Is True Nelson A Terrbot?

Several days ago, I posted on this site about True Nelson, his blog, and some horribly unkind suggestions he made about the parents of Kyron Horman, who disappeared from his Portland Oregon School in June of 2010. He suggested that Kyron's mother, Desiree Young, moved the court to abate a lawsuit she filed in June of last year against Terri Horman, Kyron's some time stepmother and the last person with whom Kyron was seen. I cited legal documents and reliable media sources which identified the office of the Multnomah County District Attorney as the party who requested that the lawsuit not move forward immediately, not Desiree Young. I also pointed out that any parent who loves his or her children is not going to care about any of the things that True Nelson suggested might constitute a reason for Desiree to stop looking for Kyron: reputation, cross examination by Terri Horman's attorney, and "skeletons in her closet". I will say this once again, True; all I see and hear whenever Desiree makes a statement to the press is a mother who wants her missing son back. If you have children of your own, you should know better.

Tonight, I glanced at his blog again, and I noticed a comment to one of his posts about Kyron that looks like it could only have been written by someone who wants the media and public opinion to shift from wondering where Terri Horman could possibly have hidden Kyron to blaming the school. It deals with possible culpability on the part the Kyron's school, Skyline Elementary. Here it is:

"I think the school did get a pass. They should have been pressed more from the start, and each teacher, principal, janitor intensely questioned. For them to delete the electronic records from that day (and LE didn't even request them) is disgusting. Schools are union shops as are LE. It would have been better to bring in outsiders to investigate and it has always troubled me that the parents haven't done that."

Let me break this down for everyone, in case there is anyone out there who cannot see through this. First of all, the police do not sit around and discuss every investigative tactic they use in a situation such as the disappearance of a child with the media. Not only do they NOT owe the general public information about the evidence they collect at a crime scene, they do not have time to discuss those things! Second, they interviewed hundreds and hundreds of people, over and over. They did interview the staff at the school, and the staff was forthcoming with all the information they had! There is only ONE PERSON who was not forthcoming with information, and whose accounts, I repeat, ACCOUNTS.....she gave more than one story about her whereabouts that day.......and that is Terri Horman. She's also the one who failed at least two polygraphs, according to her son, James Moulton. Terri Horman is the only loose end here; the school was willing to account for the whereabouts of it's staff that day.

Allow me to move on to the subject of deleting electronic records. While a phone log for the landline at the school may not have been kept, beyond voicemail and answering machine messages, no email received or sent by the school could have ever been truly deleted at the school's end. Why? Because a sent email has a sender and a recipient, and in the case of a school, often a sender and many recipients. So even if the school scrubbed all of it's hard drives, (it didn't, trust me) the people who had sent and received the electronic communiques would still have had them. At least a few of those people. Also, a lot of electronic information is stored in the cloud, and once that happens, the computer or cellphone of origin ceases to matter. The information is stored on whichever website was used, and can still be retrieved, which, I'm sure, was done. Also, electronic information, such as ISP numbers and IP addresses can very easily be tracked. Very easily. So rest assured, person who thinks the Skyline Elementary has hidden electronic information; it did not happen. The only relevant electronic products in connection to Kyron's disappearance that were not inspected by law enforcement are the burn phones that were bought by a "friend" for Terri Horman.

That comment really sounds like it was made by someone who does not understand how information moves in today's world. It also sounds as if it was made by someone who would like to lift the cloud of suspicion away from Terri Horman. Perhaps Terri Horman's mother, Carol Moulton? Hmmm? I think it's possible. The element that I find most distubing here; however, is the fact that the comment to True Nelson's blog also sounds like it was made by someone who does not want Kyron found. That, I think, is completely wrong.

True Nelson Says What?

Usaully, the writer of the blog, True At True, offers an intelligent, commonsense opinion about his chosen topics. I enjoy reading his commentaries. But his most recent post, written on January 18, about the Kyron Horman case, surprised me. Somehow, he is putting forth an idea that Desiree Young, Kyron's mother, moved the court requesting that the civil lawsuit she filed against Terri Horman, her son's stepmother, be abated. Here's a quote:

"It is my understanding that concurrent with Desiree Young requesting ‘abatement’ in said civil case there were three additional factors in play: DeDe Spicher was scheduled to testify before the Judge regarding her (DeDe’s) refusal to fully cooperate during her deposition – citing the Fifth Amendment; Desiree and her husband Tony, as well as Kaine Horman, were scheduled to be deposed; and Desiree had requested (through her attorney) a protective order regarding mental health records."

While the lawsuit has been delayed by a few months, Desiree Young certainly did not make that request of the court. In fact, the motion was filed by an outside party, specifically the office of the Multnomah County District Attorney. As for the suggestions that the reason for the delay was the information contained in medical records, mental health information in particular, Young's team fought for that information to be revealed in court, and is in no way attempting to block it. The reference to the testimony of DeDe Spicher was also a bit misleading, since no information at all about her testimony, other than her comments while answering questions, was ever analyzed for the public. The judge who permitted the delay spoke of protecting witnesses, but did not name anyone.

Here's more, explaining an imaginary role played by Steve Houze, Terri Horman's criminal attorney:

"If you were Attorney Houze, how would you attempt to defuse Desiree Young’s civil suit? Why not dig up anything and everything you can about Desiree or Kaine? What if information was developed on one or both of them that would not only cause them embarrassment, but additionally cast suspicion on them?"

Steve Houze will undoubtedly attempt to do some of those things if and when Terri Horman finds herself in criminal court, as a defendant. But he is not representing Terri Horman in this lawsuit. Why is this blogger imagining that Steve Houze is trying to "cast suspicion" on Kaine Horman, Desiree Young, or Tony Young? Not only has this already been done, time and time again, as Kyron has been missing for over two years, it also doesn't matter what "suspicions" can be cast on them. They happen to be the three adults in Kyron's life who love him and want him home. Because of that, they are at cross purposes with Houze's client, who does not love Kyron and apparently does not want Kyron home. Who cares about how, or in what ways, any of them might not be perfect? Why should any of them care, also, about any muckraking or character assasinations Houze might do? Every time I listen to Desiree Young talk about Kyron, I only hear a mother who wants her missing son found. I don't think she cares what any lawyer digs up about her.