Sunday, September 9, 2012

Baby Ayla: Collateral Damage

For those new to analysis, please research the Baby Ayla case here.  It is not a difficult case to learn.

1.  Single, unemployed young male grew up with reputation as a bully along with his brother.  Small, hot tempered and entitled, he learned that he was a father and fumed over child support payments.

2.  He attempted to get custody to stop child support payments.  He is rumored to be a low level street drug dealer, mostly in oxys and vicodin.

3.  While having the child (Baby Ayla) at his mother's home, Ayla experiences a series of injuries and ill explained bruises.  This culminates in a broken arm in which neither he nor his mother sought medical attention for at least 24 hours.

4.  Father is unable to control his temper and cannot hold even a menial job.  He also has another child by another young woman.  He purchases a life insurance policy against Baby Ayla's life, although she is healthy, betting on a large sum of money to come in to him in the event that said healthy baby dies.  He does not buy life insurance against the other child's life.

5.  While in his care, father text messages the mother expressing fear that baby will be taken by someone.

6.   Approximately Six weeks from the purchase of the life insurance, he calls 911 to report her "missing" and "taken" by someone.

7.  Tough guy father says he is "emotionally incapable" of speaking to media so that he can 'negotiate' with the kidnapper to get his child back.

8.  Police investigation uncovers:

a.  cleaned up blood in the basement found by luminol
b.  Evidence of "foul play"
c.  Announce that Ayla is dead
d.  indicate that father failed polygraph and is not cooperating.

9.  Father keeps up payments on Baby Ayla's life insurance so he can cash in when she is declared legally dead.

What makes for the collateral damage in this case is two young lives that are not spoken of mostly.

In the home on the night that Ayla Reynolds met with "foul play" and her blood was spilled, were two adult women with their two babies.  Courtney Roberts, girlfriend of Justin DiPietro, and Elisha DiPietro, sister of Justin DiPietro, and their young children.

What did police say about Courtney Roberts and Justin DiPietro?

Police publicly announce that they are also, both lying, with indication that Elisha DiPietro failed her polygraph, while Courtney Roberts refused to take one.

If a child's blood is found and police publicly state that the two mothers are lying, how is this not legal jeopardy to both of the babies in the home?

This remains a mystery in the case. 

Two mothers who are willing to lie, via withholding information to police about the whereabouts of a toddler both pose a risk to their own children, who are incapable of self defense.  

How is this not child endangerment?

If it is that prosecutors have balked because they fear having a jury listen to the only three eye witnesses conspire and lie, how is it that Child Protective Services has not intervened on behalf of the other two children?

It is too late to save Ayla, but what of the other two children?  

They continue under the care of their mothers who lied to police about the safety of a baby. 

Are they exposed to the violence of Justin DiPietro and his brother, Lance DiPietro?

Months after this, the DiPietro hunger for violence continued as Justin DiPietro's brother,  Lance DiPietro, who has seen too many episodes of The Sopranos while far too young, drove with Justin DiPietro to beat up the father of Elisha DiPietro's baby, using a baseball bat and a two on one odds maker.  Lance got a slap on the wrist and Justin, driver of the getaway car,  was not even summonsed.  

While on probation, Lance  sent this author emails hoping to meet, face to face.  

Lance would do well to remember that this author is not the size of Baby Ayla.

fun to meet....

There are other ways to prosecute.  Note what took place here as an example of prosecuting on circumstantial evidence without a child's body.  


Forever Curious said...

So what did Lance say? Was it a threat? Are the police involved?

Anonymous said...

Said author of the emails would be wise - very wise to remember MANY people would love to meet him face to face. MANY.

Notamuser said...

The DiPietros have a limited bag of tricks when confronted with the truth. Avoid it, attempt to confuse the issue, or suppress it.

Apple said...

Anon 10:35,
Would the "many" mind if we all showed up? Ya know, to practice SA and all. It's easier to do on the obvious guilty.

Apple said...

ok, gotcha now 10:35.
I still think we should all be invited to the face to face.

Nic said...

I love Clancy's caption.

I just received an email touting "wasp & hornet" spray in lieu of pepper spray or a gun. It shoots 20 feet so your attacker doesn't have to be close and where he could possibly overpower you. It's more accurate than pepper spray and it temporarily blinds the assailant until he/she is taken to emerg for an "antidote". Sounds like it would be better to keep by the bedside than a gun some people have.

It also kills snakes and mice.

That's what the email said. I hate snakes. This summer we visited friends in Virginia while we vacationed in Washington. They said they had copperheads in their neighbourhood (their part of the neighbourhood backs onto a very large farm). If I was living there, I'd be keeping a case of the stuff in my garage. Maybe if we visit again, I'll tuck a can of Wash and Hornet spray into the hostess gift bag. :0)

Jazzie said...

collateral damage n.
Unintentional or incidental injury or damage to persons or objects that would not be lawful military targets in the circumstances ruling at the time. Such damage is not unlawful so long as it is not excessive in light of the overall military advantage anticipated from the attack.
- Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. US Department of Defense 2005

The most widely used euphemism for the justifying/explanation of civilian war death.
Killing is killing. Death is death.
No amount of PR can ever change that.

The War on Children:
I have witnessed the "collateral damage". They have names: Mary, Billy, Ray-Ray, Ronnie, Frankie & Karen, Joey, Michael, Mark, & all the others who's name I've forgotten but who's faces remain in my memory. Some children damaged, stubbornly go forward in this life - stumbling but making a life for themselves. Some didn't fare so well. Bruised and beaten souls of children leave an indelible mark on your heart. It is the evidence that has been set before me which causes analytical contrecoup to my brain. This is why I keep asking "If anyone has knowledge of what happened to Ayla, why don't they come forward?" and most pointedly "How could anyone have intentionally harmed her?"

Anonymous said...


There are two telivision stations that have been trying to reach you for live interviews.

This is within the last three days.

They are willing to meet you anytime, day, or place of your choosing with no stipulations other than what you yourself put in place.

The opportunity is here for you to say what you want which is what I have been told you are looking for.

This is not directed at anyone else other than justin for HIM to be able to speak his own words as he wishes.

Justin, check your voice mail/texts for messages from one stations reporter and ask whoever answered your phone when the second stations reporter called for info in order to make contact with these two people to set up interviews.

Copy and paste by request of the author.

Anonymous said...

Whoever posted that should read the label and ponder the extreme dangers, liabilities, federal penalties for off-label use! That is one of the most assinine proposals I've heard.

I loved Clancy's pic and caption, too!

Elisha M. said...

"Two mothers who are willing to lie, via withholding information to police about the whereabouts of a toddler both pose a risk to their own children, who are incapable of self defense.

How is this not child endangerment?"

Have you ask this question to your co-workers at DHHS? Have you made a complaint wth them regarding the child endangerment you suspect?

Nic said...

The email was about a woman volunteering at her Church to count the donations from a previous day. The perish was located in a rough neighbourhood and she was worried about being robbed. The story goes that it was the police who suggested the spray. The email also said that people teaching self-defence classes are recommending it as well as it would give a victim an opportunity to flee/escape harm.

Are you American, Anon? Don't Americans have right to bear arms and aren't Americans protected under the law to defend themselves from intruders? Be it by gun, knife, etc. I doubt federal penalties for "off-label use" would successfully factor into self-defense.

Nic said...

To follow-up with what you said, I found this: Many jurisdictions specifically prohibit the use of any self-defense sprays other than pepper spray. (Additionally, most spray insecticide containers including warnings stating that "it is a violation of federal law to use this product in a manner inconsistent with its labelling."

Note the words many and most.

If you're (generally speaking) living in a state that doesn't prohibit the use of self-defense sprays and you can find a can that doesn't have labelling as per above, then the choice is yours.

On a personal level, I would rather spray than shoot. jmo

Here's the Snopes article I referenced. It's interesting in that it talks about what specifically is in the spray.

Anonymous said...

Nic, there are all sorts of reasons this would be a bad idea. Let's said you're being attacked and you spray bug spray- first of all, someone besides the attacker might get sprayed. As for the attacker, let's say he ends up with a serious medical condition because of the spray. He might sue and win. Spraying him with a potent and potentially deadly neurotoxin may not fit the concept of necessary self-defense. If the spray bottle was sitting there and the only thing at hand to defend with, maybe. But to choose in advance out of maliciousness or ignorance to use a substance that would poison someone... I don't think that would fly. Would it be okay to pour radiator fluid down his throat or slice off his legs? Either of those things would likely prevent him from harming you but I don't think the law would look kindly on them.

heartbroken said...

Peter, will you be posting the emails?

rob said...

You forgot: beat it down.

Anonymous said...

I would like to know how other child murder/endangerment cases are conducted in this jurisdiction.

Forever Curious said...

I think there's a problem with calling the exercise of a constitutional right not to incriminate oneself child abuse. Child abuse is evaluated on a child-specific basis such that a parent abusing one child doesn't necessarily preclude custody of another child. Here the distance is even greater- suggesting that failing to speak out after the fact about what happened to a child not your own would be grounds for having your own child declared unsafe and taken away. The logic here is tenuous.

Deejay said...

The logic is not as tenuous as you imply. Elisha and Courtney know that Ayla's injuries and death were caused by Justin. But then they lie to LE keep him out of jail. Their own child now lives in/visits a house with a (known) child murderer.
Neither woman has removed her baby from the dangerous home. I would call that endangerment.

Jen said...

Well said's the same logic that's applied to sexual predators being barred from ALL children... not just the child they victimized. As far as invoking the right not to incriminate yourself over ensuring the safety of a helpless child- theres no question that a 'mother' so cold & heartless should never have custody of a child...or even a pet for that matter!

Hey Doc said...

Want to play?

Doc said...

Hey Hickorydickory, where've you been?

Anonymous said...

Wow, I took down my blog because it was just too damn depressing and Peter's earlier prognostication of this case never being solved has just about cometo fruition. I wanted to believe in LE but the DA seems to have tsetse-fly testicles. With the overwhelming circumstantial and physical evidence built up against JD, I am absolutely baffled as to why there has been no arrest. JD is a sissy and would undoubtedly break under heavy interrogation. Unfortunately the DA is a PUSSY like JD and refuses to prosecute without a body because, you know, Ayla could still be alive..right?

I got a threat from JD's morbidly obese brother Lance and just about shit myself laughing. After I replied with some specifics about my military training and expressed my willingness to meet him if he so desired, I never heard back from him.... 7 months and counting. Still waiting you fucking doughboy-twat. Anytime buddy...Anytime. I would love to show you a few tricks...