Why Isn't This Mother Being Charged With Daughter's Disappearance?

OneEyedDiva

OneEyedDiva

SF VIP
Location
New Jersey
Her daughter Melody, age 9, was last seen with her and now has been missing for over a month. Her mother was arrested but on unrelated charges! WTH?! Theories are that the child may have been trafficked. The article below details the events leading up to Melody's disappearance (click Continue Reading under Previous headlines). I don't understand why she has not been charged with her daughter's disappearance, especially since she's been uncooperative with the police, which is very suspicious. I hope they find that adorable little girl alive!
MSN
 

I'd assume for two reasons.

Firstly, she is (at the time of the article anyway) already in custody. She's going nowhere.

Secondly, evidence. It's not enough to assume she must know something. You need proof. Insinuation, no matter how "logical" it is, is no substitute in the absence of evidence.

Give them time and hopefully they'll figure it out.
 
Hate to say it but hopefully she ran away and not trafficked or killed.

This doesn't look especially since it happened while traveling which leaves a lot of ground to search and/or spots for the mom to dispose of a body. Hopefully they can leverage the mom with other charges to talk.

Here's to a positive outcome
 

All roads to the child missing lead to mommy, who evidently suffers some type of mental illness. It’s really not about suspicion, or what you or I think happened, it’s what we can prove. I wish I knew more of the history between mommy and daughter, who BTW, I agree with Miss Diva, she is a precious 9 y/o. It would be really helpful to know their history.

Based on the little bit of information available, mommy knows a lot more than she is sharing. Why the trip to Nebraska? Or, Utah for that fact? We just don’t know a lot. We can’t even believe what we do know.

I read this story on another website and it kind of amazed me that the article I read didn’t even mention what PD was investigating this case. One thing is fo sure, she (mommy) crossed state lines, so the FBI should be involved, but I didn’t read, anything about what LE agency was in charge.
 
jujube said:
I think they're just being very, very careful not to make any mistakes so that when she does get charged, her attorneys won't be able to claim any misconduct on the part of the prosecution.
Click to expand...
I thought perhaps that's one of the reasons too Jujube. Hopefully they do have a good plan. @dobielvr
VaughanJB said:
I'd assume for two reasons.

Firstly, she is (at the time of the article anyway) already in custody. She's going nowhere.

Secondly, evidence. It's not enough to assume she must know something. You need proof. Insinuation, no matter how "logical" it is, is no substitute in the absence of evidence.

Give them time and hopefully they'll figure it out.
Click to expand...
The evidence is absolutely enough to assume she knows something! The child was last seen with her on a surveillance camera. They may not have evidence that the child was trafficked or killed but they know at some point she became a missing person while in that mother's care.
If there isn't something shady going on, wouldn't a mother who's "lost" her daughter while traveling report that child missing as soon as she realized it? Hopefully Jujube's and Dobielvr's replies explain the rationale behind why the investigation and arrest are/were conducted the way they were.

911 said:
All roads to the child missing lead to mommy, who evidently suffers some type of mental illness. It’s really not about suspicion, or what you or I think happened, it’s what we can prove. I wish I knew more of the history between mommy and daughter, who BTW, I agree with Miss Diva, she is a precious 9 y/o. It would be really helpful to know their history.

Based on the little bit of information available, mommy knows a lot more than she is sharing. Why the trip to Nebraska? Or, Utah for that fact? We just don’t know a lot. We can’t even believe what we do know.

I read this story on another website and it kind of amazed me that the article I read didn’t even mention what PD was investigating this case. One thing is fo sure, she (mommy) crossed state lines, so the FBI should be involved, but I didn’t read, anything about what LE agency was in charge.
Click to expand...
Thank you for replying. I was hoping you would.
 
OneEyedDiva said:
I don't understand why she has not been charged with her daughter's disappearance, especially since she's been uncooperative with the police...
Click to expand...

Being uncooperative has no legal bearing on a probable cause charge. You can bet whatever they are considering has a Statute of Limitations, there is no need to charge right away. I am sure Prosecutor's are scrutinizing provable elements of any possible charge.

Being uncooperative is essentially the same as the Constitutional right to not incriminate yourself.
 
OneEyedDiva said:
The evidence is absolutely enough to assume she knows something!
Click to expand...

Superposition is not evidence. It's circumstantial. The thing is, there is apparently plenty to suspect her. But is there enough, beyond reasonable doubt, that she did something? They need something more concrete, preferably incontrovertible. I know it can seem like the line is fine, but if you want to know she will pay a price for her actions, you need more.
 
ohioboy said:
Being uncooperative has no legal bearing on a probable cause charge. You can bet whatever they are considering has a Statute of Limitations, there is no need to charge right away. I am sure Prosecutor's are scrutinizing provable elements of any possible charge.

Being uncooperative is essentially the same as the Constitutional right to not incriminate yourself.
Click to expand...
Being uncooperative shows signs of possibly trying to hide information, which makes her suspicious of guilt. If she isn’t protecting herself, maybe another party is involved.
 
ohioboy said:
Being uncooperative has no legal bearing on a probable cause charge. You can bet whatever they are considering has a Statute of Limitations, there is no need to charge right away. I am sure Prosecutor's are scrutinizing provable elements of any possible charge.

Being uncooperative is essentially the same as the Constitutional right to not incriminate yourself.
Click to expand...
That's the only thing that makes sense to me Ohioboy (and @VaughanJB). Guess I'm afraid for that little girl plus frustrated and angry because this case reminds me of authorities taking so long to charge that woman who's two children were missing for quite a while. She married, honeymooned and partied with her new husband while the search was ongoing. Of course the children were eventually found dead and buried and the couple was charged with murder.
 
At least they put a tracker on her so she is a person of interest or suspect.

Melodee Buzzard’s Mother Released from Custody with GPS Monitor

This case with the slow to charge( for investigative or prosecutorial reasons I get) also reminds of another case in California where pop culture singer's car was found with a teenager's body in it.

Hellooo, walks like duck etc

But what one knows and can prove in court 2 different things.
 
WhatInThe said:
At least they put a tracker on her so she is a person of interest or suspect.

Melodee Buzzard’s Mother Released from Custody with GPS Monitor

This case with the slow to charge( for investigative or prosecutorial reasons I get) also reminds of another case in California where pop culture singer's car was found with a teenager's body in it.

Hellooo, walks like duck etc

But what one knows and can prove in court 2 different things.
Click to expand...
It's funny you mentioned the young man who's car contained that young woman's body. I hadn't heard anymore about it until today after I read your reply. I couldn't figure out why no charges were brought against him either, But in that case, almost no details were being shared. My questions are:
~Her body was decomposed. If he had been driving the car on the regular, wouldn't he have smelled an awful scent?
~Why would he keep a decomposing body in his car rather than dump it somewhere?
~Had he loaned the car to somebody while he was on tour? He was touring when her body was discovered.
~Why was the car parked for weeks in the spot it was towed from?
~It is known that he was dating the girl; they had matching tattoos. So again, why are police treading lightly with this case?
~Makes me wonder if someone who knew them both was trying to get with her, didn't like her response, so got angry and killed her.

Two of my questions are answered in this excerpt from an ABC article published soon after the discovery:
"The vehicle is registered to 20-year-old David Anthony Burke, known professionally as D4vd, according to a senior LAPD source. It is one of several vehicles owned by the musician, with many different people using any of the vehicles at any given time, the source added."
Full updated article from The Guardian:
Singer D4vd reportedly identified as suspect in death of teen found in Tesla


 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top