Sandra Cantu #3 4/15/09 -4/27/09

[no rose colored glasses]

Have to say ITA agree with all of you above 100%

You would think over the course of 16+ years that someone besides three of her friends would have noticed and done something helpful.  What about her teachers or others in a position to notice her troubling behavior, if it was THAT BAD??

Seems out of character that her "blind" family stands so supportive at her side now.  I'm not falling for this either.  Somethings amiss and she's not getting my sympathy.

Something is very amiss in all of this. I think her parents gave up, and shipped her and her child to live with grandma and grandpa.

[Tams]

Re: Wyks post #771 a few posts back:

"Huckaby had trouble getting along with her family, said the friends.
Private letters shared by one source indicate Huckaby was suicidal, and had been since the sixth grade."

I could not agree more with everything you said; the quote you included (above) literally screams at me personally. . . for that matter, it sounds as if we are all really feeling similarly here.

Yes, she clearly has had issues from a very young age, as you pointed out. Hopefully what is seeming so obvious to us is screaming & flashing at the investigators as well, so they can get to the bottom of this. NO, it is surely not a defense for the horror and destruction she has inflicted upon an innocent child and the Cantu/Chavez family. She needs to be permanently removed from society and pay the price for her actions.

However, if indeed her behavior stems from HER childhood abuse, then those responsible (who may well still be abusing others) need to be uncovered and brought to justice as well. The case against her family -hiding behind the 'church'- seems to be growing with every new twist. All IMHO.

Your statement, "When one is looking for a fall guy, a scapegoat, someone to take the blame for everyone else, who do they look for?  The one in the group who is vulnerable and fragile, the one who has already been in trouble, perhaps who seems to have been a problem their whole life, the one who others will easily believe is the guilty one.  And then the group can sit back and say, "It was her, what a shame, she's always been 'the sick one', while washing their hands of the whole thing."  Very insightful as well, Wyks. Thanks for sharing that.

[Wyks]

Thanks all.  For those wondering why the family seems to be surrounding Melissa now, (and where were they in the past?), doesn't it seem like they are circling the wagons?  Kind of like the Anthony's are doing.    

All this talk of Melissa's family, and I haven't mentioned much about Sandra's family.  Mainly out of respect for them.  I don't want to seem harsh toward them right now, lord knows there but for the grace of God go I, cuz I've certainly let my kids outside to play. 

And yet.. Had my child been kissed on the mouth by a neighborhood perv, I would not ever let her out of my sight again. 

And IF the rumor is true that Sandra is the child who was drugged by Melissa before, I sure wouldn't even be living in the same MHP, let alone allowing Sandra to run and play outside as she seemed to have done so much. 

The very weirdest thing to me... that I don't think many have realized yet, is this: 

It's been reported that Sandra went to the second lil friends house to play and watched a movie, etc.  Then she went home and asked if she and her sibs could go to a movie but was told they didn't have the money for that.  Reported that she was at home for about 5 minutes, then went back outside, and headed back over to the first lil friends house (Melissa's daughter).  Reported that she never made it over there.  And the family shared the video they got of Sandra on cam. 

Here's the weird part: 

We've all watched the short clip that has been played of Sandra, skipping down the street, toward Melissa's home.  It shows Sandra coming out from between some parked cars across the street from her home, then heading past her own home, in the direction of Melissa's home. 

It does NOT show Sandra stopping at her own home first, as has been reported.  Had she stopped at her own home first, we would have seen her coming OUT the door, going down the steps, and turning in the direction of Melissa's.  Right????????  We wouldn't even see her skipping down the street past her own home. 

 

And that's the only problem I have with Sandra's family.  Sure seems odd to me!!!! 

[Edward]

TRACY, Calif. – Callers have inundated the phone lines of Tracy police, saying it can't be. Veteran homicide and sex-crime researchers say they cannot recall a case quite like it. Even the investigators themselves looked at the evidence and initially said "no way."

A woman was accused not only of killing someone else's child, but of raping her

Law enforcement officials and other experts say the allegations against Melissa Huckaby in the slaying of 8-year-old Sandra Cantu are remarkably rare over decades of U.S. police work.

Tracy police Sgt. Tony Sheneman said dozens of callers a day have insisted that Huckaby could not have acted alone, that no mother would rape another's child, that the scenario was too improbable to be true. The case is so striking that police initially shared the public's reaction.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090418/ap_on_re_us/girl_in_suitcase_1
The investigators themselves, when first confronted with the evidence that pointed to Huckaby, were inclined to look for another suspect.

"When investigators were first looking at this they went 'Huh, no way... Who did she work with?'" Sheneman said. "We got that info and said 'there's no way, that doesn't happen.'"
"After this case, I'll never say never again," Sheneman said, adding that police remain confident that Huckaby acted alone.

Department of Justice data on U.S. homicides dating back more than 30 years highlight the unusual nature of this crime, said James Fox, a criminologist at Northeastern University.

Of the more than 600,000 cases recorded — more than 90 percent of U.S. homicides since 1976 — only one comes close to the alleged circumstances of Sandra's killing, said Fox. The data did not include names and some other details; the Associated Press was unable to locate the case.

Researchers say the Huckaby case does not match the typical profile of sex crimes by females.

Women represent only 1 percent of all adult arrests for forcible rape and 6 percent of all adult arrests for other sex offenses, according to a Department of Justice report.

When they do commit sex crimes, women often are acting as accomplices to men, and their victims tend to be teenagers, said David Finkelhor, director of the University of New Hampshire Crimes against Children Research Center.

"It's very, very rare for women to molest children, and when they molest children it's very unusual for them to molest a child of this age," Finkelhor said. "It's unusual for women to kill children who are not their own."



Police have declined to publicly state where and how Sandra was killed, but they have said they do not have a motive.

"I find it really hard to speculate on the motivation," Finkelhor said.

Court documents and interviews with family members show Huckaby had a rocky personal life. She went through a divorce and bankruptcy and fought depression as she tried to hold down a job and raise a child.

In 2002, she won a restraining order against a boyfriend who had an extensive criminal record and a restraining order from a previous marriage, according to San Joaquin County court records.

She married John Huckaby in 2003, separated a year later and divorced in 2005. In divorce papers, Melissa Huckaby accused John Huckaby of child abduction, domestic violence and alcohol abuse — allegations he denied in an interview with ABC's "Good Morning America" on Friday.

Records show she was arrested in November and charged with burglary and petty theft from a store. The judge suspended the case and appointed a doctor to assess Huckaby's mental health. She was found competent to stand trial. In a deal with prosecutors, she pleaded no contest in January to the petty theft charge and the burglary charge was dropped.
Huckaby's attorneys could use the sheer statistical improbability of the murder case to cast doubt on the allegations, regardless of the evidence, legal experts said.

"Instinctively it doesn't feel like a good fit," said William Portanova, a Sacramento defense lawyer and a former state and federal prosecutor.

"It's an extraordinarily rare circumstance to have an adult female commit a sexual assault and murder on a female child alone," Portanova said. "So right off the bat, any attorney is going to be looking to disprove that theory."

[no rose colored glasses]

Thanks Edward    And Wyks, the only thing I can think of is the video was edited, and not only that they didn't show us all the video, evidently there was a lot of video. I'm confused about the first child's house that she went to, the five year old, who told her mom that Sandra wanted to run away, I vaguely remember some women talking in the very beginning I'm guessing that was the child's mother, but I didn't get her name.

[Edward]

I like I was saying ... There is a male involved or the Autopsy is incorrect.

My first thought is ,I think a male involvement..
Just because of Williams knowing it was THE suitcase.. Before he could know that..
 
She may have accidentally hit the child with her car, AND She FREAKED
As it was already mentioned by herself, that the suitcase was in her driveway next to her vehicle.. When Sandra came over to play and Melissa sent her away..
 The suitcase would be a convenient coffin for the dead child. Somebody is ran over by a car, there could be terrible trauma to the lower pelvic of a body depending on how the child was hit.
 But considering you could have a bored 8 year old playing with the suitcase behind the car when Malissa decides to drive to the church.. If that happened,
 How Mellisa was not witnessed in a trailer park with an accident?
How the child got to the church ?
How the suitcase got a very short distance and in a very findable position leads me to think Mallissa herself did the disposal, because that type of disposal is or was done by a crazy person without a properly working mind..MO. There were many possible places in the area where the body would not be found as easy.
 The police cadet seeing a male next to a Chevy silverado pick ?
That is another one of those things..

There are 2 rivers very close.. One is deep and dirty "The delta river system" One of the legs of this river is right behind the holding pond in which the body was found in.
1/4 mile more ...
The next river is very deep and it has a fast moving currant.."The California aqueduct"
Only 1 mile away and that body would have NEVER been found.
Sandra was intended to be found by a guilty conscience..
I have doubts on the autopsy... You all know that.
  BUT ..WHY doesn't somebody ask Melissa What happened ?
 The police detective saying He would not guess the motive ?
 Nobody has any common sense ? Ask Her.

[Blink34]

Well I guess we can at least look on the bright side a bit. If her attorney is going to try to use the statistical improbability of her committing this crime alone, we may find out all we want to know.

I just know that when I say really smart monkeys post after post saying.. OK, maybe that part is correct, but there is more, and it involves someone else, my moneys on us
B

[klaasend]

http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090418/A_NEWS/904180324

Window into mental health of Huckaby
Transcripts show suspect in Cantu case was making progress in court ordered program

 
By Scott Smith
Record Staff Writer
April 18, 2009 6:00 AM

STOCKTON - Melissa Huckaby told a mental-health worker she was doing "very, very well" less than three weeks before 8-year-old Sandra Cantu was killed, according to court transcripts obtained Friday by The Record.

The transcripts, which give a glimpse into 28-year-old Huckaby's mental-health history, come as her public defender seeks to remove Sandra's remains from a Tracy mausoleum for a second autopsy.

In Huckaby's last appearance in mental-health court March 6, her counselor reported to a judge that she was making progress. In fact, Huckaby said at the time that "she's doing great," transcripts say.

"You know, we really work on some deep, prudent issues," San Joaquin County Mental Health Services court liaison Margie Valdez said in the hearing. "She really participates with everything and that's really good for her. I want to see her come back in a month."

That's where Huckaby's progress ended.

She missed an April 3 hearing before San Joaquin County Superior Court Judge Richard Vlavianos.

On March 27, Sandra disappeared and was killed. On April 6, her body was found inside a suitcase.

Huckaby was arrested four days later and now stands accused in Sandra's death, charged with murder and the special circumstance of rape, kidnapping and lewd and lascivious acts with a child. Huckaby is eligible for a death sentence.

Court records show that Huckaby has a history of petty theft, a prelude to the alleged violence prosecutors say she committed against Sandra.

Huckaby was previously convicted of a November 2006 petty theft in Los Angeles County. She fell into the county court system following her Nov. 3, 2008, arrest for a petty theft at a Tracy Target store.

After her San Joaquin County arrest, a judge ordered two doctors to evaluate Huckaby. They agreed she was competent to stand trial but that there was evidence of mental illness, transcripts and public court records say without revealing a diagnosis.

Huckaby agreed to a yearlong program designed to keep the mentally ill out of jail or prison and to avoid unemployment and suicide. Prosecutors agreed to drop the petty theft count from her record if she completed the program, court papers say.

Meanwhile, San Joaquin County Deputy Public Defender Sam Behar is seeking to obtain Sandra's interred remains through a judge's order. He wants pathologist Dr. Terri Haddix to perform an autopsy in search of an alternative explanation for the sexual allegations.

Superior Court Presiding Judge William J. Murray Jr. on Thursday refused to rule on Behar's request for possession of Sandra's remains, telling him he'll have to wait for another judge to decide it Friday, the next scheduled hearing date.

Oakland criminal defense attorney Daniel Horowitz said exhuming a body for a follow-up autopsy is common. In a potential death penalty case, he said it could be malpractice if Huckaby's defense did not make an effort.

"If you have cancer, you could have a great doctor," Horowitz said. "But you're still going to get a second opinion. This is no different."

Robert Lawrence, a Stockton forensic pathologist who has performed thousands of autopsies, estimated that one in 50 homicide victims undergoes an autopsy by a defense pathologist.

Most of the time, the defense will hire a pathologist to review the coroner's reports and photos to form an alternative theory rather than trying to exhume a body, Lawrence said.

He said there are some pathologists who form their analysis to fit a defense theory rather than seek the truth. Behar's pathologist, Haddix, has a reputation for being ethical and skilled, Lawrence said.

Sandra's relatives declined to comment Friday on the attempt to have the girl's remains disinterred.

[Edward]

Robert Lawrence, a Stockton forensic pathologist who has performed thousands of autopsies, estimated that one in 50 homicide victims undergoes an autopsy by a defense pathologist.

Most of the time, the defense will hire a pathologist to review the coroner's reports and photos to form an alternative theory rather than trying to exhume a body, Lawrence said.

He said there are some pathologists who form their analysis to fit a defense theory rather than seek the truth. Behar's pathologist, Haddix, has a reputation for being ethical and skilled, Lawrence said.
========================================

Some doctors bow to pressure from the defense.. ?
And the doctor I talked with indicated pressure from the Prosecutor... ?
Looks like the coroners/pathologist group are like ducks in a shooting gallery of politics and winning at any cost. ??

Like you said Blink.. I think too, We will find out soon enough.

[no rose colored glasses]

The only thing that makes sense to me in all this, is that indeed Sandra was to be found, by a guilty conscience, just by her actions alone, and where the suitcase was dumped. Now, I wish her conscience, and the family's conscience to persuade her to tell the whole truth, would kick in. But maybe the family doesn't want all the truth to be known.

[Tracygirl]

My feeling is the family swept MH emotional disturbance under the rug and/or hoped their faith would heal MH. Obviously a 6th grade girl doesn't just over night start contemplating suicide unless there is some mental disability such as bi-polar or mood disorder such as severe depression or suffered some kind of trauma which happened when she was a young child.   

I bet the psych's are going to diagnose her as having PTSS from her own rape and possibly abuse from childhood.   I find it very sad but doesn't excuse her from accepting guilt for this crime.

[Wyks]

Thanks Edward    And Wyks, the only thing I can think of is the video was edited, and not only that they didn't show us all the video, evidently there was a lot of video. I'm confused about the first child's house that she went to, the five year old, who told her mom that Sandra wanted to run away, I vaguely remember some women talking in the very beginning I'm guessing that was the child's mother, but I didn't get her name.

Wish we could see the whole video that shows Sandra on it, without it being edited, along with a timestamp kind of thing.  Cuz the way they are putting it out there, this was the last anyone (besides the murderer) saw of her.  And it just doesn't match up to what her family says is the the last thing they know that she was doing. 

 

[AZSunny]

Thanks Edward    And Wyks, the only thing I can think of is the video was edited, and not only that they didn't show us all the video, evidently there was a lot of video. I'm confused about the first child's house that she went to, the five year old, who told her mom that Sandra wanted to run away, I vaguely remember some women talking in the very beginning I'm guessing that was the child's mother, but I didn't get her name.

Wish we could see the whole video that shows Sandra on it, without it being edited, along with a timestamp kind of thing.  Cuz the way they are putting it out there, this was the last anyone (besides the murderer) saw of her.  And it just doesn't match up to what her family says is the the last thing they know that she was doing. 

 

Wyks,  I am not following you.  What did the family say is the last thing they knew she was doing?  I thought she had asked to go to the movies, and the church, and they said no.  She then went out and played.  Did I miss something?

[Izzy58]

Have to say ITA agree with all of you above 100%

You would think over the course of 16+ years that someone besides three of her friends would have noticed and done something helpful.  What about her teachers or others in a position to notice her troubling behavior, if it was THAT BAD??

Seems out of character that her "blind" family stands so supportive at her side now.  I'm not falling for this either.  Somethings amiss and she's not getting my sympathy.

Something is very amiss in all of this. I think her parents gave up, and shipped her and her child to live with grandma and grandpa.

I agree!

[Izzy58]

Thanks Edward    And Wyks, the only thing I can think of is the video was edited, and not only that they didn't show us all the video, evidently there was a lot of video. I'm confused about the first child's house that she went to, the five year old, who told her mom that Sandra wanted to run away, I vaguely remember some women talking in the very beginning I'm guessing that was the child's mother, but I didn't get her name.

I'm pretty positive that I heard that the video WAS edited before showing it to the public. The video may have shown exactly what house she went to but they edited it from the public because it was part of the evidence.  At least that's what I'm thing.

[Izzy58]

Thanks Edward    And Wyks, the only thing I can think of is the video was edited, and not only that they didn't show us all the video, evidently there was a lot of video. I'm confused about the first child's house that she went to, the five year old, who told her mom that Sandra wanted to run away, I vaguely remember some women talking in the very beginning I'm guessing that was the child's mother, but I didn't get her name.

I'm pretty positive that I heard that the video WAS edited before showing it to the public. The video may have shown exactly what house she went to but they edited it from the public because it was part of the evidence.  At least that's what I'm thing.

thinking

[Wyks]

Thanks Edward    And Wyks, the only thing I can think of is the video was edited, and not only that they didn't show us all the video, evidently there was a lot of video. I'm confused about the first child's house that she went to, the five year old, who told her mom that Sandra wanted to run away, I vaguely remember some women talking in the very beginning I'm guessing that was the child's mother, but I didn't get her name.

Wish we could see the whole video that shows Sandra on it, without it being edited, along with a timestamp kind of thing.  Cuz the way they are putting it out there, this was the last anyone (besides the murderer) saw of her.  And it just doesn't match up to what her family says is the the last thing they know that she was doing. 

 

Wyks,  I am not following you.  What did the family say is the last thing they knew she was doing?  I thought she had asked to go to the movies, and the church, and they said no.  She then went out and played.  Did I miss something?

I could be wrong.  It just seems to me that what we have is Sandra's family saying she was doing one thing last time they saw her, and the video showing she was doing something different last time she was seen.  They don't match up, in other words.  Something's off. 

Could be the video was edited.  Could be whoever edited the video only showed the part where Sandra could be seen.  And yet... Why doesn't it match what her family is saying? 

Her family reported that she had been playing at the 2nd friends home, then had come home to ask if they could go to a movie and was told that they didn't have the money, that she spent about 5 minutes there before going back out to play. 

If that's the case, then we should have seen on the video that Sandra came back out of her home, turned left and headed toward Melissa's home.  But we don't see that.  We see her skipping down the street, and passing her home, heading toward Melissa's home. 

[Wyks]

Thanks Edward    And Wyks, the only thing I can think of is the video was edited, and not only that they didn't show us all the video, evidently there was a lot of video. I'm confused about the first child's house that she went to, the five year old, who told her mom that Sandra wanted to run away, I vaguely remember some women talking in the very beginning I'm guessing that was the child's mother, but I didn't get her name.

I'm pretty positive that I heard that the video WAS edited before showing it to the public. The video may have shown exactly what house she went to but they edited it from the public because it was part of the evidence.  At least that's what I'm thing.

If that's the case, then I can understand why they would edit out the home she went to.  But it doesn't even show Sandra going into her own home before going to her friends home, like they said she did.  It just shows her skipping past her own home.  So why would her family say she stopped if she didn't? 

[no rose colored glasses]

Thanks Edward    And Wyks, the only thing I can think of is the video was edited, and not only that they didn't show us all the video, evidently there was a lot of video. I'm confused about the first child's house that she went to, the five year old, who told her mom that Sandra wanted to run away, I vaguely remember some women talking in the very beginning I'm guessing that was the child's mother, but I didn't get her name.

I'm pretty positive that I heard that the video WAS edited before showing it to the public. The video may have shown exactly what house she went to but they edited it from the public because it was part of the evidence.  At least that's what I'm thing.

If that's the case, then I can understand why they would edit out the home she went to.  But it doesn't even show Sandra going into her own home before going to her friends home, like they said she did.  It just shows her skipping past her own home.  So why would her family say she stopped if she didn't? 

It does just show her skipping past her own home, and I know a lot of people thought that it looked like she was going to go into her home, and then got distracted, I didn't see it that way though. One thing that struck me, was someone over yonder thought that it looked like Sandra had already been drugged, I didn't see that either, but maybe she was a little clumsy because her flip flops were to big.

[flossy]

Thanks Edward    And Wyks, the only thing I can think of is the video was edited, and not only that they didn't show us all the video, evidently there was a lot of video. I'm confused about the first child's house that she went to, the five year old, who told her mom that Sandra wanted to run away, I vaguely remember some women talking in the very beginning I'm guessing that was the child's mother, but I didn't get her name.

Wish we could see the whole video that shows Sandra on it, without it being edited, along with a timestamp kind of thing.  Cuz the way they are putting it out there, this was the last anyone (besides the murderer) saw of her.  And it just doesn't match up to what her family says is the the last thing they know that she was doing. 

 

Wyks,  I am not following you.  What did the family say is the last thing they knew she was doing?  I thought she had asked to go to the movies, and the church, and they said no.  She then went out and played.  Did I miss something?

I cannot for the life of me remember who it was that said it, but at one point it was said that there was going to be movie night at the church.  I know for a fact I saw this and it was in the very beginning of the case - I don't think she had even been found yet.

Did anyone else hear that?