible to go up the hill.) That staff member runs outside but the building isn't right by the road. Serenity disappears up the hill. The person from the car goes back to their car and drives up and down the road to see if Serenity has doubled back to the road with no success. By the time that staff member gets to the road and the point where Serenity ducked up the hill, she is nowhere in sight. She goes back and enlists others to help retrieve her and bring her back. No panic yet that she won't be found. They go over to the hillside and head up the hill, but after looking for awhile, don't see her anywhere. That's when they head back and report that they can't find her. That's when LE is called for their assistance. The temperature is 12 degrees and falling, with a brisk wind which makes the wind chill much lower, and now they are panicked for Serenity. All of that takes time, so the one and a half hour lapse (it wasn't a full two hours) is because they went after her and didn't think that they wouldn't find her. It was only after they came back in that LE was called.

Is this the way it happened? It fits most of the facts, although perhaps not perfectly. And you are right, MSM, as much as we rely on them, sometimes puts their own spin or understanding on events that actually are somewhat inaccurate or misleading.

You put the facts together in a way I did not understand them. One thing missing however is there was allegedly a second person in the car who waited and watched Serenity head north while the driver was inside reporting it. They kept watching but by the time the driver came back she was out of sight. From what I understand they drove up and down the road looking for her, not the staff at first.

As you say MSM often does not help. I hate them and love them simultaneously. I am upset when we have no news or they do not ask questions or report, but I hate them when they intrude and/or get the facts wrong in their goal as well in their rush sometimes.

I also wonder in the beginning we heard of no such car or people for quite some time. The initial story was a child ran, a worker ran after the child, the other worker stayed in place with two children as Serenity fled from the building. However, that worker immediately called for help, 911 was called quickly and she was searched for (came across like outside as they saw her flee outside) immediately.

The facts we now hear match nor jive with that in any way. It has changed significantly.

Is it possible the person driving the car was an employee? Bringing someone back from a home visit or into the facility for the first time? I would doubt you just "drop off" a child. Is it possible the same person being an employee was the staffer who talked to the wood cutting people as they were driving up and down the road looking for her and perhaps saw the wood cutting people? Or was it someone who went looking after this person went inside and notified the staff?

Who knows...

I have come to realize I do not like it when things do not make sense nor fit together to make sense. And so far, this is yet another case where they do not.

In closing, I think we were hearing about the wood cutters and their effort to find them long before we heard about this vehicle being at the home and seeing her outside. I, like all, would like more facts. Are there any gates at this facility? Can anyone drive in at any time? Can one just walk into the facility no matter who they are or their intent or do they have to buzz and be expected? Can a child just walk out?? With no door alarm or security that stops them from being able to?

Any answers that can be provided would be welcome.

I cannot think of a scenario that would have this child safe and sound and protected but I still hope somehow she is. She is a baby, just 9 years old.

 

[ilovepierre]

The only thing that makes sense is that perhaps someone came down tbe road and took her.

It makes perfect sense that they searched inside first.

Kids in school have computer access. There are educational programs that are purchased.

Schools have filters that block all kinds of content. There are words that make content inacessible. Older kids may be savvy enough to beat the computer gates, but I doubt that a nine year old could.

I cannot imagine a facility that allows unregulated electronic access

I hope all computers/laptops in the facility have been forensically searched.
Kids are tech-savvy these days!
My 6 year old brother has been using nan iPad since he was 3 and he knows his way around a cellphone....

IMO

 

[ilovechili]

The only thing that makes sense is that perhaps someone came down tbe road and took her.

It makes perfect sense that they searched inside first.

Kids in school have computer access. There are educational programs that are purchased.

Schools have filters that block all kinds of content. There are words that make content inacessible. Older kids may be savvy enough to beat the computer gates, but I doubt that a nine year old could.

I cannot imagine a facility that allows unregulated electronic access

Then their tips from the computer is related you think to an adult and not to her having access? The article earlier said they had 20+ tips from a computer forensic eval.

I hope she was taken and that it was by someone she knew. That is about the only scenario I can see where she may be alive and safe and unharmed.

Any thoughts on the ten businesses they obtained video from?

Someone from the area or more familiar with it may be able to answer that for us as well.

 

[Jim_M]

Then their tips from the computer is related you think to an adult and not to her having access? The article earlier said they had 20+ tips from a computer forensic eval.

I hope she was taken and that it was by someone she knew. That is about the only scenario I can see where she may be alive and safe and unharmed.

Any thoughts on the ten businesses they obtained video from?

Someone from the area or more familiar with it may be able to answer that for us as well.

Thinking about water/food/warmth.... I agree that SD needed to be abducted to provide a positive outcome here. That plain stinks to high heaven. And yet my hope for her well being is still in place. I really cannot explain why.

 

[ilovechili]

Thinking about water/food/warmth.... I agree that SD needed to be abducted to provide a positive outcome here. That plain stinks to high heaven. And yet my hope for her well being is still in place. I really cannot explain why.

Absolutely ditto here. I do not know if it is that constant case of hope that we try to have or an instinct that I cannot put my finger on but I hope so too. It also may come from seeing a few cases lately where hope was slim but the children were found alive...

 

[IceIce9]

I’m sure they’ve checked all vehicles and storage areas. I remember years ago two little kids were missing. It was two days later before they were found in the trunk of a car in their yard. The sad part was, the car is the first place their family looked but they didn’t pop the trunk. It never occurred to anyone that two kids so little could figure out how to open it. Serenity, please send us a sign sweetie! We need you home with your family!

I remember that case and the horribly sad outcome.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I love this idea. My child was with 4 adults a 6 children at her fenced in school ground . They were headed in and noticed she was missing. I’ll never know how / whys the truth that is. But they searched INSIDE first for her. duh. Didn’t alert authority’s etc. found her much later when they finally looked outside after another child reporting seeing a child from another classroom window running towards the busy street. After they put out a alert within the building. My kid was found in a 12 foot drainage ditch with 4 ft of water. How she’s alive today I’ll never know. But this stuff happens to often

So sorry for your scare, I'm sure this case resonates deeply with you.

 

[girlhasnoname]

As a parent with a child currently in one of these facilities, and as someone connected with a large network of adoptive families, at least one of whom has intimate knowledge of this family, I can pretty much assure you that neither of her adoptive parents picked her up to take her back home. When your child enters the program you sign paperwork stating that you may remove them anytime you want. There is generally a plan, and a list of goals to be met, and most parents in their right minds (and these parents from what I understand are definitely in their right minds) are not going to voluntarily remove their child unless they suspect abuse or neglect. In those cases, they can simply tell the facility they are taking their child, and go pick them up. These are typically voluntary placements, not court ordered. In fact, as an adoptive parent who has had to do this three times now, I have never heard of a case where the child was court ordered to be there except when their behavior was so dangerous that the family begged the courts to place them. Even that is a real challenge, and not what I understand happened in this case.

That you so much for your insight I truly appreciate your response. It helps me to understand how this system works.

Sincerely wishing good luck to you and your child!