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

[Willy]

I'm surprised Ariel hasn't been on the Jerry Springer show yet. Her situation makes her an ideal guest.

[XLFD]

Aquaman, hopefully this answers your basic question:

All prisoners obtain the basic rights which are needed to survive, and sustain a reasonable way of life (meaning they have the necessities), despite their imprisonment. Most rights are taken away so the prison system can maintain order, discipline, and security. Any of the following rights, given to prisoners, can be taken away for that purpose:

- The right to not be punished cruelly or unusually.

- The right to due processes.

- The right to administrative appeals.

- The right to access the parole process (denied to those incarcerated in the Federal System)

- The right to practice religion freely.

- The right to equal protection (Fourteenth Amendment).

- The right to be notified of all charges against them.

- The right to receive a written statement explaining evidence used in reaching a disposition.

- The right to file a civil suit against another person.

- The right to medical treatment (both long and short term).

(Mental Patients/Prisoners) - The right to treatment that is both adequate and appropriate.

- The right to a hearing upon being relocated to the mental health facility.

- The right to personal property such as: cigarettes, stationary, a watch, cosmetics, and snack-food.

- The right to visitation.

- The right to food that would sustain an average person adequately.

- The right to bathe (for sanitation and health reasons).

Many rights are taken away from prisoners and restrictions are put on what they can and can't do. Take as an example, the guards have to read and inspect any in-going or out-going mail. The only time they can't listen to a prisoners conversation is when it is with his or her attorney. Prisoners also have no right to privacy. This is to maintain security and make sure no contraband items are being held by the prisoners.

These laws they have to follow, are to make sure the prison system has order. All of these rights and laws are needed to maintain their lives in prison.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner_rights_in_the_United_States

[AQUAMAN]

Ok, that covers the inmates, so what about our Armed services soldiers? And what about "all men being created equal, under God, with inalienable rights"? I understand the need for security and order, but to intentionally spy on letters and conversations, doesn't ring true to my understanding of the individual rights of an American. I also see a lot of references to Ariel being the victim, and the only party that is being recognized as the parent, I don't see where Sean is now not a parent of this child, he still helped create it, just as much as Ariel. Last I knew, it still took two to procreate.

[masonco]

Aquaman

Once convicted of a crime against a child, the inmate loses parental rights in almost every case I heard of.

I just thought of something...When was this letter sent? I'm not sure how closely they monitor letters sent from Mason County jail and can not remember if he was still there when this letter was sent.

On the other hand, I'm not so sure they tell the inmates their letters are read before mailing out. Other inmates do warn new prisoners of it though...but if no one told him he might have been dumb enough to not realize it. BUT if it was copied, handed over to the police and that is why they had the ongoing investigation, then mailed it on to her to see what she would do.

Just know that those in prison have to legal rights as far as privacy. They can be searched at any time day or night. They can not even vote while in prison. They do have rights to shelter, food, etc but now expect cable etc. etc.

[AQUAMAN]

Thanks for the cogent and informative responses, both Masonco and X, you both have brilliant posts. I would be interested in what Max might have for input right now, but sadly, I see he just logged off, or at least for now. He alone to me has the expertise to analyze this situation more clearly, and quite legally, at least as the constitution reads, and should be interpreted. Max, can you please insert your expertise on what soldiers and inmates have as constitutional rights, in their respective positions, irregardless of political and DOC rulings, both past and present? Or has nothing changed? Thanks all.