Jason Midyette
First Prev
of 66
Next Last
tara12

Boulder, CO

#1311 Mar 22, 2010
On March 18, Candy says: "She jury saw the baby's doctor say statement after statement of hers was a lie."

What language is that? What does that mean? I love the way Candy continues to bend things around her argument. She also takes things out of context, and makes gross assumptions about what goes through a juror's head. It is safe to say Candy was not in the courtroom in Dec 2007 and only writes based on what she has read in the paper. Bad news, Candy, the paper captured like 2% of the actual content of the trial. However, Candy must have some insight nobody else does that let's her decide what the jury thought was true and what wasn't. Candy also flip flops: on one side she gives the baby's doctor credit, on the other she doesn't. It entirely depends on if it supports Candy's argument or not.

Again, in the jury's head?? Right, I don't buy it.

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#1312 Mar 22, 2010
tara12 wrote:
On March 18, Candy says: "She jury saw the baby's doctor say statement after statement of hers was a lie."
What language is that? What does that mean? I love the way Candy continues to bend things around her argument. She also takes things out of context, and makes gross assumptions about what goes through a juror's head. It is safe to say Candy was not in the courtroom in Dec 2007 and only writes based on what she has read in the paper. Bad news, Candy, the paper captured like 2% of the actual content of the trial. However, Candy must have some insight nobody else does that let's her decide what the jury thought was true and what wasn't. Candy also flip flops: on one side she gives the baby's doctor credit, on the other she doesn't. It entirely depends on if it supports Candy's argument or not.
Again, in the jury's head?? Right, I don't buy it.
So I take it you are on the other side of the argument and think Molly should be free? Could you tell me why?

Candy and I disagree, a lot, but you can't come on here slamming her with just a differing opinion of her personality. What about the case? Where do you stand on it? If you want to talk personalities - go to FaceBook. Candy is a good researcher, and I am sure, most likely knows more about this case than you do, whoever you are.(unless you are Molly and if that is the case - shame on you for not protecting your son.)

I think the sentences for Molly and Alex both were too lenient. We need better laws to protect children and ensure their abusers are taken off the streets.
LillyAndGish

Reynoldsburg, OH

#1313 Mar 22, 2010
Henri McPhee wrote:
<quoted text>
You are assuming again.
I'm not assuming anything, Henri. To borrow a phrase from BrotherMoon, why are you ALWAYS acting as an apologist for a murderer or murderess? Good grief, these people need to PAY for what they did to a lovely ten-week-old little boy.

The evidence shows that Alex Midyette battered his beautiful son. The evidence shows that Molly Midyette turned a blind eye. And it showed it beyond a reasonable doubt. I think both should have been thrown into prison for the rest of their miserable lives. Anyone who would lay an abusive hand on a child is sick, sick, sick. Anyone who would stand by silently and let it go on is sick. Molly Midyette is one sick puppy. I hope she rots.
LillyAndGish

Reynoldsburg, OH

#1314 Mar 22, 2010
tara12 wrote:
On March 18, Candy says: "She jury saw the baby's doctor say statement after statement of hers was a lie."
What language is that? What does that mean? I love the way Candy continues to bend things around her argument. She also takes things out of context, and makes gross assumptions about what goes through a juror's head. It is safe to say Candy was not in the courtroom in Dec 2007 and only writes based on what she has read in the paper. Bad news, Candy, the paper captured like 2% of the actual content of the trial. However, Candy must have some insight nobody else does that let's her decide what the jury thought was true and what wasn't. Candy also flip flops: on one side she gives the baby's doctor credit, on the other she doesn't. It entirely depends on if it supports Candy's argument or not.
Again, in the jury's head?? Right, I don't buy it.
Candy's well known to the people on this board. As Legal Eagle said, Candy's a very good law researcher. If you have a problem with her on another board, take it to that board, don't bring it here.

Both Alex and Molly Midyette got off WAY to easy. Where is the justice for poor little Jason?
candy

East Lansing, MI

#1315 Mar 22, 2010
From the grand jury indictment of Molly and Alex, an example of the LIES Molly told about the injury to baby Jason, WEEKS before he died:

28....Additionally, Molly told Jane (Mrs. Bowers, Molly's mother) there was something wrong with Jason's arm. Molly described Jason's arm as "it sort of floated." Further Molly told Jane that she and Alex talked to the doctor about it and showed her the arm. Molly said the doctor examined the arm and referred to it as his "gimpy" arm. Dr. Siegfriend said that Molly or Alex NEVER INFORMED HER ABOUT A PROBLEM WITH JASON'S ARM. JASON'S MEDICAL RECORDS DO NOT REFLECT ANY MENTION OF THIS CONCERN.

30. Kay (Mrs. Midyette, Alex's mother) said she received a call from Alex sometime prior to February 2, 2006, wher Alex expressed concern about bleeding from an injury to Jason's gum. Molly later expressed a concern to Kay about a second bleed from the gum when giving him a pacifier. The area of the bleed was described as front center area of the upper gum. Alex and Molly advised Kay they had talked to the doctor and the area of the gum had been examined by the doctor using a metal probe and the doctor indicated that it was not a problem as it did not go all the way through. DR. SIEGFRIED STATED THAT AT NO POINT WAS THE ISSUE OF A GUM BLEED RAISED BY MOLLY OR ALEX, AND SHE SAID SHE HAD NEVER USED A METAL PROBE TO EXAMINE ANY INFANTS' GUMS.

Molly's role of not taking the baby for IMMEDIATE medical care was significant in that IT CAUSED THE BABY TO DIE. Dr. Carole Jenny testified that Jason could have survived his horrific injuries if he had been taken for prompt medical treatment:

"If he had gotten care immediately ... he might not have gotten severe swelling and most likely would have lived," Jenny said. "He was going downhill right in front of their eyes, and not taking him in was unconscionable.

"THAT'S WHAT KILLED HIM."

www.dailycamera.com
candy

East Lansing, MI

#1316 Mar 22, 2010
Again, this demonstrates Molly, doing what she does best, looking out for #1, ice water running through her veins, while her son is dying, asking her lawyer about what OUR, not his, OUR defense will be:("eggshell baby" is a legal theory, that lawyer Molly would know about, as well as "broken baby")

"Social worker Jenna Reed told jurors this afternoon that she heard Molly Midyette, standing just feet away from her dying baby, ask her attorney, "Do you know what our case is going to be, our position, going to be - broken baby or eggshell baby?"

www.dailycamera.com
Capricorn

Brooklyn, NY

#1317 Jun 17, 2010
http://www.dailycamera.com/boulder-county-new...

It was just a matter of time before Molly blames Alex (John Ramsey's buddy)

It doesn't matter what he did or that she was intimidated. She allowed her baby to be murdered and did nothing. They both should fry!
justice 12

Boulder, CO

#1318 Jun 17, 2010

Candy,

You are a desperate loser whose life is based on telling half truths.Did it ever dawn on you that the doctor was protecting herself from liability? Why is it this child was taken to the doctor 6 or 7 times and this great source for truth,the doctor, saw nothing . No soft tissue crepidation or bruises . Just remember Candy ,oh light for Justice,the baby lived 11 weeks divided by 6 or 7 visits . Hum? Now what great protector of justice.
candy

East Lansing, MI

#1319 Jun 17, 2010
LOL! You are almost as stupid as your felonious friend. The jury heard from the doctor, they heard from THE CONVICTED FELON, and they didn't believe the FELON, and threw the book at her.
Henri McPhee

Ringwood, UK

#1320 Apr 20, 2012
I still think there was jumping to conclusions and not a proper investigation in the Midyette case.

There needs to be a reinvestigation of the medical evidence in the Midyette case.

There was a recent case in the UK with similarities to the Midyette case. I don't know if rickets in the mother or baby was ever investigated in the Midyette case, but I doubt it:

LONDON—A young British couple has been reunited with their infant daughter after a long legal battle that dragged on even after they were acquitted of murdering their 4-month-old son.

Rohan Wray, 22, and Chana Al-Alas, 19, were charged with murder after their son Jayden suffered a fractured skull and died of brain damage in 2009.

The baby boy was diagnosed post-mortem with severe rickets, which causes bones to become soft and which some experts explained as the cause behind Jayden's fractures.

Jayden's parents blame the hospitals that treated their son for failing to spot the rickets, but the hospitals say they did everything they could, and medical professionals continue to disagree over what caused the baby's death.

The judge's ruling at the High Court on Thursday allowed Al-Alas to be reunited with the little girl she was forced to relinquish to state custody immediately after giving birth in October 2010 amid the murder case.

The mother and daughter had remained apart because of a civil suit filed by the London Borough of Islington alleging that, despite having rickets, Jayden suffered fractures caused by "non-accidental injury" and "died as a result of inflicted trauma caused to him whilst in the care of the parents."

A High Court judge found those allegations to be unproven in a ruling issued Thursday and made public Friday, leading baby Jayda to be returned to her parents.

A lawyer for Al-Alas said Friday it's not yet clear if her client will sue the hospitals after going through "two-and-a-half years of hell" that started with the loss of one child and led to first a criminal trial and then a civil suit that was only resolved on Thursday.

"It's whether they want to go through another four years of litigation," said lawyer Ann Thompson. "They've got a little baby back at home with them and they're really enjoying her. They just want to enjoy that."
candy

East Lansing, MI

#1321 Apr 20, 2012
Jason Midyette had an extensive autopsy by Dr. John Meyer, who conducted JonBenet's extensive autopsy, that was peer reviewed BEFORE charges were filed by 5 specialists. Jason Midyette did not have "severe rickets." Furthermore, the only one claiming any kind of disease was the father. The mother claims she believes her husband beat the child to death.

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#1322 Apr 20, 2012
Both of the Midyettes are exactly where they deserve to be
candy

East Lansing, MI

#1323 Oct 26, 2012
Molly Midyette's SICKENINGLY mild punishment. Great article! Someone cares, of course in DENVER, not Boulder:

http://blogs.denverpost.com/opinion/2012/10/2...

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#1324 Oct 27, 2012
candy wrote:
Molly Midyette's SICKENINGLY mild punishment. Great article! Someone cares, of course in DENVER, not Boulder:
http://blogs.denverpost.com/opinion/2012/10/2...
Great article Candy; thanks

It wouldn't surprise me if she ended up with a reality show and became a star now.

I'm thinking she will also be married again soon too and be pregnant.

That seems to be the way things go nowadays, especially in Colorado. She will eventually be rewarded for her 15 minutes of shame and another child will have paid the extreme price for their parents' freedom

I can hardly wait for her to make a statement that she too, has to "get on with her life"

Sickening!

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#1325 Oct 28, 2012
Amazing article Candy, thanks for the link.

I can't believe she is already headed to a halfway house. That action is just like re-victimizing Jason all over again.
candy wrote:
Molly Midyette's SICKENINGLY mild punishment. Great article! Someone cares, of course in DENVER, not Boulder:
http://blogs.denverpost.com/opinion/2012/10/2...
Henri McPhee

Harrow, UK

#1326 Oct 31, 2012
The moral of all this is not to have a sickly baby who dies unexpectedly. There should have benn a careful and thorough investigation.

You must be guided by the evidence, and the medical evidence, in these sort of cases, and not just by emotion and opinions.

Expert opinions must be from real experts, and not from purported experts.

Even the judge in the Midyette case seems to have been emotional. The American Press seems to have been biased, like a lot of these Hollywood films. No wonder Charlie Chaplin was hounded out of the country.

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#1328 Oct 31, 2012
Henri McPhee wrote:
The moral of all this is not to have a sickly baby who dies unexpectedly. There should have benn a careful and thorough investigation.
You must be guided by the evidence, and the medical evidence, in these sort of cases, and not just by emotion and opinions.
Expert opinions must be from real experts, and not from purported experts.
Even the judge in the Midyette case seems to have been emotional. The American Press seems to have been biased, like a lot of these Hollywood films. No wonder Charlie Chaplin was hounded out of the country.
Henri, if you got your way, we could close all the prisons.

Then I think we should release them all back into society - in the UK!
candy

East Lansing, MI

#1329 Aug 17, 2014
The Devil gets out of prison to a halfway house after complaining he was convicted of a lesser offence than his equally bad wife. This whole case is a monumnetal travesty of Jusitce:

http://www.dailycamera.com/News/ci_26346794/A...
candy

East Lansing, MI

#1330 Aug 18, 2014
Denver Post editorial: Why is Alex Midyette out of prison after only 5 years?

http://www.denverpost.com/editorials/ci_26287...

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#1331 Aug 19, 2014
candy wrote:
Denver Post editorial: Why is Alex Midyette out of prison after only 5 years?
http://www.denverpost.com/editorials/ci_26287...
$$$Family Money$$$

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 66
Next Last

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.

JonBenet Ramsey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
A staged crime scene leaves only two real possi... 17 min berrytea333 97
Do intruder theorists accept the ransom note at... 30 min Sig Turner 167
For the BDI's 54 min moonjack 31
How far is the phone from stairs? 7 hr Just Wondering 22
News Laurence L Smith Releases Updated Version of 'T... Thu robert 64
Ramsey vs Duggar Thu rainbow 34
What I believe is close to what happened Thu Sig 270
More from around the web