Thursday, November 3, 2016

2012: Lena Lunsford 911 Call Analyzed

This is analysis from 2012.  

Police today announced that the mother, Lena Lunsford,  has been arrested in the death of her daughter.  At this time, she was reported missing.  Subsequent statements analyzed indicated that the child was deceased.  



The following is Statement Analysis of the 911 call, made 11 days ago, by Lena Lunsford, reporting her 3 year old child missing. 




911 What is your emergency?
My baby’s missing. 

Note that this is the first thing mentioned.  There is no information give as to what happened, only the present status.  No name used.  
What is your address?
(address given)   I was out looking for her for over an hour.

In 911 calls, it is common to find over-talking, so it may be that one interrupts the other. 
Here, we have the caller portraying herself in a positive light, adding in the time she has invested.  

Note that after answering the question that she provides additional information.  When an answer goes beyond the scope of the question, every word is critical.  What is it that is a priority to the caller that she goes beyond the address alone? It began well with "my baby's missing" but without listening, she has a message for police. 

The subject wants police to know that she has been out looking for over an hour. 

Please note that she does not say "I was looking for her" but "out" looking for her for "over an hour".  This is important as it is a reference to time; as all time references are significant. 
How old?  I need you to calm down.
I’m sorry she’s she’s only three.
Please note "I'm sorry"has entered into the subject's language.  This is always noted no matter why the subject is using these words (see Casey Anthony's 911 call) 
We red flag it because it enters the language of the guilty.  It does not conclude guilt (we do not make conclusions on a single indicator) but is part of an overall view.  
We wonder if there is guilt within the caller that causes the words, "I'm sorry" to enter the language.  

When was the last time you saw him?

It’s a girl.  This morning. Real early.  I went in and checked on her because she’s been sick with the flu. 

Note that "because" tells us why, rather than simply answering the question.  This goes beyond the realm of the question of what happened and goes to why something happened.  Here she says that she checked on her "real early" because she was sick.  Note that she "went in" and checked on her.  
Note that sick with the flu is now mentioned.  The caller feels the need to explain why she checked on a little girl, making her checking on the child very sensitive to the caller.  She was only asked when; not why. 

It is norm for a parent to check on a child, yet here, it is beyond the norm. 
Okay is it a male or female?
It’s a Girl
Note that "it's" is reflective language; entering into the language of the operator.  We might expect, "she's a girl!" or the use of Aliayah's name here, but we only find her using the 911 operator's language.  

A girl?
Yes.
Ok you saw her this morning around 6:30?
Yes
That’s the last time you saw her was at 6:30 this morning?
Yes and then she laid back down and went back to sleep.  And we went back to bed.

Note that she "laid back down" would indicate that she would have to be up in order to go back down.  

She is 3 years old. 

Note that when a sentence begins with "And" the subject has missing information here.  This information is about the time Aliayah got up, and laid down again.  Note that the child laid back down, not that the mother put helped her back to bed.  Given her age, and the fact that Aliayah was apparently awake (laid "back" down), the normal or expected is that she would be up and she would be hungry.  Children have "stomach clocks" that once they go off, they stay on until fed.  We must consider this in light of the "blue" indicator above:  The mother felt the need to explain why she was up checking on her.  This is a critical period of time in the case. 

Note that "we" went back to bed.  Who is "we"?  Is it she and Aliayah?  Since "we" indicates unity or cooperation, was it she and her husband who went back to bed?  She and another child? Who is the other part of the "we"?  
Ok was the doors open or anything?

No the doors weren’t open. 
Note that she uses reflective language (the language of the operator).   No information is offered.  The 911 operator has to ask questions.  The flow of information is not smooth nor 'forthcoming' from the mother.  

Were they locked?
Yes I think. 
(Inuaudible) the residence?

It was difficult to hear the question but it sounded like who lives in the residence, of which the answer is important: 

Me and my other kids.  

Note that "other" is a dependent word. 

She does not mention the husband or step father.  This is not lost on the 911 operator who then asks: 
Ok do you live with her father?

No.   

Note that other questions she answers but then adds information.  Note here regarding who else resides there that she does not give additional information and is not bringing up her husband's name.   We note all names that enter the language, especially the victim's name.  
Who is her father?

Her father is a guy named Eric Harris.  He doesn’t even know that she exists.  

Note that she references the father (male) as a "guy" and gives his full name.  
Ok and you’ve been looking for her for the past hour?

Yes I’ve looked everywhere (inaudible) 

This is alarming.  It is a red flag as it goes against the natural denial of a mother. 

First, "I've looked" is first person singular, but then she says,
"everywhere".  When someone says that they have looked "everywhere" they have no other places to search.  This is akin to saying, "I've told you everything" therefore, there is nothing more to say.  When someone says "I have looked everywhere" they are saying that there are no more places to look, a strong indication that she has no places to search; hence, out of hope. 
What was she wearing when you put her back in bed?

She had a little pair of purple Dora pj’s.  We went up all these streets.  We went up all these streets.  

"we" often shows the desire to share guilt or responsibility.
The pronoun is changed to plural, "we"; which is repeated.  If she is now speaking of herself and her children, please note that it is repeated:

this is sensitive.  

She did not say that they searched or looked for her; only that "we went up" these streets.  We seek to believe what people tell us. 

If she does not tell us that they went up searching, we cannot say that they were searching.  This correlates to what the lawyer said:  children asked him for gas;  and it fits what another neighbor said:  he was out at his truck all morning and no one was searching, nor asking him if he had seen Aliayah.  People did not report searching.  If the children were begging gas from a neighbor, would they not alarm the neighbor and tell him about the missing sibling?  This sets the scenario for a contrived situation set up by Lena. 

If she went "up" by herself without the children, the change in pronoun is deceptive

Also, that she went "up" ; something that is repeated.  Does this mean that she went up, and that she did not find Aliayah, that Aliayah is "down" somewhere?

Past tense reference is specific to what she was wearing...
Have you been outside checking the area?

Please note that she checked "everywhere" but the operator asks this question anyway. 

Yes I’ve drove up all the streets around here looking thinking that maybe she went outside or something.  And don’t think my mom would have came and got her because she’d have woke me up and stuff 

1.  Please note that she uses for the third time the word "up" where Aliayah is not found.  This may indicate that Aliayah will be found "down" somewhere; down in water, buried in a grave, et.c.

2.  "all" the streets; with the same meaning at looking "everywhere".  All the streets "around here" have been looked so even though she has been thorough, she has not been located. 

3.  Note the inclusion of her thinking, even though it wasn't 'correct' thinking. 

4.  Note the inclusion of "or something" which strongly indicates that Aliayah went out "or something"; what is the choice?  It is she went outside "or" something else happened to her.  She is giving police a choice.  If she went out, we won't find her because she has searched "everywhere" and on all the "streets around here" where Aliayah, "only three"could have gone. But since she didn't, we then must conclude "or something" took place with Aliayah that Lena knows and is not sharing.  This sentence is an indiction that Lena Lunsford is deceptively withholding information and would like to limit the searching.  She does not want someone else to find Aliayah.  

5.  Lena introduces, with the word "And" to start the sentence (missing info) her "mom" to the operator.  Her mom is significant to Lena and her mother should be carefully interviewed.  Please also note that she tells us "because" which explains why something, rather than report what happened.  Her mother would have wakened her "and stuff"; what stuff?  Police should seek to learn if there has been any arguments, specifically about child care, between Lena and her own mother.  What other "stuff" would the mother have done, besides woken Lena up?
Ok have you called your mother?

No I need to do that.  

Did the operator just give Lena the idea that she should have called her mother?  Now she "needs" to do it. 

Please note that she allegedly drove around for an hour and did not call her mother.  If she was searching for her child, would she not, after the first few minutes, called her mother?  Why would she think that her mother could have had Aliayah ?  Is this the type of family that takes a 3 year old without notice?  How could a three year old leave without it being known?

This appears contrived and false. 
Do you have a phone number for her?
Yes its (number).  
What is her name?
Joanne Evans.
Joanne Evans?
Yes
Do you want to just call her real quick and call me right back so I know what’s going on ok?

This is unusual and may indicate that the 911 operator did not entirely trust the caller and wanted her to check with her mother.  Better would have been to keep Lena on the line, give pauses to allow Lena to choose her own words, while the police were en route to the home.  But it does not answer the question as to why she would need to call her mother when she was out searching "everywhere" (everywhere but...her mothers?  everywhere, but..."down" where Aliayah can be located?)

Ok
911 what is your emergency?
This is Lena Lunsford my mom doesn’t have her.  

We do not like to hear the child's name avoided by biological mother.  
ok
She doesn’t have her she’s coming now. Oh my God. 
You don’t know of any place she would have went there in the community?  Is there a friend’s house nearby or somebody that she plays with?
No (crying)
Ok.  Is there any place there in the community, a playground, or does she go to church anywhere there?
No. (crying)  Help me find her.  

The caller specifies her request for help:  "help me find her" yet she has looked "everywhere" (see above) so there is no other place to look.  
I have an officer on the way mam, I need you to calm down ok.  You’ve looked everywhere in the  house
Yes
All the closets, under everything?  Under every beds
yes
Do you have a basement?
Yes
Its been checked too.

The passive language here suggests that she did not check the basement.  

It is likely that if police asked the children if they searched the basement, they would tell the police that they did not.  Passive language is used to conceal identity often, or when a subject does not want to own a statement with the pronoun, "I" such as "I checked the basement too" especially since she said "I" previously, but then also said "we" drove up the streets...
Ok how about the vehicles outside?

Its been checked that’s what I used to go look for her.

She reported driving around for about an hour looking for her. 
And you said that there’s other children in the residence?
Yes.  (Noises)
Is she old enough where she would be able to reach the door handle?
Yes she is. 
Oh my God.  Here, please play with your brother for a minute. (talking to child)

Note inclusion of Divinity.
What color is her hair?

She has brown hair and brown eyes.  

Here the subject gives the additional info of the color of her eyes which would have been asked next.  Was this rehearsed?  That she has not been forthcoming causes us to expect only parroting answers.  Here, she goes beyond that and we must consider scripted language.  
Do you know how much she weighs?

She weighs approximately 32 to 35 pounds. 
Maybe a little more. 


Ok.  Do you know how tall she is?
Um I’m guessing around three feet I’m, I’m not for sure right now I’m sorry. 

Please note that this is the 2nd time she has said "I'm sorry" to a 911 operator. 
That’s ok.  Was there anybody else in the residence with you this morning, any other adults?
No, umm the only adult that
The tape cut out here.  


Other children in the residence?
Umm I have five kids

That she has five kids does not say they all live there.  This may speak to custodial issues.  
OK so there’s 4 others in the residence? 
There’s three right now
Ok. Where is the other one?
My son is at visitation with his father. 

Note:  he is not visiting with his father, but "at visitation" suggests court ordered or even supervised. 
Ok.  So you got up at 6:30 this morning with her?

Yes she got sick.  Yes

This should be considered sensitive; via repetition and that the time frame is mentioned and she repeats about being sick.  That the child was sick may prove vital in the investigation. 

She went back to bed, went back to sleep and you laid down on 

Yes

Lena is not working to facilitate the flow of information.  
How old are your other children that are in 
Ok did any of them see her this morning? What time did they get up?

The compound question is to be avoided. 

They came in here umm, I’m not sure maybe around 7, 7:30, came in my room with me. 

Please notice that the additional qualifiers are found when asked about timeframe.  
"I'm not sure" is a qualifier
"maybe" is a qualifer
"around" is a qualifier, equally three in one sentence to this point, but then she says "7, 7"30, 
which is the fourth.  Investigators assuming that this is sensitive and deceptive would be correct.  Overall, her time frames are sensitive and she does not appear truthful about them.  
Ok you said 11 year old 9year old and 8 mos?
Yes
Ok can you look outside and see the officer?
Yes Inaudible Oh God.  
In the front.  Oh my God.  Yes I see one out here. 

Please note that in these two calls, she appeared to avoid talking about her husband, Aliayah's step father.  Statement Analysis means not only looking at the words chosen, but what is missing. 

It can be assumed that the following are sensitive to Lena Lunsford:

1.  Time Frame
2.  Actual Searching
3.  "Up" versus "down"
4.   Her husband; Aliayah's step father

It appears that she does not want them looking for Aliayah, as she has already told them that she has searched "everywhere" and that being only 3, she could not have walked far, but "we" have been "up" all the streets in the area.  

It should be noted that twice she formed the words "I'm sorry" in this call.  This is often an indicator of a form of regret; for some, they are sorry for what they have done (or failed to do) and for others, they are sorry for being caught.  

It is likely that Lena Lunsford knows more than what she has said to police and may be directly involved, or may be covering up for someone else, including her husband.  Careful interviewing and polygraphs should be conducted also with the grandmother, and from other statements, the aunt. 

Others will weigh in on the crying; those trained in voice recognition, for example; though at times, to my untrained ear, the crying sounded contrived and forced. 

911 Call Analysis Conclusion:


Lena Lunsford is being deceptive by withholding information, and the searching, timeline and topic of her husband should all be considered  sensitive areas for her. 

Note:  past tense reference of missing child by bio parent so close to disappearance is flagged.  Even in parroting language, a mother on 'high alert' due to extremity of hormonal response is to 'correct', intuitively, the past tense reference.  If it is not corrected, it is seen as 'neutral to slight negative' in rating the quality of the response.  There is a difference between "expected" and "appropriate" and "acceptable" and "concerning" as it is broken down for overall conclusion.  

More on this 'fine tuning' coming up. 

37 comments:

Anonymous said...

Is this the one that included a funeral procession, a nearby relative house and a shopping trip? Which was that?

Jo said...

Who lives at the residence?

Me and my other kids.

I take other as meaning other than my daughter. Why does she no longer include her missing daughter as living at her residence. Expected would be Me and my kids.

What she was wearing when put back to bed.

She had a little pair of purple Dora pj’s.

Had is past tense, why would she not believe she still has her PJs on?

Anonymous said...

The question was inaudible; it could have been "who else lives there?"

The question about clothing is a past tense question: "what was she wearing when...". A past tense answer is appropriate.

Me2l said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
tania cadogan said...

About darn time.

Me2l said...

Please note "I'm sorry" has entered into the subject's language. This is always noted no matter why the subject is using these words (see Casey Anthony's 911 call)


I've noticed that comparisons to the Casey Anthony case have often been used in this blog, and it's puzzling, because a jury found Casey Anthony not guilty in the death of her daughter.

Maybe we don't believe the verdict, but........

Anonymous said...

She was found guilty of misleading authorities so the 911 call fits that pattern.

Layla said...

Peter, I havent yet finished reading your full analysis, because I need to do dishes, but I have wondered as of late whether the word "checked" as in "I checked on her", or "I checked in the bathroom, bedroom" carries serious sensitivity indicators possiibly indicative of homicide. I noticed Blackbburn said he was looking for Amanda and "checked" the bathroom (although he claims this scenario occurred the morning before the robbery, when he found Amanda "in a posture of surrender".

Vance Holmes said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

So, when 911 asks when Lena last saw her she says "real early," but later 911 inserts "6:30" into her questioning about time. Lena confirms. Lucky guess??

Anonymous said...

911 call

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MmdapppKlg

Layla said...

Peter, Excellent analysis! That is so interesting about "up" vs "down".

It is also disturbing the linguistic similarity between Lena "checking" on Ailayah and then saying Ailayah "laid back down" and Blackburn "checking" for Amanda and finding her "bowed...beside bed" "in a posture of surrender"....I feel linguistically both Ailayah and Amanda were dying or deceased at the point they are "checked" for/on and the victim is described as "lying", "bowing" or "in a posture of surrender". In both of these cases it is stated or implied the victim being "checked on" is ill or appears ill.....Ailayah was "checked on" because she was sick....Amanda is "checked on" and found "bowing by the bed" and it is presumed by Davey she is not physically well either and asks her "You OK babe?" It is just striking to see the similarity linguistically and as far as such similar scenarios when the victim is "checked on".

Vance Holmes said...

"Bout 9 - 9:30, I went back in to wake her up and she was gone."

Characterizing her child as "gone" at that point seems strangely hopeless -- and Lunsford is again focused on NOT knowing the time this occurred. Wouldn't she have naturally noted the exact time she realized her child was "gone"?

Vance Holmes said...

Instead of -- "It’s a girl. This morning. Real early." -- maybe what Lunsford says is:

"It's a girl. 6:30 this morning. Real early. I went in and checked on her because she’s been sick with the flu."

Nic said...

Peter said:
Please note that she does not say "I was looking for her" but "out" looking for her for "over an hour". This is important as it is a reference to time; as all time references are significant.


Vance Holmes said...
"Bout 9 - 9:30, I went back in to wake her up and she was gone."


Speaking from the vantage point of losing a family member, I left and then returned and learned she was "gone".


Anonymous said...

Im very sorry for your loss, Nic. Are you saying you left and then returned from sonewhere and your family member had passed away? I think in this case, Lena is saying she left and then returned and Ailayah was physically not there (missing or gone). Sorry for your loss though...that is very sad. I just found a friend died , which is much different, but it's a very jarring feeling.

Habundia said...

Itndoes seem strange that the operator fills in a time when the caller didnt tell any time.....only early. Why would 6.30 be early? Why couldnt it be 5 or 4?
I was listening to the call....when around 1.15 the operator asks who lives in the recidence.....when listen carefully quickly hear a male voice when tape stops for a second.....but the deep voice is clearly saying something only not hearing what its saying because tape stops
Later on operator ask about her mother (after caller pulls her into the conversation), i find it strange that when you just have been looking for over an hour after your kid and a phone numbers is asked that she can sum this number up in very fast way....you would think because of stress she would have to think about the number because your mind would be thinking about where she could be and not focussed on a phonenumber.
After this the operator asks to call her mother quick.....again there is a male voice at the background before she hangs the phone.

The up and down part of her telling.....could it be that the child could be "killed" in he basement....."it was checked too", "looking up the streets", so no need to look at basement...because it was checked too. It has to be because she has "looked everywhere", but she checked the basement....she didnt looked in the basement.

She checked on her "early", she was sick because of the flu.(was she already sick before or did she got sick that night and woke up sick? (Could this mean that the night before something has happend why she would instantly know her child woke up sick?How would you know immediately it is flu? Not something else?)
"She laid back down to go back to sleep"
Could it be that she laid back down because of pain and maybe then died while going "back" to sleep.
Her way of crying seems to me she is sort of coprohending things she has seen and witnessed....like shes rasping to get air as sort of hyperventilation, becuase of what has happend and which she knows happend.....by her or someone else.
There is something else odd to the times mentioned.
If she has layed aliayah back to bed around 6.30/6.45......and "they" went back to bed but at around 7/7.30 her "other" kids came to her room
So when is this call being made? What time it is at that moment?
When did she came out of bed and noticed Aliayah wasnt in her bed anymore? When start the "one hour" search? It just doesnt seem to fit these times.

Layla said...

One thing though: Lena does say that Ailayah's father "doesnt even know she exists " which is speaking of her in present tense as being alive.
My gut tells me the step-father killed her. Peter hit the nail on the head that the step-father is very sensitive, and this is why she doesnt mention him.
My feeling is that the step-father killed her and disposed of her somewhere during the night. The mother may not have been aware of it but surely suspects it during the call.

Layla said...

Scratch that.

She "disappeared" before she was put to bed.

The 911 operators asks Lena what Ailayah was wearing.

Listen closely to her answer. She avoids saying what Ailayah wore to bed probably due to the fact she was not put in pj's and wasnt put to bed the night before.

"She had a little pair of purple Dora pj’s. We went up all these streets. We went up all these streets. "

Lena doesnt answer the question. She doesnt tell us what Ailayah wore. She tells us what Ailayah "had" (Dora pj's).

I think Ailayah disappeared before being put in pjs. Before bedtime.

Anonymous said...

"Ok. So you got up at 6:30 this morning with her?

Yes she got sick. Yes

This should be considered sensitive; via repetition and that the time frame is mentioned and she repeats about being sick. That the child was sick may prove vital in the investigation.

She went back to bed, went back to sleep and you laid down on"


Here I think she means Aliayah vomited which is a different from "being sick" or having "the flu." She is explaining why Aliayah was up at 6:30. Since she told us Aliayah had "been sick with the flu," I don't think "got sick" is repeating the same thing, but relaying a specific occurrence at a specific time.

Anonymous said...

See, I think she did vomit at 6:30 am, woke mom up, and the timeline got fuzzy after that.

Anonymous said...

Re: "at visitation"

I agree it sounds court ordered. What I envision is a brief visit, not an overnight stay. Does this mean in the middle of the morning, the emergency of the missing Aliayah, somehow this "visitation" still took place as scheduled?

Something's not right. What else could "at visitation" mean?

trustmeigetit said...

OT
I keep seeing posts that are anti Trump using the Central Park 5 case because he thinks they are guilty despite being acquitted.

I have done a little research and I almost think they may actually be guilty. Partly cause of the physical evidence

But found statements from 3 of them.

Would love others thoughts.


Antron McCray: “We charged her. We got her on the ground. Everybody started hitting her and stuff. She was on the ground. Everybody stompin’ and everything. Then we got, each—I grabbed one arm, some other kid grabbed one arm, and we grabbed her legs and stuff. Then we all took turns getting on her, getting on top of her.”

Kevin Richardson: “Raymond [Santana] had her arms, and Steve [Lopez] had her legs. He spread it out. And Antron [McCray] got on top, took her panties off.”

Raymond Santana: “He was smackin’ her, he was sayin’, ‘Shut up, bitch!’ Just smackin’ her…I was grabbin’ the lady’s tits.”

Kharey Wise: “This was my first rape.”

Me2l said...

Yes, it does

Layla said...

Why doesn't the Mom say "she was wearing....."?

This is the norm amongst even guilty callers.

The Mom says "She had a little pair (added sensitivity) of Dora pjs." She doesn't say she was wearing them, and we cannot say it for her.

I'm pushing the time of "disappearance" back into the night...pre-midnight or shortly after. This young girl was never put in pjs and was not put to bed.

Layla said...

"At visitation" does have a "court-ordered" sound to it, and may have been, but courts can order overnight visits, and it sounds like that's what this was.

Layla said...

Re: your question

No, this does not sound like an authentic confession

Antron McCray: “We charged her. (vague) We got her on the ground.(vague) Everybody started hitting her and stuff (vague). She was on the ground (very unnecessary repetition). Everybody stompin’(stompin' what or who?) and everything (vague). Then we got, each—I grabbed one arm (who's arm?), some other kid grabbed one arm (who's arm?), and we grabbed her legs and stuff (vague). Then we all took turns getting on her, getting on top of her (repetition).”

It sounds like a lot of description, but it's not realistic, it's not the way it should naturally come out in speech, and despite a lot of action words, it does not paint a realistic picture of any kind of attack.

Anonymous said...

At 7:33. Good point. Perhaps AB had been already assaulted. Is there any witnesses that the thug crew were in her house? Is a pack of cigars the only evidence in the house? All the info reported seems to have come allegedly come from the thug crew themselves.

trustmeigetit said...

The child looks so very sad. Its heartbreaking..😢

Layla said...

@11:55, Well, I believe she had been assaulted at that point.

No, there are no witnesses, and the CI seems to be parroting back police language during portions of the write-up that describe what Larry Taylor allegedly told him about actually shooting Amanda.

I am struck linguistically by Davey's description of "checking" for Amanda and finding her bowed in a posture of surrender beside the bed. Additionally, certain clues point to this having been the time she was assaulted. Actual clues as well as linguistic indicators that point to her having been attacked initially in the bedroom prior to staging.

Layla said...

I should add I feel that what Davey is describing did not happen in the morning before the robbery but rather it occurred during the evening prior.

Anonymous said...

The blackburn house should have the snoop dogz fingerprints everywhere. But only the unlocked door IMO indicates they were inside. Lured for quick theft. Just to entangle them in a murder committed by someone else prior to their entry? A crime of passion, anger, then staging afterwards. A gun as sermon prop? Too many coincidences?

Anonymous said...

Off Topic: Wow This might be an interesting SA case study. Dr Phil episode Teen Says that Eminem is her father and that she is pregnant with Jesus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMExSD4eQ1M

Anonymous said...

^^^^^^^^^This is a must-watch episode I must say. One of the funniest and most bizarre Dr Phil's ever. Very funny how Phil is so patient throughout the whole thing...that is probably the funniest part of it!

Linnet France said...

"I have searched everywhere". Isn't this a normal way of speaking? Meaning she has searched all the places she can think of (or for some period of time), and that she now needs help?
Or do the English language only consist of literall meaning?

English is not my first language, so I may be wrong.

All that said, Lena killed her daughter. Or knows who did it.

This reminds me to look up Darlie Routier, and her deluded followers. The case which brought me to this blog years ago.

Anonymous said...

I think maybe she didn't have the flu, but rather fever and vomiting from possible head trauma the night before, and mom covered it up when she died, because she was too chickensh!t to take her to ER.
They never found her right? Ask stepdad. (Was he step dad to all kids, or father of the infant?)
This reminds me of Lonzie Barton.

Linnet said...

Haha, I am looking forward to read the backstory, Peter :)