The Place Where Ludington Talks
Re: April Reynolds
On December 27, 2011 a Personal Protection Order (PPO) was issued by Circuit Court Judge Richard Cooper on April Reynolds regarding some alleged behavior by her to Ariel Courtland, Baby Kate's mother. In Courtland's claim for the PPO, Ariel stated that Reynolds called her at least 30 times on Christmas Eve and left voice mail messages threatening to kill her.
A PPO sounds reasonable if such harassing activity has taken place, which should be easily proved by phone records and the voice mail messages.
April Reynolds challenged the PPO decision in court on February 1st in front of Judge Cooper with Ariel Courtland present. According to WMOM reports, Ariel stated Mrs. Reynolds has posted disparaging information about her on three different Facebook pages. She reiterated that she is not and never has been a suspect in the disappearance of her daughter, Baby Kate. And, stated that she never has requested help from April Reynolds.
When Reynolds took the stand the story was completely different. She claimed that Ariel's application for the PPO was 99.9% false. She insisted that Ariel had contacted her in August. But later admitted that she had posted numerous hostile messages on various Facebook pages. After carefully considering all of the testimony, Judge Cooper ruled that the original PPO would stand.
April joined the Ludington Torch as a member back on August 16, 2011. A review of her postings shows she does have an opinion of some complicity at the least by Ariel Courtland in the disappearance of Baby Kate. Her outspoken views could upset Ariel, but her posts here, at least, have been measured and well within her rights given her by the First Amendment. I cannot comment on her posts elsewhere, but it seems as if her main beef has been with the rigor of the investigation by the investigating unit, the Ludington Police Department (LPD).
This was confirmed by the protest march she organized at the end of October. She organized the event to protest the LPD's flawed investigation of Baby Kate; later on in November she was visited in Grand Rapids by two LPD detectives under questionable rationale and methods. I think there was a correlation between her activism and the visit, where the lead detective made an explicit threat to her about obstructing an investigation.
Come December 27, 2011 Ariel Courtland petitions for a PPO saying April had phoned her on Christmas Eve over 30 times and threatened to kill her on voice messages. Yet, according to what has been reported on at the hearing, she fell back not on these alleged calls and threat, a definite PPO starter, but on Facebook postings by April that disputed her innocence in the investigation of the disappearance of her baby.
Perhaps this is why April claimed her PPO application was 99.9% false. And that's the point here. If those 30+ phone calls were never made, if no voice mails exist of April Reynolds making a threat to Ariel is forthcoming, and the information that Ariel included on her PPO was falsified and/or exaggerated, then she may not be guilty of anything involving her baby, but is guilty of
MCL 600.2950(24): "An individual who knowingly and intentionally makes a false statement to the court in support of his or her petition for a personal protection order is subject to the contempt powers of the court."
April's statements right here at the Torch on 12-30 and 1-6 also seem to indicate that the City applied for the PPO on Ariel's behalf:
Views: 2252
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by XLFD on
-
Explain what the 0.1% truth is, April.
I have seen plenty on Facebook over the course of this saga that would possibly be interpretted by Ariel as impugning her veracity, made by many people. April led a protest parade of the LFD in October, had a visit by the LPD to her Grand Rapids residence in November, and now what looks to be a nearly baseless PPO and bench warrant isued to her in December, and an odd court hearing in January that seeks to ignore the original basis of the PPO in finding it applicable to her. What's up for February?
-
Permalink Reply by april on
-
I dont know if there is a bench warrant yet, Last I knew it was waiting on Spaniola to decide.
-
-
The 0.1% truth is , I made 6 calls to Ariel on dec 24th, but never threatened her or left a voice mail, not once did I make contact with her. Also at the time she made the 30 phone call claim there is only one phone call that would have showed up on her phone from me.
-
-
ARE YOU FREEKING SERIOUS ARIEL, YOU HAVENT DONE SHIT FOR KATE, NOTHING AT ALL!!!! ALL YOU ARE DOING IS TRYING TO GET ATTENTION, YOUR OWN FAMILY THAT KNOWS YOU SAYS YOUR A PIECE OF CRAP AND THAT YOU DONT DESERVE YOUR DAUGHTERS.DONT DARE TELL ME I HAVENT DONE SHIT FOR KATE , I WENT SEARCHING, WENT TO THE VIGIL, PUT FLIERS UP, PUT HER INFORMATION OUT ON THE INTERNET,WTF HAVE YOU DONE ARIEL BUT SIT ON THE COMPUTER ALL DAMN DAY WORRYING ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE ARE THINKING OF YOU, YOU SIT AND SAY YOU CANT PLEA FOR BABY KATE ON TV BUT YET CAN SIT ON A PAGE AND ANSWERS QUESTION, THAT DONT HURT THE CASE? YOU ARE NOTHING BUT FAKE AND KNOW WHERE YOUR DAUGHTER IS AT YOU SELFISH PIECE OF TRASH!!!!
-
-
The above message by me to her was brought up at court but half of it left out?
why when it was read , wasnt the whole message read?
-
-
The other side's objective wasn't to make you look good. You may as well ask why the Daily News didn't worry about being an objective reporter for the story.
In the past, you've bad-mouthed the local authorities. The authorities and their advocates do not forget. You can do what over 90% of folks will do and call Ludington corrupt for a day or two, and Ariel a liar for as long as you want, and then slump back in your chair and stew over that fact for the rest of your life.
Or you can take legal action, and make a difference-- and all you need to do is show she lied by attacking a verifiable statement, like the amount of calls as revealed in the phone records.
-
-
Honestly I have bad mouthed LE and told a few of the media how I felt also, this is why they are probably making it one sided. As you can tell I don't know much about the law and don't know how to peruse the matter.
-
-
-
Did Ariel ever implicitly or explicitly tell you not to contact her before 12-24-2011?
-
-
like twice she said to leave her alone but then followed it up with another email from herself.
-
-
If it was communicated to you to not contact her and you had made efforts to do so thereafter, that does fall into harassment behavior. And they could effectively utilize those five or six calls on Christmas Eve as unconsented contacts. The basis of a PPO is there, and Judge Cooper has the ability to make a call at that point.
However, any exaggeration of your actions on her sworn statements is actionable by yourself and so by saying you made over 30 phone calls and left threatening messages, etc., if you can show through her own phone records that she was lying about that fact, you can perhaps show what you may have failed to show everyone before: that she is capable of lying to authorities, and ergo, should not be summarily dismissed and overlooked as being complicit in the disappearance of Baby Kate as our vaunted Ludington Police Department have claimed all along.
© 2024 Created by XLFD.
Powered by
