Flashbacks:
The RNGC Caddyshackpocalypse
Bollards!
Police are looking for a 37-year-old Reston woman and her two young children. A handgun and psychopharmaceuticals may be involved, so the term "endangered" probably has merit.
News and notes from Reston (tm).
Thursday, April 9, 2009
This Week in Crime: Watch for Reston's 'Endangered Family'
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Have worked with this woman and while she may have issues, probably the soon to be ex-husband pounced on the fact that she was taking medicine for possibly bi-polar or depression issues. She is nice and loves her children...he may have pushed her over the edge.
ReplyDeleteIs she running from the law? She was arrested for larceny and obtaining money under false pretences last October.
ReplyDeleteIs the above photo a mug shot?
hey david---- ex husband stop putting that shit on here that she stole from u and the larceny shit. you are the psycho and it will all come out in the end,i told you you will get what is coming to you
ReplyDeleteI can assure you it was not her ex husband, or anyone associated with Ms. West, that posted the arrest reference. That being said, your immediate jump to point fingers and blame lead me to conclude you don't have panoptic logical abilities.
ReplyDeleteShe lost custody of her youngest son after falsely accusing her husband of various crimes--false accusations against the father of child endangerment, false claims of physical abuse. She made the same claims against her first husband and the father of her eldest child. Her view of reality is skewed and she is able to con intelligent people, including police officers and judges. She needs to turn herself in and face reality.
ReplyDeleteJust because she has bad taste in men doesn't make her a "mental" case. How can she have falsely accused her ex-husband of child endangerment when the child comes home with a broken finger that had not been attended to by a doctor. Her ex-husband's family is apparently tied to high level executives at prominent business in the Richmond area and can pay off the judges. She has disappeared to protect her children from the manipulative and abusive ex-husband. The media can be so easily manipulated as well. Don't believe everything you read.
ReplyDeleteagain, it's all about the he said she said BS... everyone misses the big picture here, the children. if anything, at least put the 2 kids into protective services or with another family member. at that point, they can play cat and mouse all the live long day. just sad it's come to name calling and dragging one another through the mud to try to make others fall in line and believe either one of them... we all know there are 3 sides to every story (his, hers, and the truth).
ReplyDeleteDo any of Ms. West's friends or associates know whether she appeared in court today for the case to legally retain custody of the son who is age six? If so, what were the judge's conclusions with respect to father of this child? Just curious...
ReplyDeleteShe did not show for court on Monday for her custody case of her first child and lost the case.
ReplyDeleteI think the interesting thing here is that Ms. West's family and friends are putting themselves at risk for legal recourse if they were or are involved with her so called "disappearance to protect her children." That statement alone implies that there is third party knowledge of her actions. If two separate courts have reviewed evidence and have ruled in favor of both of the fathers then any neural third party observer to the situation would have to conclude that there is certainly some underlying issue with the mother that is causing the same situation to happen again and again with multiple partners, fathers, etc. If Ms. West's family wants to help her then they should persuade her to turn herself in and seek professional help. In the end they will find her and if she wants to retain any chance of seeing her children then she needs to give herself up.
ReplyDeleteGiven the comments posted here, it is my understanding that there are two children (as reported in the media), and, two different fathers. And, if I further 'understand' correctly, BOTH fathers have recently brought 'custody' cases, in 'different' courts, to have their respective sons placed into their personal care... Are these 'facts' accurate??
ReplyDeleteThe facts of the situation are as follows:
ReplyDelete1. There are two children involved in this situation.
2. Each child has a different father.
3. Last week one father took Ms. West to court and won custody of the youngest of the two children. That case was tried in New Kent Virginia and Ms. West was ordered by the court to meet the father in Fredericksburg the following morning at 8:00 AM to turn the child over to his father. This arrangement was allowed by the judge even after Ms. West stated in court that she would never allow the father to have unsupervised visitation with the child. This is a rather bold statement to make in a courtroom after you have just lost custody of your child. The judge should be held accountable for letting her have the opportunity to run with the kids.
4. Ms. West failed to show up as ordered by the court and a bench warrant was issued for her arrest.
5. Ms. West was due in court this past Monday for a second custody hearing involving her older son. She did not show up and the court ruled in favor of the older son's father and also awarded him full physical and legal custody.
6. Subsequently parental abduction charges have been filed for both of the children.
All of this information can easily be verified through the courts.
The question that I would ask is how can logical and presumably intelligent people continue to believe that Ms. West is a victim when in two instances a judge has reviewed the evidence and found that enough evidence existed to make a custody change. The legal standard for making a ruling like this is fairly high. Statistically speaking it is fairly rare for a father to win custody of a child unless there are very valid and compelling reasons to do so. The comments that have been made on this blog regarding alleged abuse by one or both of the fathers involved were certainly not ignored by the courts in making their decisions.
you are obviously the one with lack of knowledge there dear. of course if you run out of fear for your kids and you dont show up fpr court. youve then lost the case because guess what...... YOU NEVER SHOWED UP... if you dont show up how can you have a chance at winning.... where the heck is this "poor" dad who doesnt appear to be too worried, no ones seen him begging for hids childs return...
ReplyDeleteAre you disputing the facts that I listed? Would you also dispute the other criminal charges that Ms. West has been found guilty of in the last couple of months? (e.g. larceny and obtaining money under false pretences)
ReplyDeleteYou sound like you have an absolute lack of respect for the integrity of our judicial system. Do you actually think that people should believe that a judge, social workers and everyone else involved with the first custody case somehow reviewed all the evidence and made a mistake by granting custody to the father?
That is completely absurd.
As for not showing up for the second case I think your reasoning is flawed. How about this for a logical explanation. You go to court a week ago and lose custody of your first child. You then realize that you lost custody of the first child and based on the evidence presented you will most likely lose custody of the second child and you decide not to even bother with showing up because not only will you lose custody of the second child you will also be arrested because you are fugitive from the law. Could that be the real reason you don't show up in court.
The interesting thing about your comments and the comments of others who are supporting Ms. West is that there seems to be a lack of explanation as to why Ms. West actually lost custody. I would find it interesting to see one of you actually address that part of the story without fabricating stories about paying off judges and other outlandish accusations as some of you have stated on other blogs.
You are pathetic and your friend is a criminal who is endangering the well being of her children.
Finally I would like to address your comments about the father begging for the return of his child. Are you proposing that Ms. West would actually bring the child back if the father showed up on TV and begged for her to do so? What kind of twisted manipulative statement is that? Are you mentally stable? If you are helping Ms. West run from the law you will be prosecuted and held accountable as well. I would watch my steps if I were you.
I couldn't said it better. She has broken the law. She was court ordered to produce the child and chose not to. She had a hearing on Mon. in N. VA and again she disregared the law, no show. Her judgement is impaired. I too fault New Kent County, Judge Hoover, for giving her time to do do this. She was in contempt of court. Shame on Judge Hoover. Like I said in other blogs, I fear for the safety of all three.
ReplyDeleteNice to see that you are concerned Charmagne. Just when everyone thought your sole purpose of posting on all the blogs was to smear the ex-husband you attempt to display a glimmer of compassion however contrived it may be. The world needs more concerned individuals like you :-) However your objectiveness is somewhat questionable given your repeated failed attempts at regaining custody of your daughter from said ex-husband. He must not be that bad of a guy if a compassionate caring person such as yourself can't manage to regain custody of your child from him.
ReplyDeleteThank Goodness all are safe.
ReplyDeleteWho drove her to Fluvanna>
ReplyDeleteThe ex- husband is crazy. She did not know what to do and made a bad decision because he "supposedly won in the court system". She is a good person, caught up in a bad situation. I have to laugh at the above comments. Someone really is trying to persuade powers that be that he is the better person. How absurd.
ReplyDeletePeople can sway the courts by bad testimony in order to win. Which is what happened in this case. Don't try to sway the public. You won't win. She loves her children. You are trying to humiliate her and hurt her the most by taking away her kids. Yea for you for having the best testimony. Too bad it was not the truth.
ReplyDeleteand for the mug shot comment, wow... that really made a difference.
ReplyDelete