CA CA - Hannah, 16, Devonte, 15, & Sierra Hart, 12, Mendocino County, 26 March 2018 #3

[everybodhi]

I’ve been busy and having a hard time keeping up with WS lately, sorry it’s taken me so long to respond.

Originally Posted by everybodhi
Sarah has a conviction for misdemeanor domestic assault

Yeah. She's super lucky. And privileged. Doesn't mean she didn't commit atrocious abuse against her child, causing bruises from sternum to navel:

Even in the unlikely case that it wasn’t, the Hart’s story is a tragic case study in racial disparity. The ways in which Sarah and Jennifer managed to continually evade the notice (or action) of officials is a luxury that is by and large only provided to white parents. All three of the states that the family lived in received reports of child welfare concerns, and yet apparently the children were never removed from the Harts’ care. The disparity in ramifications for suspected—and confirmed—child abuse is particularly striking when compared with the jail time black mothers receive for something like leaving their kids at a food court while they were doing an interview less than 30 feet away. Or for testing positive for marijuana after giving birth. Or for only being able to afford an apartment where your landlord won’t fix a rat problem.

https://slate.com/human-interest/20...-disparity-in-child-abuse-investigations.html

.

I want to clarify, again, I do not question the children’s abuse, it’s documented. I don’t spank but I know some parents do, however, leaving bruises while disciplining a child is abuse. Period.
Withholding food is abuse.

I posted the charge because it is documented and we know it as a fact.
I believe if she had been charged with felony child abuse, as was stated in the post I responded to, her sentence would have been worse, probation longer, and the state would have paid more attention.

Stating a fact should not be construed as defending child abuse.

 

[keeleydoll]

More recent http://mn.gov/msgc-stat/documents/meeting materials/October2016/Child_Neglect_Endangerment.pdf




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rosemadderlake]

Now what good natured mother wouldn't want a role model like that in her sons life? Even if it's just a few meetings or chats etc...please


IMO

There is something very kind about Ken that comes across. And, I would think part of being progressive is understanding how important role models really are, for both young men, and women. For most in school, there is always, most always a teacher somewhere along the line that truly inspires. And, it's something a child brings home to parents, too. Their discovery.

 

[mrtnira]

I almost wonder if the two adults had planned to roll out right before it went over the cliff and pretend it was a bad accident.

Thank you for this insight. I never thought of it before. It sounds plausible as an explanation. Or, they wanted to make sure it was the end. If they were seat-belted in and the airbags were effective, they might have feared living, but with permanent disability and having to answer questions.

 

[Zelda1010]

http://www.crimeonline.com/2018/04/...harts-age-may-have-been-miscalculated-police/

Info on identifying the kids and incorrect info regarding one child’s age.

Well, that is sort of a big deal. Are Sierra and Devonte twins, then? Or less than a year apart, for sure.

Does this mean we'll get an update on Hannah's & Abigail's ages too? Or DNA evidence refuting who is dead and who is missing? It is just so weird.

 

[HeidiTX232]

I'm new here. I joined in Januaryfollowing the Turpin case; but this is my first post. I have had aton of thoughts as I've read; but I'll stick to just a few to start.


First, I really doubt that Jen (orSarah) started out as evil. They were likely normal enough peoplewho wanted to have a family. However, like many of us who haveadopted kids “from hard places,” I think they got frustrated,overwhelmed, desperate. Unfortunately, they also turned to abuse. They likely even felt guilty about all that; but they didn't get thechildren or themselves the help they obviously desperately needed.

Second...that help. It just isn't easy. So many peoplethink that time and love and guidance, maybe some meds and therapy,and the kids will eventually come along. But that isn't necessarilythe case. These are kids who likely had substances inutero, wereneglected/abused, had multiple placements in fostercare, etc. Theywere challenging enough that even at pretty young ages, they ended uphaving to be placed out-of-state. So, no doubt they made progress intheir new home; but they still may have had many challenges also. And finding the right meds, therapies, etc is hard, often impossible. Sadly. And mom getsfrustrated. If they had any issues, those were likely exasperated. Even if they didn't, they likely ended up with secondary (caregiver)PTSD. Maybe they tried meds and therapies for themselves also.


I don't want to seem as if I'mdefending the Hart women. Abusing the children is indefensible. Ican't even describe murdering them! But as a mom in the trenches, Ido understand the history, behaviors, frustration, and fearassociated with adopting children with trauma in their backgrounds. And it changes you, not always, not in all ways, for the better. Iwish they had kept fighting to find what would work for their kids,themselves, and their family rather than turning to abuse andeventually murder.

 

[everybodhi]

Thank you for this insight. I never thought of it before. It sounds plausible as an explanation. Or, they wanted to make sure it was the end. If they were seat-belted in and the airbags were effective, they might have feared living, but with permanent disability and having to answer questions.

I can’t imagine thinking I would survive that, or that I would want to.
However, a few days after they found the Hart’s vehicle, an 18 year old drove over a 300 foot cliff in Pacifica and she’s still alive.
Critical condition, but alive.
She also landed on sand, not rocks, and didn’t flip on her hood

 

[HeidiTX232]

They almost definitely got adoptionsubsidy. There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about it though (a friend said that someone in the forum she is reading stated that they got $12,000/month for the kids!).

The subsidy comes from the sending state. It is a simpleapplication and the kids qualified (siblings, minorities over 2). In Texas, there really isn't a negotiation (though it is called that). Its simply that the kids meet the requirements, the parent fills out the few pages required, and the checks come every month.

However, they weren't getting a “paycheck” from it. It costsmoney to raise kids. In Texas, the current rates are $400 for basiclevel children and $545 for those with additional needs. It was slightly lower a few years back when the Harts would have gotten it started. It islikely that at least a couple of the kids get the higher rate. Evenstill, six teens are going through that money is food, clothing,needing a big enough house, electricity (I was surprised that ourelectricity bill more than quadrupled and that was with little kids,not the teens these kids were at their deaths), etc.

Anyway, just wanted to provide some information about subsidy. I really believe they got it; but they weren't making bank on it either.

 

[waschbaer]

I'm new here. I joined in Januaryfollowing the Turpin case; but this is my first post. I have had aton of thoughts as I've read; but I'll stick to just a few to start.


First, I really doubt that Jen (orSarah) started out as evil. They were likely normal enough peoplewho wanted to have a family. However, like many of us who haveadopted kids “from hard places,” I think they got frustrated,overwhelmed, desperate. Unfortunately, they also turned to abuse. They likely even felt guilty about all that; but they didn't get thechildren or themselves the help they obviously desperately needed.

Second...that help. It just isn't easy. So many peoplethink that time and love and guidance, maybe some meds and therapy,and the kids will eventually come along. But that isn't necessarilythe case. These are kids who likely had substances inutero, wereneglected/abused, had multiple placements in fostercare, etc. Theywere challenging enough that even at pretty young ages, they ended uphaving to be placed out-of-state. So, no doubt they made progress intheir new home; but they still may have had many challenges also. And finding the right meds, therapies, etc is hard, often impossible. Sadly. And mom getsfrustrated. If they had any issues, those were likely exasperated. Even if they didn't, they likely ended up with secondary (caregiver)PTSD. Maybe they tried meds and therapies for themselves also.


I don't want to seem as if I'mdefending the Hart women. Abusing the children is indefensible. Ican't even describe murdering them! But as a mom in the trenches, Ido understand the history, behaviors, frustration, and fearassociated with adopting children with trauma in their backgrounds. And it changes you, not always, not in all ways, for the better. Iwish they had kept fighting to find what would work for their kids,themselves, and their family rather than turning to abuse andeventually murder.

Nope.

They had already started beating the little ones in the first set of siblings when they finalized the adoption on the second set. If they were so overwhelmed, not adopting another three siblings would have been a great way to keep things under control. They chose to go ahead and adopt more kids. I really don't think the abuse had anything to do with being "overwhelmed." It's more about having the kind of personality problems that cause a person to externalize their discomfort with themselves onto people they objectify and control.

 

[keeleydoll]

Well, that is sort of a big deal. Are Sierra and Devonte twins, then? Or less than a year apart, for sure.

Does this mean we'll get an update on Hannah's & Abigail's ages too? Or DNA evidence refuting who is dead and who is missing? It is just so weird.

I was wondering today about DNA evidence of which siblings were found. I know a lot of “Irish twins” (women are actually most fertile in the month or two after giving birth) but I’m unsure if Sierra’s age being misreported was solely the mothers misrepresenting her age as they did with the neighbors in regard to Hannah.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sleuth99]

I'm new here. I joined in Januaryfollowing the Turpin case; but this is my first post. I have had aton of thoughts as I've read; but I'll stick to just a few to start.


First, I really doubt that Jen (orSarah) started out as evil. They were likely normal enough peoplewho wanted to have a family. However, like many of us who haveadopted kids “from hard places,” I think they got frustrated,overwhelmed, desperate. Unfortunately, they also turned to abuse. They likely even felt guilty about all that; but they didn't get thechildren or themselves the help they obviously desperately needed.

Second...that help. It just isn't easy. So many peoplethink that time and love and guidance, maybe some meds and therapy,and the kids will eventually come along. But that isn't necessarilythe case. These are kids who likely had substances inutero, wereneglected/abused, had multiple placements in fostercare, etc. Theywere challenging enough that even at pretty young ages, they ended uphaving to be placed out-of-state. So, no doubt they made progress intheir new home; but they still may have had many challenges also. And finding the right meds, therapies, etc is hard, often impossible. Sadly. And mom getsfrustrated. If they had any issues, those were likely exasperated. Even if they didn't, they likely ended up with secondary (caregiver)PTSD. Maybe they tried meds and therapies for themselves also.


I don't want to seem as if I'mdefending the Hart women. Abusing the children is indefensible. Ican't even describe murdering them! But as a mom in the trenches, Ido understand the history, behaviors, frustration, and fearassociated with adopting children with trauma in their backgrounds. And it changes you, not always, not in all ways, for the better. Iwish they had kept fighting to find what would work for their kids,themselves, and their family rather than turning to abuse andeventually murder.

No one gets frustrated and starts abusing children. Nope. Miss me with this.


IMO

 

[everybodhi]

Too bad they don’t give birth mothers the bucks they give adoptive moms, so they could have the same kinds of opportunities, some women lose their children primarily because of poverty.
I remember that mom who left her kids in the food court while she applied for a job nearby in the mall. She was arrested for “Abandonment” and may have lost them if not for the public outrage.

 

[georgiajean]

I'm new here. I joined in Januaryfollowing the Turpin case; but this is my first post. I have had aton of thoughts as I've read; but I'll stick to just a few to start.


First, I really doubt that Jen (orSarah) started out as evil. They were likely normal enough peoplewho wanted to have a family. However, like many of us who haveadopted kids “from hard places,” I think they got frustrated,overwhelmed, desperate. Unfortunately, they also turned to abuse. They likely even felt guilty about all that; but they didn't get thechildren or themselves the help they obviously desperately needed.

Second...that help. It just isn't easy. So many peoplethink that time and love and guidance, maybe some meds and therapy,and the kids will eventually come along. But that isn't necessarilythe case. These are kids who likely had substances inutero, wereneglected/abused, had multiple placements in fostercare, etc. Theywere challenging enough that even at pretty young ages, they ended uphaving to be placed out-of-state. So, no doubt they made progress intheir new home; but they still may have had many challenges also. And finding the right meds, therapies, etc is hard, often impossible. Sadly. And mom getsfrustrated. If they had any issues, those were likely exasperated. Even if they didn't, they likely ended up with secondary (caregiver)PTSD. Maybe they tried meds and therapies for themselves also.


I don't want to seem as if I'mdefending the Hart women. Abusing the children is indefensible. Ican't even describe murdering them! But as a mom in the trenches, Ido understand the history, behaviors, frustration, and fearassociated with adopting children with trauma in their backgrounds. And it changes you, not always, not in all ways, for the better. Iwish they had kept fighting to find what would work for their kids,themselves, and their family rather than turning to abuse andeventually murder.

I appreciate your perspective, and this mirrors some of my thoughts. MOST people would struggle to keep on an even keel, with adopting 6 high-trauma children. Not saying MOST people would become abusers. This was a huge under-taking, and I find it devastating that our adoption and child protection services are this lax or lackadaisical. And I echo a previous poster's comment that it has much to do with the women being white and the children being black. Sad but true.

The fact that the abuse allegations began soon after the first adoption points to problems beginning right away. Likely far more than the two women expected. Likely behaviors which did not validate the women as wonderful saviors (as it seems they really needed to be perceived as). So these women do not fall under my definition of "Most." They are an aberration and these young people deserved a better outcome.

 

[georgiajean]

Too bad they don’t give birth mothers the bucks they give adoptive moms, so they could have the same kinds of opportunities, some women lose their children primarily because of poverty.
I remember that mom who left her kids in the food court while she applied for a job nearby in the mall. She was arrested for “Abandonment” and may have lost them if not for the public outrage.

Yes yes yes. This New Yorker story was eye-opening about that. If parents could get more support, to keep them from going homeless or jobless in the first place.... https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/08/07/when-should-a-child-be-taken-from-his-parents

 

[waschbaer]

I am disturbed by this case for a lot of reasons, but one is how much Jen and Sarah remind me of a couple I knew for years. They are divorced now. Our friend group always strongly suspected the "Sarah" of the pair was being abused by the "Jen"--there was one incident in particular where she had an injury to her face that was irritably waved away as an accident that was "all her fault" by her partner while she sat silent. The "Jen" was extremely political about everything and obsessed with being a leader and a rolemodel as a lesbian this or lesbian that, progressive this, progressive that. Very self-righteous and focused on image. Also a grievance collector who held the stupidest things against people in our friend group, for YEARS. Like that one woman was able to get pregnant before she could, for instance. When they did have kids, the image obsession only increased. She became downright mean and unpleasant in close interaction and I kept my distance.

One thing that made me think of this couple was the guy who had offered to Jen to be a male role model for her sons, and her apparent disgust at that offer. The "Jen" I knew irl would have been absolutely beyond offended if a man had suggested fathers were in any way important to kids. She held it as a point of pride that her kids were to be raised "father free" and she considered any advocacy for the importance of dads to be homophobic.

 

[Sleuth99]

I appreciate your perspective, and this mirrors some of my thoughts. MOST people would struggle to keep on an even keel, with adopting 6 high-trauma children. Not saying MOST people would become abusers. This was a huge under-taking, and I find it devastating that our adoption and child protection services are this lax or lackadaisical. And I echo a previous poster's comment that it has much to do with the women being white and the children being black. Sad but true.

The fact that the abuse allegations began soon after the first adoption points to problems beginning right away. Likely far more than the two women expected. Likely behaviors which did not validate the women as wonderful saviors (as it seems they really needed to be perceived as). So these women do not fall under my definition of "Most." They are an aberration and these young people deserved a better outcome.

Do we have evidence that these children had high-trauma and/or showing effects of high-trauma? When I communicated that I felt that at least one of these women had a narcissistic personality disorder based on what I read from articles, what I gathered from interviews, my own knowledge of the dsm-5, life experiences, working with youth etc I was prompted to show some receipts.

<modsnip>

IMO

 

[keeleydoll]

Do we have evidence that these children had high-trauma and/or showing effects of high-trauma? When I communicated that I felt that at least one of these women had a narcissistic personality disorder based on what I read from articles, what I gathered from interviews, my own knowledge of the dsm-5, life experiences, working with youth etc I was prompted to show some receipts.

<modsnip>

IMO

They certainly seemed friendly, neurotypical and on an even keel from the response of their elementary school principal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[roche.analisa]

This is just a tiny bit off topic, but I'll share anyway...

With all the posts here about the photo of Devonte hugging the police officer, and people sharing their interpretations of what he was feeling in that moment, it made me think of the test called "Reading the Mind in the Eyes" by professor Simon Baron-Cohen.

Its a series of photos of eyes and you have to guess which of four choices is the emotion being expressed in the photo. It is designed to measure how well a person can read facial expressions/emotions.

I found an on-line version of the test you can take here- it will score you at the bottom.

Reading the Mind in the Eyes test- NYT

I thought it would be interesting for people who are trying to interpret Devonte's emotions in that photo to see how well they score on the test.

30/36. Very interesting. The six I missed were all ones I knew I was unsure of.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[Doghairrules]

That question I asked was in no way shape or form trying to justify her actions. Sorry you went through that and for my order of question. Just made me think of a jealous rage.


IMO

No she wasn’t bald. But I had long hair and it was convenient for her to pull me that way - otherwise I hit and kicked.

 

[Doghairrules]

Don't you know it. I guess my fascination with this case is related to the fact that I would assume a lesbian couple so involved in progressive causes would be much more progressive in their parenting. I never truly believed that was the case across the board, but I still hoped. I certainly wouldn't have assumed this level of abuse.This case is pretty devastating to me as a result.

I’m not sure it was a lack of parenting skill as much as it was that real life did not match the fantasy they thought they were signing up for. In my case, my mother was amazing with infants and toddlers. But once our personalities and independence fully emerged, she was overwhelmed.