Yes, there is proof. She has a birth certificate and adoption paper work showing she was born on September 4, 2003 in Ukraine. Her birth mother confirms it.
Which means she is 19 years old now.
IN - Couple charged with abandonment of adopted child after legally changing her age, Sept 2019 #2 *not guilty*
- Thread starter j_in_c
- Start date
Which means she is 19 years old now.
Also, prosecution send investigators to Ukraine to talk to Natalia's mother. They collected DNA from the mother, and verified in the US with DNA testing that she was Natalia's biological mother. Her mother confirms Natalia was born in 2003. But prosecution was not allowed to use any of that evidence at trial, because Natalia was legally re-aged and that has not been overturned. So evidence of her being a child when abandoned was not allowed at trial.
Laughing
Rarely Speechless
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2010
- Messages
- 15,587
- Reaction score
- 60,521
Not looking for the dates -- those are upthread.
The child has had a complete skeletal scan at Boston Children's Hospital, another about 2 years later at Riley Children's in Indianapolis, and after being rescued by her current family a third complete skeletal scan at a hospital in Michigan.
The purpose of this scan is to determine skeletal age and to see what devices & procedures & therapies she needed for optimal health & development.
The age indicated by each scans matches the Ukrainian & immigration paperwork.
ymmv lrr
Meloni88
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2019
- Messages
- 329
- Reaction score
- 2,622
So it seems the TV programme has been ultimately good for Natalia? I have not watched it yet. The few clips I've seen are very sensationalist and, from what I've heard, there is footage of Natalia being mentally tortured by these pieces of filth, which I'd rather not see. People have realized she was the victim all along and are outraged by the lack of justice. Finally! Michael has been hoisted by his own crazy petard. I wish this could have been achieved with a more respectful, sensitive documentary series but there we go.
Natalia deserves peace and security forevermore. The poor girl's body, trauma and LIFE have been under the most intense, terrible scrutiny for years. The treatment she has endured would have broken me that's for sure.
Natalia deserves peace and security forevermore. The poor girl's body, trauma and LIFE have been under the most intense, terrible scrutiny for years. The treatment she has endured would have broken me that's for sure.
Justice system sounds more like an injustice system. Again, how can a court just legally re-age a minor, without minor even having representation in that courtroom, and why does it only go one way? Why has that not been overturned despite all the proof that she was a child? What would be the process to overturn that ruling? Is there a process to overturn that ruling?
The prosecution of Barnetts was obviously going to fail, since evidence of Natalia being a child was not allowed by the judge. So the judges are so concerned about protecting Barnett's rights. Before being selected to the jury, the potential jurors are screened to pick ones who don't know anything about the case. So the jury obviously wasn't going to convict since they had such an incomplete picture of what was done to Natalia, and her age at the time it was done to her. So what about Natalia's rights? Why wasn't the judge concerned about that when Natalia was legally re-aged by 14 years?
The prosecution of Barnetts was obviously going to fail, since evidence of Natalia being a child was not allowed by the judge. So the judges are so concerned about protecting Barnett's rights. Before being selected to the jury, the potential jurors are screened to pick ones who don't know anything about the case. So the jury obviously wasn't going to convict since they had such an incomplete picture of what was done to Natalia, and her age at the time it was done to her. So what about Natalia's rights? Why wasn't the judge concerned about that when Natalia was legally re-aged by 14 years?
And just looking at her photos taken at the time, she clearly looked like a young child. Her rights should have been protected. And that didn't happen.
megs1477
Former Member
I did not know the story before watching the docu. I will admit the way the first few episodes were presented I was unsure what to think. Some of the photos did make her look older. Now, being able to compare the photos, she absolutely looked like a child.
Well looks like legally they got away with it all. Natalia is now 19, but her mobility is severely restricted. She needed multiple surgeries and don't think she got them at all. I believe she is now wheelchair bound. That probably could have been avoided (at least for a while) if she actually got the care she needed. She clearly suffered, with the countribution from US courts, and her rights were not protected. I would say she might have been better off staying in Ukraine (at least she wouldn't have been aged up 14 years) but of course now Ukraine is at war. And it doesn't appear she would have gotten the care she needed there either. There was a different mentality, her mother says doctors encouraged her to give up Natalia after Natalia was born, because Natalia had severe disabilities. I think that was the prevailing idea at the time, and many people in countries like Ukraine gave up their disabled children. And children in orphanages were not getting all the latest and greatest treatments. Any child, especially a disabled child, needs an advocate and protector, and parents serve thar role.
Last edited:
Michael was found not guilty. Kristina’s case was dismissed.
Does that mean she could be charged again? What about different charges for Michael? They probably don’t have much now but could Natalia still try a civil case against them?
Her case was dismissed with prejudice, I don't think she can be charged again.
Also, with courts not allowing any evidence of Natalia being abandoned as a child, a prosecution isn't going to succeed.
Lexiintoronto
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2009
- Messages
- 5,399
- Reaction score
- 22,445
If they were able to prove she was actually a child when abandoned, why weren’t the parents convicted?
I understand from your helpful answers that the adoptive parents legally had her age changed at some point, but there seems to be proof contradicting that.
(And I’m sorry for asking, I tried and failed to understand the case by googling it.)
I understand from your helpful answers that the adoptive parents legally had her age changed at some point, but there seems to be proof contradicting that.
(And I’m sorry for asking, I tried and failed to understand the case by googling it.)
None of the evidence showing she was a child was allowed at trail. Prosecution could not present evidence showing Natalia was a child when abandoned. Because she was legally re-aged to an adult and that was not overturned, judge ruled that evidence that she was a child inadmissible. Again, she has a birth certificate showing she was born in 2003, and her bio mother was contacted and verified by DNA. But the jury never heard any of that.
Lizzysun
Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2011
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 62
So even though the Barnetts were to be tried separately, when the judge ruled that Natalia's age info was not allowed in MB's case that same ruling went for Christine's case too? I thought since they were to be tried separately there'd be a different judge for Christine's case; therefore, a new ruling regarding admission of evidence related to of Natalia's age. TIA for any info that helps me understand this situation.
I believe since prosecution appealed and decision to not allow evidence of Natalia's age was upheld by a higher court, it would have been the same for Kristine.
Indiana appeals court affirms 2020 Barnett decision
A decision regarding the neglect charges against the adoptive parents of Natalia Barnett was upheld today in The Indiana Court of Appeals.
Last edited:
It was a good decision for the defense not to have Michael testify. I watched parts of the documentary and as far as I am concerned he doesn't come across well at all. If the evidence of Natalia being a child was allowed, it's a good guess his a$$ would have ended up convicted. But of course US court made her a legal adult, so therefore she is.
The mind boggles.
The mind boggles.
It doesn't surprise me at all that their genius son ended up living in his father's basement. I kind of expected it.
Last edited:
The prosecution would have run into exact same issues with Kristine. If jury is not allowed to hear that Natalia was a child, the conviction is highly unlikely. It would have been the same in Kristine's trial, since the decision not to allow this evidence was upheld by higher courts.
"Kristine and Michael Barnett were charged with multiple counts of neglect of a dependent in 2019 for leaving their then-adopted daughter alone in an apartment in Lafayette. A Tippecanoe judge dismissed most of the charges in August 2020, deciding that they weren't applicable due to another judge's determination of Natalia's actual age, as well as the statue of limitations being exceeded before the charges were filed."
www.purdueexponent.org
"Kristine and Michael Barnett were charged with multiple counts of neglect of a dependent in 2019 for leaving their then-adopted daughter alone in an apartment in Lafayette. A Tippecanoe judge dismissed most of the charges in August 2020, deciding that they weren't applicable due to another judge's determination of Natalia's actual age, as well as the statue of limitations being exceeded before the charges were filed."
Indiana appeals court affirms 2020 Barnett decision
A decision regarding the neglect charges against the adoptive parents of Natalia Barnett was upheld today in The Indiana Court of Appeals.
DNASolves
Staff online
-
CarlK90245UID Moderator
Online statistics
- Members online
- 106
- Guests online
- 3,286
- Total visitors
- 3,392