joshua parker
ShowMeTheMoney

Mount Holly, NJ

#3984 Apr 22, 2014
Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
I interpreted that comment as the commenter telling her own story of a friendship she had and how it was similar to being friends w Kate. I don't think she was talking about Kate specifically.
Ohhhhh! My Apologies Robin
ShowMeTheMoney

Mount Holly, NJ

#3985 Apr 22, 2014
OldTownFather wrote:
the most important business to discuss in Medford, I agree. With as many junkies, sex offenders in the town and state, gangsters and all around riff raff, dysfunctional local government and such. Is anyone helping any other children is or is it just this one that everyone knew about, yet nobody seemed to do much till the state got involved? She's in jail and they took her kids, I'd as soon see her hung up, but that's not gonna happen here. Thank God the Portland jail isn't full, eh? Otherwise, she would have just been released from Jackson County. This is a reflection of the single mindedness and spotlight people in this area live with. How many other children are on Caring Bridge? Just a thought to ponder!
Looks like a past poster a lot of us are familiar with has made a reappearance
SLF

Eugene, OR

#3986 Apr 22, 2014
SLF wrote:
<quoted text>
I am a little confused here. What adopted daughter are you talking about? She adopted two from Ukraine. She didn't ever mention letting her adopted girls going with anybody. And, with another man? Really? I don't think so on that one. And she doesn't have a 10-year old daughter as far I know. Can you explain these things please?
I am sorry Robin! I didn't get that it wasn't about Kate! My apologies!
Caring Mom

Broken Arrow, OK

#3987 Apr 23, 2014
ShowMeTheMoney wrote:
<quoted text>
Looks like a past poster a lot of us are familiar with has made a reappearance
I think a lot of us noticed that. I certainly did! We probably shouldn't be surprised.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#3988 Apr 23, 2014
Caring Mom and Showme TheMoney, not necessarily. I recall seeing, months ago, a thread from Grants Pass complaining about a lack of adequate policing in the area. A couple of the sentences in OldTownFather's post alluded to selective justice in the area. I suspect this poster is another such disgruntled local citizen sharing his/her opinion on the blaring spotlight we're shining on one transgressor when, in their opinion, that shiny light could be doing much more to help their community. Or they're just sharing their general curmudgeon perspective on life. Negative opinions don't prove membership in the Parker camp.
Robin who was scammed

Cedar Rapids, IA

#3989 Apr 23, 2014
Sorry I was off topic... I was stating how I felt to lose a friend I thought I had.:)
Love the Lemons LOL

Since: Mar 14

Location hidden

#3990 Apr 23, 2014
Robin who was scammed wrote:
Sorry I was off topic... I was stating how I felt to lose a friend I thought I had.:)
Love the Lemons LOL
I thought it was very relevant, seeing as many here have talked about how they're hurting because they lost a friend in Kate.
It's comforting to know you're not alone in a painful experience.*shrug*
SLF

Eugene, OR

#3991 Apr 23, 2014
Robin who was scammed wrote:
Sorry I was off topic... I was stating how I felt to lose a friend I thought I had.:)
Love the Lemons LOL
I don't think it was necessarily off topic. I just feel bad that I missed the intent of your post and thought you were talking about Kate. We can all relate to losing a friend here. I am glad you made your post.

Since: Nov 13

Location hidden

#3992 Apr 24, 2014
Family court hearing today----

http://www.ojd.state.or.us/JOS/Calendar.nsf/3... $FILE/JOS-64385272-FAMCRT.PDF

Mother was I/C by phone.

Since: Oct 13

Location hidden

#3993 Apr 24, 2014
Motion to reconsider judgement of disposition...what does that mean?
Interested

Glendale Heights, IL

#3994 Apr 24, 2014
Only 4 of the kids appear on that list.

Since: Apr 14

Location hidden

#3995 Apr 24, 2014
Wow.

Motion to reconsider judgement of disposition.

So this one was just for Sarah, Emily, Isaac & David. They had been at home lately, right? Does anyone know if Charley was there? Megan or Adam? Was this on the local news?

J&B still out of the home, hopefully continuing to thrive. Right?

Since: Apr 14

Location hidden

#3996 Apr 24, 2014
Madi, or any other legally savvy member here,

Dispositions is the judges ruling, right?

So reconsideration would be like an appeal of what the judge ruled, right?

I wonder what that was...

And which side is asking for reconsideration - the Parkers or the government?

Since: Nov 13

Location hidden

#3997 Apr 24, 2014
I believe it is the defendents asking.

It may be that they are looking to appeal the judge's disposition as it might prejudice Kate's trial or that they are looking for some other relief that will benefit Kate. Remember Kate and Charley chose to pled no lo contendre/no contest. Would make sense that it is criminal trial related.
Could be that the judge mentioned things in the judgement phase that might influence the criminal case.

This would be a great time for a Parker to come here and clarify for us. 4672

Since: Apr 14

Location hidden

#3998 Apr 24, 2014
I didn't know they pled no contest! If I recall correctly, that basically means "I'm not saying I'm guilty, but I recognize that you have enough evidence to make me look that way that I don't think I can effectively argue against."

Or something like that?

Since: Mar 14

Location hidden

#3999 Apr 24, 2014
B-Lynn wrote:
Madi, or any other legally savvy member here,
Dispositions is the judges ruling, right?
So reconsideration would be like an appeal of what the judge ruled, right?
I wonder what that was...
And which side is asking for reconsideration - the Parkers or the government?
Hi Blynn!
That's exactly right.
I offered to help out with a few posts on the Truth Blog and I put up a post on this:
http://thetruthaboutkpmomof789.wordpress.com/...

I wrote;
"According to the docket, this hearing was for a motion to reconsider judgment of disposition. A disposition is the settlement or final ruling on a case, so this motion is essentially asking the judge to reconsider whatever decision was made previously concerning the children’s placement."

So you're exactly right --- it's like an appeal of the judge's ruling.
I had the same question --- which side filed this motion? It's impossible to know from that document. If I had to make an educated guess, I'd say it was the Parker's filing that motion for a reconsideration. The state doesn't typically do that.
But again, that's only an educated guess. There are laws about when/what the state can appeal or seek reconsiderations, but I'm not familiar with this particular state. Perhaps Anna has more info on this.

The only way we could figure it out for certain would be A) with the transcripts or B) determine if the kids have been in the home. If the kids were in the home the past week or two, then it would have been the state filing the motion for reconsideration. If the kids haven't been in the home, then it would be the Parkers.

What's curious is that the motions were only filed for the four middle kids: Emily, Sarah, Isaac and David.
Bethany and Joshua were NOT among them.

Also on the Truth Blog, there's some other new stuff if you haven't seen it. See the top: charges, bios and resources.

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#4000 Apr 25, 2014
Another possibility: someone, either an extended family member or a past friend with knowledge of the middle kids, has stepped forward to take them in and the court agreed to consider it. This would explain including the mother in the proceedings.

Since: Nov 13

Location hidden

#4001 Apr 25, 2014
B-Lynn wrote:
I didn't know they pled no contest! If I recall correctly, that basically means "I'm not saying I'm guilty, but I recognize that you have enough evidence to make me look that way that I don't think I can effectively argue against."
Or something like that?
Exactly.

Since: Mar 14

Location hidden

#4002 Apr 25, 2014
Sherlo wrote:
Another possibility: someone, either an extended family member or a past friend with knowledge of the middle kids, has stepped forward to take them in and the court agreed to consider it. This would explain including the mother in the proceedings.
You're absolutely correct. It's possible a family or friend stepped forward, offering to take them in.

I hadn't thought of that. That would be wonderful, wouldn't it?

The only thing is that it would be an odd way to go about it -- filing a motion for a reconsideration of a disposition. You'd think they would file an entirely new request.
But you never know. Perhaps this person was involved in the case previously but the judge declined because of a problem/situation that has now been remedied.

Since: Nov 13

Location hidden

#4003 Apr 25, 2014
The last I saw on news reports, etc, she pled not guilty. I'm confused.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Medford Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Man pleads no contest to stealing over $260k fr... (Jun '17) Dec 22 AIPAC is a RICO 2
Defective Homes and Fraud (Dec '06) Dec 22 PULTE is a RICO 93
News Grants Pass woman reported missing Nov '17 We hate coos bay ... 1
News Teen skateboarder dies in nighttime collision w... Nov '17 Grandma 1
why did the 14 yr old shoot them? (Oct '13) Nov '17 Larry Dean Stuckey 4
Need black Nov '17 barelynodding 1
Avondale, AZ Police Raid 11/08/2017 @ Homesmart... Nov '17 Wondering 1

Medford Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Medford Mortgages