Still Missing CA - Orson & Orrin West (3&4), California City, 21 Dec 2020 #2

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
PommyMommy said:
JAN 7, 2021
Total of $50,000 now offered in missing California City boys case (turnto23.com)
California City approved a $25,000 reward in the case of the two boys reported missing in the community, back on Dec. 21.

[...]

The reward will be offered to anyone who provides information that leads to the conviction or arrest of a suspect in the case, or to the location of the boys.

[...]
Click to expand...
Oh WOW !!!
that amount jumped up quickly.
Hoping that "someone" who knows something comes forward soon.
 
Inquisitive2018 said:
I feel so too,I think Orson might have been the "rambunctious" one.
Click to expand...
And we all know how "rambunctious" 3-4 yr olds can be.
Plus add in Covid factor--not allowed to play outside, said dad
due to Covid
Dear Lord--- cooping up 3 and 4 yr olds inside a house for how long???
Yeah, I'm not buying it
 
PommyMommy said:
JAN 7, 2021
Total of $50,000 now offered in missing California City boys case (turnto23.com)
California City approved a $25,000 reward in the case of the two boys reported missing in the community, back on Dec. 21.

[...]

The reward will be offered to anyone who provides information that leads to the conviction or arrest of a suspect in the case, or to the location of the boys.

[...]
Click to expand...
I feel sorry for the CCPD, people don't realize what information they want. They will be getting, I had a vision, I had a dream. I read the cards, did you do this did you do that.
The person manning the phone has their work cut out for them.
 
Bio mom and family have been very vocal in the media (sorry I don't have a link) that they feel the system failed them and I think the bio grandfather is suing. A lot of emotion when one feels they have been robbed of something.
 
Campizi67 said:
According to this article (link below) This spokesperson for Kern County Department of Human Services (DHS) details how a bio parent can regain custody. Not easy, but not out of the question. Being that the two boys were adopted, it would appear that they were already past the much desired family reunification option.

Of course we are not privy to the details, so this is only to further understand the dynamics of the bio moms involvement post adoption. May have nothing to do with their disappearance, or everything to do....

edited to add - to be clear, I am in know way accusing anyone of anything. Just thinking about custody issues and how terrible they can be.

"Slagle added that the goal post-foster care is family reunification, if the biological parent is deemed fit to take care of their child after six months of reforming their lives and court decisions. regular check-ups would occur even after if granted. If not, adoption is the next step.

“That process can take up to 18 months to two years to finalize, because biological parents are giving many chances to make those changes,” Slagle said. “So it’s not a fast process.”

When asked if biological parents can obtain custody post-adoption, Slagle said the cases are rare, but still possible. It’s carefully decided by the courts and the biological parent has to prove they’ve changed since their custody was denied."

Disappearance of California City boys places spotlight on fostering, adoption process
Click to expand...


"When asked if biological parents can obtain custody post-adoption, Slagle said the cases are rare, but still possible. It’s carefully decided by the courts and the biological parent has to prove they’ve changed since their custody was denied."

This^^^ is shocking to me. :eek: As an adoptive parent, in California, I would have been terrified to hear that statement....

We were always told, 100%, that our adoptions were FINAL and there was no way for the biofamilies to regain parental rights after we received the final court ruling. They told us and our children, in court, that we are the 'Forever Family. '

I am shocked to hear that a child could be taken away from their 'forever family' if the bio-parent eventually 'changed' their ways.


I cannot imagine having one of our kids taken away from us, their siblings, and grandparents, because years later their bio-mom gets sober and finds a house to rent. This is a frightening ruling, and I think it is somewhat new.

Just when did Social Services make the decision that a bio-parent has an open ended amount of time to get their lives in order, even if their child has been legally adopted and is fully engaged in a new 'forever family' dynamic? :(
 
I keep going back to the chalk. Over embellishment is a sign of lying. The chalk is mentioned multiple times in the AP interview. I’m an art teacher and can confirm that if the boys were as AD described, chalk wouldn’t hold their attention for more than 5 minutes. (I was taught that attention is one minute for every year of age.. I can’t confirm that is true, but that always stuck in my head)

Every detail seems rehearsed and meticulously thought out. Sidewalk chalk seems to be the only material I can come up with that would not show finger prints. Could this be why it became of their “story?” It’s mentioned too many times to be ignored. Any other toy would have fingerprints proving they were actually there on the day they were reported missing. Is there anyone that can provide detail on fingerprinting on a porous surface such as chalk? Powder (for getting the print) and chalk are similar in property which would make me believe prints wouldn’t stick.

I know this information doesn’t help bring the boys home, but it could prove how much time and thought went into planning their story.
 
dandyda said:
(I was taught that attention is one minute for every year of age.. I can’t confirm that is true, but that always stuck in my head)
Click to expand...

O/T but now I understand why I can only stick with something for about an hour! :p (kidding, kidding)

And to get back on topic that does seem like a really useful heuristic. I don't know the answer about prints on chalk but I hope someone who knows will speak up. I'm more inclined to think that it's just a common outside activity for their kids and it came to their mind for that reason.
 
Last edited:
dandyda said:
I keep going back to the chalk. Over embellishment is a sign of lying. The chalk is mentioned multiple times in the AP interview. I’m an art teacher and can confirm that if the boys were as AD described, chalk wouldn’t hold their attention for more than 5 minutes. (I was taught that attention is one minute for every year of age.. I can’t confirm that is true, but that always stuck in my head)

Every detail seems rehearsed and meticulously thought out. Sidewalk chalk seems to be the only material I can come up with that would not show finger prints. Could this be why it became of their “story?” It’s mentioned too many times to be ignored. Any other toy would have fingerprints proving they were actually there on the day they were reported missing. Is there anyone that can provide detail on fingerprinting on a porous surface such as chalk? Powder (for getting the print) and chalk are similar in property which would make me believe prints wouldn’t stick.

I know this information doesn’t help bring the boys home, but it could prove how much time and thought went into planning their story.
Click to expand...
Welcome to WS @dandyda
 
Ontario Mom said:
In one of the very first video interviews with the bio mom, standing in the street in front of the parent's home, the bio mom said "I don't even know them". She went on to say just after that, that she thinks they did something to her boys.

So... if she doesn't even know them, how in the world did she know where they live?
There seems to be a lot about this case that just doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...
I wonder if that was one reason why the parents didn't want to reveal their names at first.

Maybe the bio mom found out who they were from investigators or from the media? Or SM? I don't know, but it's a good question.
 
katydid23 said:
"When asked if biological parents can obtain custody post-adoption, Slagle said the cases are rare, but still possible. It’s carefully decided by the courts and the biological parent has to prove they’ve changed since their custody was denied."

This^^^ is shocking to me. :eek: As an adoptive parent, in California, I would have been terrified to hear that statement....

We were always told, 100%, that our adoptions were FINAL and there was no way for the biofamilies to regain parental rights after we received the final court ruling. They told us and our children, in court, that we are the 'Forever Family. '

I am shocked to hear that a child could be taken away from their 'forever family' if the bio-parent eventually 'changed' their ways.


I cannot imagine having one of our kids taken away from us, their siblings, and grandparents, because years later their bio-mom gets sober and finds a house to rent. This is a frightening ruling, and I think it is somewhat new.

Just when did Social Services make the decision that a bio-parent has an open ended amount of time to get their lives in order, even if their child has been legally adopted and is fully engaged in a new 'forever family' dynamic? :(
Click to expand...

I agree with you.

However it doesn’t say that all is required is for the bio parent to change their ways.

It does say it is extremely rare. If eg the adoptive parents die or are imprisoned for life or something, and none of the rest of the adoptive family - eg grandparents - will take the children; if the bio mom has turned her life around and is now a stable loving provider; perhaps in such circumstances the bio mom can apply and be considered carefully by the courts?

I’m sure it would only be considered in those, or similar, rare & exceptional circumstances - and in the best interest of the child. Surely?

And with all those changes in circumstances, behaviours, and wishes having to apply to both the bio and adoptive families it would be very rare I think.
 
MsBetsy said:
I've heard of biological parents suing if the adoption process was fraudulent in some way but I don't know if that's what they are referring to. I didn't know a grandparent could sue.

Which article was this mentioned in?
Click to expand...

Unless the state did something fraudulent during the adoption process (not unheard of), it’s not going to fly. Grandparents can sue for rights before the adoption is final, and probably had many opportunities to be involved. So I’m not sure where all of this is coming from, but an adoption is a done deal in most cases. MOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 74 more.
Total: 4,037 (members: 75, guests: 3,962)

Online statistics

Members online
75
Guests online
3,962
Total visitors
4,037
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,398
Messages
17,968,347
Members
228,767
Latest member
Mona Lisa
Back
Top