Discussion in '2010's Missing' started by cybervampira, Mar 28, 2018.
Speaking of bottle propping, how old was the youngest one they got?
I think around 2. Someone posted upthread who figured out their ages when adopted, roughly.
Does the author sound skeptical with the way this picture has been captioned?
Yes, I noticed that right away. That may just be standard caption-writing though. I’ve seen it before in other cases in articles...”according to her husband, she went missing in Mexico” (Jenny Chen case). Not sure it’s anything other than being abundantly cautious. Hard to tell.
In the latest article about JH's growing up years, there is a photo of the children taken "in November 2009, months after the adoption of three of the children became final" (the 2nd set).
Hannah, in pink sweater with her arm around Jeremiah's neck, is shown missing at least one front tooth. (At what age was she adopted, again?) She is also noticeably taller than her two sisters at this point in time.
ETA: Hannah must've been about 8 in this November photo if listed now as 16. And--she has both front teeth in the Packers photo (2011) in same article. So missing front tooth must've been a baby tooth.
I don't think they would purposely spare the 2 kid's lives. But if they were in a guarded compound, and the kids ran off, with the protection of the community, then there is nothing the 2 women could have done.
Markis has that jaw thing.
The children are so darn cute. I don’t know how they could be cuter!
Abigal got punished with the belt, Hannah and Devonte claims they were being starved.
We know from Alexandra’s report that food deprivation was used. We know laughing as not allowed.
I sure wonder what the condition of six kids not allowed out for 18 months was.
During that time, Hannah ran for help and was thought to be seven years old by the neighbors.
Can you even imagine that crew coming into your house and searching, even going upstairs? I cannot fathom it. I imgaine the DeKalb’s felt it was surreal.
The apology in the morning by the lovely suburban family smoothed everything out. They were the lovely festival folks using their charm.
Fatal attraction of those two women to get together. The stars were aligned.
A community like that would not just let anyone in. They would have to have credentials. We know that lots of people think they were saints, even with the info coming out.
How would they be convinced that the kids were the bad ones? Would they let them leave with the other kids if they thought the Harts were abusers?
If the kids ran off someplace like that, would they not be found right away?
If they were not found right away, why would the Harts leave?
I am not as excited about this scenario as I once was.
I mean, I guess. It just seems unlikely to me.
I'm hoping against hope that Hannah and Devonte somehow managed to escape before (or during) the road trip. I know it's wishful thinking, but I'm so saddened that the alternative is that they all lost their lives due to their parents' abusive actions and things escalating out of control. I want a happier ending to this harrowing tale.
For some reason, seeing pictures of Hannah before she lost her adult front teeth just tears at my heart. She had the biggest, brightest smile of them all. I can't shake the feeling that Jen didn't like her smile. Perhaps it was too pretty, or sometimes too cheeky for her?
Oh, wow, yes, this is very true and a very interesting consideration. Most people who have interaction with CPS and even lose their kids do *not* get charged with a crime. It's part of how it can be really bad if you're falsely accused, because you only get all the constitutional protections if you're actually charged with something.
How did they actually get to the point of being charged? And once there, how on earth did the adoption proceed if it happened afterwards? (Can't remember the timeline; I thought the second adoption was finalized *before* the criminal conviction, which I thought was in 2011?)
I wonder with all of the spending, how they afforded two residences. Sarah was gome for at least six months. She lived somewhere. How did they pay for all of that and all of the trips?
Jen does not mind stealing. She was caughtthat one time.Who knows how many times she got away with it.
I see no reason for Jen to not have other money making ideas. Who knows what she conned out of people?
After reading this new article and another FB post of Jen's where she wrote about being able to travel so far and wide for longish periods of time with just the kids, something tells me that packing these kids into the car at 3 am that fatal weekend may not have been unusual for them.
I get the sense that there was little structure, routines or schedules for these kids. Which would make it hard on both the kids and the parents. Especially if these kids had any kind of disability or special needs,which I now seriously doubt. Developmental delays, perhaps, which would have been exacerbated by the parenting of the adoptive family.
Earlier I posted the structure of dysfuctional families. I think Hannah was the child who was the source of all problems. If it was not for Hannah, their family would be perfect.
Why she would get that role, who knows. But I believe she did.
Remember, she had the major crime of having a penny in her pocket.
Maybe Jen thought that Hannah was a liar and thief like Jen. Projection, Beat it out of her
The things she stole back in her 20s were not things she probably wanted for herself, but the kind of thing professional thieves like to fence for quick cash. I would not be surprised if she was running various cons to finance their lifestyle all along.
I never saw Sarah's salary before; thanks! That's quite a bit higher than I was guessing.
This is a link to the Mendocino Sheriff's facebook post about the incident. It gets updated everytime something new is discovered.
Hmmm, now I wonder if there was shrinkage fm Kohls due to internal theft...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think Markis.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk
Well exactly. They had to work hard to catch a tiny peek, peering through a cedar hedge, and that justifies a visit from CPS.
Edit: the full story is actually far more bizarre. Her kids (both toddlers) got out of the kiddie pool. She stepped up onto the porch to get a towel, and when she turned back to come down the steps, there was a strange lady in her yard saying "I noticed your kids were unattended [which they weren't] so I came in". She then proceeded to interrogate my friend about why her kids were naked, and later that day CPS showed up. In my opinion, they would have been better off investigating the lady who happened to walk into a screened backyard with little kids in the 20 seconds their mom's back was turned.