Alleged Sean Phillips' Prison Letter Says Baby Kate Accidentally Died

[XLFD]

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

[CLFD]

Willy

Ariel is a victim because it is her baby child that is missing.

If it were my 4-month old child then I would hope the law would consider me a victim too.

Visitation is not a right, it is a privilege.

[CLFD]

This link refers to a US Supreme Court decision to uphold Michigan's right to withhold visitation privileges for prison inmates.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=0...

 

[Willy]

That appeals ruling is not about the right to have visitors it is about security issues and who can visit and under what circumstances. The prison system cannot deny prisoners visitations rights for family unless there is a drug history. They also can't arbitrarily claim a visitor is a victim unless the prosecutor wanted her to be declared so. The reason for that is because the case is ongoing and they wanted to separate the two so there were no private conversations between them.

[masonco]

Willy

The Warden in each site has the right to allow or deny visitation to anyone they want family or not. Prisoners do not have automatic rights to visitors of their choosing.

In a situation like this, she can appeal the wardens decisions, but it sounds like a judge already ruled no visitation.

Also they can just decide a prisoner can have no visitors, no phone calls at all if they feel it is necessary. 

They do have a right to force Ariel to testify against her husband if they were married. Many people automatically assume that because they are married they do not have to testify. The spouse can be forced to testify.

Everything including phone calls are decided on a case by case basis. In this situation, everyone knows why he is there and will not do him any favors since baby Kate is still missing. 

[CLFD]

masonco

Thank you for clarifying. If Willy would read that entire Supreme Court decision he would probably agree. It clearly explains the basis behind their decision. It says visitation is a privilege and not a right. The prisons are allowed to limit or restrict visitation. There is no constitutional right to visitation and a lawyer would charge a lot of money if anybody wanted to challenge it, and would most likely lose if the warden was firmly resolved to prohibit certain citizens from visiting certain inmates.

[Willy]

CLFD

This appeal is not saying the prisoners do not have the right to visitors. It is defining under what circumstances the DOC can limit or refuse visitation to selected prisoners but limiting the visitation must be for security reasons. For example the DOC cannot arbitrarily decide that there will be no visitation for any prisoner until 2020. Based on this appeal they must have a good reason. Don't forget when a prisoner is refused visitation of family members then the family members right to see their relative is infringed upon. And yes the DOC can deny a prisoners visitations but they must have a damn good reason for their decision.

[XLFD]

And "Romeo and Juliet" had an unhappy ending too: http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/local/nw_mich/baby-kates-mom-ariel-c...  

[Lisa O'Brien]

I have to agree with the posters from the wood tv site - if she had indeed informed the authorities when she received the letter, wouldn't they have immediately seized it as evidence? I swear none of her statements ever seem to be truthful.

[AQUAMAN]

These two have been caught in so many deceptions and spins on the truth, it's pathetic, and unconscionable. This "letter" must Not be evidence, because if it was, the Prosecutor's office would have jumped all over this 2 months ago, with the manslaughter charges. And even if they get married, sooner or later, the Prosecutor can only "compel testimony", that which can or can't be honored, and if it isn't, what does she get, 10 days in jail for contempt? So WHAT! And the Saga continues......and where is that body Sean, don't say you didn't know where you were either, like the letter either.

[AQUAMAN]

Masonco, someone earlier stated that prisoners, once incarcerated, lose all their constitutional and civil rights. Is that true? And if so, how can that be? Doesn't our constitution protect even the convicts, at least up to some reasonable point? I understand the visitation part, but privacy in letters and conversations would seem to be protected. Did the DOC just decide they can do this on their own, because they are in charge, or is it legally permitted to happen, as one would have to believe. I have also heard that once you join the armed services, you also lose all your constitutional rights, and to me, irregardless of the service to your country, your rights should never be automatically cancelled out, for the convenience and authority of the state over the individual. Just thinking out loud, and would like rebuttal, thanks.

[masonco]

When they use phones, there is a notice phone calls are recorded. Even the numbers they call have to be approved. Letters are screened upon exit and entry of facility because you never know if a prisoner is writing to plan a vendetta against someone, an escape, or other illegal activity. Ummm why are they in prison to begin with? Illegal activities.

In a situation like Peters and Courtland, it would be foolish for them to not review all letters, phone calls etc sent to or from Peters. There is an ongoing investigation there and a missing child.

There is a reason there is no privacy in prison if you think about it so yes letters are reviewed. I imagine some prisoner's letters are more closely monitored than others. Sometimes they will let a letter go through to follow up on getting more information for crime activities just like (real world example) a drug house might be allowed to continue until they can get the big fish.

RE military:

When my one son was overseas during operation desert storm, they reviewed letters from soldiers and actually edited out or cut out some words/ paragraphs. During vietnam war, there were times you'd receive a letter with "lots of holes" in it where military cut out private information.

[XLFD]

In Michigan, both parties must be aware that a phone conversation is being recorded, a courtesy that most inmates would get unless the court ordered waiving that restriction.  Which they might do in Phillips' (not Peters, though we've introduced Drew Peterson into the conversation) case. 

Sean has to know that anything that he writes will be seen and used against him eventually, so the veracity of anything he writes is pretty much dismissed unless it's a confession. 

Military serving overseas has always had to deal with having their mail looked at, a necessary invasion of privacy because those pieces of mail may be intercepted by the enemy, and used for their benefit.  My dad can relate stories during WW2 about that.