Update: Edington-James tragedy. Some medical details revealed.
Hunter
Fairfield Police Department withheld details as to why they found that
Barry C. James could not have molested Jonathon and Christina
Edington's two year old girl, other than the interviews didn't support
the claim. However, further details have come come out, namely James's
medical records regarding James's physical ability to be able to do
such a thing. Apparently he had nerve damage in his legs which would
had restricted his ability to climb into the room of Edington's
sleeping daughter, in addition the 59 year old James was significantly
overweight further reducing his ability:
Cops: Victim did not assault girl
By ed...@ctpost.com (ANDREW BROPHY abr...@ctpost.com)
The Connecticut Post
FAIRFIELD - Police on Thursday confirmed what State's Attorney
Jonathan Benedict told the media three days ago: No evidence exists to
support the claim that murder victim Barry C. James had molested his
accused killer's 2-year-old daughter.
"There's no evidence of any molestation occurring," police Capt. Gary
MacNamara said. "We're confident that the evidence does not support any
molestation."
MacNamara declined to say whether police plan to charge Christina
Edington, wife of accused killer Jonathon Edington, with making a false
statement to police. "I don't know at this point if we're pursuing
anything on those lines," he said.
Christina Edington's Aug. 28 call to her husband, accusing Colony
Street neighbor James of molesting their daughter, caused him to fly
into a rage, burst through James' bedroom window and stab him in the
chest more than a dozen times with a kitchen knife.
Christina Edington filed a molestation complaint against James with
police two days after her husband was arrested for allegedly killing
James. Police said they had no knowledge of any molestation claims
against James before he was killed.
Peter Ambrose, a spokesman for the James family, said they are relieved
by the statements from Benedict and police.
"The family is relieved to some extent because it's one thing to have a
son taken from a family, but it's another to have his name besmirched,"
Ambrose said Thursday. "The paradox of this whole thing is,
notwithstanding the findings of the Fairfield Police Department and
what was said by the state's attorney, Barry has been taken from his
family."
"It's a shame of massive proportion - it's beyond that," Ambrose
said.
Ambrose said James' family knew James, 59, had not molested the
Edingtons' daughter, but felt it was inappropriate to comment while the
police investigated Christina Edington's claim.
He said James' family gave investigators full access to the Colony
Street house where James lived with his elderly parents, his car and
his medical records. The medical records indicated it was not realistic
to expect James, who was heavy and had nerve damage in his legs, to be
able to climb through a window in the Edington house and molest their
daughter.
"We purposefully provided them with information that could be used by
them. We did that because we felt all along Barry was absent any
involvement in this matter," Ambrose said.
Christina Edington was on vacation in Rhode Island with their daughter
on Aug. 28 when she called her husband at their Colony Street house and
told him James had molested their daughter, Rebecca.
She told police she did not witness the molestation and relied on
statements from the child, who allegedly said she did not want to
return to their house, according to police.
James' family intends to file a wrongful death suit against Edington to
clear James' name.
Edington, a 29-year-old patent attorney, is free on $1 million bond and
pleaded not guilty last week to murder and burglary charges.
Police said they found Edington at his sink, washing blood off his
arms, after receiving 911 calls from both James' mother and Edington.
Edington told emergency dispatchers only that his neighbor had been
hurt, police said.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15345326/
James's medical condition was further clarified in another article:
"The James family not only fully cooperated with police but voluntarily
opened their whole house to police to do a complete search for any
evidence, but police found nothing that would fit the profile of
someone who would do the activity Mrs. Edington has accused Barry James
of," he said. "The real mystery here is why this woman would make these
allegations."
Meehan said James suffered nerve damage to his legs which made it
difficult for him to climb stairs, meaning it would have been nearly
impossible for him to crawl through a window more than 4 feet off the
ground to get into the girl's room in the Edington home.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15316096/
As noted in the articles the Jame's family will file a wrongful death
suite and the Fairfield Police Department hasn't ruled out charging
Christina Edington with false report.
So not only that Edington has an excellent chance of spending a the
next 10 to 20 years in prison, his family could be impoverished between
the civil suite and the legal bills; and as for Christina, the mother,
if it is found to have been a deliberate False Report, could spend
sometime in jail as well.
---->Hunter
tiny dancer
"Hunter" <buffh...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1161581350....@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Doesn't if *feel* like we are missing something here? The husband is a
nerdy patent attorney, parents appear to be well-educated. Family appears
to be upper middle-class *normal*. It just *feels* like there has to be
more to this story than what meets the eye. I'm certainly not saying the
dead guy molested the child. IIRC, my early comment was 'when would he have
an opportunity to even have access to the little girl?' 'Two year olds
aren't 'out and about the neighborhood' unsupervised.' But it just seems
like there has to be more behind this whole story IMO.
td
>
b
that was my thought as well - especially since the guy was considered a
little odd it's hard to imagine that these people had their daughter in
his house unsupervised
although i am not so suspicious pf the guy
the father's extreme reaction - running over there and stabbing 12
times - just really makes me wonder what else was going on
also if he had some vendetta with the guy..... and was ranting and
raving about him (apparently he called in a report about him before) so
makes sense that the girl might talk about him - for example if father
is complaining about seeing the guy at the window..... in preschool
language that becomes the boogeyman coming in the window
i wonder if had some long-running prejudice against this family to
start with and then the accusation was just the last straw
my first thought, before knowing the details was that perhaps there was
some love triangle or something weird between the wife, neighbour and
husband
Educate
tiny dancer wrote:
yes, like rank good ole american irrationality.
Hunter
You are thinking that someone like Edington is immune to blind rage.
Anyone can have a trigger that would cause them to lash out
irrationally. I have heard that as you just said that this guy, is a
normal nerdy guy that is well educated and an attorney who should had
known better because he is an officer of the court. Well, if you
believe your child was attacked all of that veneer of civilization that
we have goes out the window. He could have been a construction worker,
a garbageman, a longshoreman. He could have been a doctor, corporate
executive, officer in the military or the lawyer he is, it doesn't
matter. It is not matter of education but feeling. Heck, his being an
apparent milquetoast helps him with the Extreme Emotional Distress
defense. If he was the "type" to go off the handle on a regular basis,
the EED defense would work as well. He would be just another hot head
and in fact it would actually be worse for him even if he didn't do a
thing different, so his placid past is an asset with him snapping, as I
believe he truly did.
>
> I'm certainly not saying the dead guy molested the child. IIRC, my early comment was 'when
> would he have an opportunity to even have access to the little girl?' 'Two year olds
> aren't 'out and about the neighborhood' unsupervised.' But it just seems
> like there has to be more behind this whole story IMO.
I think what you see is what you get. A man who snapped after hearing
his child was molested and probably had a preconceived notion that his
neighbor was a potential sex offender. Ironically as I have said
before, the parent's attitude toward Barry James may have planted the
seed of fear in their daughter's mind, casing her to be afraid of the
boogieman next door. As I said many times, I was always suspicious as
to why the mother took two days to report the so-called abuse
officially and formally. The fact that the cops *haven't* ruled out
charging Christina with False Report makes my suspicions rise further.
---->Hunter
Carmen
It isn't like this is the first time Edington has flown off the handle
and done something outrageous. The 1998 incident involving his
distruction of the Planned Parenthood display and yelling at the
educators and being charged with harassment, disorderly conduct and
dangerous behavior isn't the action of someone in control of himself.
As I see it, his wife was probably well aware of the earlier incident.
She would have been in a position to know whether he was likely to do
something rash if she told him someone threatened his daughter. My
leaning is towards her having made the call from out of state half
hoping he'd do something rash. I just don't think she counted on it
going this far. I feel (and yes, this is pure conjecture on my part)
that she may have been looking for some sort of active confrontation to
either force a move by the James family or give herself a reason to
convince her husband to move their family elsewhere. That's my theory.
I know, normally I give almost everyone the benefit of the doubt.
This time though something just tells me the mother instigated this.
Carmen
b
agreed..... always felt something was going on w- the mother here
i did not know about the planned parenthood thing.... given that, it
does not make sense the way she did it
if i had a hot-headed hubby who i knew was furious at someone - esp in
context of molestation - i would call the cops to get over there before
he did
has anyone seen a picture of barry james? i find it odd that there are
plenty of edington and none (that i can find) of him
tiny dancer
> >
> > Doesn't if *feel* like we are missing something here? The husband is a
> > nerdy patent attorney, parents appear to be well-educated. Family
appears
> > to be upper middle-class *normal*. It just *feels* like there has to be
> > more to this story than what meets the eye.
> -----
> You are thinking that someone like Edington is immune to blind rage.
Not necessarily, my thoughts were more along the line of there *still* being
more to the actual dynamics of the history of all of the people involved in
this incident. Edington, wife, and victim.
> Anyone can have a trigger that would cause them to lash out
> irrationally. I have heard that as you just said that this guy, is a
> normal nerdy guy that is well educated and an attorney who should had
> known better because he is an officer of the court. Well, if you
> believe your child was attacked all of that veneer of civilization that
> we have goes out the window.
What made him believe that, to such an extent, *immediately*, is what I'm
referring to. Was it the way it was told by the wife? Was it *other*
things, besides the 'naked window' performance to do with the neighbor?
I'm curious as to exactly how verbal this two year old is normally. Like I
said, it just feels like there is more to the dynamics of this threesome.
That part really doesn't bother me because the wife was out of the state at
the time. What with all the chaos of the stabbing, arrest, husband locked
up, etc.
td
cro...@earthlink.net
guy to try to build up some sort of case to make her husband's murder of the
neighbor more "understandable" - to try to prepare a legal
defense/mitigation.
I had not heard of the Planned Parenthood temper tantrum, etc. Where was
that noted?
If it is as described herein, the wife holds even more responsibility for
the killing, as she had knowledge of her husband's propensity for violence.
In addition, I cannot imagine giving a husband such upsetting news (even tho
it was not true...I wonder if she made up the whole thing? or embroidered
upon what little remarks the child may have made?) over the telephone...and
in the possible context of his already having exhibited out-of-proportion
reactions in the past, her telephone report become quite reprehensible...
"tiny dancer" <tinyda...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1k4%g.23279$Zn1....@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
Greegor
Clearly this patent ATTORNEY had no faith in our criminal justice
system.
Some of the earliest news reports mentioned Barry James allegedly
"exposed himself".
How come none of these news stories mention
allegations that Barry James exposed himself to this family?
I haven't seen ANY news reports mentioning his temper tantrum at
planned parenthood.
Various news stories with links and 9 Comments from alt.true-crime
follow.
http://crime.about.com/b/a/257176.htm
Slain Neighbor Didn't Molest Two-Year-Old
When Connecticut attorney Jonathon Edington learned from his wife that
their two-year-old daughter said their neighbor had molested her,
police say he went home, got a knife, broke into the neighbor's house
and stabbed 58-year-old Barry James to death. Now investigators say the
alleged molestation never took place.
"We're confident this two-year-old was not molested," Police Capt. Gary
MacNamara told reporters. "We are confident in our investigation that
Mr. Edington did in fact kill Mr. James. We are as confident in our
investigation that Mr. James did not molest the Edingtons' daughter."
The story unfolded Aug. 28 while the Edingtons were visiting family in
Rhode Island. According to police reports the young girl told her
mother that she did not want to return home "because of Barry." The
mother told police that her daughter told her "that Barry puts it on
her belly and her nose," and that "He comes to me in the starry
nights."
Investigators now say they are confident that the molestation never
happened.
"The family of Barry James is adamant that Barry James was not a child
molester, would never have harmed that child," Richard Meehan, the
family's attorney, said. "We fully anticipated and expected there would
be nothing to corroborate this. I believe the complaint is untrue."
Edington, a 29-year-old attorney from Fairfield, pleaded not guilty
last week.
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/463557p-389959c.html
Tragic twist in slay
Cops say girl, 2, wasn't abused - as dad believed
BY DAVE GOLDINER
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
A Connecticut toddler whose lawyer father stabbed a neighbor to death
in a rage after being told the girl had been sexually abused was never
molested after all, cops said yesterday.
Her mother said the 2-year-old Fairfield girl had cryptically hinted
that neighbor Barry James had done something that upset her "in the
starry nights."
Her enraged dad, Jonathon Edington, 29, allegedly killed James on Aug.
28, but cops now say the neighbor never molested the child.
"We're confident this 2-year-old was not molested," said Capt. Gary
MacNamara. "We are ... confident in our investigation that Mr. James
did not molest the Edingtons' daughter."
Edington, 29, a patent lawyer who graduated from Syracuse University
and Fordham Law School, faces murder and burglary charges. He is free
on $1million bond.
MacNamara said investigators interviewed the tot but declined to reveal
what led them to conclude she was not abused.
James' lawyer called the finding a vindication of the slain man, who
worked at a funeral home and lived with his elderly mother next door to
the Edingtons.
"Barry James was not a child molester, would never have harmed that
child," said Richard Meehan, the James family's attorney. "We fully
anticipated and expected there would be nothing to corroborate this."
The bizarre case of mistaken retaliation started with a talk between
the little girl and her mother, Christina, while the two were visiting
relatives in Rhode Island, a police report said.
The girl "explained that she did not want to go home because of Barry,"
police said in the report.
When her mother asked her to explain, the girl said "that Barry puts it
on her belly and her nose," the report said.
When her mother asked her when James did this, she replied, "He comes
to me in the starry nights."
Edington's wife called her husband at home on the leafy suburban street
where the couple and their two children moved about a year ago when he
started work at a Fairfield-based law firm.
The angry dad broke into James' home through a window and stabbed him
repeatedly with a kitchen knife, police said.
James' mother found his blood-drenched body in the house.
Cops caught up to Edington standing in his own kitchen, the alleged
murder weapon on a counter.
Police would not say whether the girl's mother, who lodged an official
abuse claim after James' murder, could face charges of filing a false
police report.
James' relatives are planning to file a wrongful-death claim against
Jonathan Edington and may sue his wife, too.
Originally published on October 20, 2006
http://www.kvia.com/Global/story.asp?S=5563017&nav=AbC0
Police: Child wasn't molested in case that allegedly led dad to kill
neighbor
NEW HAVEN, Conn. A new development in the case of the Connecticut
father accused of killing a neighbor he thought had molested his
daughter. Investigators now say they don't believe he ever touched the
girl.
Police in Fairfield, Connecticut, say they're "confident" the
two-year-old was not molested. While they won't give any details about
their investigation, they are confirming they interviewed the child.
They're also uncertain why the molestation claim was made.
Lawyer Jonathon Edington has pleaded not guilty to charges of stabbing
the neighbor to death in August.
A police report quoting Edington's wife says the girl didn't want to go
home from a visit to relatives because the neighbor came to her "in the
starry nights."
When his wife told him that, Edington allegedly climbed through the
neighbor's window and repeatedly stabbed him.
http://www3.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO31586/
Police say girl not molested before father stabbed neighbor
NEW HAVEN, Conn. -- Fairfield police have concluded that a two-year-old
girl was not molested by the neighbor her outraged father is accused of
stabbing to death.
Attorney Jonathon Edington (pictured) is charged with killing neighbor
Barry James on August 28 after his wife told him of the abuse
allegation. Edington pleaded not guilty to the charge last week.
Fairfield Police Captain Gary MacNamara says police are confident that
the girl was not molested.
They won't say whether they will charge the girl's mother. She told
police that the girl told her while they were on vacation that James
came to her in the starry nights.
James' family has been adamant that he was not a child molester and
would not have harmed the girl. The family's attorney says the family
is considering legal action.
(Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
http://www.connpost.com/opinion/ci_4532399
Barry James' death is Greek tragedy
Article Launched:10/22/2006 07:56:57 AM EDT
The little ghosts made of bunched white cloth danced and dangled from
the branches along Colony Street in Fairfield, life breathed into them
by a brisk fall breeze on this sullen Friday afternoon.
Leaves swirled around the trappings of Halloween, the carved pumpkins,
the decorations of black cats with arched backs, all declaring this
neighborhood as kids' territory.
At one end of the street a tall wooden barrier muffles the hum and
rumble of I-95, the Sullivan-McKinney Elder Housing complex at the
other.
It is a tidy street of bungalow, Colonial, cape and ranch-style homes,
an unlikely setting for the horrible violence that exploded there in
August, when a 29-year-old lawyer broke into the home next door,
knocked down his 59-year-old neighbor and stabbed him multiple times.
Stabbed him to death.
The murder of Barry James, has become even more tragic with the
conclusion of law enforcement authorities last week that James, a
generally well-liked 59-year-old man whose family has been on Colony
Street for six decades, had any improper contact with a little
2-year-old girl who lived next door. The Edingtons, who'd moved into
the neighborhood earlier this year, had complained to police, according
to reports, that they could see James either naked or partially clothed
in his bedroom. What happened on Monday, Aug. 28, according to police,
was this:
Jonathon Edington, a 29-year-old patent lawyer who lived next door to
James with his wife, Christina, and their 2-year-old daughter, went
into the James house through a window and stabbed his neighbor a dozen
times.
What triggered Edington's murderous outburst, they say, was a phone
call from his wife in which she told him that their 2-year-old daughter
told her that Barry James had done something to her.
It's just hard to imagine a 2-year-old being able to articulate
something about Barry coming to her in the "starry night," as the
mother claimed the girl described.
Harder still to imagine the 59-year-old James stealthily getting in and
out of the Edington home and the little girl's room.
Nevertheless, Edington apparently snapped, picked up a kitchen knife
and headed next door.
James lived with his elderly parents and his mother told police she
heard yelling in her son's bedroom and got to the room in time to see a
man come through the window, knock James to the ground and stab him
repeatedly. Police arrested Edington in his home, washing the blood off
in his kitchen sink. Richard T. Meehan, the Bridgeport lawyer who
headed the defense team that represented former Bridgeport Mayor Joseph
P. Ganim, is now representing the family of James. They plan a wrongful
death suit against Edington.
Meehan called the Fairfield police report "a bittersweet moment."
I knew Barry James only to say `hello' to. He approached me once at a
wake to comment on something I'd written.
I saw him a few times over the last few years and we exchanged small
talk. He was pleasant. "He was personable and respectful to everyone,"
said Bob Carroll, who would occasionally hire James to work at funerals
out of the Larson Funeral Home at 2496 North Ave., not far from the
Fairfield line.
In the early 1990s James worked as the personnel director for
Cooperative Education Services in Trumbull.
Jimmy Carroll, coincidentally Bob Carroll's brother, is the chief
financial and operations officer at CES.
"He was a compassionate, caring guy. I can't say anything bad about
him," Jimmy Carroll said the other day. Even his supporters will say
that James' demon was alcohol and he pleaded guilty in 2001 to a DUI
charge. The mystery that lingers is what the motivation was for the
accusation of child molestation. The police report, Meehan said, was "a
major step toward vindicating his name and his memory."
But there will never be any rest from this case. "This is a Greek
tragedy," Meehan said the other day. "There is no happy ending for
anyone." Michael J. Daly is managing editor of the Connecticut Post.
You can reach him at 203-330-6394 or by e-mail at md...@ctpost.com.
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17320426&BRD=1653&PAG=461&dept_id=12717&rfi=6
Out on $1 million bail, suspect pleads not guilty in neighbor murder
case
By: Bill Bittar, Associate Editor10/12/2006
Email to a friendPost a CommentPrinter-friendly
BRIDGEPORT - Jonathon Edington, 29, is on trial for allegedly climbing
through his neighbor's bedroom window and stabbing him to death in a
fit of rage on Aug. 28, apparently believing his neighbor had molested
Eddington's two-year-old daughter. But the bespectacled Edington, clad
in a navy blue suit, appeared subdued when he and his wife, Christina,
entered Courtroom 3A inside the Fairfield County Courthouse Tuesday
afternoon. Edington sat quietly in the back of the room until his
defense attorney, Andrew Bowman, told him he could sit beside him in
front of Judge Richard Comerford Jr.'s bench.
Advertisement
Edington waived his right to a probable cause hearing, instead opting
to enter his plea on the charges of murder and burglary. "I plead not
guilty," Edington said in response to both charges. He also said he
wanted to be tried by a jury.
Edington is currently free on $1 million bail. Comerford scheduled his
trial to begin on Dec. 19.
Fairfield police said Edington had returned early from a family
vacation in Rhode Island in August when his wife, who was still there
with their children, called him at home to tell him their two-year-old
daughter said their neighbor, Barry James, 59, molested her. Police
said Edington immediately went next door to confront James, and stabbed
him multiple times in the torso. Rita James, the victim's 87-year-old
mother, reportedly told police she saw Edington push her son down
before jumping out the window. Police later found Edington at home,
covered with blood and standing by his kitchen sink. Detectives also
found a kitchen knife they believe to be the murder weapon.
On Tuesday, Comerford granted the request of the prosecutor Jonathan
Benedict for Rita James, who is in frail condition, to give a sworn
deposition to the court on Nov. 13, instead of appearing in court. At
the deposition, Bowman will also have a chance to ask her questions.
Families stand by
their men
Stories of drunken behavior by Barry James, who his friends say
suffered from diabetes, began to circulate after the murder. Two days
after the murder, Christina Edington filed an official complaint with
Fairfield Police alleging James had molested her daughter.
The James family strongly denied the allegations and rumors and hired
Fairfield attorney Peter Ambrose and Bridgeport attorney Richard T.
Meehan Jr., to represent them.
Meehan, who joined Ambrose outside the courthouse on Tuesday afternoon,
told a gathering of reporters that they are representing the James
family - including his parents, sister and brother-in-law - during the
court proceedings, as well as handling his estate.
In response to Christina Edington's complaint that James molested her
daughter, Meehan said he has grandchildren who are ages 2 and 3 who are
extremely intelligent, but who would not be able to articulate stories
of sexual molestation in the way Christina Edington said her daughter
told her about James.
"The allegations are shoddy," Meehan said. "The family denies that and
allowed the police department to have a full investigation."
Meehan said his clients expect to file a civil lawsuit against Edington
after the criminal proceedings are concluded.
The Edington family is already gearing up for a costly legal fight. One
relative, who did not give his name, passed out a typed statement to
reporters, informing them of the "Jonathon Edington Defense Fund,"
which was set up to solicit donations for attorney's fees. In the
statement, Edington's family said they "whole-heartedly" support him.
©Fairfield Minuteman 2006
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2006Oct19/0,4670,NeighborStabbing,00.html
Police: Girl Wasn't Molested by Neighbor
Thursday, October 19, 2006
By JOHN CHRISTOFFERSEN, Associated Press Writer
NEW HAVEN, Conn. - Police have concluded that a 2-year-old girl was
not molested by a neighbor whom the girl's father is accused of
stabbing to death in rage, a police official told The Associated Press
Thursday.
Jonathon Edington, a 29-year-old attorney from Fairfield, is charged
with killing Barry James on Aug. 28 after his wife told him their
daughter had indicated James touched her inappropriately"in the starry
night,"police said.
Edington pleaded not guilty last week.
"We're confident this 2-year-old was not molested,"said Capt. Gary
MacNamara."We are confident in our investigation that Mr. Edington did
in fact kill Mr. James. We are as confident in our investigation that
Mr. James did not molest the Edingtons'daughter."
MacNamara confirmed that investigators interviewed the girl but
declined to release further details.
MacNamara also would not comment on whether the girl's mother would be
charged. A molestation complaint was filed against James shortly after
he was killed.
A telephone message left Thursday for Edington's attorney, Andrew
Bowman, was not returned.
"The family of Barry James is adamant that Barry James was not a child
molester, would never have harmed that child,"Richard Meehan, the
family's attorney, said Tuesday."We fully anticipated and expected
there would be nothing to corroborate this. I believe the complaint is
untrue."
According to a police report describing the mother's account, the girl
told her mother about the alleged molestation while the family was
visiting relatives in Rhode Island.
The girl"explained that she did not want to go home because of
Barry,"police said in the report. When her mother asked her to explain,
the girl said"that Barry puts it on her belly and her nose,"the report
said. When her mother asked her when James does this, she replied,"He
comes to me in the starry nights."
Police say that after Edington's wife told him whattheir daughter said,
Edington climbed through James'bedroom window and repeatedly stabbed
him.
http://www.connpost.com/news/ci_4521740
Cops: Victim did not assault girl
ANDREW BROPHY abr...@ctpost.com
Connecticut Post Online
Article Launched:10/20/2006 07:02:22 AM EDT
http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/1006/370342.html
Police: Girl Wasn't Molested by Neighbor
UPDATED - Thursday October 19, 2006 2:38pm
NEW HAVEN, Conn. (AP) - Police have concluded that a 2-year-old girl
was not molested by a neighbor whom the girl's father is accused of
stabbing to death in rage, a police official told The Associated Press
Thursday. Jonathon Edington, a 29-year-old attorney from Fairfield, is
charged with killing Barry James on Aug. 28 after his wife told him
their daughter had indicated James touched her inappropriately "in the
starry night," police said.
Edington pleaded not guilty last week.
"We're confident this 2-year-old was not molested," said Capt. Gary
MacNamara. "We are confident in our investigation that Mr. Edington did
in fact kill Mr. James. We are as confident in our investigation that
Mr. James did not molest the Edingtons' daughter."
MacNamara confirmed that investigators interviewed the girl but
declined to release further details.
MacNamara also would not comment on whether the girl's mother would be
charged. A molestation complaint was filed against James shortly after
he was killed.
A telephone message left Thursday for Edington's attorney, Andrew
Bowman, was not returned.
"The family of Barry James is adamant that Barry James was not a child
molester, would never have harmed that child," Richard Meehan, the
family's attorney, said Tuesday. "We fully anticipated and expected
there would be nothing to corroborate this. I believe the complaint is
untrue."
According to a police report describing the mother's account, the girl
told her mother about the alleged molestation while the family was
visiting relatives in Rhode Island.
The girl "explained that she did not want to go home because of Barry,"
police said in the report. When her mother asked her to explain, the
girl said "that Barry puts it on her belly and her nose," the report
said. When her mother asked her when James does this, she replied, "He
comes to me in the starry nights."
Police say that after Edington's wife told him what their daughter
said, Edington climbed through James' bedroom window and repeatedly
stabbed him.
9 Comments from alt.true-crime so far:
1 From: Hunter - Date: Mon, Oct 23 2006 12:29 am
Groups: alt.true-crime
Before the Fairfield Connecticut District Attorney's office and the
Fairfield Police Department withheld details as to why they found that
Barry C. James could not have molested Jonathon and Christina
Edington's two year old girl, other than the interviews didn't support
the claim. However, further details have come come out, namely James's
medical records regarding James's physical ability to be able to do
such a thing. Apparently he had nerve damage in his legs which would
had restricted his ability to climb into the room of Edington's
sleeping daughter, in addition the 59 year old James was significantly
overweight further reducing his ability:
Cops: Victim did not assault girl
By e...@ctpost.com (ANDREW BROPHY abro...@ctpost.com)
molestation."
clear James' name.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15345326/
allegations."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15316096/
---->Hunter
2 From: tiny dancer - Date: Mon, Oct 23 2006 1:07 am
Groups: alt.true-crime
Doesn't if *feel* like we are missing something here? The husband is a
nerdy patent attorney, parents appear to be well-educated. Family
appears
to be upper middle-class *normal*. It just *feels* like there has to
be
more to this story than what meets the eye. I'm certainly not saying
the
dead guy molested the child. IIRC, my early comment was 'when would he
have
an opportunity to even have access to the little girl?' 'Two year
olds
aren't 'out and about the neighborhood' unsupervised.' But it just
seems
like there has to be more behind this whole story IMO.
td
3 From: b - Date: Mon, Oct 23 2006 1:28 am
Groups: alt.true-crime
that was my thought as well - especially since the guy was considered a
little odd it's hard to imagine that these people had their daughter in
his house unsupervised
although i am not so suspicious pf the guy
the father's extreme reaction - running over there and stabbing 12
times - just really makes me wonder what else was going on
also if he had some vendetta with the guy..... and was ranting and
raving about him (apparently he called in a report about him before) so
makes sense that the girl might talk about him - for example if father
is complaining about seeing the guy at the window..... in preschool
language that becomes the boogeyman coming in the window
i wonder if had some long-running prejudice against this family to
start with and then the accusation was just the last straw
my first thought, before knowing the details was that perhaps there was
some love triangle or something weird between the wife, neighbour and
husband
4 From: Educate - Date: Mon, Oct 23 2006 2:57 am
Groups: alt.true-crime
yes, like rank good ole american irrationality.
5 From: Hunter - Date: Mon, Oct 23 2006 6:31 am
Groups: alt.true-crime
You are thinking that someone like Edington is immune to blind rage.
Anyone can have a trigger that would cause them to lash out
irrationally. I have heard that as you just said that this guy, is a
normal nerdy guy that is well educated and an attorney who should had
known better because he is an officer of the court. Well, if you
believe your child was attacked all of that veneer of civilization that
we have goes out the window. He could have been a construction worker,
a garbageman, a longshoreman. He could have been a doctor, corporate
executive, officer in the military or the lawyer he is, it doesn't
matter. It is not matter of education but feeling. Heck, his being an
apparent milquetoast helps him with the Extreme Emotional Distress
defense. If he was the "type" to go off the handle on a regular basis,
the EED defense would work as well. He would be just another hot head
and in fact it would actually be worse for him even if he didn't do a
thing different, so his placid past is an asset with him snapping, as I
believe he truly did.
> I'm certainly not saying the dead guy molested the child. IIRC, my early comment was 'when
> would he have an opportunity to even have access to the little girl?' 'Two year olds
> aren't 'out and about the neighborhood' unsupervised.' But it just seems
> like there has to be more behind this whole story IMO.
----
I think what you see is what you get. A man who snapped after hearing
his child was molested and probably had a preconceived notion that his
neighbor was a potential sex offender. Ironically as I have said
before, the parent's attitude toward Barry James may have planted the
seed of fear in their daughter's mind, casing her to be afraid of the
boogieman next door. As I said many times, I was always suspicious as
to why the mother took two days to report the so-called abuse
officially and formally. The fact that the cops *haven't* ruled out
charging Christina with False Report makes my suspicions rise further.
---->Hunter
6 From: Carmen - Date: Mon, Oct 23 2006 7:07 am
Groups: alt.true-crime
It isn't like this is the first time Edington has flown off the handle
and done something outrageous. The 1998 incident involving his
distruction of the Planned Parenthood display and yelling at the
educators and being charged with harassment, disorderly conduct and
dangerous behavior isn't the action of someone in control of himself.
As I see it, his wife was probably well aware of the earlier incident.
She would have been in a position to know whether he was likely to do
something rash if she told him someone threatened his daughter. My
leaning is towards her having made the call from out of state half
hoping he'd do something rash. I just don't think she counted on it
going this far. I feel (and yes, this is pure conjecture on my part)
that she may have been looking for some sort of active confrontation to
either force a move by the James family or give herself a reason to
convince her husband to move their family elsewhere. That's my theory.
I know, normally I give almost everyone the benefit of the doubt.
This time though something just tells me the mother instigated this.
Carmen
7 From: b - Date: Mon, Oct 23 2006 9:02 am
Groups: alt.true-crime
agreed..... always felt something was going on w- the mother here
i did not know about the planned parenthood thing.... given that, it
does not make sense the way she did it
if i had a hot-headed hubby who i knew was furious at someone - esp in
context of molestation - i would call the cops to get over there before
he did
has anyone seen a picture of barry james? i find it odd that there are
plenty of edington and none (that i can find) of him
8 From: tiny dancer - Date: Mon, Oct 23 2006 9:28 am
Groups: alt.true-crime
"Hunter" <buffhun...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1161603068.0...@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> tiny dancer wrote:
> > "Hunter" <buffhun...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> > snipped> >
early comment was 'when
td
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> charging Christina with False Report makes my suspicions rise further.
> ---->Hunter
9 From: <cro...@earthlink.net> - Date: Mon, Oct 23 2006 9:53 am
Groups: alt.true-crime
Greegor
> I think the media reports should change the description of Edington as
> "mild mannered" he seemed to have some anger problems before this
> murder, and besides the complaints he or his wife filed with the police..
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/12/national/main2001014.shtml#ccmm
Was Slain Neighbor A Child Molester?
Lawyer Accused Of Killing The Man Next Door Believing He Molested
Attorney's Daughter
FAIRFIELD, Conn., Sept. 1, 2006
Photo: Jonathon Edington sits in the passenger seat of a car after
being released on $1 million bail
(CBS/AP) A lawyer in this quiet suburban community was charged with
killing a 58-year-old neighbor he suspected had molested his 2-year-old
daughter, prompting police to investigate whether the molestation
actually occurred.
"We have no indication it's true or not true," said Capt. Gary
MacNamara, adding that authorities had not received a complaint about
the neighbor before the killing.
Jonathon Edington is accused of stabbing neighbor Barry James to death
on Monday after his wife told him that James had inappropriate contact
with the child. He was released from jail on $1 million bond Wednesday.
"The daughter gave the mother information which was alarming and
disturbing. The mom relayed it to her husband. That was the spark,"
said Edington's attorney, Michael Sherman.
Police said Edington, 29, climbed through James' bedroom window and
stabbed him nearly a dozen times in the chest. James' 87-year-old
mother discovered his body.
Police had gone to the neighborhood before, when Edington called to
complain that he could see James through a window, police said. "Either
he was partly clothed or revealed parts of his anatomy that were
inappropriate," MacNamara said.
A picture of the two men began to emerge on Friday.
Edington, a graduate of Syracuse University and Fordham University Law
School, was described as a quiet man who worked for a small law firm.
But the murder charge wasn't his first brush with the law.
The New York Times reported that in 1998, Eddington was charged with
harassment and disorderly conduct for throwing items from a Planned
Parenthood display at a health fair in upstate New York.
After destroying the display, Edington told a Planned Parenthood
representative, "How many babies have to die?" and "How's your
conscience," the police said, according to the Times.
Eddington's slain neighbor was described as a troubled man who battled
alcoholism. Barry James served two days in prison in May 2001 on a
drunken driving charge, according to the state Department of
Correction.
"He had some bizarre behavior over the last month," Darrell Maynard, a
neighbor, told the Times. "He drove his car through his garage, hit the
other neighbor's building."
Pat Wysocki, a neighbor who has known the James family for 39 years,
described James as a "very nice fellow" who worked for a funeral home
and said she found it hard to believe he would molest a child.
"But then again, you don't know," she said.
Estrella
If there was no public registry, this would have never happened. Panic
was already set up because they lived near a child molester. The
pictures , work addresses (if they can keep a job), and home addresses
are listed. The fear of living near a Hannibal Lecter baby raper sets
up a fearful mind frame. But if you actually look at the details of
the crimes sex offenders commit, this horrible pedophile crime of
kidnapping and hurting children is actually rare. The crimes vary from
kiddy porn on their computer, to consensual sex with someone 4 years
younger (if they are 14-15), to women lying about their boyfriend
molesting the kids to get custody, to rape and assalt. Keep a registry
only in the hand of police. Citizens are not police and listing
alleged sex offenders, waiting for trial sex offenders, and guilty ones
are the causes of these types of murders. Many more accused pedophiles
are killed or shanked in prison.
comadreja wrote:
> In article <1161630668.7...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> "Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I haven't seen ANY news reports mentioning his temper tantrum at
> > planned parenthood.
>
> http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/12/national/main2001014.shtml
>
>
> I think the media reports should change the description of Edington as
> "mild mannered" he seemed to have some anger problems before this
> murder, and besides the complaints he or his wife filed with the police..
>
> -c
JonesieCat
> nerdy patent attorney, parents appear to be well-educated. Family appears
> to be upper middle-class *normal*. It just *feels* like there has to be
> more to this story than what meets the eye. I'm certainly not saying the
> dead guy molested the child. IIRC, my early comment was 'when would he
> have
> an opportunity to even have access to the little girl?' 'Two year olds
> aren't 'out and about the neighborhood' unsupervised.' But it just seems
> like there has to be more behind this whole story IMO.
>
> td
What is the most enlightening new info imho, is that the killer is a guy
who, it seems, from other posts in this thread, does have a history of
erratic/aggressive (or violent) behaviour. Earlier someone posted a scenario
about the wife having been maybe abused as a child, who in turn told her
husb all about it & got him riled up, and then when she manipulated the
child into saying whatever, & then called husb - that put the husb over the
edge, murderously. That sounded plausible then.
But now I'm thinking it isn't anything like that. I think what we don't know
is the full extent of the husb's troubled personality, and that it likely
was he who was controlled the dynamics of that marriage. He may be the kind
of guy who wanted his wife to 'report in' to him anything & everything. So
he could 'control' their lives. Maybe the wife was not the conniving,
troubled or manipulative sort at all. Maybe she was just worried &
frightened? And bewildered? And he was just one perpetually angry man? I'm
now wondering if it went something like this: she called him, as any normal
woman would, worried, and said, "honey, I don't like the sound of this, Baby
told me she's scared of James next door, like he did something to her, I
don't know what to think." Maybe Dad was having a bad day - and hollered
back at her over the phone, angry at her, "goddamn it" - and he then
instantly directed the (self-righteous) anger - rage - at the neighbor,
enjoying having a reason to justifiably (in his mind) attack (anyone). After
the killing, he ran back to the house, called her back and said something
like, 'okay, I took care of it, bitch, now fuggetaboutit and get that kid
back her NOW.' (I don't recall how quickly she did return though.)
Listen, I just have to add, anyone (and I don't mean you personally - at
all - td) who believes a fat guy with sore legs can't be a child molester
lives in fantasyland. That part is all spin. And little by little it's
effective. But I wish they'd leak more about the killer's life, if there are
more instances of his temper, eg. Stuff like that. jc
JonesieCat
>> like there has to be more behind this whole story IMO.
>>
>> td
> But now I'm thinking it isn't anything like that. I think what we don't
> know is the full extent of the husb's troubled personality, and that it
> likely was he who was controlled the dynamics of that marriage. He may be
> the kind of guy who wanted his wife to 'report in' to him anything &
> everything. So he could 'control' their lives. Maybe the wife was not the
> conniving, troubled or manipulative sort at all. Maybe she was just
> worried & frightened? And bewildered? And he was just one perpetually
> angry man? I'm now wondering if it went something like this: she called
> him, as any normal woman would, worried, and said, "honey, I don't like
> the sound of this, Baby told me she's scared of James next door, like he
> did something to her, I don't know what to think." Maybe Dad was having a
> bad day - and hollered back at her over the phone, angry at her, "goddamn
> it" - and he then instantly directed the (self-righteous) anger - rage -
> at the neighbor, enjoying having a reason to justifiably (in his mind)
> attack (anyone). After the killing, he ran back to the house, called her
> back and said something like, 'okay, I took care of it, bitch, now
> fuggetaboutit and get that kid back her NOW.' (I don't recall how quickly
> she did return though.)
>
> Listen, I just have to add, anyone (and I don't mean you personally - at
> all - td) who believes a fat guy with sore legs can't be a child molester
> lives in fantasyland. That part is all spin. And little by little it's
> effective. But I wish they'd leak more about the killer's life, if there
> are more instances of his temper, eg. Stuff like that. jc
=============================================
Scratch most of what I just said above. I just re-read the story below, from
1 September. I'm back to believing the killer was 'right of center'
idealogically, and maybe even fanatical about children, babies (due to the
report about his behaviour re Plan. Parent.) - but I'm thinking he isn't
otherwise violent, and had what he thought was good reason to think
something happened to his child. And the other neighbors found the dead
guy's behaviour to "bizarre" of late. One of them says, about him being
accused of molestation, "no, wouldn't think so - but you never know"
(paraphrased) - far from a ringing endorsement of the dead man. I'm back to
wondering if the killer didn't have some abuse in his OWN past he projected
on to what did or did not happen to his kid. Whether he did or not, I bet
something along those lines will be suggested at trial, depending. hmmmm.
[early story below]
=============================
Was Slain Neighbor A Child Molester?
Lawyer Accused Of Killing The Man Next Door Believing He Molested Attorney's
Daughter
FAIRFIELD, Conn., Sept. 1, 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CBS/AP) A lawyer in this quiet suburban community was charged with killing
a 58-year-old neighbor he suspected had molested his 2-year-old daughter,
prompting police to investigate whether the molestation actually occurred.
"We have no indication it's true or not true," said Capt. Gary MacNamara,
adding that authorities had not received a complaint about the neighbor
before the killing.
Jonathon Edington is accused of stabbing neighbor Barry James to death on
Monday after his wife told him that James had inappropriate contact with the
child. He was released from jail on $1 million bond Wednesday.
"The daughter gave the mother information which was alarming and disturbing.
The mom relayed it to her husband. That was the spark," said Edington's
attorney, Michael Sherman.
Police said Edington, 29, climbed through James' bedroom window and stabbed
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/12/national/main2001014.shtml#ccmm
Hunter
Do you have some sort of agenda, because this had nothing to do with
the Megan's law issue. James wasn't a sex offender on a list or
something. If he was and the neighborhood, or at least Jonathon, knew
of it then you have a point, but not in this case.
--->Hunter
Greegor
> Do you have some sort of agenda, because this had nothing to do with
> the Megan's law issue. James wasn't a sex offender on a list or
> something. If he was and the neighborhood, or at least Jonathon, knew
> of it then you have a point, but not in this case.
Goes to state of mind your honor.
0:->
> Hunter wrote
>> Do you have some sort of agenda, because this had nothing to do with
>> the Megan's law issue. James wasn't a sex offender on a list or
>> something. If he was and the neighborhood, or at least Jonathon, knew
>> of it then you have a point, but not in this case.
>
> Goes to state of mind your honor.
An "attitude," Greg?
Carmen
Estrella has a friend, friend claims their sex offender registry
necessitative offense was a miscarriage o' justice, said friend is
hunted to the ends of the earth, take it from there.
Carmen
Hunter
JonesieCat wrote:
> Listen, I just have to add, anyone (and I don't mean you personally - at
> all - td) who believes a fat guy with sore legs can't be a child molester
> lives in fantasyland. That part is all spin. And little by little it's
> effective. But I wish they'd leak more about the killer's life, if there are
> more instances of his temper, eg. Stuff like that. jc
I know you are addressing that to me JonesieCat. This is a case of
nerve damage, not mere sore legs. Probably as a result of being a
diabetic. He had a lot of difficulty walking up stairs let alone
crawling into a window four feet off the ground. He had no history of
molestation. After almost two months since the tragedy and wide
publicity no one has come forward to say he/she was victimized by him
in the past. In addition the police in searches of his house absolutely
no evidence that he was the type to molest a child, i.e. no child porn.
The child didn't manifest any of the signs of abuse when interviewed
by forensic child psychologist. Even the rumors of him being drunk
around the neighborhood may only be just rumors and not fact.
Why are you so determined to believe Barry James was a child molester?
---->Hunter
Hunter
This story is from almost two months ago now. We do know about Barry.
Again, why are you so determine to believe he was a molester? There
seems to be some sort of psychological need for you to believe so
despite the mounting evidence against it.
---->Hunter
Estrella
the word of his wife and daugter. Because of the hype of Megan's &
Jessica's laws, this lawyer fell into a rage due to all of the
pedophile hype.
Estrella
believed Barry was a child molester. It is Megan's law that sets up
the fear, for him to act upon. OK, Barry James wasn't on the list, but
what if he was, then how would the people in this town
reacted...............
catherine yronwode
>
> JonesieCat wrote:
> > Listen, I just have to add, anyone (and I don't mean you personally - at
> > all - td) who believes a fat guy with sore legs can't be a child molester
> > lives in fantasyland. That part is all spin.
>
> I know you are addressing that to me JonesieCat. This is a case of
> nerve damage, not mere sore legs. Probably as a result of being a
> diabetic. He had a lot of difficulty walking up stairs let alone
> crawling into a window four feet off the ground. He had no history of
> molestation. After almost two months since the tragedy and wide
> publicity no one has come forward to say he/she was victimized by him
> in the past. In addition the police in searches of his house absolutely
> no evidence that he was the type to molest a child, i.e. no child porn.
> The child didn't manifest any of the signs of abuse when interviewed
> by forensic child psychologist. Even the rumors of him being drunk
> around the neighborhood may only be just rumors and not fact.
>
> Why are you so determined to believe Barry James was a child molester?
>
> ---->Hunter
Diabetic neuropathy (nerve damage associated with diabetes) is a leading
cause of erectile dysfunction, and Mr. James' doctor, who was treating
his diabetes, would have known of his erectile dysfunction -- it would
have been in his medical records. See
http://tinyurl.com/wc2b7
"DIABETES-ASSOCIATED ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION
It is well known that diabetes
mellitus, both type I and type II, is
associated with a significant prevalence
of erectile dysfunction. It is thought
that at least 50% of diabetic men have
erectile dysfunction. Erectile dysfunction
occurs at a younger age in diabetic men
and usually occurs within 10 years of
diagnosis of the disease. It also is well
known that not all diabetics develop erectile
dysfunction, but those individuals with certain
associated diabetic related complications such
as peripheral neuropathy have a very high
association of erectile dysfunction.
See? Fifty percent of diabetics have erectile dysfunction -- but most of
those are in the group of diabetics who have nerve damage.
There's a lot more there of interest on that web page, and this piece if
of special interest:
While the overall success rate for Sildenafil
(Viagra) is quoted in the 60-70% range, diabetic
men appear to fare a bit worse and are only
achieving a 50% satisfaction rate.
50% of diabetic men have ED. Only 50% of diabetic men who have ED can
helped by Viagra. (25% can be helped by Viagra. BUT ... diabetic men
with neuropathy are more likey than other diabetic men to have ED, and
they are also less likely to be helped by Viagra -- probably 10% can be
helped by Viagra.
So, here's my theory:
Barry James was a man with diabetic neuropathy and thus he had a high
chance of erectile dysfunction. This was probably confirmed by the
doctor who was treating him. Additionally, James may have asked his
doctor for a prescription for Viagra, but was among the 50% of diabetics
whose erectile dysfunction is not mitigated by Viagra, and he told his
doctor that it did not work for him. Thus, if the police interviewed his
doctor, they could say with some conviction that not only was Barry
James phyically incapable of climbing stairs or entering the child's
window located four feet off the ground, due to his diabetic neuropathy,
he had also had diabetic neuropathy-associated ED, had tried a
prescription drug to treat this and had later told his doctor that it
did not work for him and had not bought further supplies of the drug.
If i were Law Enforcement, i would take the doctor's records -- along
with lack of incrimating evidence, such as child-porn, in the house --
as a pretty strong indication that Barry James not only was NOT a child
molestor, medically and athletically, he could not BE a child molestor.
cat yronwode
Greegor
> Goes to state of mind your honor.
Estrella wrote:
> Panic was already set up because they lived near a child molester.
Carmen wrote:
> Estrella has a friend, friend claims their sex offender registry
> necessitative offense was a miscarriage o' justice, said friend is
> hunted to the ends of the earth, take it from there.
Interesting motive, but doesn't change the way that
"state of mind" enters into this murder case.
If as some have said, the wife lied to her husband
about this, she deserves punishment far beyond
what our legal system will ever give her.
JonesieCat
>
>> > Listen, I just have to add, anyone (and I don't mean you personally -
>> > at
>> > all - td) who believes a fat guy with sore legs can't be a child
>> > molester
>> > lives in fantasyland. That part is all spin.
>>
>> I know you are addressing that to me JonesieCat. This is a case of
I am not addressing this to you whatsoever, Hunter. If I want to address
something to you, I will most certainly do it.
> http://tinyurl.com/wc2b7
> "DIABETES-ASSOCIATED ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION
> It is well known that diabetes mellitus, both type I and type II, is
> associated with a >significant prevalence of erectile dysfunction. It is
> thought that at least 50% of diabetic >men have erectile dysfunction.
> Erectile dysfunction occurs at a younger age in diabetic >men and usually
> occurs within 10 years of diagnosis of the disease. It also is well
> known that not all diabetics develop erectile dysfunction, but those
> individuals with >certain associated diabetic related complications such
> as peripheral neuropathy have a >very high association of erectile
> dysfunction.
>
> See? Fifty percent of diabetics have erectile dysfunction -- but most of
> those are in >the group of diabetics who have nerve damage.
>
> There's a lot more there of interest on that web page, and this piece if
> of special interest:
>
-snip-
> 50% of diabetic men have ED. Only 50% of diabetic men who have ED can
> helped by Viagra. (25% can be helped by Viagra. BUT ... diabetic men
> with neuropathy are more likey than other diabetic men to have ED, and
> they are also less likely to be helped by Viagra -- probably 10% can be
> helped by Viagra.
>
> So, here's my theory:
>
> Barry James was a man with diabetic neuropathy and thus he had a high
> chance of erectile dysfunction. This was probably confirmed by the
> doctor who was treating him. Additionally, James may have asked his
> doctor for a prescription for Viagra, but was among the 50% of diabetics
> whose erectile dysfunction is not mitigated by Viagra, and he told his
> doctor that it did not work for him. Thus, if the police interviewed his
> doctor, they could say with some conviction that not only was Barry
> James phyically incapable of climbing stairs or entering the child's
> window located four feet off the ground, due to his diabetic neuropathy,
> he had also had diabetic neuropathy-associated ED, had tried a
> prescription drug to treat this and had later told his doctor that it
> did not work for him and had not bought further supplies of the drug.
>
> If i were Law Enforcement, i would take the doctor's records -- along
> with lack of incrimating evidence, such as child-porn, in the house --
> as a pretty strong indication that Barry James not only was NOT a child
> molestor, medically and athletically, he could not BE a child molestor.
>
> cat yronwode
If I were LE I would do exactly the same. (Well, except if he used Viagra -
that might skew my opinion once again, since perps have been known to use it
too. If he was drunken diabetic acting bizarrely, as his neighbors have
said, I would wonder why he'd want viagra.) (Not that some such people might
not have perfectly good reasons for it.)
Thx for all the info. I have learned from it. I really do hope that guy did
nothing to that little girl.
But what about the killer then (I keep calling him that, because I am under
the impression he agree he was when arrested)? Do you entirely discount the
possibility he believed his child was abused by the man (at the time of the
crime)? jc
Estrella
against Barry James, 2 days after her husband killed him?
Estrella
and herself. Perhaps she is trying to frame Barry James of molesting
the daughter, two days after the fact........................
JessicaG
"Estrella" <estrella...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1161655561.1...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> Then why did the wife of the "lawyer dad" file molestation charges
> against Barry James, 2 days after her husband killed him?
Supposedly:
- she heard the child's story while on vacation
- she immediately phoned the husband at home
- he went into rage and killed the guy
- she heard about the killing
- she reacted to this information
- she had to plan and organize a number of arrangents
2 days to file a report under these circumstances is not only conceivable,
but expected. It makes sense. Nothing out of the ordinary considering all
the details she had to do, not the least of which is dealing with the fact
that her husband just murdered another human solely based on her words over
a phone call.
I don't know why some folks seem determined to make 2 days to file somehow
sinister. 2 days is about right.
Just how long to file would be expected then? 1 week? 1 day? 5 minutes?
cro...@earthlink.net
psycho husband plan a legal defense...
"JessicaG" <jjj...@jotjail.com> wrote in message
news:yEf%g.216$OY...@newsfe11.lga...
JonesieCat
imo too. If she really did believe the neighbor did something to her
daughter, and the neighbor died - why go to LE? Only one reason, which was
to bolster husb's story/defense. (Regardless, of how got her to go to the
police, it may be she did believe the neighbor guy molested her kid. Who
knows?)
jc
<cro...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:aHf%g.15810$o71....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
catherine yronwode
I just wated to correct my groos typos in the paragraph below:
It should have read:
50% of diabetic men have ED. Only 25% can be helped by Viagra.
BUT ... diabetic men with neuropathy are more likely than
other diabetic men to have ED, and they are also lesslikely to be
helped by
Viagra -- probably 10% can be helped by Viagra.
> So, here's my theory:
>
> Barry James was a man with diabetic neuropathy and thus he had a high
> chance of erectile dysfunction. This was probably confirmed by the
> doctor who was treating him. Additionally, James may have asked his
> doctor for a prescription for Viagra, but was among the 50% of diabetics
> whose erectile dysfunction is not mitigated by Viagra, and he told his
> doctor that it did not work for him. Thus, if the police interviewed his
> doctor, they could say with some conviction that not only was Barry
> James phyically incapable of climbing stairs or entering the child's
> window located four feet off the ground, due to his diabetic neuropathy,
> he had also had diabetic neuropathy-associated ED, had tried a
> prescription drug to treat this and had later told his doctor that it
> did not work for him and had not bought further supplies of the drug.
>
> If i were Law Enforcement, i would take the doctor's records -- along
> with lack of incrimating evidence, such as child-porn, in the house --
> as a pretty strong indication that Barry James not only was NOT a child
> molestor, medically and athletically, he could not BE a child molestor.
>
> cat yronwode
Also, in reply to Jonsiecat, who said:
> If he was drunken diabetic acting bizarrely,
> as his neighbors have said, I would wonder
> why he'd want viagra.
First, there are indeed many diabetics who are alcoholics. Alcoholism
nmakes diabetes worse, but diabetes also makes alcoholism worse as well.
My daughter, who is a doctor, tells me that there is a common hospital
acronym for such folks: HONDA -- Hypertensive Obese, Non-compliant
Diabetic Alcoholic -- that is, a person with high blood pressure who is
overweight, has diabetes, is not controlling his diabetes properly with
insulin and diet, and drinks.
Being a diabetic can cause one to "act bizarrely" and although this may
be caused by alcoholism, sometimes it LOOKS like drnkenness but is not.
Such episodes are caused by blood sugar fluctuations when the diabetes
is being poorly controlled (as in the "N" in HONDA -- Non-compliant).
Why would such a man want to try Viagra? Probably because he wanted to
have orgasms again, as he had when he was younger, before his diabetes
and dabetic neuropathy got so bad.
catherine yronwode
b
more significantly - edington NEVER mentioned the molestation issue
when the police caught up with him....... hmmm if he was in such a rage
of righteous indignation then why not explain right away?
the molestation excuse is something that came up afterwards
JonesieCat
> have orgasms
> catherine yronwode
Yes. That's why every man who takes viagra chooses to take it, basically.
Along with other individual qualities viagra may or may not provide for the
particular individual. Yep, can't disagree with that.
jc
Hunter
Thanks for all of this. I am sure the cops know exactly what his
medical condition is, which is why they are certain that this poor man
didn't do anything. Simply put, giving all of his known and probable
medical disabilities it is very very unlikely that this guy did
anything, and that is before we even get to his lack of a history, lack
of items in his house that would show a predilection toward molestation
of a child. This man was innocent.
--->Hunter.
Hunter
JonesieCat wrote:
> >> JonesieCat wrote:
> >
> >> > Listen, I just have to add, anyone (and I don't mean you personally -
> >> > at
> >> > all - td) who believes a fat guy with sore legs can't be a child
> >> > molester
> >> > lives in fantasyland. That part is all spin.
> >>
> >> I know you are addressing that to me JonesieCat. This is a case of
> >> ---->Hunter
>
> I am not addressing this to you whatsoever, Hunter. If I want to address
> something to you, I will most certainly do it.
>
done here, and for the second time overall. There are two very recent
replies of mine (within the last 12 hours of this one) that you have
unanswered. Let's start there.
---->Hunter
Hunter
I don't know if it was an excuse, but I did read somewhere that
Edington didn't mention it at the time of arrest, but that could have
been easily that he was in shock. I have to find the article again.
--->Hunter
Carmen
> I think the wife reported to the police only after her husband killed the
> guy to try to build up some sort of case to make her husband's murder of the
> neighbor more "understandable" - to try to prepare a legal
> defense/mitigation.
> I had not heard of the Planned Parenthood temper tantrum, etc. Where was
> that noted?
I'm surprised nobody provided it for you before now:
http://tinyurl.com/y2h84x
Excerpt from a September 1st report by CBS News. Note that this was
available very early on in the case, yet not widely noted:
"Edington, a graduate of Syracuse University and Fordham University Law
School, was described as a quiet man who worked for a small law firm.
But the murder charge wasn't his first brush with the law.
The New York Times reported that in 1998, Eddington was charged with
harassment and disorderly conduct for throwing items from a Planned
Parenthood display at a health fair in upstate New York.
After destroying the display, Edington told a Planned Parenthood
representative, "How many babies have to die?" and "How's your
conscience," the police said, according to the Times."
********************************************************************************************
Carmen
> If it is as described herein, the wife holds even more responsibility for
> the killing, as she had knowledge of her husband's propensity for violence.
> In addition, I cannot imagine giving a husband such upsetting news (even tho
> it was not true...I wonder if she made up the whole thing? or embroidered
> upon what little remarks the child may have made?) over the telephone...and
> in the possible context of his already having exhibited out-of-proportion
> reactions in the past, her telephone report become quite reprehensible...
> "tiny dancer" <tinyda...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1k4%g.23279$Zn1....@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
> >
> > "Hunter" <buffh...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> > news:1161603068.0...@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >> tiny dancer wrote:
> >> > "Hunter" <buffh...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> >> > snipped> >
> >> >
> >> > Doesn't if *feel* like we are missing something here? The husband is a
> >> > nerdy patent attorney, parents appear to be well-educated. Family
> > appears
> >> > to be upper middle-class *normal*. It just *feels* like there has to
> >> > be
> >> > more to this story than what meets the eye.
> >> -----
> >> You are thinking that someone like Edington is immune to blind rage.
> >
> >
> > Not necessarily, my thoughts were more along the line of there *still*
> > being
> > more to the actual dynamics of the history of all of the people involved
> > in
> > this incident. Edington, wife, and victim.
> >
> >
> >> Anyone can have a trigger that would cause them to lash out
> >> irrationally. I have heard that as you just said that this guy, is a
> >> normal nerdy guy that is well educated and an attorney who should had
> >> known better because he is an officer of the court. Well, if you
> >> believe your child was attacked all of that veneer of civilization that
> >> we have goes out the window.
> >
> >
> > What made him believe that, to such an extent, *immediately*, is what I'm
> > referring to. Was it the way it was told by the wife? Was it *other*
> > things, besides the 'naked window' performance to do with the neighbor?
> > I'm curious as to exactly how verbal this two year old is normally. Like
> > I
> > said, it just feels like there is more to the dynamics of this threesome.
> >
> >
> >
> > He could have been a construction worker,
> >> a garbageman, a longshoreman. He could have been a doctor, corporate
> >> executive, officer in the military or the lawyer he is, it doesn't
> >> matter. It is not matter of education but feeling. Heck, his being an
> >> apparent milquetoast helps him with the Extreme Emotional Distress
> >> defense. If he was the "type" to go off the handle on a regular basis,
> >> the EED defense would work as well. He would be just another hot head
> >> and in fact it would actually be worse for him even if he didn't do a
> >> thing different, so his placid past is an asset with him snapping, as I
> >> believe he truly did.
> >> >
> >> > I'm certainly not saying the dead guy molested the child. IIRC, my
> > early comment was 'when
> >> > would he have an opportunity to even have access to the little girl?'
> > 'Two year olds
> >> > aren't 'out and about the neighborhood' unsupervised.' But it just
> > seems
> >> > like there has to be more behind this whole story IMO.
> >> ----
> >> I think what you see is what you get. A man who snapped after hearing
> >> his child was molested and probably had a preconceived notion that his
> >> neighbor was a potential sex offender. Ironically as I have said
> >> before, the parent's attitude toward Barry James may have planted the
> >> seed of fear in their daughter's mind, casing her to be afraid of the
> >> boogieman next door. As I said many times, I was always suspicious as
> >> to why the mother took two days to report the so-called abuse
> >> officially and formally.
> >
> >
> > That part really doesn't bother me because the wife was out of the state
> > at
> > the time. What with all the chaos of the stabbing, arrest, husband
> > locked
> > up, etc.
> >
> >
> > td
> >
> >
> > The fact that the cops *haven't* ruled out
> >> charging Christina with False Report makes my suspicions rise further.
> >>
> >>
> >> ---->Hunter
> >>
> >
> >
Carmen
I don't know that she lied for a fact, but she most definitely did
something painfully stupid at the very least. It may have been done as
a deliberate lie, but since the little girl is only two, without a
confession from Christina Edington we'll never know for sure.
Carmen
Carmen
Estrella wrote:
> Then the moral panic was set up by the fact that the lawyer dad,
> believed Barry was a child molester. It is Megan's law that sets up
> the fear, for him to act upon. OK, Barry James wasn't on the list, but
> what if he was, then how would the people in this town
> reacted...............
>
alone for crying out loud. Megan's law had nothing to do with this.
Sex offender registries had nothing to do with this. Save your
personal agenda for a situation where it applies.
Carmen
Hunter
I did read before that their was an altercation involving him at a
protest but I assumed he struggled as he was being lead away or
something. I had no idea that he went ballistic and started throwing
things around and destroying a display. This most certainly hurts my
characterization as a "milquetoast" and it will hurt any Extreme
Emotional Distress defense he would put up. The prosecution will no
doubt mention this. Hell, there could be even video tape of it, but I
haven't seen any news organizations running it if it exist.
I still think he snapped, but this puts a big dent in his crime of
passion defense.
---->Hunter
catherine yronwode
>
> Carmen wrote:
> > http://tinyurl.com/y2h84x
> > Excerpt from a September 1st report by CBS News. Note that this was
> > available very early on in the case, yet not widely noted:
> >
> > Edington, a graduate of Syracuse University and
> > Fordham University Law School, was described as
> > a quiet man who worked for a small law firm. But
> > the murder charge wasn't his first brush with the law.
> >
> > The New York Times reported that in 1998, Eddington
> > was charged with harassment and disorderly conduct
> > for throwing items from a Planned Parenthood display
> > at a health fair in upstate New York.
> >
> > After destroying the display, Edington told a Planned
> > Parenthood representative, "How many babies have to
> > die?" and "How's your conscience," the police said,
> > according to the Times."
>
> I did read before that their was an altercation involving him at a
> protest but I assumed he struggled as he was being lead away or
> something. I had no idea that he went ballistic and started throwing
> things around and destroying a display. This most certainly hurts my
> characterization as a "milquetoast" and it will hurt any Extreme
> Emotional Distress defense he would put up. The prosecution will no
> doubt mention this. Hell, there could be even video tape of it, but I
> haven't seen any news organizations running it if it exist.
>
> I still think he snapped, but this puts a big dent in his crime of
> passion defense.
>
> ---->Hunter
More than that, Hunter, it paints him as an Extremely Violent Loon who
was cruising for fights based on presumed moral outrage.
What seemed at first to be a father's justifiable anger over the abuse
of his daughter now fits into a different frame of reference -- violence
based on Edington's desire to control the lives of women under the guise
of "protecting" them, up to and including assault on anyone whom he
perceived as a threat against the women and girl-children he imagined he
was "protecting." It's a kind of knight-in-shining-armour scenario gone
astray. In other words, a delusional psychopathology. .
As more details of this case appear here, i am becoming more sickened at
the scenario.
Poor Mr. James, a diabetic guy who can't climb stairs and can't get an
erection -- and is caring for his elderly parents despite his own
fragile medical condition -- is attacked and killed by a knife-weilding
psycho from next door who is on some kind of hopped-up crusade against
birth control and child molestation. Then, to add insult to injury, he
is accused, post-mortem, of child molestation, a crime he could not have
committed, due to his medical condition.
No wonder James' family is suing -- not only have they lost the life of
their child, who ws also rendering his parents considerable material aid
and assistance at the time of his death, but they have seen their boy's
innocent name besmirched by false accusations after his murder -- a
murder which took place right in their home, as his mother watched in horror!
Now we must look to Edington's wife's role -- was she the victim of
childhood sex abuse who accidentally or on purpose "triggered"
Edington's psychosis?
Was she herself a victim of Edington's violence-prone control-mania and
knight-in-shining-armour delusions, producing strange fantasies as part
of the craziness of trying to please and ameliorate a violent sociopath?
Were they both members of some lunatic hate-church that sees Satanists
and Abortionists in every neighborhood and announces fatwahs against
imaginary pedophiles?
Did her husband urge her to file molestation charges against the murder
victim to justify the murder -- or was that her own cockamamie idea?
cat yronwode
JessicaG
news:aHf%g.15810$o71....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> your psycho husband plan a legal defense...
>
Yes it helps the psycho husband, but a crime was allegedly committed
regardless of who committed it. Whether the supposed accused is deceased or
not is irrelevant, it may have the been a different neighbor that did it, or
the dad, or the pool guy, it doesn't matter. The alleged crime itself needs
to be reported.
There's nothing sinister about the timing. The killing happened on Monday
afternoon and the molestation claim was filed on Wednesday morning.
Travelling back from Rhode Island accounts for the delay.
Now don't get me wrong, it was necessary for the defense but regardless, it
needed to be filed and it was, promptly.
JessicaG
"JonesieCat" <Long Ago & Far Away> wrote in message
news:453d8a4c$0$11970$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> That's exactly why she filed. It was her husb's lawyer who orchestrated it
> imo too. If she really did believe the neighbor did something to her
> daughter, and the neighbor died - why go to LE? Only one reason, which was
> to bolster husb's story/defense. (Regardless, of how got her to go to the
> police, it may be she did believe the neighbor guy molested her kid. Who
> knows?)
>
> jc
No. Even if the neighbor died of natural causes, the crime should still be
reported. The filing occurs to report a crime, not necessarily against a
specific individual. Of course it helps the defense in this case.
JessicaG
> ----
> Thanks for all of this. I am sure the cops know exactly what his
> medical condition is, which is why they are certain that this poor man
> didn't do anything. Simply put, giving all of his known and probable
> medical disabilities it is very very unlikely that this guy did
> anything, and that is before we even get to his lack of a history, lack
> of items in his house that would show a predilection toward molestation
> of a child. This man was innocent.
>
> --->Hunter.
Also, he didn't seem to put up much of a physical fight. According to the
parents, Edington was found on top of the guy in his bed and on the floor
with him. The victim had a few defensive wounds on his left hand along with
the multiple chest stab wounds. He didn't even seem to have the ability to
get out of bed while this guy was crashing through his window.
JessicaG
> when the police caught up with him....... hmmm if he was in such a rage
> of righteous indignation then why not explain right away?
>
> the molestation excuse is something that came up afterwards
Exactly, that's what's should be discussed concerning the filing, not about
the timing of the filing.
Also, why did Edington leave for home from RI earlier than the rest of the
family? Did the wife have her own transportation? When was she supposed to
return? Was it simply because they had 2 vehicles and he wanted some peace
and quiet at home or was there another reason?
Carmen
nude display by James earlier. Once again, it looks (to me) as if it
was hardly the lewd intentional actions of a depraved predator (Excerpt
only below):
http://www.connpost.com/localsports/ci_4265519
"Brophy said Edington's wife called her about three months ago to ask
if she knew James. Brophy said Edington's wife told her she had "a
run-in" with James because the neighbor had allegedly exposed himself.
Jonathan Edington complained to police several months ago that James
appeared either partially clothed or naked in his bedroom window in
view of Edington's family, MacNamara said.
But MacNamara said police were not able to determine whether that was
true. Police said James was warned about the incident.
Less than five yards separate the two homes, and no trees block the
view between them.
MacNamara said James did not have a criminal record and was not under
"any investigation alleging inappropriate activity regarding children."
*****************************
Carmen
Carmen
To be fair, there may well be a perfectly innocent explanation for
this. He may well have needed to return for work, whereas Christina
Edington may not have had a job outside the home.
Carmen
patfish
this JAmes guy could get at the girl was to climb in her window. Which
this article says was four feet from the ground so my totally deduced
scenario that I concocted, hey based on the layout of mine own ranch
type house, was exactly how the LE and I suppose the Edingtons, decided
it came down. Because, as so many of you correctly speculated, the
Edingtons were not likely to leave a 2-year-old around this guy. I
also, in my original speculation, concluded that the Edingtons could
not have dogs as the climbing-in-the-window scenario would not work if
they had dogs. Dogs bark and carry on when people climb into windows
in their house. Duh.
On that note, somebody wrote in a comment on my Blog that the Edingtons
DID have dogs. The commenter provided no backup to this claim and so
far I have not seen any published accounts verifying this. The
commenter said the Edington had TWO dogs in fact.
Hey, on True Crime blogs, you'd be surprised at how many actual
participants in the true crimes being written about actually comment
about the crime on the Blog. I have relatives and friends of perps and
victims alike comment on a Blog post I might make on a particular
crime. It's that 15 minute in the sun thing even though I am but a
humble Blogger with no great big following or anything. So that
commenter might know something about the Edingtons and such as dogs
that I don't. Could be a neighbor or something, maybe even one of the
James' family.
Just for the hell of it, here is a link to my Blog page with
compilation of ALL my true crime posts. Which I do every Tuesday by
the way.
http://patfish.blogspot.com/2005/01/true-crime.html
All THAT being said, I still think there's big things going on with
this case. For now, this post establishes that the Edingtons DID have
a window close to the ground and someone could crawl in that baby's
window. At least as I interpret the reports and this is veeeeery
interesting.
The 2-year-old said James came to her in the "starry nights", put his
thing in her face and asked her to snort or something odd, and then she
felt "rain" on her. Wow. I'm sorry folks, this is just a whole lot of
coincidence here. I continue to assert-and others have argued against
my assertions with vigor-that there is simply no way this baby could
have made this up out of whole cloth. I am not buying it. On another
thread some argued that the child would know about stuff coming out of
a penis and perhaps so. But the "starry nights"-hey, James would have
to do this in the middle of the night when parents are sound asleep.
The putting of his penis on her face...it sounds nuts enough to me to
be true. And that bit about "rain" on her....I just do not think that
baby could make up such a story. Now that I know that there is indeed
a window close enough for someone to crawl into I still think there is
something to the baby's childish story.
UNLESS, and I stipulate again, Mrs. Edington made it all up and later
recanted to the police. I'm simply not buying that the initial tale as
told by the baby, plus her fear of returning home, was something the
child made up.
Just a bit more, bear with me. According to these quotes, James was
considered too obese to go climbing into windows. Note that there was
no reference to a continual impotency or other sexual disorder that
would prevent the sex act as the baby described from happening. And as
I've argued before, that LE statement that the child was never
molested, IF it was based on a physical examination of the toddler,
just didn't hold water. Even if a physical examination revealed no
trauma to the baby's genital area, that is NOT what the child said
happened to her.
So the LE now say that JAmes was too fat to go climbing into windows?
Give me a break. The guy could have brought over a step stool or
something. That is really lame as I see it.
In summary, this Edington case is a prosecutorial hot potato. I'd sure
hate to be the prosecutor trying this case. For now I still believe
that behind the scenes a deal is being made. Jonathan Edington did
kill Barry James and he did it brutally. Murder, for whatever reason,
is murder. We don't want vigelante justice in this country.
Notice how the Edington defense team is mum. They are trying to get
the best deal for this guy. He is going to have to serve SOME time.
If this case before a jury, he might go free completely. If I'm the
prosecutor in this case I'm doing everything to avoid a trial on this
case. If I'm on the jury on this case and I'm hearing that a
2-year-old told such a story to her mother and was afraid to come home
because of it, I'm thinking there must be truth to the story. Add to
it the indignity of a neighbor climbing into a window, molesting my
baby, then going back home....I might vote to let the guy off. I can
see the Edington defense team taking the jury to the Edington home,
showing how the baby's bed was by the window, bringing a stepstool and
illustrating how the deed as described by the baby COULD have happened.
If I'm the Edington defense team I'm for sure going to keep banging on
the fact that it's not likely a 2 year old would concoct such a story.
If I'm the Edington defense team, I'm going to call the child's mother
to the stand AND the child's relative who she was visiting, assuming
someone ELSE heard this child's story.
I also recall at first there were many stories about this James guy and
his weird behavior. I distinctly recall there were already reports on
file about JAmes exposing himself and a story about James drinking and
something about crashing a car into his own garage.
Now you would think Barry James was a saint. All I can say is I'm
still not convinced. I still believe something happened to that baby.
Your mileage, of course, might vary.
tiny dancer wrote:
> "Hunter" <buffh...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:1161581350....@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> > Before the Fairfield Connecticut District Attorney's office and the
> > Fairfield Police Department withheld details as to why they found that
> > Barry C. James could not have molested Jonathon and Christina
> > Edington's two year old girl, other than the interviews didn't support
> > the claim. However, further details have come come out, namely James's
> > medical records regarding James's physical ability to be able to do
> > such a thing. Apparently he had nerve damage in his legs which would
> > had restricted his ability to climb into the room of Edington's
> > sleeping daughter, in addition the 59 year old James was significantly
> > overweight further reducing his ability:
> >
> > Cops: Victim did not assault girl
> >
> > By ed...@ctpost.com (ANDREW BROPHY abr...@ctpost.com)
> > The Connecticut Post
> > FAIRFIELD - Police on Thursday confirmed what State's Attorney
> > Jonathan Benedict told the media three days ago: No evidence exists to
> > support the claim that murder victim Barry C. James had molested his
> > accused killer's 2-year-old daughter.
> >
> > "There's no evidence of any molestation occurring," police Capt. Gary
> > MacNamara said. "We're confident that the evidence does not support any
> > molestation."
> >
> > MacNamara declined to say whether police plan to charge Christina
> > Edington, wife of accused killer Jonathon Edington, with making a false
> > statement to police. "I don't know at this point if we're pursuing
> > anything on those lines," he said.
> >
> > Christina Edington's Aug. 28 call to her husband, accusing Colony
> > Street neighbor James of molesting their daughter, caused him to fly
> > into a rage, burst through James' bedroom window and stab him in the
> > chest more than a dozen times with a kitchen knife.
> >
> > Christina Edington filed a molestation complaint against James with
> > police two days after her husband was arrested for allegedly killing
> > James. Police said they had no knowledge of any molestation claims
> > against James before he was killed.
> >
> > Peter Ambrose, a spokesman for the James family, said they are relieved
> > by the statements from Benedict and police.
> >
> > "The family is relieved to some extent because it's one thing to have a
> > son taken from a family, but it's another to have his name besmirched,"
> > Ambrose said Thursday. "The paradox of this whole thing is,
> > notwithstanding the findings of the Fairfield Police Department and
> > what was said by the state's attorney, Barry has been taken from his
> > family."
> >
> > "It's a shame of massive proportion - it's beyond that," Ambrose
> > said.
> >
> > Ambrose said James' family knew James, 59, had not molested the
> > Edingtons' daughter, but felt it was inappropriate to comment while the
> > police investigated Christina Edington's claim.
> >
> > He said James' family gave investigators full access to the Colony
> > Street house where James lived with his elderly parents, his car and
> > his medical records. The medical records indicated it was not realistic
> > to expect James, who was heavy and had nerve damage in his legs, to be
> > able to climb through a window in the Edington house and molest their
> > daughter.
> >
> > "We purposefully provided them with information that could be used by
> > them. We did that because we felt all along Barry was absent any
> > involvement in this matter," Ambrose said.
> >
> > Christina Edington was on vacation in Rhode Island with their daughter
> > on Aug. 28 when she called her husband at their Colony Street house and
> > told him James had molested their daughter, Rebecca.
> >
> > She told police she did not witness the molestation and relied on
> > statements from the child, who allegedly said she did not want to
> > return to their house, according to police.
> >
> > James' family intends to file a wrongful death suit against Edington to
> > clear James' name.
> >
> > Edington, a 29-year-old patent attorney, is free on $1 million bond and
> > pleaded not guilty last week to murder and burglary charges.
> >
> > Police said they found Edington at his sink, washing blood off his
> > arms, after receiving 911 calls from both James' mother and Edington.
> > Edington told emergency dispatchers only that his neighbor had been
> > hurt, police said.
> >
> > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15345326/
> >
> > James's medical condition was further clarified in another article:
> >
> > "The James family not only fully cooperated with police but voluntarily
> > opened their whole house to police to do a complete search for any
> > evidence, but police found nothing that would fit the profile of
> > someone who would do the activity Mrs. Edington has accused Barry James
> > of," he said. "The real mystery here is why this woman would make these
> > allegations."
> >
> > Meehan said James suffered nerve damage to his legs which made it
> > difficult for him to climb stairs, meaning it would have been nearly
> > impossible for him to crawl through a window more than 4 feet off the
> > ground to get into the girl's room in the Edington home.
> >
> > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15316096/
> >
> > As noted in the articles the Jame's family will file a wrongful death
> > suite and the Fairfield Police Department hasn't ruled out charging
> > Christina Edington with false report.
> >
> > So not only that Edington has an excellent chance of spending a the
> > next 10 to 20 years in prison, his family could be impoverished between
> > the civil suite and the legal bills; and as for Christina, the mother,
> > if it is found to have been a deliberate False Report, could spend
> > sometime in jail as well.
> >
> > ---->Hunter
>
>
> Doesn't if *feel* like we are missing something here? The husband is a
> nerdy patent attorney, parents appear to be well-educated. Family appears
> to be upper middle-class *normal*. It just *feels* like there has to be
> more to this story than what meets the eye. I'm certainly not saying the
> dead guy molested the child. IIRC, my early comment was 'when would he have
> an opportunity to even have access to the little girl?' 'Two year olds
> aren't 'out and about the neighborhood' unsupervised.' But it just seems
> like there has to be more behind this whole story IMO.
>
>
> td
> >
catherine yronwode
> This is an article that describes the incident involving the alleged
> nude display by James earlier. Once again, it looks (to me) as if it
> was hardly the lewd intentional actions of a depraved predator (Excerpt
> only below):
> http://www.connpost.com/localsports/ci_4265519
>
> "Brophy said Edington's wife called her about three months ago to ask
> if she knew James. Brophy said Edington's wife told her she had "a
> run-in" with James because the neighbor had allegedly exposed himself.
>
> Jonathan Edington complained to police several months ago that James
> appeared either partially clothed or naked in his bedroom window in
> view of Edington's family, MacNamara said.
>
> But MacNamara said police were not able to determine whether that was
> true. Police said James was warned about the incident.
>
> Less than five yards separate the two homes, and no trees block the
> view between them.
>
> MacNamara said James did not have a criminal record and was not under
> "any investigation alleging inappropriate activity regarding children."
> *****************************
>
> Carmen
Thanks, Carmen!
"Either nude or partially clothed"????
Could Jonathan Edington not tell the difference, or did he want what he
saw to appear worse than it was?
Was Barry James in his boxers and a t-shirt?
What the fuck is "partially clothed" doing in a complaint like that?
There is no claim by Edington that James was engaging in lewd behaviour,
merely that he was "partially clothed" in his own home!
Obviously Edington was a psycho and had it in for this guy for a while.
One could even try to mount a case for premeditation of the murder,
given this earlier bullying harassment, false report to police, etc by
Edington. Under that viewpoint, the crime of passion defense is a false
cover -- Psycho Edington had been stalking the poor guy for months!
Just saying.
cat yronwode
catherine yronwode
>
> Well I must say, humbly, that I initially decided that the only way
> this JAmes guy could get at the girl was to climb in her window. Which
> this article says was four feet from the ground so my totally deduced
> scenario that I concocted, hey based on the layout of mine own ranch
> type house, was exactly how the LE and I suppose the Edingtons, decided
> it came down. Because, as so many of you correctly speculated, the
> Edingtons were not likely to leave a 2-year-old around this guy. I
> also, in my original speculation, concluded that the Edingtons could
> not have dogs as the climbing-in-the-window scenario would not work if
> they had dogs. Dogs bark and carry on when people climb into windows
> in their house. Duh.
Dogs, if present, may or may not bark, depending on if they know the
person approaching -- and depending on their own personalities as well.
> The 2-year-old said James came to her in the "starry nights", put his
> thing in her face and asked her to snort or something odd, and then she
> felt "rain" on her. Wow. I'm sorry folks, this is just a whole lot of
> coincidence here. I continue to assert-and others have argued against
> my assertions with vigor-that there is simply no way this baby could
> have made this up out of whole cloth. I am not buying it. On another
> thread some argued that the child would know about stuff coming out of
> a penis and perhaps so. But the "starry nights"-hey, James would have
> to do this in the middle of the night when parents are sound asleep.'
James had diabetic neuropathy, nerve damage caused by diabetes. He could
barely walk up stairs, could not climb through a window four feet off
the ground, and he was probably sexually incapable of an erection, due
to his medical condition. He may also have been going blind, another
complication of diabetes, as witnessed by his recent trouble driving his
car. When attacked, he could not even get up to defend himself, but just
lay their and was killed -- with defensive wounds on his hands only.
> The putting of his penis on her face...it sounds nuts enough to me to
> be true.
Most of us prefer things that sound logical enough to be true.
If you think that truth of a claim is based on its degree of nuttiness,
i am glad you are not the judge or on the jury!
> And that bit about "rain" on her....I just do not think that
> baby could make up such a story.
We have no evidence that she did say that -- or whether she was induced
to say it. All we know is that her mother claims she did say it and that
her mother is married to a man so psycho that he physically assaulted
volunteers at a Planned Parenthood booth and threw their pamphlets
around while screaming at them. Who knows how psycho living around a
lunatic like that makes his wife -- or their child?
> Now that I know that there is indeed
> a window close enough for someone to crawl into I still think there is
> something to the baby's childish story.
You may think you "know" this, but the police statement, as carried in
newspapers, is that the window is four feet off the ground and that the
victim was physically unable to have climbed into it, due to his
obesity, diabetes, and diabetic neuropathy.
> UNLESS, and I stipulate again, Mrs. Edington made it all up and later
> recanted to the police. I'm simply not buying that the initial tale as
> told by the baby, plus her fear of returning home, was something the
> child made up.
I recall no story mentioning the child having "fear" of returning home,
only that she was "reluctant." or "didn't want to."
Note also that her father, the raving lunatic psycho Planned parenthood
assaulter, had gone home before the mother and child. Perhaps the child
did not want to go home to be with psycho-daddy.
> Just a bit more, bear with me. According to these quotes, James was
> considered too obese to go climbing into windows. Note that there was
> no reference to a continual impotency or other sexual disorder that
> would prevent the sex act as the baby described from happening. And as
> I've argued before, that LE statement that the child was never
> molested, IF it was based on a physical examination of the toddler,
> just didn't hold water. Even if a physical examination revealed no
> trauma to the baby's genital area, that is NOT what the child said
> happened to her.
I got the impression from the news stories that LE consulted with Barry
James' doctor in addition to examining the child. James' doctor is the
most likely source for the firm statement by LE that James could not
have been a molester.
> So the LE now say that JAmes was too fat to go climbing into windows?
> Give me a break. The guy could have brought over a step stool or
> something. That is really lame as I see it.
Please take a moment to acquaint yourself with diabetic neuropathy. Yes,
he was obese -- most people with diabetes are obese, at least until they
go into organ failure near the ends of their lives -- but this was not
the primary problem James had. His worst problem was nerve damage --
diabetic neuropathy. This made it very difficult for him to even walk up
stairs, much less climb a "step stool or something." Many people with
diabetic neuropathy are sexually impotent. Many lose their legs to
related vascular damage, including gangrene. They also go blind. They
suffer kidney failure. Surely you must have heard about this somewhere.
It is not an obscure disease.
> In summary, this Edington case is a prosecutorial hot potato. I'd sure
> hate to be the prosecutor trying this case.
For my part, i think i would enjoy prosecuting it.
> For now I still believe
> that behind the scenes a deal is being made.
Insupportable claim.
> Jonathan Edington did
> kill Barry James and he did it brutally. Murder, for whatever reason,
> is murder. We don't want vigelante justice in this country.
True enough.
> Notice how the Edington defense team is mum. They are trying to get
> the best deal for this guy. He is going to have to serve SOME time.
> If this case before a jury, he might go free completely. If I'm the
> prosecutor in this case I'm doing everything to avoid a trial on this
> case. If I'm on the jury on this case and I'm hearing that a
> 2-year-old told such a story to her mother and was afraid to come home
> because of it, I'm thinking there must be truth to the story. Add to
> it the indignity of a neighbor climbing into a window, molesting my
> baby, then going back home....I might vote to let the guy off. I can
> see the Edington defense team taking the jury to the Edington home,
> showing how the baby's bed was by the window, bringing a stepstool and
> illustrating how the deed as described by the baby COULD have happened.
> If I'm the Edington defense team I'm for sure going to keep banging on
> the fact that it's not likely a 2 year old would concoct such a story.
> If I'm the Edington defense team, I'm going to call the child's mother
> to the stand AND the child's relative who she was visiting, assuming
> someone ELSE heard this child's story.
Meanwhile, James' family is suing for civil damages and defamation of
the name of their son, apparently because he was medically incapable of
carrying out the molestation. There is also the matter of Edington's
previous violence, which i should hope would be admitted -- but may not
be.
> I also recall at first there were many stories about this James guy and
> his weird behavior. I distinctly recall there were already reports on
> file about JAmes exposing himself and a story about James drinking and
> something about crashing a car into his own garage.
The complaint, filed by Edington (the guy who beats up Planned
Parenthood volunteers, mind you) was that James was "partially clothed"
in his own home. No suggestion was made that James "exposed himself" --
merely that psycho-Edington got into a twisted snit because his neighbor
didn't have a suit-coat on. No charge was filed against James -- but
Edington was charged with assault for his attack on the Planned
Parenthood volunteers.
As for James drinking and crashing his car in his own garage. Diabetes
exacerbates alcoholism, but many people with diabetic blood sugar
imbalances are mistakenly thought to be drunk. Diabetes also has another
unfortunate side effect -- it causes people to go BLIND. With failing
eyesight, especially lack of depth perception, it is very likely that
James crashed his car inside his own garage.
This man was severely ill, barely able to walk up stairs, unable to
drive, in pain from neuropathy, unable to get an erection -- and you
paint him as the molester climbing around on a step stool of all the
crazy things -- while right under your nose you have evidence that
Edington was a violent man who assaulted complete strangers in the past
and then committed murder upon his defenseless neighbor -- and you think
Edington will get off because his "baby" couldn't make up a story and
what she said had to be (a) literally true and (b) actually what she
said and not fabricated or embroidered by her mother.
> Now you would think Barry James was a saint. All I can say is I'm
> still not convinced.
No one said he was a saint. We have said that by all indications he was
too debilitated to have been a child molester, that he had no record of
child molestation, and that no evidence of child molestation was found
in his house or in the house of the child. Please stick to facts.
> I still believe something happened to that baby.
Yes, i think so too. I think her daddy and mommy planted spurious ideas
in her head as part of their intense hate campaign against their
neighbor.
> Your mileage, of course, might vary.
Indeed it does.
cat yronwode
JessicaG
"catherine yronwode" <c...@luckymojo.com> wrote in message
news:453E31D2...@luckymojo.com...
>...
I agree totally.
What I also found refreshing is the victim's parents opening up their home
completely and cooperating fully with LE. They didn't hire PR folks and
issue press releases (AFAIK). That's the way it's supposed to work and it
seems justice is prevailing because of this. I hope they win big in a civil
suit to help them out financially, they seem to deserve it for the agony
they're being put through.
Carmen
patfish wrote:
> Well I must say, humbly, that I initially decided that the only way
> this JAmes guy could get at the girl was to climb in her window. Which
> this article says was four feet from the ground so my totally deduced
> scenario that I concocted, hey based on the layout of mine own ranch
> type house, was exactly how the LE and I suppose the Edingtons, decided
> it came down. Because, as so many of you correctly speculated, the
> Edingtons were not likely to leave a 2-year-old around this guy. I
> also, in my original speculation, concluded that the Edingtons could
> not have dogs as the climbing-in-the-window scenario would not work if
> they had dogs. Dogs bark and carry on when people climb into windows
> in their house. Duh.
>
> On that note, somebody wrote in a comment on my Blog that the Edingtons
> DID have dogs. The commenter provided no backup to this claim and so
> far I have not seen any published accounts verifying this. The
> commenter said the Edington had TWO dogs in fact.
The Edingtons had a dog. Darrell Maynard, their neighbor, was quoted
as describing Edington as a quiet man who walked his dog around the
neighborhood with his daughter. It took me a whopping minute to find
the reference by using "Jonathan Edington" and "dog". Do you not look
for stuff that doesn't fit your theory?:
Attorney accused of killing neighbor over molestation suspicions
FAIRFIELD, Conn. (AP) - A lawyer climbed through a neighbor's bedroom
window and stabbed him to death after being told by a family member
that the man had molested his 2-year-old daughter, authorities say.
Barry James, 58, was stabbed in the chest nearly a dozen times Monday.
The lawyer, Jonathon Edington, 29, appeared in court on murder and
burglary charges Tuesday and was released Wednesday after posting $1
million bond. Capt. Gary MacNamara said Wednesday that police had not
received a complaint about the child being assaulted before the
killing, and "we have no indication it's true or not true." Edington's
attorney, Michael Sherman, said the information came from Edington's
wife. "The daughter gave the mother information which was alarming and
disturbing. The mom relayed it to her husband. That was the spark,"
Sherman said. James' 87-year-old mother discovered his body. When
officers went to Edington's home a short time later, they found him
standing by his kitchen sink with what appeared to be blood on him,
authorities said. Officers said a large kitchen knife was next to him
on a counter. "He's in shock," Edington's attorney said. "This is the
most unexpected turn of events one can imagine with this young man's
background." Police had gone to the neighborhood before, when Edington
called to complain that he could see James through a window, police
said. "Either he was partly clothed or revealed parts of his anatomy
that were inappropriate," MacNamara said. Edington, a graduate of
Syracuse University and Fordham University Law School, has been
practicing patent law, Sherman said. Police said Edington has no
criminal record. Rita James declined to comment on her son's death. Pat
Wysocki, a neighbor who has known the James family for 39 years,
described Barry James as a "very nice fellow" who worked for a funeral
home and said she found it hard to believe he would molest a child.
"But then again, you don't know," she said. James served two days in
prison in May 2001 on a drunken driving charge, according to the state
Department of Correction. "He had some bizarre behavior over the last
month," said Darrell Maynard, a neighbor. "He drove his car through his
garage, hit the other neighbor's building." Another time a neighbor
found James intoxicated on the street, Maynard said. James shouted
obscenities at children, he said. Edington liked to walk his dog with
his daughter around the neighborhood, Maynard said. "He seemed to be a
very nice low-key man," Maynard said. "It seemed like he really loved
his daughter. He was really good with her." Maynard said his wife heard
screams and shouting Monday from the house. "Something had to happen
that was terrible for this to have occurred," Maynard said. Edington
"seemed like a computer geek or something. He was not anybody you would
ever feel you were threatened by."
****************************
Carmen
patfish
the silly snide sarcasm people on this group feel they HAVE to post.
It's mean and it's small.
Like do I not check out theories that don't suit me. If one properly
read my post, I remarked that a commenter on my Blog said the Edingtons
had TWO dogs. And NO I didn't check it out and never pretended to.
But thank you anyway for checking that out. I posited my position and
one big posit I made was that if the Edington had a dog or dogs than I
could not believe that James climbed into the window.
Hey, I know there are some dogs that don't bark but very few. If the
Edingtons had a dog I'd say the odds are the dogs, or dog, would bark.
Makes me lean towards a mid of night molestation did not occur. I
simply do not think a person would be carrying around step stools,
bungling all about...a fat man at that, when James surely had to know
the Edingtons had a dog, living nearby and everything. Even if the dog
didn't bark for whatever reason, surely James had to THINK the dog
would bark.
I still stand on that baby's story as reported. Although I certainly
have a lot of caveats with that position. I must assume the mother
reported what the baby told her just as it happened. A really big
assumption I know because who knows if that baby wasn't coached or
whatever. But if the report of what the toddler said is true, I simply
do not believe she made it up.
So sue me. My opinion is different than yours, whoever. I respect
your opinion and allow you're probably right. I base that on the
presence of a dog at the Edingtons. I gave my reasons. Now proceed to
make fun of me.
It sure makes you look real intelligent. I'm done here.
Carmen
You said a dog would act as a deterrent. Added a "Duh" just to show
how stupid someone would have to be to not know that. Clearly you
thought the absence or presence of a dog would clear up the point once
and for all, at least for you. Why then would you not have taken a
minute to check for whether or not there was a dog reported in one of
the stories about Edington? Yet you didn't. I don't have any patience
for that. If it isn't a desire not to kill a theory, or just old
fashioned laziness, what excuse is there?
Carmen
JonesieCat
Yes, yes, in theory LE would "investigate" to determine if a crime was
committed, and what crime it was, thus: if the child was inappropriately
approached & if so, to what extent. If a crime was found to have been
committed, LE would "investigate" who did it, and make an arrest or close
the case in some other way if possible. However, when both LE and the
complaintant agree on the ID "suspect" - even if they don't agree on whether
a crime has been committed or not - it's all over bar the shouting. LE
routinely closes cases where there is no case. There is no case if a) there
was no crime, or if, b) the "suspect" is dead. Naturally, LE is choosing a)
in this case, which protects them from charges they didn't investigate other
possible perps. And helps the prosecution win its case.
In reality, surely you are experienced enough at life to know that many
"crimes" are never reported for a plethora of reasons. Espec if the perp is
dead, in a case like this. There was no reason for the mother to file a
report. Certainly not to protect her daughter. It would be more protective
of her daughter NOT to. But it was nec in order to help her husb.
jc
JonesieCat
Everyone agrees he also had a problem with alcohol, and may very well have
been drunk at the time of his attack.
There is absolutely no basis for calling Edington a "psycho-daddy". A killer
yes, but your characterization of the child fearing return to her father
does nothing but demonstrate your own bias.
>> Just a bit more, bear with me. According to these quotes, James was
>> considered too obese to go climbing into windows. Note that there was
>> no reference to a continual impotency or other sexual disorder that
>> would prevent the sex act as the baby described from happening. And as
>> I've argued before, that LE statement that the child was never
>> molested, IF it was based on a physical examination of the toddler,
>> just didn't hold water. Even if a physical examination revealed no
>> trauma to the baby's genital area, that is NOT what the child said
>> happened to her.
>
> I got the impression from the news stories that LE consulted with Barry
> James' doctor in addition to examining the child. James' doctor is the
> most likely source for the firm statement by LE that James could not
> have been a molester.
>
>> So the LE now say that JAmes was too fat to go climbing into windows?
>> Give me a break. The guy could have brought over a step stool or
>> something. That is really lame as I see it.
>
> Please take a moment to acquaint yourself with diabetic neuropathy. Yes,
> he was obese -- most people with diabetes are obese, at least until they
> go into organ failure near the ends of their lives -- but this was not
You know, your ignorance, or maybe it's just your tendency to
overgeneralise, has the opp effect of what you put forth in your argument. I
don't know which diabetic people you know, but I have known a fair few in my
life and "most" are not "obese". I can think of several off the top of my
head - none obese.
> the primary problem James had. His worst problem was nerve damage --
> diabetic neuropathy. This made it very difficult for him to even walk up
> stairs, much less climb a "step stool or something." Many people with
> diabetic neuropathy are sexually impotent. Many lose their legs to
> related vascular damage, including gangrene. They also go blind. They
> suffer kidney failure. Surely you must have heard about this somewhere.
> It is not an obscure disease.
Does spiteful weaving of absurdity and presumption with strands of the
obvious make you feel as if you have insight or that you are participating
in intelligent debate or friendly discussion? Any of the above?
>> In summary, this Edington case is a prosecutorial hot potato. I'd sure
>> hate to be the prosecutor trying this case.
>
> For my part, i think i would enjoy prosecuting it.
>
>> For now I still believe
>> that behind the scenes a deal is being made.
>
> Insupportable claim.
WTF? The poster stated what she believes to be true. And what she believes
so happens in nearly every criminal case everywhere - both sides exploring
some sort of compromise. Of course this "claim" is not evidenced yet.
His previous "violence" is hard to gauge. So far, he only hollered and
messed up some papers. Hard to say what that may mean. For many, because it
was Plan. Parenthood thing he was yelling and carrying on about, that itself
is enough to convict him. It does not cause me to sympathise with him
certainly. As for the James' family suing for defamation on behalf of their
son - complete nonsense.
>> I also recall at first there were many stories about this James guy and
>> his weird behavior. I distinctly recall there were already reports on
>> file about JAmes exposing himself and a story about James drinking and
>> something about crashing a car into his own garage.
>
> The complaint, filed by Edington (the guy who beats up Planned
> Parenthood volunteers, mind you) was that James was "partially clothed"
> in his own home. No suggestion was made that James "exposed himself" --
> merely that psycho-Edington got into a twisted snit because his neighbor
> didn't have a suit-coat on. No charge was filed against James -- but
> Edington was charged with assault for his attack on the Planned
> Parenthood volunteers.
>
> As for James drinking and crashing his car in his own garage. Diabetes
> exacerbates alcoholism, but many people with diabetic blood sugar
> imbalances are mistakenly thought to be drunk. Diabetes also has another
> unfortunate side effect -- it causes people to go BLIND. With failing
> eyesight, especially lack of depth perception, it is very likely that
> James crashed his car inside his own garage.
You could be right. But the drunk part - well, I think the people who
arrested him for drunk driving and who helped secure his conviction for it
may disagree about your "mistaken" assertion. Has someone said that poor
Barry was blind?! Ah, that's probably another reason he was convicted for
drunk driving?!
> This man was severely ill, barely able to walk up stairs, unable to
> drive, in pain from neuropathy, unable to get an erection
This is quite an interesting case to discuss, but boring when you make
things up. You have no idea whether he was unable to walk up stairs or get
an erection. A+ for a fertile imagination tho, like what you say the little
girl has, too.
-- and you
> paint him as the molester climbing around on a step stool of all the
> crazy things -- while right under your nose you have evidence that
> Edington was a violent man who assaulted complete strangers in the past
Oh, who are the strangers he assaulted? Tell me, please.
> and then committed murder upon his defenseless neighbor -- and you think
> Edington will get off because his "baby" couldn't make up a story and
> what she said had to be (a) literally true and (b) actually what she
> said and not fabricated or embroidered by her mother.
>
>> Now you would think Barry James was a saint. All I can say is I'm
>> still not convinced.
>
> No one said he was a saint. We have said that by all indications he was
> too debilitated to have been a child molester, that he had no record of
> child molestation, and that no evidence of child molestation was found
> in his house or in the house of the child. Please stick to facts.
YOU'RE telling somebody to stick to the facts?!! <big ol eyeroll>
Hunter
Well, his feelings and acts regarding abortion aside, his supposedly
being controlling for whatever reason is just speculation. I think he
was just a dad you lost control of his feelings. Here is another case
of that:
WILMINGTON -- An Elsmere man pleaded guilty Wednesday morning to
fatally beating a senior citizen he believed molested his 5-year-old
daughter.
Robert J. Fontanez Jr., 27, of the 2100 block of Seneca Road, pleaded
guilty to criminally negligent homicide. He faces up to five years in
prison when Superior Court Judge Jerome O. Herlihy sentences him early
next year.
According to court records, Fontanez is free on $10,000 bail.
According to relatives of Fontanez, his daughter told him that
77-year-old Bismark Vasquez had molested her. An infuriated Fontanez
punched Vasquez so hard on April 14 that the victim went through the
back door of his Wilmington home, police said.
Fontanez did not try to help Vasquez, police said. Instead, he punched
him several more times as he lay on the ground bleeding. Vasquez was
taken to Christiana Hospital, where he died April 20.
Deputy Attorney General Marsha White said the girl was interviewed at
the Children's Advocacy Center and her story sounded credible.
"That did play into the plea agreement," White said. "But there were
certainly other factors."
Police charged Fontanez with second-degree murder after Vasquez died.
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061005/NEWS/610050360/1006/NEWS
Also:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/10/04/molestation.suspicion.ap/index.html
Now in the Bismark case the allegation is based on somewhat more solid
ground 1) The father heard it directly from the daughter; 2) The
daughter was five years old therefore she has a somewhat better grasp
of reality and is more articulate than a 2+ year old, 3) The police
found her story consistent and credible. Still, the victim, ie the
Bismark Vasquez, was a 77 year old man with apparently no history of
sexual abuse and as far as I know no child porn was in his possession
and of course he had no opportunity like Barry James, to defend himself
against the charges. I don't know his medical history but he was 77.
And while a five year old is a more capable witness, they are still
frighteningly prone to confuse reality and fantasy. I have to do more
research on this case, because I didn't know about it at the time of
the occurrence in April of 2006. There are a lot of details I want to
know, like where exactly it supposed to have happened, Bismark's
medical condition, any opportunity, etc.
The point of bringing this case up is that people do snap, their
politics not withstanding. I am not excusing it but it does happen, but
of course they have to pay the consequences when they do.
---->Hunter
JessicaG
> committed, and what crime it was, thus: if the child was inappropriately
> approached & if so, to what extent. If a crime was found to have been
> committed, LE would "investigate" who did it, and make an arrest or close
> the case in some other way if possible. However, when both LE and the
> complaintant agree on the ID "suspect" - even if they don't agree on
> whether a crime has been committed or not - it's all over bar the
> shouting. LE routinely closes cases where there is no case. There is no
> case if a) there was no crime, or if, b) the "suspect" is dead. Naturally,
> LE is choosing a) in this case, which protects them from charges they
> didn't investigate other possible perps. And helps the prosecution win its
> case.
>
> In reality, surely you are experienced enough at life to know that many
> "crimes" are never reported for a plethora of reasons. Espec if the perp
> is dead, in a case like this. There was no reason for the mother to file a
> report. Certainly not to protect her daughter. It would be more protective
> of her daughter NOT to. But it was nec in order to help her husb.
I think we agree to disagree.
Obviously, I realize the filing helps her husband but there are also other
legitimate, non-sinister reasons for filing as I have stated. The reason for
reporting a crime is to report a crime. Suspicions and conjecture as to the
perpetrators can be added to the report but subsequent investigation may
disprove those suspicions.
JonesieCat
Let me add too, in helping her husb by filing this crim complaint, I don't
consider it "sinister" in any way. It's a good idea, as a matter of fact, if
she loves, believes & has loyalty to her husb (as well as to her child). I
do agree with you there is good reason to report crimes in general,
regardless of circumstances, for many reasons too numbered to go into here -
except in this particular case, which is unique. Ah, well, perhaps we do
agree to disagree. jc
catherine yronwode
> > Please take a moment to acquaint yourself with diabetic neuropathy.
> > Yes, he was obese -- most people with diabetes are obese, at least
> > until they go into organ failure near the ends of their lives [...]
>
> You know, your ignorance, or maybe it's just your tendency to
> overgeneralise, has the opp effect of what you put forth in your
> argument. I don't know which diabetic people you know, but I have known
> a fair few in my life and "most" are not "obese". I can think of
> several off the top of my head - none obese.
I am not trying to generalize; i am speaking from personal experience. I
know two people with type I (childhood) diabetes who are not obese.
Considering those with type II (adult onset) diabetes whom i personally
know: My grandmother had diabetes and was obese. My ex-mother-in-law had
diabetes and was morbidly obese but lost weight as her kidneys failed.
One man i knew had diabetes and was not obese. I know three middle-aged
women and one middle aged man right now who have diabetes and all are
either obese or morbidly obese. One friend developed gestational
diabetes and she was obese at the time of her pregnancy. Two males i
know have type II and are overweight but not obese. Counting only type
II, that's a ratio in my personal sphere of experience of 7 obese to 2
overweight to 1 that is neither obese nor overweight. Adding in the type
I diabetic people, the ratio is still 7 : 2 : 3 -- most are obese.
No intention to offend -- i am simply telling what i have seen in my
immediate vicinity.
cat yronwode
cat yronwode
cro...@earthlink.net
had diabetes...???
"catherine yronwode" <c...@luckymojo.com> wrote in message
news:453FA689...@luckymojo.com...
Carmen
cro...@earthlink.net wrote:
> I seem to have missed the article in which it was reported that the dead man
> had diabetes...???
Here's one:
http://www.fairfieldcitizen-news.com/local/ci_4547016
You can pull it up. I'm heading out to N'ville.
Carmen
PS I swear I'm gonna give an online class on Googling
Kris Baker
"Carmen" <carm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1161816099.5...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> cro...@earthlink.net wrote:
>> I seem to have missed the article in which it was reported that the dead
>> man
>> had diabetes...???
>
> Here's one:
> http://www.fairfieldcitizen-news.com/local/ci_4547016
>
> You can pull it up. I'm heading out to N'ville.
>
> Carmen
> PS I swear I'm gonna give an online class on Googling
How about we cut 'em all off cold turkey?
Kris
JonesieCat
"Kris Baker" <kris....@prodigyyyy.net> wrote in message
news:gOR%g.1178$s6....@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
OH PLEEZE GAWDNOOOO ANYTHING BUT THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Kris Baker
"JonesieCat" <Long Ago & Far Away> wrote in message
I'm just talking about the ones who consistently ask for
help, when they're capable of finding the information themselves
and contributing.
Kris
Greegor
> something painfully stupid at the very least. It may have been done as
> a deliberate lie, but since the little girl is only two, without a
> confession from Christina Edington we'll never know for sure.
The little girl's comments "He put it on my belly" and
"he put it on my nose" sure are a mystery.
Especially since the authorities say no abuse occurred.
cro...@earthlink.net
"Greegor" <Gree...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1161820423.3...@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
JonesieCat
>>>
>>> Kris
>>I said:
>> OH PLEEZE GAWDNOOOO ANYTHING BUT THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> I'm just talking about the ones who consistently ask for
> help, when they're capable of finding the information themselves
> and contributing.
>
> Kris
:::sigh::: ~whew~
Carmen
This is all my fault, not Kris'. I was a bit o' cranky when I posted
about a Googling class. My patience is pretty scarce these days. I
didn't post the Google smackdown link for anyone yet, although I
thought about it the day before yesterday. If you aren't familiar with
it, it's this:
http://justfuckinggoogleit.com/
Even when I'm not being Bitch-o-Blonde it still doesn't seem like a
half-bad idea to come up with some plain language Googling tips. Not
everyone knows some of the little stuff - like enclosing words you
want in exact sequence with quotation marks.
Carmen
JonesieCat
Hilarious link - just the name I mean! hahaha! Actually I do use google,
know about the quotation thing and stuff - helpful to use the adv search
option generally - but I swear, every time I want something really FAST -
that's when I get 12,000 hits and none of 'em what I wanted. Well, not
everytime, but sometimes.
One note tho, sometimes when I post a question here, it's more to get a
poster's opinion rather than a hard fact which might be better rendered by
google. I mention that, because I'm conscious of not always googling when I
ask one thing or another of someone or in general, but it isn't ALWAYS
because I'm lazy or inept. (only sometimes!)
I do like it tho, when you more learned types gratuitously post info or
links in one thread or another, when you happen to be in the mood - very
enlightening, and I do appreciate it. Just so's you know.
jc ::::tiptoeing away ever so quietly::::::
JessicaG
> know about the quotation thing and stuff - helpful to use the adv search
> option generally - but I swear, every time I want something really FAST -
> that's when I get 12,000 hits and none of 'em what I wanted. Well, not
> everytime, but sometimes.
>
> One note tho, sometimes when I post a question here, it's more to get a
> poster's opinion rather than a hard fact which might be better rendered by
> google. I mention that, because I'm conscious of not always googling when
> I ask one thing or another of someone or in general, but it isn't ALWAYS
> because I'm lazy or inept. (only sometimes!)
>
> I do like it tho, when you more learned types gratuitously post info or
> links in one thread or another, when you happen to be in the mood - very
> enlightening, and I do appreciate it. Just so's you know.
>
> jc ::::tiptoeing away ever so quietly::::::
I hate a lot of the kneejerk DAGS responses. Those posts usually have no
point other than stating the obvious.
But a simple question that may be easily searchable but it's within the
midst of a long thread doesn't always require the DAGS reply. It may be
easily searched but if the question's relevent, so be it and should be
answered. A quick question like "i forget, was jonbenet's basement window
open or closed when they first searched?" in the middle of a larger
discussion could have use and may spur other good points within the thread.
However, a standalone question that is easily searchable is laziness and is
fair game for snide remarks.
JonesieCat
Erm, what's DAGS mean?
jc ::::scurrying away on little kitten feet:::: (Are you Aussie, re 'dags'?)
Carmen
It's an acronym. First lesson: Put in Dags and acronym. See what you
get. <G>
Carmen
JessicaG
>
> jc ::::scurrying away on little kitten feet:::: (Are you Aussie, re
> 'dags'?)
Do a google search. Wow, a recursive paradox! ;-)
JonesieCat
>
> It's an acronym. First lesson: Put in Dags and acronym. See what you
> get. <G>
>
> Carmen
>
>>
>> jc ::::scurrying away on little kitten feet:::: (Are you Aussie, re
>> 'dags'?)
Oh! hahahaha! got it! (d'oh)! jc
JonesieCat
Michael Snyder
"JonesieCat" <Long Ago & Far Away> wrote in message
> >> Erm, what's DAGS mean?
> >
> > It's an acronym. First lesson: Put in Dags and acronym. See what you
> > get. <G>
Umm... Diagnostic and AGreement Statistics?
Demonstrator Application Grant Scheme?
Data Architecture and Gateway Services?
Department of Accounting and General Services?
Direct Access Guarantee Scheme?
Dalhousie Association of Graduate Students?
Dallas Area Gerontological Society?
District Aviation Gas Office?
The search you suggest turned up all of the above, but
from my grad school days, it means "directed acyclic graphs".
JonesieCat
"Michael Snyder" <msn...@socmen.org> wrote in message
news:4545517e$0$88644$742e...@news.sonic.net...
hahaha! My first quick search quickly turned up 'Do A Google Search'!
hahahaha! Just as we were discussing....! So funny! jc
Michael Snyder
"JonesieCat" <Long Ago & Far Away> wrote in message
I still like directed acyclic graphs...
Carmen
Um, yeah. That's great work Michael! <pats on head>
Carmen
Carmen
Don't feel bad JC. We all do it from time to time. ;-)
Carmen
JonesieCat
hahaha! You're a nut! And you're a 'puter person! jc