Found Deceased AL - Kamille "Cupcake" McKinney, 3, kidnapped from birthday party, Birmingham, 12 Oct 2019 #2

[Subiechik21]

Alabama Law Enforcement Agency Online Services

3-year-old girl kidnapped from Birmingham birthday party; Amber Alert cites ‘extreme danger’

Kamille “Cupcake” McKinney vanished about 8:30 p.m. Saturday from Tom Brown Village public housing community in Avondale. She was outside with friends when she disappeared.

According to other children, a man and a woman in a dark SUV picked up Kamille. An 11-year-old boy said he saw a man get out of the SUV, pick up Kamille and put her in the vehicle. Police do not believe this is a custodial issue. Both of Kamille’s parents as well as her extended family are on the scene.

This is my first time making a thread, please let me know if I missed anything!

Thread #1

 

[Subiechik21]

AMBER ALERT: 3-year-old girl kidnapped in Birmingham

 

[Subiechik21]

 

[cass523]

@Subiechik21 you need a link for this, just to let you know- TOS rules. How adorable is she?

I found the link. Praying this girl is found quickly and Unharmed. She is adorable

Kamille "Cupcake" McKinney - al.com

 

[cass523]

"Police said Kamille is approximately 3 feet tall and weighs 60 pounds. She has brown eyes and black hair. Kamille was last seen wearing a pink t-shirt with Minnie Mouse leopard print design, leopard prints shorts, and yellow, white, and blue hair bows.

Police said Kamille may have been abducted by a man and woman traveling in a dark-colored black or blue SUV possibly an older model Toyota 4 Runner with rims and a tan protruding bumper, according to a release.

If you have any information regarding Kamille or the people who abducted her, please contact the Birmingham Police Department at 205-254-0841."

AMBER Alert issued for 3-year-old Birmingham girl

 

[MsBetsy]

That was at Woodside. I was asking about a connection between the POIs and Tom Brown Village, where the birthday party took place. I haven't seen anything in msm but could have missed it.

Ok, thank you. I wasn't sure which place it was.

 

[peppertheyorkiepoo]

Didn't they just move there?

They just moved into that condo, but they could be from that area. Her kidnapping charges were from Birmingham, I believe.

 

[MsMarple]

Patrick Devone Stallworth and Derick Irisha Brown have been questioned by the police the last couple of days in the case.
...
Stallworth, 39, of Birmingham, was arrested and charged with four counts of possession of child *advertiser censored* and three counts of possession of child *advertiser censored* with the intent to distribute. Stallworth, who was found to have the information on his phone, is being held on a total bond of $500,000.

Stallworth previously pleaded guilty to possession of marijuana in 2004 and spent 30 days in jail.

Brown, 29, was originally charged with kidnapping, but ultimately had her probation revoked. She is being held with no bond.
2 people questioned in Birmingham 3-year-old’s abduction facing unrelated charges

 

[MsMarple]

Tonight's Press Conference:

 

[swanniee11]

Sorry folks, I"m playing Ketchup. Do we know what was on his phone yet? Boy a lot has gone on this evening. I'm still reading.

 

[MsMarple]

Sorry folks, I"m playing Ketchup. Do we know what was on his phone yet? Boy a lot has gone on this evening. I'm still reading.

Child *advertiser censored*. No photos of Cupcake.

 

[MissMalowe]

Could someone explain the difference between the 4 counts of possession of child *advertiser censored* and the 3 counts of possession of child *advertiser censored* with intent to distribute?

Does each count = 1 image?
From what I understand, they were all images and they were all found in his phone. What escalated 3 of the charges to intent to distribute? Did he have 3 img attachments saved as a draft for an outgoing email to someone? Were they saved in a different folder that would indicate he would be sharing them? Or is there a pre-set number of images that escalates charges to intent to distribute, sort of like a specific weight or amount of drugs? Like perhaps 4 images is just possession but 5+ = intent to distribute, hence 3 charges of intent to distribute?

Anyone know? Could someone explain?

 

[alyssa5597]

Could someone explain the difference between the 4 counts of possession of child *advertiser censored* and the 3 counts of possession of child *advertiser censored* with intent to distribute?

Does each count = 1 image?
From what I understand, they were all images and they were all found in his phone. What escalated 3 of the charges to intent to distribute? Did he have 3 img attachments saved as a draft for an outgoing email to someone? Were they saved in a different folder that would indicate he would be sharing them? Or is there a pre-set number of images that escalates charges to intent to distribute, sort of like a specific weight or amount of drugs? Like perhaps 4 images is just possession but 5+ = intent to distribute, hence 3 charges of intent to distribute?

Anyone know? Could someone explain?

Each count is one image/video. If you have 100+ images, they quite literally will charge you with 100+ charges. The two charges are different though - there is likely 4 total images/videos, 3 of which they have proof of him attempting to distribute. It would count as a "double charge" for those.

Intent to distribute usually arises from having evidence of conversation with someone else about plans to sell or trade images.

If you have numerous copies of the same image/video, it also can be considered intent to distribute by law - but this is relatively uncommon to see nowadays and is more of a residual thing from when images/videos were physically traded in printed/CD/DVD/tape/etc form.

 

[MissMalowe]

Each count is one image/video. If you have 100+ images, they quite literally will charge you with 100+ charges.

But what qualifies/escalates only some of the images to "intent to distribute?"

 

[alyssa5597]

But what qualifies/escalates only some of the images to "intent to distribute?"

Sorry, my above post got cut off.

Intent to distribute is when there is evidence that someone is making plans to send/sell/trade to someone else. It is typical to see when there are emails or texts or other evidence found of an exchange with someone where their "intention" is to share the images.

 

[MsBetsy]

But what qualifies/escalates only some of the images to "intent to distribute?"

Those are the particular images he attempted to distribute, I assume, and not the others. Imo

 

[zecats]

Child *advertiser censored*. No photos of Cupcake.

Would he have had time to delete any photos of her if he did have some?

 

[MassGuy]

Would he have had time to delete any photos of her if he did have some?

It’s possible, but law enforcement has the ability to recover deleted photos in most instances (this has come up in previous cases).

If they didn’t find photos of her, it’s possible, if not probable, that no photos exist in the first place.

 

[doyoulovemepfg]

It’s possible, but law enforcement has the ability to recover deleted photos in most instances (this has come up in previous cases).

If they didn’t find photos of her, it’s possible, if not probable, that no photos exist in the first place.

I really hope that no pictures existing is the outcome.

 

[zecats]

It’s possible, but law enforcement has the ability to recover deleted photos in most instances (this has come up in previous cases).

If they didn’t find photos of her, it’s possible, if not probable, that no photos exist in the first place.

When I delete photos on my phone, they go into a deleted folder but can be permanently deleted. I know "the cloud" also stores photos, but perhaps this guy doesn't have that turned on.

I'm with you that it's not probable, but IMO, just because they didn't find any, that's not a definite there never were any photos of her.

On the other hand, it's possible he didn't have a chance to take any of Cupcake yet. So lack of photos doesn't disprove his potential connection.