"In this case, we don't even have an indictment"

New Posts

sorrell skye

sorrell skye

Former Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2009
Messages
6,684
Reaction score
7,007
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/10/judge_delays_terri_and_kaine_h.html

Kaine Horman's lawyer, Laura Rackner, said Terri Horman's request for a delay is not in the children's best interest but is "about her concerns and what she wants for herself." She cautioned the divorce could be delayed indefinitely, and that would hurt the children.

"In this case, we don't even have an indictment, so we don't even have a limit as to how long this can go on," Rackner argued.

Does KH's divorce attorney have inside info regarding the Grand Jury's conclusion (if, in fact, the GJ has even reached a conclusion)?

IMO, it would seem that she (Rackner) has at least come to her own conclusion (based on this statement, inside info or not) and it would also seem that she has reasoned that the GJ has not delivered an indictment against TMH at this time.

What I wonder is: based on this statement by Rackner, does she have inside info, or is she basing her statement on what she has read in the MSM?
 
And if it turns out (against all odds it may seem) that Terri was involved in sexting, an is a not very faithful nice wifey or maybe even person but is completely blameless in the disappearance of Kyron. Then all this time away from her mommy was not exactly in the best interest of the child.
 
signh. Where is taht little man?

I just wish we could find the little guy. Kaine and Desiree deserve an end to this.
 
sorrell skye said:
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/10/judge_delays_terri_and_kaine_h.html

Kaine Horman's lawyer, Laura Rackner, said Terri Horman's request for a delay is not in the children's best interest but is "about her concerns and what she wants for herself." She cautioned the divorce could be delayed indefinitely, and that would hurt the children.

"In this case, we don't even have an indictment, so we don't even have a limit as to how long this can go on," Rackner argued.

Does KH's divorce attorney have inside info regarding the Grand Jury's conclusion (if, in fact, the GJ has even reached a conclusion)?

IMO, it would seem that she (Rackner) has at least come to her own conclusion (based on this statement, inside info or not) and it would also seem that she has reasoned that the GJ has not delivered an indictment against TMH at this time.

What I wonder is: based on this statement by Rackner, does she have inside info, or is she basing her statement on what she has read in the MSM?
Click to expand...

I don't doubt for a minute she has inside information; LE has been assisting her in her case all along.
 
Rackner is certainly in a position to know if there's an indictment or not. I'm going to take her at her word. There's no indictment.
 
tlcox said:
And if it turns out (against all odds it may seem) that Terri was involved in sexting, an is a not very faithful nice wifey or maybe even person but is completely blameless in the disappearance of Kyron. Then all this time away from her mommy was not exactly in the best interest of the child.
Click to expand...

Terri doesn't have to wait for it to "come out" that she is innocent of Kyron's disappearance before she fights for K. If she is innocent, she has always had options available to her that would enable her to petition to see K. How many of us parents would allow our child to be kept away from us knowing that we are innocent of the allegations that are keeping us away? Especially if we had options available to be able to see her?

Terri has the obligation to fight for her rights with Baby K. SHE is choosing not to do so at this time. No one else is keeping baby K from her. Jmo
 
BeanE said:
Rackner is certainly in a position to know if there's an indictment or not. I'm going to take her at her word. There's no indictment.
Click to expand...

She would not know anymore than the other lawyers. The GJ indictment is a secret and sealed process and would not be disclosed to Kaine or his lawyer before LE was ready to act on an indictment(if one existed).

She is speaking on facts in evidence, IMO. Terri Horman has not been charged or indicted with anything, therefore jeopardizing her constitutional rights as it relates to charges and arrests(and self-incrimination) is a moot issue.

Jmo
 
tlcox said:
And if it turns out (against all odds it may seem) that Terri was involved in sexting, an is a not very faithful nice wifey or maybe even person but is completely blameless in the disappearance of Kyron. Then all this time away from her mommy was not exactly in the best interest of the child.
Click to expand...

AZLawyer wrote on the legal thread that Terri needs to fight for custody or she might lose the right to gain any type of joint custody in the future. It's up to her.

Instead, her silence and problematic evidence about the sexting with other men isn't going to work in her favor at all.

If she fights for custody, she will have to undergo a psychological evaluation. That is what her attorney is trying to stop with these delays because he doesn't want Terri on the record about any problems.

So even if she is blameless about Kyron, the fact she isn't fighting right now for custody is going to work against her in the future - but that's up to her, not Kaine.
 
Copied from the Verified Lawyers Thread from back in September talking about the Grand Jury and whether they would indict or not:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108830&page=13

AZLawyer said:
But the reporter might mean that the GJ did not issue an indictment, but also decided not to make an official finding that the proposed indictment was "not a true bill," which would require prosecutors to get court permission before attempting another indictment. So the GJ might have said, "Look, you don't have enough evidence yet, but we'll move on to some other cases and just set your indictment form over here for a while with no decision one way or another, and you can come back if you find more evidence."
Click to expand...

And as far as the custody of Baby K:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108830&page=14

AZLawyer said:
I agree that, the longer TH shows no interest whatsoever in seeing her daughter, the harder it will be to convince the judge that her daughter can't live without her. In that sense, her failure to contest the RO is a terrible strategic decision.
Click to expand...
 
And how could she fight an RO when attached to that RO are unsubstantiated claims, those claims which now apparently aren't enough for an indictment, but demonstrate a prejudice in the court which seemingly has no basis in truth.

An interesting dilemma, because Terri's attorney has now stated emphatically in court that keeping K from her mother is definitely not in the best interests of the child, given that she was the primary parent and has been kept from her via legal maneuvering to force her into a place of self-incrimination or pleading the 5th, or declaring her innocence, all of which will be used against her in a court.

Next up, I guess, is a revised visitation.
 
debs said:
And how could she fight an RO when attached to that RO are unsubstantiated claims, those claims which now apparently aren't enough for an indictment, but demonstrate a prejudice in the court which seemingly has no basis in truth.

An interesting dilemma, because Terri's attorney has now stated emphatically in court that keeping K from her mother is definitely not in the best interests of the child, given that she was the primary parent and has been kept from her via legal maneuvering to force her into a place of self-incrimination or pleading the 5th, or declaring her innocence, all of which will be used against her in a court.

Next up, I guess, is a revised visitation.
Click to expand...
respectfully debs you and the rest of viewing America don't know what LE has.

Any modification of visitation will come only after revisitation of the RO which has not been done. So, if she is going to go for any sort of visitation I would think that is what would be "up next" as professional poster/ lawyer Gitana posted in the trial thread.

moo
 
nursebeeme said:
respectfully debs you and the rest of viewing America don't know what LE has.

Any modification of visitation will come only after revisitation of the RO which has not been done. So, if she is going to go for any sort of visitation I would think that is what would be "up next" as professional poster/ lawyer Gitana posted in the trial thread.

moo
Click to expand...

Respectfully, I don't need to know what LE has. Terri's attorneys do, however, because so far their client has been kicked out of her home and had her daughter taken away from her, on top of her stepson going missing. LE might want to blame her, but they've given that information to Kaine Horman, who used it to proceed in a civil matter.

and I did state that up next is Terri's attorney attempting to get her some visitation with her daughter. I'm sure I did. Hmm.
 
Trt said:
Terri doesn't have to wait for it to "come out" that she is innocent of Kyron's disappearance before she fights for K. If she is innocent, she has always had options available to her that would enable her to petition to see K. How many of us parents would allow our child to be kept away from us knowing that we are innocent of the allegations that are keeping us away? Especially if we had options available to be able to see her?

Terri has the obligation to fight for her rights with Baby K. SHE is choosing not to do so at this time. No one else is keeping baby K from her. Jmo
Click to expand...

I will make a point here that is MOO and then leave it at that as we will have to agree to disagree.

If I am the most hated woman in Oregon, the press is up my butt each time I walk out of the door, my most embarrrassing bad behavior (sexting) has been detailed by many media outlets, my husband thinks I hurt his son, LE is treating me like a suspect, and now my child has been removed from my care pending some sort of outcome to all this, the cherry on top is that I am being advised by counsel not to speak regarding the accusations (a move seen by some as uncooperative).

Given all those circumstances perhaps if I am Terri, in my view - I have an obligation to leave my daughter exactly where she is, no matter the heartbreak it causes me, to keep my precious daughter safe from the harsh glare of media, LE and public scrutiny and circus like atmosphere that would come with pursuing visitation at this time. Just a thought.
 
Not that big of a stretch to think there is no indictment at this time. If there were there would be a swift arrest. I doubt a DA would let an indictment languish around while their suspect is free to come and go as she pleases.

That said, I think the judge made the right decision. TH's right against self incrimination doesn't begin only if she is indicted, she has that right now as do the rest of us.
 
tlcox said:
I will make a point here that is MOO and then leave it at that as we will have to agree to disagree.

If I am the most hated woman in Oregon, the press is up my butt each time I walk out of the door, my most embarrrassing bad behavior (sexting) has been detailed by many media outlets, my husband thinks I hurt his son, LE is treating me like a suspect, and now my child has been removed from my care pending some sort of outcome to all this, the cherry on top is that I am being advised by counsel not to speak regarding the accusations (a move seen by some as uncooperative).

Given all those circumstances perhaps if I am Terri, in my view - I have an obligation to leave my daughter exactly where she is, no matter the heartbreak it causes me, to keep my precious daughter safe from the harsh glare of media, LE and public scrutiny and circus like atmosphere that would come with pursuing visitation at this time. Just a thought.
Click to expand...


Thank you for a brilliant post!
 
debs said:
And how could she fight an RO when attached to that RO are unsubstantiated claims, those claims which now apparently aren't enough for an indictment, but demonstrate a prejudice in the court which seemingly has no basis in truth.

An interesting dilemma, because Terri's attorney has now stated emphatically in court that keeping K from her mother is definitely not in the best interests of the child, given that she was the primary parent and has been kept from her via legal maneuvering to force her into a place of self-incrimination or pleading the 5th, or declaring her innocence, all of which will be used against her in a court.

Next up, I guess, is a revised visitation.
Click to expand...

[bbm]

self-incrimination about what?

- MFHP
- disappearance of Kyron

in my mind, either one of those things is enough to keep her child from her

it's a pretty simple thing when we pare it down:

an innocent person would not be concerned about self-incrimination IMO
 
I agree LadyL. That's why she is silent IMO and not fighting for Baby K.
It was mentioned in another thread that maybe TH should be able to see Baby K after going through a psych evaluation. Well, IMO that will not happen. Because IMO she is worried to death about self incrimination each time her mouth opens. So, why would she subject herself to such evaluation???

IMO she is trying her best not to say a word and I'm sure her atty has told her to keep a lid on it.

WHERE IS KYRON TH?????
 
sorrell skye said:
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/10/judge_delays_terri_and_kaine_h.html

Kaine Horman's lawyer, Laura Rackner, said Terri Horman's request for a delay is not in the children's best interest but is "about her concerns and what she wants for herself." She cautioned the divorce could be delayed indefinitely, and that would hurt the children.

"In this case, we don't even have an indictment, so we don't even have a limit as to how long this can go on," Rackner argued.

Does KH's divorce attorney have inside info regarding the Grand Jury's conclusion (if, in fact, the GJ has even reached a conclusion)?

IMO, it would seem that she (Rackner) has at least come to her own conclusion (based on this statement, inside info or not) and it would also seem that she has reasoned that the GJ has not delivered an indictment against TMH at this time.

What I wonder is: based on this statement by Rackner, does she have inside info, or is she basing her statement on what she has read in the MSM?
Click to expand...

One of the confirmed lawyers (I think it was desquire) said that once an indictment is handed down, LE has to attempt to make an arrest within so many days.

Now I could be wrong about this, I may have misunderstood the reply completely because I am not a lawyer.

If I am correct and since TMH's whereabouts are well known and she has not yet been arrested, I believe Ms Rackner is inferring there has been no indictment yet.
 
I want to post the whole quote, because I find Rackner's statement bizarre.

"We don't even have an indictment," Kaine's attorney Laura Rackner said. "So we don't even have a limit as to how long this can go on. It's about her convenience and what she wants for herself."

http://www.kgw.com/news/Kaine--Terri-Horman-due-in-court-for-divorce-hearing-104487169.html

WTH, does she think TH wants to be indicted? Does she think it's convenient for TH to be in the position she's in? Goofy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 60 more.
Total: 3,613 (members: 61, guests: 3,552)

Online statistics

Members online
61
Guests online
3,552
Total visitors
3,613
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,113
Messages
17,963,401
Members
228,686
Latest member
Pabo1998
Back
Top