alledged child abuser let out thanks 2 j slade

[sockgirl77 (Premo)]

Originally Posted by mgdbaa

My family is the oldest childs family. Ryan is not the oldest childs father, he is only baby Jaydens father. The state has ordered that the oldest child remain in the Woodfords custody until further investigation is done. Now the oldest childs family is not allowed to be with her until we have been cleared by child protective services but yet the state feels she is better off remaining in the home where the alledged abuse took place. If anyone in the media is reading this please make sure this story stays alive. Its all about politics. Who ever has the most money and becuase Cathy Woodford is a school principle, I feel the state will side with her the Woodfords. She is not even the oldest childs paternal grandmother. Why are the paternal grandparents being punished for what the Woodfords son did to baby Jayden? Where is the justice? Judge Slade let him out. Its obvious that the Woodfords will protect their son until the end. All the criminal charges on his record prove that. Someone please help . Do not help the Woodfords. They have had their son in their home his whole life. You have to know at some point that your child needs therpy. But instead they have sheltered him and bail him out everytime hi screws up and now he has almost taken a childs life. What more has to happen before he is put away for ever?

Why was the child taken away from their mother? Judges do not take children especially babies away from their mother because the grandparents make more money.

[Baja28 (Premo)]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

People get out on bail all the time. Why is this so shocking?

Because it involved critically wounding a baby.

[sockgirl77 (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Baja28

Because it involved critically wounding a baby.

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by Baja28

Because it involved critically wounding a baby.

Realistically, he's not a threat to the community or anyone else. It's doubtful that he's a danger to other children, not like he's going to troll the playgrounds for some kid to beat up, so it makes sense that he would be offered bail to free up jail space for some other criminal who IS more of a threat.

Musing:

All the internet tough guys who spout that they'd love to get this guy in a dark alley, yet whenever a cop slaps some punk around or even yells at them, these same tough guys pule and whine about police brutality and abuse of authority.



Anyway, it's not unreasonable that this kid would be granted bail.

[Tigerlily]

Originally Posted by Vince

Why is this piece of garbage back on the streets?

Because the law provides that you are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Even though we all know he's a dirtbag who would be better off as crab bait in the river, we will have to wait for the outcome of the trial. Also his previous criminal record or possible lcak of would be taken into account by the judge when determining bail. Was the the bond 25K or was the 25K the 10% they had to put up on 250K?

[kom526]

Judge Slade did not "let" him out, he was bonded out. Granted, $25,000 is ridiculously low given the nature of the charges, but the fact remains that he was not let out. As far as the situation with the older child MAYBE since she was living under that roof it was decided to keep her there since that is where the custodial parents live.

[kom526]

Originally Posted by Tigerlily

B Was the the bond 25K or was the 25K the 10% they had to put up on 250K?

This sounds more plausible.

[Baja28 (Premo)]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

Anyway, it's not unreasonable that this kid would be granted bail.

I know, it just hits harder when it's a child.

Originally Posted by Baja28

I know, it just hits harder when it's a child.

That is true...........anyone abusing children or the elderly are evil.

Originally Posted by Callie girl

Wouldn't you think she would be at the hospital, I think that's an obvious question. I would be spending every chance I could with my baby.

I hadn't heard anything about the mother at all, so I didn't even know if she was still in the picture. Did she not know this abuse was taking place?

I had also asked about the OTHER child that mgdbaa is concerned about. It was mentioned that there was another child that this pos could harm as well, so I asked where that child was. I find it ridiculous that the other child is still residing in that household. There are realtives willing to take care of the baby - why leave a second innocent child in a potentially fatal position when there are alternatives?