Terri did lie and there is plenty of evidence that she did....repeatedly. From the Oregonian...
"Kaine Horman told The Oregonian that Terri Horman deliberately misled friends about when their relationship began, saying they met when he hired her to take care of Kyron. "Completely false," he said.Jul 27, 2010"
So it's not evidence she lied, but someone saying that others said she lied. I'm not trying to be difficult, but sometimes it's less lies and more people getting the wrong impression and stories changing inadvertantly as they pass between people. This is far from the only case where that has happened. If there is a clear statement directly from Terri that says something false, I have yet to see it.
But even so, let's say she did lie - before Kyron went missing about something that happened a long time ago and is completely unrelated to the case. Giving a more flattering account of the messy beginning of their relationship. Come to think of it, that is an actual lie I have seen from Terri - her telling reporters everything was fine after Kaine had left with the baby. The kind of "lie" literally anyone could (and does) tell.
I just expect a bit more. Something that's relevant to the case.
Her so called "alibi" is not actually an alibi because she is unable to prove her wherabouts for almost 2 hours.
It's one and a half hour, but that doesn't matter since that period is after Kyron's disappearance. The whole point of an alibi is that you have it when the crime occurs - and Terri did.
Just being in a store doesn't mean she didn't leave Kyron in the truck.
She left Kyron alone in the truck in two (or three, counting Michaels) public parking lots where anyone could see him?
She lied about the dry cleaners, and we know she lied because the employee of the dry cleaners disputed what Terri said. There was no line. The employee said it was a slow day and that there was never a line in that store all day. There are many incidences of Terri lying,and THAT is not in dispute by LE.
It's funny you should pick this example, as it is a case of the book being provably wrong.
The dry cleaners couldn’t place Terri at the store. [...] At first Terri hadn’t mentioned the cleaners. Then she said she had gone to the store but didn’t go in. Later she said she walked up to the store but there was a long line and she decided not to wait. The police interviewed the clerk, who said it had been a quiet morning with no long lines. No one saw Terri. BM, ch 5
Well, except the dry cleaner staff was
interviewed by reporter Kyle Iboshi when they went to testify for the divorce trial:
KGW interviewed a woman who works at a drycleaners. She says Terri came in to the cleaners the day Kyron went missing to drop off two shirts, but didn't have any children with her. Unfortunately she doesn't say what time Terri visited the cleaners.
So the dry cleaner staff directly contradicts the book's claim. I'd say that's poor evidence of Terri being deceitful.
As an aside, the question of why Terri walked into the dry cleaners alone, as opposed to the main Fred Meyer where she brought her daughter,
this street view image from before the dry cleaners closed shop might explain it. Before the store is a couple of short term (10 minutes) parking spaces and the whole store front is glass. It might not be advisable, but a person could certainly stop, go inside to get or leave (I never was certain of which it was) shirts while still having eyes on their baby in the car.
LE cannot bring Terri to trial without the DA giving the go-ahead. The grand jury can vote to indict but the DA has to agree and take it to trial. The fact that there is no body has been the sticking point.....not that they all think Terri is innocent.
That's one theory. Another is that the Grand Jury no-billed the case back in 2010 and the DA and MCSO haven't been able to get a new indictment after that. I think that explains the subsequent events a lot better.
This is a common occurance in cases where LE know who is guilty but can't arrest until the DA is onboard. This has nothing to do with Terri's guilt but everything to do with a DA who has been reluctant to prosecute because Kyron's body is still missing. They know the who and the what but the where is the hold-up. It's disengenous to say that means Terri is not guilty. It does not mean that at all.
The evidence of motive is actually very clear. Kaine has said that he and Terri were fighting over her treatment of Kyron, her drinking and neglect of the baby, and her excessive spending.
But that's not a motive for kidnapping or murder.
Terri blamed Kaine and Kyron for everything that was unraveling in her life instead of her own dysfunction.
We don't know that she blamed Kyron for anything.
As for the emails....as has been established many times and is NOT in dispute.....the contents do show motive. We don't know what's in them but LE does and they know what it means. They are the ones who showed Desiree the contents of the emails so it's not her "opinion". It's evidence of motive.
They also showed them to Kaine, who disagrees with Desiree on the contents. I'd say that's a pretty clear indication that Desiree is reading between the lines.
It's one thing to be of the mind that Terri is not guilty. To each his or her own. But the claim that there's no evidence of certain elements of the case that already are known to be true, and to claim that Terri had an alibi when in fact she did not, and that there's no motive is absolutely incorrect.
There are speculations, sure, but nothing that has been substantiated. If there was evidence Terri had taken Kyron from the school, she would have been arrested, body or no body.
These known facts are the reason her criminal defense attorney was in charge of her civil court case because the known facts coming out inthe civil case would damn her in the criminal case. An innocent woman would never give up her baby and refuse to give depositions in a divorce case. That just doesn't happen.
Your first sentence explains the second. Her defense lawyer's duty was to keep Terri out of prison, and that meant preventing her from being deposed in civil trials that could be used against her in a criminal trial. This does not in any way, shape or form mean that she was guilty or that Houze believes she's guilty. Innocence is not a defense against being railroaded, as countless examples show. Until Terri was/is officially cleared by the MCSO, there will always be a danger of a criminal trial - though honestly I'd say any real danger was over by the time the book came out. Either way, the MCSO can't move either since they haven't got an indictment and now their illegal trick of bringing back cases before the Grand Jury without a court order has been exposed and shut down, I don't see any way for them to get one.
I do agree that a trial will commence if Kyron's body is found, it's just that it won't be a trial against Terri.
