The Place Where Ludington Talks
Alleged Sean Phillips' Prison Letter Says Baby Kate Accidentally Died
LUDINGTON, Mich. (WOOD) - A letter apparently written by the father of presumed dead Baby Kate tells how the little girl died. Katherine Phillips -- known as Baby Kate to many -- was 4 months old when she went missing on July 29, 2011. Her father Sean Phillips was convicted of unlawful imprisonment in connection to her disappearance in April 2012. In June, he was sentenced to 10 to 15 years in prison. The same day Phillips was sentenced, police announced they would begin to treat the case as a homicide investigation. On Sept. 11, Target 8 obtained a letter from a source that was apparently written by Phillips. It explains how he believes Baby Kate died, what he did with her body -- and gives a possible explanation to why he and Baby Kate's mother Ariel Courtland are getting married. Courtland filed for a marriage license on Sept. 10. In the letter, for the first time, is an admission from Phillips that Baby Kate is dead.
== Read: The full letter from Sean Phillips to Ariel Courtland (pdf) ==
On jail-issued lined paper and in an envelope postmarked July 16 is a letter believed to be scrawled by the man at the middle of the search for Baby Kate. The letter is unsigned, but does have Sean Phillips' name and prison ID number on the front of the envelope. The print is small and fills the paper from edge to edge. It has no greeting to apparent intended recipient Ariel Courtland. "If this is what you want, OK," starts the letter. Then it gives a five-page explanation of what happened the day Baby Kate went missing. The letter says it was a series of mistakes. First, Phillips drove off with the baby. But he says he had no idea Courtland had left Kate in her car seat in his car. "Heard the door shut, saw you walk off. Your hands in front of you, not at your sides. Like you were holding Kate. I drove away," the letter reads. Then a cell phone started to ring over and over again as he drove, the note says. But Phillips couldn't silence the phone because he couldn't reach it. He was frustrated, the letter says, because he thought Courtland was trying to control him by leaving the car seat in the car so he would have to bring it back to her. The letter says he had no idea Baby Kate was still in that seat and that he planned to ditch the car seat in frustration. "(I) was just going to throw it out onto that area between Burger King. I pulled but it was jammed between the seats. That just made it worse," the letter reads. "I grabbed it at the top and ripped it out as hard as I could. She was thrown from it. I didn't know. I'm so sorry. Held her for a long time. Seemed like forever. Maybe an hour, maybe a minute." "I've never cried that hard. Seemed like my throat was closing ... I was in shock." The letter goes on to detail what Phillips did once he realized what had happened. "I never even tried to help her. Never even thought to. Just sat there. Holding her. I don't think anything could have been done. Still I used to hate myself for not trying." Then he drove and drove, the letter says, not even knowing where he was headed. Then he stopped and got out of the car. "For the first time I could think some. Thought about Kate. Her smile. The way she looks around. Everything. I cried until I somehow couldn't anymore. She was set in a peaceful place. I was walking and lost. ... For the first time I realized I had left her. I wanted to die." But, he said, leaving the baby was never deliberate. "It wasn't dumping a body," the letter reads. "Wasn't like that at all. I want her buried too. I don't know where she was left. No, it's not some f------ swamp or lake." That seems to be an allusion to to evidence presented at his April trial regarding the plant life on Phillips' shoes. After Phillips got home, he learned the police were involved. That same day, he was in police custody. "Everything just happened, and I never had a chance to do the right thing," the letter reads. A mention of marriage comes toward the end of the letter. "Things spouses tell each other in confidence can't be made to testify. But we aren't married yet in the eye of the government," it reads. The letter ends abruptly: "Out of time for mail. Destroy this. We'll talk." Police say they know about the letter, but won't comment further.
http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/target_8/Dads-letter-Baby-Kate-is-dead
Views: 1523
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by AQUAMAN on
-
Good points again Willy, esp. about the LDN, as usual, they are late in reporting, and inept in local news. As for CLFD, remember what I said earlier about "denial"? And bashing X and other Torchers that seek the truth, and are not acting like Sheeple? Some want the "status-quo" observed to their deathbeds, don't rock the boat, and all that blah, blah, blah.....sad way to go thru life.
-
Permalink Reply by XLFD on
-
A couple of out of town news vehicles have been seen in the area this afternoon, something big might be in the works regarding this story and its consequences.
The FOIA appeal regarding the Baby Kate investigatory records is in the works, this will also cover a variety of other illegally-withheld-from-the-people information from the City of Ludington and County Prosecutor. City and County Officials are free to gloat when the 51st Circuis Court rules in their favor, if they permit me to get out my Sharpie to autograph the football later when it gets to appeals court.
-
Permalink Reply by CLFD on
-
I do not understand how it can be called "illegally-withheld-from-the-people" when there has not been a trial to confirm your allegation of illegality?
I will accept a future appeals court verdict but right now the only court verdict is the one that upheld the COL's actions. Innocent until proven guilty is the standard, right?
-
-
CLFD,
It was here before your time but this should hopefully explain to you why the Prosecutor and City of Ludington holding all Baby Kate records from the public with no explanation at all, is against the law: http://ludingtoncitizen.ning.com/forum/topics/when-open-government-...
I am certain that if I had not disqualified honorable Judge Richard Cooper, father of one of the City of Ludington's six attorneys that came forward on 11-8-2011 and someone who kept that information away from the plaintiffs until 3-7-2012, that he would have ruled the same. Just as I am always certain I will unanimously lose any administrative appeal I take before the City Council of Ludington, even though I am sure they are legitimate appeals that should pass.
It's not that the law is not on my side; look back at any appeal I've brought to the City and consider the rationale (if any is provided) the council uses for upholding the FOIA Coordinator's decision used to deny the people the records at a legitimate cost. You would not find anything in the FOIA law or the court precedents that affirm their judgments.
The City and County will find that they will have a perfect record in their home games, but they have to remember that game seven is an away game at the Appeals Court.
-
-
Getting back on topic: here is an analysis piece by Gather Article on Baby Kate that offers some good analysis from someone who is paying attention, but not too close to miss the big picture of things.
-
-
Ok - like others have said how do you rip a car seat out of a car and not realize there's a baby in it? Also aren't car seats built to protect a child in the event of a car accident? And if it was an accident and he walked around aimlessly and set her down - why on earth did he remove her clothes. Also if there was trauma to her which I'm assuming since she was thrown from the car - why wasn't there any blood on the clothes? Ariel visited him constantly when he was on trial and now they want to get married - seems to me they both did something to that baby, and are trying to cover it up. I think their original plan was a he said - she said, I don't think they thought he would be convicted without a body. Plus there is the fact that every idiot on the planet knows they read incoming and outgoing mail at prisons and they also listen in on phone calls. All expectations of privacy are stripped away once you are incarcerated. These 2 don't add up.
-
-
Good analysis Lisa, it does have a lot of holes when you look at it closely.
-
Permalink Reply by Willy on
-
Very good questions Lisa. I'm still inclined to believe as Aqauman, that the baby was sold and it was a mutual decision by mom and dad. Can you imagine these two getting married and having more children?
-
Permalink Reply by masonco on
-
Willy
Take comfort that once he's out they won't be able to have any more kids. At least when I look at Ariels age now and what her age will be in 15 years. I doubt he will meet parole in 10 years. And if she ends up in prison there is no way they will see each other at all. Just contact via love letters...maybe.
Lisa excellent points
When I saw the article say the prison claims they do not read prisoners mail without just cause, all one has to do is look very closely at envelopes from the prison. They all have sealant tape inside the envelope where most can not see it. There is a reason they are only allowed prison envelopes.
2nd they have email system now but it always takes 2 days to go through.
When they scan the letters, they look for specific cues depending on the prisoner especially those in Maximum security prisons which Ionia is. He is a level 4 out of 5 for Pete's sake. If he thinks he has any privacy he has fewer brain cells than anyone should have.
As for phone calls, they can shut off phone calls if there are specific words used in conversation. All calls are taped and reviewed after the fact at a site off prison grounds.
I have been trying to support a prisoner who is there because he did not report a family member so is as guilty of the abuse as the one who actually committed the crime. The only time you can talk at the minimum security prison is during visitation and then a guard is there watching at all times. Even in minimum security prison you have to apply to be able to visit, the prisoner has to request you to visit and it is quite a lengthy process.
I am surprised he is still at Ionia. I thought there was maximum security prison in UP where they would send him so it would be a hardship for "family" to visit.
-
-
The way I see it now, is that, after a lengthy review of this letter for about 2 months, they should be able to charge Sean with involuntary or voluntary manslaughter, depending on your interpretation of law and facts now known. Can they use that private communication/letter in court, or not? It would seem like it's inadmissable but I'm not sure on that either.
-
-
Once they are married, DOC will not be able to prevent visitations. I don't know how DOC can establish that Ariel is the victim in this case since the charges were againts Sean regarding the baby's disappearnce. A simple visit to a judge will knock DOC's no visitation ruling right out of the water
© 2024 Created by XLFD.
Powered by
