Loading summary
Transcript48 lines
- [00:00]
A
Hey, everyone.
- [00:01]
B
I'm Ann Emerson, and this is criminally obsessed. I want to start with something that made me do a double take. Just days after 16 children were rescued from what's being called a house of horrors. Before we know the full story, before every piece of evidence is even in, the Vinton county prosecutor said this about the Siders case.
- [00:22]
A
That was a major issue to the community, and I wanted to make sure they knew this was not human trafficking.
- [00:27]
B
There's no evidence of human trafficking. My first thought was, how can anybody know that already? So I called someone I trust, Ashley Wilcott. You know her from Court tv, but she's also a former judge and a child welfare expert who has spent her career protecting children. And she didn't just answer my questions. She started asking some of her own. Could the ciders also be charged with human trafficking?
- [00:53]
A
Human trafficking is when a person knowingly recruits, harbors, or transports another person, knowing they'll be subjected to involuntary servitude, forced labor, or compelled sexual activity. Boy, doesn't that fit? Don't you feel like from our earlier conversation, that's exactly what's happening in this case with Elizabeth, but also, as you pointed out, some of their children.
- [01:19]
B
That's when I knew this was gonna be a very different conversation. Because we don't just talk about whether the prosecution is moving too fast. We talk about the warning signs.
- [01:28]
A
You can't keep up to 16 children in one little room and not take care of them and not educate them and not feed them. You can't not get the medical care. Some of the medical conditions these children suffered from was pretty unthinkable.
- [01:41]
B
And why is there an alleged pattern of child brides in the Siders family? Is Elizabeth Siders a victim or a perpetrator?
- [01:50]
A
I absolutely believe you can have both. That a lot of the reason that people may become monsters is because of the trauma caused because they were victims.
- [02:01]
B
If you've been following this case, this conversation is going to challenge some of your assumptions. Be sure to, like, subscribe and turn on your notifications. I'll be updating this story. Now, let's get into it. When you heard about the Siders case, what did you think?
- [02:24]
A
Well, first of all, thanks for having me. I'm thrilled to come on, because this is the kind of case that I've worked on my entire career as a child advocate for the state of Georgia, as a former judge dealing with abused and neglected children. And it is one of the worst of the worst. So let's be clear. People hear of this and they think, oh, this could never happen. How does this happen? No, this happens more than I'd ever like to say it happens. But it's clearly one of the worst. The worst because they have 16
- [02:53]
B
children,
- [02:53]
A
16 siblings and, and that's a lot for anyone to wrap their hands around that they're this many.
- [02:59]
B
I have to ask right off the bat, when you see Elizabeth Ciders, could we be looking at her as a monster or is she truly possibly a victim in this case, considering the age she was when we know that she was 13 when she got pregnant. We've been, we're reporting that she was 15 when she got married, you know, and, and now she's had all of these children.
- [03:25]
A
So. Really excellent question. And I don't think there's one answer to that. I do want to start with what you pointed out because I too have read reports that she was 15 years old when she married Gary Siders and he was 18 at the time. But keep this in mind from all reports that they actually traveled in order to get married. They had to go from Ohio to West Virginia because parental consent would allow the marriage in West Virginia. And you heard what I just said, parental consent. Her parents signed the consent paperwork.
- [04:03]
B
It's so hard for, for everyone to sometimes look at these cases because you see the, the years and years of abuse and, and issues, alleged abuse and, and, and these horrible conditions we hear about. But then we, we think about it that she, she's so little at 13 years old. There is no way I would put that on any of the kids that I've known, any of the kids that I've known, or my own children.
- [04:32]
A
No way, ever, ever. No way. Would you ever and think about the brain development of a 13 year old. Our brains don't fully develop until we're 25 years old at 13. This is a child. They do not have the capacity to make decisions like this.
- [04:51]
B
The records that are coming out about the child marriages in this family are so disturbing. 14 year old who married a 48 year old man in the Siders family in 2002 and another 15 year old who married an older man in 2003. So we see a pattern, not only
- [05:12]
A
a pattern, crimes, statutory rape. These are crimes, let's be very clear, lots of crimes besides statutory rape. But the age of the child, the age of the adult in, in most states, and I can't say that the laws for the states wherever they got married, but I can assure you there are crimes committed when you do marry a child of that age. And you're con, you know, having sex, whether it's consensual or not, with a child of that age, it doesn't matter. It's statutory rap. So I'm bothered by, it's almost in my mind like a cult, right? Like a belief that it's okay to marry these young children. It's abuse, it's servitude. It's so many things and wrong on so many levels.
- [05:57]
B
I don't think that they're going after trafficking charges on this. They have come out and said this isn't trafficking. Really? Why not? Why is it not trafficking?
- [06:08]
A
Where are they getting these children? That's the question. Where are they getting these 15 year olds and 14 year olds? They're their own kids, they're signing over. And I'm going to suggest this. There's no evidence of this. I haven't read anything. I'm just saying, based on my experience, I would not at all be surprised if they are paid a sum of money for those children to go off with these older men and think about how are they paying their bills, how are they living in this house? They're not spending it on the children, we know that. But it would make sense that they get money in order to allow it. To answer your question, I think you are proactively thinking about what's next in this case. I know right now I've not read anything that they've been charged with trafficking, but I will suggest is that next for the very reason you're pointing out, what else are they going to learn in the investigation? What did the parents get? Did they get something in consideration of it for it? And if it's more than one child. So I think, I think we're not there yet. I think perhaps those charges will be appropriate.
- [07:15]
B
Well, and I, I, I certainly don't think that they should be ruling them out. I mean I did hear the prosecutor for the county talking about, no, we're not talking about trafficking. You know, basically like settle down. I'm like, well, hold on, hold on. So, yes, I agree with you, Ashley. I think there's a lot more that needs to be discussed before anything gets ruled out. It's overwhelming to think that this woman that we've learned about, Elizabeth Seiders, that she was pregnant. She's, she's been pregnant as long as it, for more than half of her life. I mean she has, she literally has been pregnant since she was 13 years old, according to the reports we have. And she has gone through about 18 pregnancies from what we understand, 18 and 16 live births. This is, this is more than, than, than any amount that I've heard of.
- [08:12]
A
Think about a few of the reality TV shows like the Duggars, where families have child after child after child. I'm not at all suggesting they're the same as this family, but I'm saying biologically, women can have a lot of children. And in the world that I work in and have my whole career, I was saying 16 children is a lot. That's what makes this one of the worst of the worst. But the reality is this. I've seen families that have had child after child after child that are neglected and abused and still had another child, another child, another child. And that's one of my biggest frustrations, is when we haven't realized until there's 16 children that they've been allegedly abused and neglected, then there's been no opportunity to stop the madness, to prevent her from having more children that she can't care for adequately.
- [09:07]
B
It's just gone down. It's just snowballed in one direction the entire time.
- [09:12]
A
Yeah, you're right. That's exactly what's happened. But I also want to say this. So when I see this, typically there's going to be some other issue involved, whether it's mental health issues, whether it's drug use, it's usually not in and of itself. Two parents have said maliciously, we're going to have child after child after child and abuse and neglect them. Now, I'm not excusing them. Don't misunderstand me now, you know, they should never be let out of jail from my perspective, ever, ever, ever. But the thing I'll say about this case is that they made efforts not to be caught. They made efforts to move to homeschool their children. And so there's that thought process they've engaged in that makes this even more horrific.
- [10:02]
B
Another thing we found out about Elizabeth Siders. There was a Facebook post that actually showed up on Gary Seiders Jr's page. Now, Gary Seiders Jr is her husband, the father were told of all these children. In June 2014, someone wrote, 2014, this is Elizabeth. I don't want anyone putting pictures of me on Facebook. Everyone, if you have any pictures of me on here, please take them off of here. From what you know, what does this give you? What kind of clue does this give you into this family when you see a, a strange, cryptic message like this that would on social media? Now, we can't, we can't verify that that was Elizabeth that wrote that, but that. That in 2014. So we're talking 12 years ago. That was the message that was put out there was get erase me from social media.
- [11:02]
A
I think if I did the math right, she would have been 21. So I have two thoughts. The first is there are people that's hard to believe for all of us sometimes that truly don't want to be on social media. And they've made every effort and every desire to stay off it because they just don't want to be on it. In a case like this, I look at it through a different lens, and to me it screams control. And I, I'm suspicious as to whether or not she wrote that message because it would not surprise me if we were to learn that someone else in the family, including the husband, wrote that message. Because they don't. They didn't want to be found. They moved from place to place to avoid being found. In my experience, homeschooling is another red flag. In this particular instance, homeschool could be completely appropriate. I'm not knocking it. I'm just saying in this instance, I think this family hid behind it. And so when you hear all those things, who really wrote that message and was it simply to avoid detection because they knew what they were doing to these children was wrong?
- [12:07]
B
We were told by a Dollar General clerk, Ariel Guterres. She said that she, she literally witnessed Gary Seiders Jr. Caring, like, holding her by the elbow, taking her through the store when they would come after dark, right before closing. She looked exhausted, according to Ariel. And this, I don't think this was in hindsight because he's literally leading her around. I mean, these are. Am I reading too much into this or do you think this is just more. More of his ability to have control over her?
- [12:38]
A
Yeah, I don't think you are all reading too much into it. And I will say trust your gut to anyone listening, because to me, of course, we don't know everything yet, but here's my immediate response when you mentioned trafficking, Back it up. I suspect she fits that same M.O. given she was pregnant, 13, married at 15 to this man. So I would argue perhaps she was even trafficked. She is now a victim, and that behavior supports that. She has been a victim, victim and controlled. And he's controlling. And again, remember, if. If it's him that wants to avoid detection, that's part of the reason he's exercising this control and has over her probably since she was 13 years old. And so that's when you start to see her as a victim, also a perpetrator. But you really look at that victim aspect more.
- [13:38]
B
What is needed to make this a child trafficking case, do you think?
- [13:42]
A
Let me tell you specifically, and this is the state of Ohio charge, human trafficking is when a person knowingly recruits, harbors, or transports another person, knowing they'll be subjected to involuntary servitude, forced labor, or compelled sexual activity. Boy, doesn't that fit? Don't you feel like from our earlier conversation that potentially that's exactly what's happening in this case with Elizabeth? But also, as you pointed out, some
- [14:14]
B
of their children, we have their records. We saw them moving around. We've got reports from our reporters on the ground. Syx. I just was looking at reports from them talking about how these families were dealing with truancy reports. Elizabeth Sers was named in it. You know, there was a lot of moments of institutional intervention that fell apart. Just felt kind of little like it was done on purpose. And, you know, like, we moved it around because we don't want to get caught.
- [14:45]
A
Oh, I can't. What do you do?
- [14:47]
B
What do you do? I want to get caught with. What are you not trying to get caught with? Like, because they know you can't keep
- [14:52]
A
children in a room. You can't keep up to 16 children in one little room and not take care of them and not educate them and not feed them. You can't not get the medical care. Some of the medical. Medical conditions these children suffered from was pretty unthinkable. But they didn't get medical care for them, all of these things. Absolutely. They did it on purpose. Absolutely. They were avoiding detection. When you said that, the prosecutor had already come out and said, oh, it's not trafficking. No attorney should be coming out yet and saying this is what it is or isn't. Because this is a complex case with a complex set of facts, and those investigators should be looking at every avenue to figure out where the evidence leads them. And so I think that prosecutor spoke prematurely.
- [15:36]
B
And now, you know, another thing I have to say, you know, yes, she is this young mom. She has got 16 children. Two which died. Died at childbirth, from what we understand. She's got these 16 children. They're taking care of. Her first job is to protect these kids. And that's not happening, Ashley.
- [15:59]
A
That's the problem.
- [16:00]
B
Absolutely not happening. Is this. Do we hold her accountable for that?
- [16:04]
A
100%. 100%. Even if you're a victim. I've worked with so many victims who have gone through unthinkable, horrific things and you know what they say to me, even though they've been through that, they say, but. But I'm not that way. I'm not a perpetrator, even though I went through that trauma. And so they have to be held accountable because it doesn't excuse her failing to protect her own children. And if you are complicit in your children being abused or neglected, you have to be held accountable. So even though I see her as a victim, give her services, give her treatment, get her help, but it doesn't mean, in my mind, she shouldn't be in jail. It doesn't.
- [16:47]
B
Well, and, you know, this is in. And this could be a line straight out of a criminal defense attorney, which it is. It's her defense attorney. But he says that, like, the first thing that she said to him was, are my children okay? Do you expect this is what a defense attorney would tell the press, that his client would say straight out of the gate? Or do you think it actually means anything as far as what she's thinking right now?
- [17:14]
A
I think it means she said it. I think that it means. If I were a defense attorney, of course, that would be the first thing I share with press because it shows he's going to argue no intent, that she did not have the intent to commit these crimes. But, and here's the thing. I've seen people murder their own children and get convicted for it, and they will still say to you, I love my children. I worried about my children. Well, screw you. I mean, you know, take that out if you want. I'm sorry, but I don't care. You. You still. You don't get to tell me you love your children. Are they okay? Oh, my gosh. I can't believe it. Are they good? When you had a hand in. Even if your hand is doing nothing. So I believe we may learn that she was so controlled and so afraid and so terrified that she did nothing. Even though she loved her children, even though she was concerned about her children. But guess what? The doing nothing is a crime, too. She failed to act. That's a crime, regardless of what's happened to her.
- [18:18]
B
Elizabeth has already said that, you know, that she wants to be released on. On a GPS monitor to visit her children. And would. Would the judge allow her to do this?
- [18:30]
A
I would not do that. I can tell you for a fact based on what we know. Like, right, let's assume the facts we know are the ones proven in court, because you can't make a decision as a judge without the evidence in front of you to make the decision assuming the facts are correct. I would not allow that. And, and here's why. Because the trauma the children have been through and less than until I've got evidence in front of me from experts that these children want and need and it's safe for them to see their mother. I don't care about mother seeing the children. I'm not going to let mother see the children because mother wants to see the children. Too little, too late. Look what you did to your children, regardless of why. So for me that would be the issue.
- [19:21]
B
Can we see her as a monster and a victim at the same time? How do you see her?
- [19:28]
A
I can, but that's because of what I've done my entire career. I absolutely believe you can have both. That a lot of the reason that people may become monsters is because of the trauma caused because they were victims. But I stand by those two things are not necessarily correlated. I know so many people who have endured significant trauma and been victims and guess what? They don't do. They don't do this to their kids. She's a monster.
- [20:00]
B
So tell me what you think her defense looks like.
- [20:05]
A
I think everything we've been talking about, I have no doubt there will be experts hired by the defense. I have no doubt that very credible renowned experts are going to explain that she's a victim, that she was controlled, that there was coercion, that she loved her children, that she had no intent to hurt her children at all, but that this was something that she was not given a choice. Now, there is no such thing as a legal defense of I'm a victim and so I get off. There's no legal defense as to that, but it can certainly a play to the sympathy of the jury that then may say we're not going to convict her. B, convict her of lesser crimes because the intent is missing and C, if there were any convictions in this case affect her sentencing because of sympathy by the court or the jury, if it's a jury sentencing in this particular state to really recognize she was the victim. Now, the other part of this, keep in mind as a defense, we don't know yet if they have experts who say that she was suffering from a mental health condition and didn't have the capacity to understand what she was doing, you may have a mental health defense and saying that. And in that case, instead of if there's a conviction under the right grounds, instead of going to jail, she would go to for treatment. And so that's another opportunity in this case.
- [21:46]
B
Drop a comment below. I want to hear what you're thinking about this case. We're going to have some updates to this story we're expecting later this week, so be sure to, like, subscribe and turn on your notifications. I will certainly be updating it.