Kyron Horman Discussion Thread 2020 - 2022

[ReadySet]

How would he be spirited from the school.
is there a media map
page still?

The easiest way to remove a child from a school is for the child to be with a parent.

 

[ReadySet]

Or immediately given him a drink containing something to make him fall asleep. (I'm not saying I think this happened, only that it's a possibility.)



In your opinion, why would she do that?
I just can't think of a suspicious reason, beyond it being an odd way to appear to be doing something "nice" for missing Kyron.

JMO/IMO.

Yes, she could have dosed him. He passes out, is unconscious or even dies. IMO

 

[ReadySet]

If you use Google Street View and place yourself at the entrance to the southern parking lot of Skyline School, and face northwestward looking down Skyline Boulevard, I, at least, can see that "hidden patch" perfectly. Not even elevation helps, really, since Skyline Boulevard slopes downwards and the access road is more visible from the parking lot than right below it. This would also have occurred between 8:45 and 9:00, when dozens of parents would get in their cars and drive onto Skyline Boulevard. Everyone turning an immediate right would have a perfect view of the clandestine deed, and Terri would have no real way of seeing them in advance.

It would be an incredibly poor choice of place for a murder.

I think at some point we have to realize how contrived the scenarios for the abduction and murder of Kyron by Terri have become. Every explanation needed to explain a hole in the theory contradicts another.

* Terri took Kyron to school and then clandestinely snuck him out, not signing him out, so everyone would believe he was still at the school. She leaves his jacket and backpack at school.
* Of course, Kyron would have been noted as missing as soon as the class gathered just before 9:00, which means Terri would have been called immediately after leaving the school with Kyron.
* This was averted by the teacher believing Kyron was at a doctor's appointment, delaying discovery for seven hours. But if that was sloppiness on behalf of the teacher, Terri would have no way of knowing or controlling that delay. So Terri must have informed the teacher about the (false) appointment deliberately.
* But if Terri informed the teacher about the (false) appointment, the school knows Kyron went with Terri, meaning sneaking out was completely pointless, and everyone knew exactly who Kyron walked out with and where he was.
* Terri had the chance to kill and hide Kyron in the 90 minutes she drove on rural roads in the forested hills.
* Prior to those 90 minutes she spent over an hour shopping in the city. This is supposedly to establish an alibi.
* But those stores are in the city, public parking lots in urban areas, and she goes into the stores with the baby, with Kyron still in the car. So she establishes her alibi for Kyron's abduction, with the victim in the car right outside?
* To circumvent this, we can try saying she had already killed Kyron before. Since there's no real time and place to do it, we can say she took a wild chance killing him right by the school, hoping no one noticed.
* But what, then, is the point of those "missing" 90 minutes? Kyron was already dead, it wouldn't take her 90 minutes to drive to a forest, toss him, and drive back. She's creating an alibi for an hour and then leaving an unnecessary gap for 90 minutes?
* For that matter, what is the point of killing Kyron at the school when you've supposedly made the school believe you were taking him to an appointment? But if Terri informed the teacher about the (false) appointment, the school knows Kyron went with Terri, meaning sneaking out was completely pointless, and everyone knew exactly who Kyron walked out with and where he was.

That's not even going into the case of DeDe Spicher, whose involvement would not solve a single problem that existed with the scenarios were Terri was alone.

Agreed on all three, especially the last. Bring in the FBI already. They're far from perfect, but if Desiree is to be believed they were probably far closer to the truth than the MCSO.

sbm
My comments bolded and in italics

* Of course, Kyron would have been noted as missing as soon as the class gathered just before 9:00, which means Terri would have been called immediately after leaving the school with Kyron.
Not if she had told the teacher that she was going to take Kyron for the rest of the day.

But if Terri informed the teacher about the (false) appointment, the school knows Kyron went with Terri, meaning sneaking out was completely pointless, and everyone knew exactly who Kyron walked out with and where he was.
Terri would go on to deny that she told the teacher Kyron had an appointment. She wanted it to be her word against the teacher's. She wanted to get Kyron out of the school, without being seen, so that people would believe someone else took him. If someone saw her and spoke to her, she could have planned to say that she was taking Kyron for an appointment. Then, she would put the plan on hold. She wanted the teacher to be blamed.

* Prior to those 90 minutes she spent over an hour shopping in the city. This is supposedly to establish an alibi.
* But those stores are in the city, public parking lots in urban areas, and she goes into the stores with the baby, with Kyron still in the car. So she establishes her alibi for Kyron's abduction, with the victim in the car right outside?
If he was in the truck, he could have lying on the floor, covered up, unconcious or deceased. He could have been in a container. This has been stated.

* To circumvent this, we can try saying she had already killed Kyron before. Since there's no real time and place to do it, we can say she took a wild chance killing him right by the school, hoping no one noticed.
IMO it wouldn't take much time, or much space, to kill a little seven year old.

* But what, then, is the point of those "missing" 90 minutes? Kyron was already dead, it wouldn't take her 90 minutes to drive to a forest, toss him, and drive back. She's creating an alibi for an hour and then leaving an unnecessary gap for 90 minutes?
If she didn't need the 90 minutes to kill him, she needed it to dispose of him. It takes a lot longer to hide a body than to kill a little boy. She needed to clean up, to possibly clean up the truck, to calm her nerves, and to make this part of her day fit in with all the rest.

* For that matter, what is the point of killing Kyron at the school when you've supposedly made the school believe you were taking him to an appointment?
She didn't tell the office or anyone else about the supposed appointment. She didn't want the school to believe she was taking him to an appointment. Just the teacher. It was tricky, I agree. But who better? She had spent a lot of time in the building. She knew Kyron. She knew the area. She had planned carefully.

IMO

 

[Boxer]

The easiest way to remove a child from a school is for the child to be with a parent.

Still it’s hardly anonymous -and though granted it might just happen no one noticed - MOO it is hardly anything to be counted on, there is no way to know if someone saw you leave.

 

[ReadySet]

Did she admit to the scam under oath? Or did she plead the fifth when the question of payment at the farm came up?

It's not like the MCSO has behaved intelligently in this case.

Why would she admit to something she got immunity for? Either way, if the police aren't going to publicly clear her since they're still (at least at the time) trying to build a case against Terri, there's not much she can do. And quite honestly, the media has behaved pretty one-sidedly in this case.

Because polygraphs are as valid as a tarot reading. If the MCSO considers not taking one as not cooperating, and the passing or failing of one as any kind of indication of guilt, they're not serious. But sadly that's how a lot of LEAs operate.

bbm
There's a lot of gray area between the all or nothing view that polygraphs are either always valid for every suspect in every situation; or they are never valid with any suspect in any situation.

Polygraphs are screening tools. They are not allowed in court (and rightly so.) But they can be useful as a tool.
Here's how I think about it: Your child goes to the school nurse's office to have their vision screened. Not tested, screened. The nurse must be well trained and practiced in giving the screener. If the child is very young, they will be assessed on a machine called a Telebinocular. They will pass or fail. If they fail, the nurse will inform the parents and say that the results MAY indicate a vision problem and they might want to take their child for an actual vision test. A test given by a professional, not just a screener. No one would ever recommend glasses based on a Telebinocular assessment. It's a red flag that should be further looked into, not a definitive conclusion.

So, a polygraph can be useful for looking for possible problems in a suspect's account. Looking for red flags that should be further investigated. It doesn't tell you everything, but it tells you something.

 

[Boxer]

bbm
There's a lot of gray area between the all or nothing view that polygraphs are either always valid for every suspect in every situation; or they are never valid with any suspect in any situation.

Polygraphs are screening tools. They are not allowed in court (and rightly so.) But they can be useful as a tool.
Here's how I think about it: Your child goes to the school nurse's office to have their vision screened. Not tested, screened. The nurse must be well trained and practiced in giving the screener. If the child is very young, they will be assessed on a machine called a Telebinocular. They will pass or fail. If they fail, the nurse will inform the parents and say that the results MAY indicate a vision problem and they might want to take their child for an actual vision test. A test given by a professional, not just a screener. No one would ever recommend glasses based on a Telebinocular assessment. It's a red flag that should be further looked into, not a definitive conclusion.

So, a polygraph can be useful for looking for possible problems in a suspect's account. Looking for red flags that should be further investigated. It doesn't tell you everything, but it tells you something.

They deliver false "pass" results too, and that perpetrators to evade scrutiny, i.e. "no red flags."

 

[ReadySet]

Why are you heaping shame on Law Enforcement? A grand jury was convened. They chose not to indict. LE has done and continues to do their job.

Concerning your reenactment photo, how does she supposedly get KH from the science fair into the truck without anyone noticing?

Maybe someone did notice.
We don't know.
Why wasn't that enough for an arrest?
Maybe for a trial they needed more. Maybe someone saw Terri and Kyron go out a door, but not to the truck. Maybe before she stopped talking, she said that he just went out the door with her but she sent him back. Or he went out to the truck but then he went back. We don't know what all she told LE.
Terri was very familiar around the school. If someone saw Kyron with her, they may not have thought too much about it at the time and not taken a second look.
If they saw Kyron with a "strange man," that would have stood out.
I don't believe that if someone saw Kyron leaving with a man that day, and then found out Kyron had disappeared, that they would have disocunted it and not provided a description. That seems so unlikely, that they would have seen something like that and not reported it.

 

[DFWNF]

sbm
My comments bolded and in italics

* Of course, Kyron would have been noted as missing as soon as the class gathered just before 9:00, which means Terri would have been called immediately after leaving the school with Kyron.
Not if she had told the teacher that she was going to take Kyron for the rest of the day.

But if Terri informed the teacher about the (false) appointment, the school knows Kyron went with Terri, meaning sneaking out was completely pointless, and everyone knew exactly who Kyron walked out with and where he was.
Terri would go on to deny that she told the teacher Kyron had an appointment. She wanted it to be her word against the teacher's. She wanted to get Kyron out of the school, without being seen, so that people would believe someone else took him. If someone saw her and spoke to her, she could have planned to say that she was taking Kyron for an appointment. Then, she would put the plan on hold. She wanted the teacher to be blamed.

* Prior to those 90 minutes she spent over an hour shopping in the city. This is supposedly to establish an alibi.
* But those stores are in the city, public parking lots in urban areas, and she goes into the stores with the baby, with Kyron still in the car. So she establishes her alibi for Kyron's abduction, with the victim in the car right outside?
If he was in the truck, he could have lying on the floor, covered up, unconcious or deceased. He could have been in a container. This has been stated.

* To circumvent this, we can try saying she had already killed Kyron before. Since there's no real time and place to do it, we can say she took a wild chance killing him right by the school, hoping no one noticed.
IMO it wouldn't take much time, or much space, to kill a little seven year old.

* But what, then, is the point of those "missing" 90 minutes? Kyron was already dead, it wouldn't take her 90 minutes to drive to a forest, toss him, and drive back. She's creating an alibi for an hour and then leaving an unnecessary gap for 90 minutes?
If she didn't need the 90 minutes to kill him, she needed it to dispose of him. It takes a lot longer to hide a body than to kill a little boy. She needed to clean up, to possibly clean up the truck, to calm her nerves, and to make this part of her day fit in with all the rest.

* For that matter, what is the point of killing Kyron at the school when you've supposedly made the school believe you were taking him to an appointment?
She didn't tell the office or anyone else about the supposed appointment. She didn't want the school to believe she was taking him to an appointment. Just the teacher. It was tricky, I agree. But who better? She had spent a lot of time in the building. She knew Kyron. She knew the area. She had planned carefully.

IMO

It has always seemed so obvious to me and pure evil. A busy early morning event at a school, with busy proud parents and kids and teachers, it would not stand out and be memorable imo for many to recall a precious little step child (accounted for imo in the teacher's mind) walking seemingly normal around/away with his step mom and baby sister. No soddi bushy haired stranger to burn a hole in their memory. Jmo.

 

[ReadySet]

Still it’s hardly anonymous -and though granted it might just happen no one noticed - MOO it is hardly anything to be counted on, there is no way to know if someone saw you leave.

She may have had a plan in place if she thought anyone saw her leave or spoke to her. Maybe she would have planned to say that she was just having Kyron help her carry something to the truck and she was going to walk him back to the school. Or she would have just taken him out for the rest of the day. Plan scrapped for the day.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

bbm
There's a lot of gray area between the all or nothing view that polygraphs are either always valid for every suspect in every situation; or they are never valid with any suspect in any situation.

Polygraphs are screening tools. They are not allowed in court (and rightly so.) But they can be useful as a tool.
Here's how I think about it: Your child goes to the school nurse's office to have their vision screened. Not tested, screened. The nurse must be well trained and practiced in giving the screener. If the child is very young, they will be assessed on a machine called a Telebinocular. They will pass or fail. If they fail, the nurse will inform the parents and say that the results MAY indicate a vision problem and they might want to take their child for an actual vision test. A test given by a professional, not just a screener. No one would ever recommend glasses based on a Telebinocular assessment. It's a red flag that should be further looked into, not a definitive conclusion.

So, a polygraph can be useful for looking for possible problems in a suspect's account. Looking for red flags that should be further investigated. It doesn't tell you everything, but it tells you something.

Wasn't Terri pregnant? They are not usually given at all when someone is pregnant, because they are even more unreliable given those circumstances.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

If you use Google Street View and place yourself at the entrance to the southern parking lot of Skyline School, and face northwestward looking down Skyline Boulevard, I, at least, can see that "hidden patch" perfectly. Not even elevation helps, really, since Skyline Boulevard slopes downwards and the access road is more visible from the parking lot than right below it. This would also have occurred between 8:45 and 9:00, when dozens of parents would get in their cars and drive onto Skyline Boulevard. Everyone turning an immediate right would have a perfect view of the clandestine deed, and Terri would have no real way of seeing them in advance.

It would be an incredibly poor choice of place for a murder.

I think at some point we have to realize how contrived the scenarios for the abduction and murder of Kyron by Terri have become. Every explanation needed to explain a hole in the theory contradicts another.

* Terri took Kyron to school and then clandestinely snuck him out, not signing him out, so everyone would believe he was still at the school. She leaves his jacket and backpack at school.
* Of course, Kyron would have been noted as missing as soon as the class gathered just before 9:00, which means Terri would have been called immediately after leaving the school with Kyron.
* This was averted by the teacher believing Kyron was at a doctor's appointment, delaying discovery for seven hours. But if that was sloppiness on behalf of the teacher, Terri would have no way of knowing or controlling that delay. So Terri must have informed the teacher about the (false) appointment deliberately.
* But if Terri informed the teacher about the (false) appointment, the school knows Kyron went with Terri, meaning sneaking out was completely pointless, and everyone knew exactly who Kyron walked out with and where he was.
* Terri had the chance to kill and hide Kyron in the 90 minutes she drove on rural roads in the forested hills.
* Prior to those 90 minutes she spent over an hour shopping in the city. This is supposedly to establish an alibi.
* But those stores are in the city, public parking lots in urban areas, and she goes into the stores with the baby, with Kyron still in the car. So she establishes her alibi for Kyron's abduction, with the victim in the car right outside?
* To circumvent this, we can try saying she had already killed Kyron before. Since there's no real time and place to do it, we can say she took a wild chance killing him right by the school, hoping no one noticed.
* But what, then, is the point of those "missing" 90 minutes? Kyron was already dead, it wouldn't take her 90 minutes to drive to a forest, toss him, and drive back. She's creating an alibi for an hour and then leaving an unnecessary gap for 90 minutes?
* For that matter, what is the point of killing Kyron at the school when you've supposedly made the school believe you were taking him to an appointment?

That's not even going into the case of DeDe Spicher, whose involvement would not solve a single problem that existed with the scenarios were Terri was alone.

Agreed on all three, especially the last. Bring in the FBI already. They're far from perfect, but if Desiree is to be believed they were probably far closer to the truth than the MCSO.

Well said!

 

[FergusMcDuck]

sbm
My comments bolded and in italics

* Of course, Kyron would have been noted as missing as soon as the class gathered just before 9:00, which means Terri would have been called immediately after leaving the school with Kyron.
Not if she had told the teacher that she was going to take Kyron for the rest of the day.

At which point the teacher should have made sure he was signed out.

But if Terri informed the teacher about the (false) appointment, the school knows Kyron went with Terri, meaning sneaking out was completely pointless, and everyone knew exactly who Kyron walked out with and where he was.
Terri would go on to deny that she told the teacher Kyron had an appointment. She wanted it to be her word against the teacher's. She wanted to get Kyron out of the school, without being seen, so that people would believe someone else took him. If someone saw her and spoke to her, she could have planned to say that she was taking Kyron for an appointment. Then, she would put the plan on hold. She wanted the teacher to be blamed.

Well, that's better than the other theory, that she mailed about the appointment in advance. But that still relies on the teacher being sloppy and not checking if Kyron had been signed out. And the only witness testimony that has actually been made public goes against this - the teacher told the chaperone that the missing Kyron was probably in the bathroom.

I don't think this convoluted plan that relies on telling someone you're taking the child from the school and then relying on everyone believing you when you say "nuh-uh" is particularly realistic, but hey, at least it technically doesn't contradict, I suppose.

* Prior to those 90 minutes she spent over an hour shopping in the city. This is supposedly to establish an alibi.
* But those stores are in the city, public parking lots in urban areas, and she goes into the stores with the baby, with Kyron still in the car. So she establishes her alibi for Kyron's abduction, with the victim in the car right outside?
If he was in the truck, he could have lying on the floor, covered up, unconcious or deceased. He could have been in a container. This has been stated.

And she would have to have killed him or knocked him out or shoved him in a container, back at the school where there were no safe places to do so.

* To circumvent this, we can try saying she had already killed Kyron before. Since there's no real time and place to do it, we can say she took a wild chance killing him right by the school, hoping no one noticed.
IMO it wouldn't take much time, or much space, to kill a little seven year old.

Not space, place. She has nowhere to do the deed that isn't exposed, and that she can get to within the tight timeline.

* But what, then, is the point of those "missing" 90 minutes? Kyron was already dead, it wouldn't take her 90 minutes to drive to a forest, toss him, and drive back. She's creating an alibi for an hour and then leaving an unnecessary gap for 90 minutes?
If she didn't need the 90 minutes to kill him, she needed it to dispose of him. It takes a lot longer to hide a body than to kill a little boy. She needed to clean up, to possibly clean up the truck, to calm her nerves, and to make this part of her day fit in with all the rest.

I mean, if she had planned this in advance, there would be no need for such a large window of time.

* For that matter, what is the point of killing Kyron at the school when you've supposedly made the school believe you were taking him to an appointment?
She didn't tell the office or anyone else about the supposed appointment. She didn't want the school to believe she was taking him to an appointment. Just the teacher. It was tricky, I agree. But who better? She had spent a lot of time in the building. She knew Kyron. She knew the area. She had planned carefully.

So she didn't email anyone about the appointment? Well, I agree with that. It makes no sense that she would do that.

 

[FergusMcDuck]

bbm
There's a lot of gray area between the all or nothing view that polygraphs are either always valid for every suspect in every situation; or they are never valid with any suspect in any situation.

Polygraphs are screening tools. They are not allowed in court (and rightly so.) But they can be useful as a tool.
Here's how I think about it: Your child goes to the school nurse's office to have their vision screened. Not tested, screened. The nurse must be well trained and practiced in giving the screener. If the child is very young, they will be assessed on a machine called a Telebinocular. They will pass or fail. If they fail, the nurse will inform the parents and say that the results MAY indicate a vision problem and they might want to take their child for an actual vision test. A test given by a professional, not just a screener. No one would ever recommend glasses based on a Telebinocular assessment. It's a red flag that should be further looked into, not a definitive conclusion.

So, a polygraph can be useful for looking for possible problems in a suspect's account. Looking for red flags that should be further investigated. It doesn't tell you everything, but it tells you something.

No, polygraphs are bunk. Using them as a screening tool is the height of lunacy, since passing or failing one tells you nothing about whether they tell the truth or not. The people who passed a polygraph include Aldrich Ames and Gary Ridgway. It doesn't matter if the administrator is a "professional" or not.

The non-functionality of polygraphs has been known for a long time. The US Congress Office of Technology Management, the National Academy of Sciences and the American Psychological Association all found them to be unreliable. But some LEAs still believe in them, either because they're deluded or just set in their ways. It doesn't help that there is a 2 billion dollar industry surrounding polygraphs. The only "gray" area is that some LEAs might be aware of the unreliability of polygraphs, but use them as an intimidation tool. At this point, passing or failing becomes irrelevant since police are allowed to lie about it. Of course, that still doesn't make it right, since as with other deceptive techniques such as Reid, it can produce false confessions.

 

[Boxer]

TH needed thorough investigation, but its pretty rickety case. MOO the theories of "is not her," need more attention.

 

[Alleykins]

Wasn't Terri pregnant? They are not usually given at all when someone is pregnant, because they are even more unreliable given those circumstances.

I'm fairly certain Terri wasn't pregnant at the time of the polygraph, not that we were told. Not sure if she was considered postpartum from a mental health point of view at that point.

 

[Truth Prevails]

So, a polygraph can be useful for looking for possible problems in a suspect's account. Looking for red flags that should be further investigated. It doesn't tell you everything, but it tells you something.

This is exactly their purpose. It doesn't tell them everything, but it tells them something.

Terri failed her first poly; she walked out on a second poly; she failed a third poly.

The "trouble" began when the questions became centered around her involvement with taking Kyron from school on June 4th.

It doesn't tell them everything, but it tells them something.

And her excuse for failing because she is deaf in one ear is even more ridiculous than it sounds.

 

[Truth Prevails]

If she didn't need the 90 minutes to kill him, she needed it to dispose of him. It takes a lot longer to hide a body than to kill a little boy. She needed to clean up, to possibly clean up the truck, to calm her nerves, and to make this part of her day fit in with all the rest.

And let's not forget that a portion of those 90-minutes would involve driving to and from the actual drop-off point. (Or to whatever her purpose was).

She had to drive from the 2nd Fred Meyer (Walker Road) to her intended and planned destination (IMO) and then back to the flower farm to pick up her "helper". Then reach the gym to make herself visible again.

I spent some time a while back on Google maps working out driving times from the purported ping location and also from the Newberry Road area. It worked out to where she seemed to have had about 30 minutes to do whatever it was she did.

There are also statements "out there" saying she may have been spotted in the same areas in the days leading up to June 4th driving her hot red Mustang. Canvassing? Choosing a location? Doing some preliminary work that would save time? Visiting a friend? We don't know.

 

[Truth Prevails]

We can't know what was presented at the GJ. I presume that LE had a solid timeline locked in for DeDe before a GJ was convened, but I don't know that for certain. What I do know for certain is that the GJ did not indict. However many "points" one assigns to that <modsnip> is up to him or her. For me, and for our justice system, it's highly significant and supersedes everything else. IMOO

No one knows for certain that she ever even appeared before a GJ.

We know she was called to appear for the first GJ but she was left waiting in the hall and never gave actual testimony. That's a tactic they use for a reason.

That's all we know. The rest is misleading, unethical statements put forth from a very "un-newsworthy" blog.

Her own lawyer would not comment when called upon by respected media to do so.

 

[Truth Prevails]

I’m confused as I thought TH had washed Kyron’s backpack and jacket before the school bus showed up minus Kyron? Thanks in advance to anyone!

Kyron's jacket and backpack were still at the school when the bus showed up minus Kyron.

Terri had left them at the school that morning when she left with Kyron and the baby.

With unforgivable, unconscionable judgment, those items were given to Kaine and Terri later in the evening to take home with them. (Remember Kaine had driven directly to the school when he discovered Kyron wasn't on the bus. He took her and the baby with him).

Upon returning home, on the evening of June 4th, she washed them.

 

[GoBuckeyes]

No one knows for certain that she ever even appeared before a GJ.

We know she was called to appear for the first GJ but she was left waiting in the hall and never gave actual testimony. That's a tactic they use for a reason.

That's all we know. The rest is misleading, unethical statements put forth from a very "un-newsworthy" blog.

Her own lawyer would not comment when called upon by respected media to do so.

Regardless of who testified, the state put forth the evidence. The GJ didn't indict.