The Curious Case Of Natalia Grace

[nokat]

4 hours ago, Straycat80 said:

I started watch this. I’m on episode 2. Very weird story. The way the adoption went was very confusing, what was this couple thinking? No social worker, no lawyer or court procedure? She’s suppose to 6 years old but had pubic hair and periods. The girl definitely had serious mental health issues. The Dad, Michael, is off too, very dramatic and extra.

Where was the Mom, did she not want to be involved in this doc? And the younger two sons? The oldest son is Autistic and a genius right? Why does it looks like he lives in a basement? So many questions, but I’ll keep watching to see how this ends. 

It would be difficult to hide periods.

The son is in prison.

[Andyourlittledog2]

14 minutes ago, borealis said:

Yeah, don't bother with the 1-hour episodes. They've split up the 2-hour eps & renumbered them BACKWARDS.

First 2-hr episode: Part 1

Then 1-hr episode: Part 2 = first half of Part 1, that you've already watched. 

They number it as Part 2 to make it look new, but it's not. It's the FIRST hour of the original, two-hour Part 1. (And they do that with the entire series.)

Right? The numbers are backwards. It's a hot mess. Probably, like you said, to get DVRs to pick up 'new' episodes. I'm watching the first run two hour deals. Watched.

[nokat]

4 minutes ago, Andyourlittledog2 said:

Right? The numbers are backwards. It's a hot mess. Probably, like you said, to get DVRs to pick up 'new' episodes. I'm watching the first run two hour deals. Watched.

I watched the first two? It was made confusing.

Episode 5 is now recording. I'm confused.

Edited June 1, 2023 by nokat

[Gemma Violet]

Thanks for explaining the mishmash of episodes.  I was instructing my sister to tape the three two-hour episodes and she was finding all these confusing one-hour episodes.  I was just as confused.  I agree it's probably for the DVR.  Some people will DVR all the episodes to make sure they don't miss one.

Unsatisfying ending?  My words exactly. 

According to what Natalia's biological mother said, Natalia was 13 years old when she was adopted.  That fact was kind of glossed over and never mentioned again.    

I wanted to know more about what happened to Jacob's bright future.  How did he end up in the basement?  And what about that comment on the mic about "throwing down the stairs?"  I though sure something more would come of that.

Michael gave me a headache.  

Quote

The son is in prison.

What happened?

Edited June 1, 2023 by Gemma Violet

[Annber03]

13 minutes ago, Andyourlittledog2 said:

I can't take much more of Michael's histrionics. Of course whoever produced this focused on him; he is the most dramatic and the most likely to draw viewers into his theatrics. That how these things work on ID when they broadcast a more than two episode deal. Every damn time.

I had to laugh at him walking around all cocky thinking he'd gotten off scot free in that trial, and then you cut to a couple of the jury members being like, "We were basically left with no choice but to vote 'not guilty', but we definitely think something's fishy about this whole situation." 

And then he's sitting there talking about how the trial made it clear that he did nothing wrong, that it was all "Kristine, Kristine, Kristine"...and then he starts going on about how he can't ever be tried for anything that came out during the course of the trial, 'cause double jeopardy and all, and I'm like, "...okay, but if you did nothing wrong, then why bring up that particular fact?" He was telling on himself without even realizing it. That ending - they may have blocked out the reveal of whatever that guy said in his interview,, but considering it was a sex trafficking unit asking him questions, and considering some of the weird, creepy stuff about Natalia being overtly sexual and having inappropriate interactions with boys in the neighborhood and Kristine using sex the way she did, and then Michael's bizarre thing about Kristine "sexually abusing" him and his "bit of an interest" in pornography...I mean...not a stretch to put *those* dots together, you know? And if that's the case, then that pretty much confirms the feelings I'd been having up to this point, and there is so much ick in that theory that I don't even know where to begin. 

(I remember thinking in the first segment the other night that it was kind of odd that Michael would've Googled the earliest age a girl can get pubic hair. In this context, that just seems like the sort of Google search that you see on "Dateline", the kind that always inevitably comes back to bite the suspect in the ass. And when they briefly mentioned that Michael and Kristine had helped other foster kids, I started to wonder if we'd find out that there was shady stuff going on with them, too. Like I said before, I just would not be surprised by any bombshell revelations about this case going forward, it's just twisted enough to where you could throw in everything but the kitchen sink and be like, "Yeah, I figured that was happening.")

Other random thoughts:

-Michael somehow looked creepier without the beard.

-Kristine, about the ID channel: "Your network is whack!" And she would know, I guess.

-I felt bad for Anna. 

-Given Michael's threat about breaking that laptop at the end, and tossing the bat in anger...yeah, not at all surprised he'd have a domestic violence charge in his past. It killed me how on the one hand he was acting like he was so intimidated and cowed by Kristine, and then then next he's talking about hoping she burns in hell and making these veiled threats. She's definitely no prize, that's for damn sure, but spare me your martyr BS, dude. 

-I wonder if/when we'll find out what comes of that sex trafficking investigation. 

[nokat]

2 minutes ago, Gemma Violet said:

What happened?

I want to know too. He seemed to be the most normal.

[nokat]

I thought the son was in prison. Is that his life, In a basement?

[Gemma Violet]

1 minute ago, nokat said:

I thought the son was in prison. Is that his life, In a basement?

Oh, OK.  I thought you meant he went to prison after it was filmed.  Yeah, that was his dad's basement.

[Andyourlittledog2]

Can you imagine being married to or the child of this man?  He never stops talking. It's like a mental illness with him, he must talk incessantly about himself and what he thinks and feels and how other people relate to him. This is how he relates to the world.  If anyone needs a psych eval it's Michael. I can only thank God I have no reason to related to him at all at any time.  What a creepy lunatic.

[nokat]

2 minutes ago, Gemma Violet said:

Oh, OK.  I thought you meant he went to prison after it was filmed.  Yeah, that was his dad's basement.

I had thought something else. I was like what did he do.Nothing.

[Cobb Salad]

5 hours ago, For Cereals said:

How is there again no update on Natalia and how she’s doing?

At the very end they had a preview of Natalia’s response to all of this.  The tease was for later this summer.  Should be interesting.  

[libgirl2]

42 minutes ago, Cobb Salad said:

At the very end they had a preview of Natalia’s response to all of this.  The tease was for later this summer.  Should be interesting.  

I didn't catch that! I wanted to know more about how she is doing now. The ending was very unsatisfactory. I hope she is settled well with that family, though I still don't know what to think!

I honestly couldn't take listening to Michael's histrionics very much longer! 

Edited June 1, 2023 by libgirl2

[Guest]

The Daily Mail tracked down Natalia's birth mother who confirmed that Natalia was born in 2003. So I don't give a shit what some neighbor decided, "she claimed she was the same age as my 6-year old...BUT LOOKED SO MUCH OLDER!!" or some idiot doctor "confirmed" to get the Barnett's their bogus court declaration that Natalia was 20, the girl was a CHILD when she was forced to live ALONE in two separate apartments. And now she's still labeled all over the internet as some Machiavellian-like, psychopathic schemer.

There was a clip of her on Dr Phil I watched on YouTube where she (and the people who are caring for her) confirm that, to this day, she STILL hasn't gotten a period and that Christine forced her to wear tampons and would use the bloody tampon as "proof" that she had a period. Well, guess what? The child injured herself with the tampon and no WONDER there was blood on it. 

This is a horrific case of child abuse and I feel so sorry for Natalia having to live with labels like "sociopath" and "psychopath" when the evidence is clear that the only sociopaths or psychopaths in this story were people with the Barnett surname—along with the Ciccone family who first adopted her. 

 

[sagittarius sue]

One thing I discovered last night while checking IMDB this series is a docu-drama, not a documentary.  Michael and Kristine are portrayed by actors, and Natalia is portrayed by an actor in one episode, probably the last episode.  Who knows about the other characters.   They could be uncredited actors or real people.

I believe that Natalia was adopted by Americans early in life and abruptly dropped off when the Barnetts unwisely adopted her.  That would explain her lack of any foreign accent.  They briefly showed clips of her with baby front teeth and later adult front teeth which fits with her being a young child when adopted by the Barnetts.  Very early onset of puberty does occur (what a horrible thing to happen to a young child) with having periods, breast development, and possibiy an unusual interest in the opposite sex.  This is in addition to her disability, and her mental illness, possibly even psychopathy.

[Whimsy]

3 hours ago, sagittarius sue said:

One thing I discovered last night while checking IMDB this series is a docu-drama, not a documentary.  Michael and Kristine are portrayed by actors, and Natalia is portrayed by an actor in one episode, probably the last episode.  Who knows about the other characters.   They could be uncredited actors or real people.

I believe that Natalia was adopted by Americans early in life and abruptly dropped off when the Barnetts unwisely adopted her.  That would explain her lack of any foreign accent.  They briefly showed clips of her with baby front teeth and later adult front teeth which fits with her being a young child when adopted by the Barnetts.  Very early onset of puberty does occur (what a horrible thing to happen to a young child) with having periods, breast development, and possibiy an unusual interest in the opposite sex.  This is in addition to her disability, and her mental illness, possibly even psychopathy.

The actors were only used for the reenactment parts of the docuseries. The parts that weren’t filmed by the Barnett’s that the show wanted to dramatize but didn’t really focus on their faces. They showed the actress who portrayed Natalia interacting with neighbor kids, etc, in the re-enactments and it was obvious it wasn’t really Natalia based on her legs alone. Other than that, there were no actors used. 
 

I agree with your second paragraph. I also believe she was adopted early on, which is why she didn’t have an accent and I also believe she had early onset of puberty (I posted a link in an earlier comment about this). I also noted that Natalia’s face changed drastically as she matured. It was very obvious, seeing how much she’s changed over the years, that she was a child when the Barnett’s got her. 
 

Did the stair thing that the son (Jacob?) alluded to ever get explained?  I’m thinking he pushed Natalia down the stairs. 
 

Michael is exhausting. I wouldn’t be able to spend 5 minutes in the same room as him. 
 

It was so frustrating they didn’t have enough evidence or whatever to proceed with the trial for Kristine. Can Natalia file a civil suite?

[Pi237]

I can’t believe they left a 9 year old alone and wiped all her contacts on her phone. Her odd behavior at the first apartment is explained by her age, and the physical, psychological, and most likely, sexual abuse she suffered. That poor girl. These people are pure evil. Michael celebrating his ‘win’ made me sick. I hope they’re both hassled and shamed for the rest of their lives, although I’m not sure either of them are capable of feeling shame.  Looking down their noses at ‘white trash’ beyond ironic. 

[Cobb Salad]

2 hours ago, libgirl2 said:

I honestly couldn't take listening to Michael's histrionics very much longer! 

Neither could I.  He thinks he won his court case.   No, the jury thought you’re guilty but they couldn’t declare you guilty based on what they had to work with.  I’m glad the jury forewoman was interviewed to explain that.  

Any interview they showed with Natalia indicates that when ID shows the follow up with her we’ll hopefully get some more rational explanation about parts of this story (like what happened at the creamery) and we’ll be spared the histrionics like what Michael displayed.  

[libgirl2]

6 minutes ago, Pi237 said:

I can’t believe they left a 9 year old alone and wiped all her contacts on her phone. Her odd behavior at the first apartment is explained by her age, and the physical, psychological, and most likely, sexual abuse she suffered. That poor girl. These people are pure evil. Michael celebrating his ‘win’ made me sick. I hope they’re both hassled and shamed for the rest of their lives, although I’m not sure either of them are capable of feeling shame.  Looking down their noses at ‘white trash’ beyond ironic. 

I was talking to my husband about it this morning. He didn't watch it though but he agreed that she was mentally/emotionally/physically scarred by what happened and that, combined with her age, explains a lot about how she was behaving at that first apartment. She glommed onto those neighbors because she had no one. 

Question, that woman who lived in Lafayette had nine cats and 4 or 5 children, was adopting another one? 

[Pi237]

Also, Kristina’s abuse and hatred toward Natalia makes sense if Michael was sexually abusing her…she saw her as competition. 

[libgirl2]

43 minutes ago, Pi237 said:

Also, Kristina’s abuse and hatred toward Natalia makes sense if Michael was sexually abusing her…she saw her as competition. 

I think the whole atmosphere was highly sexual. 

[Straycat80]

Finished watching all six episodes, easier to watch the one episode at a time if you get MAX. And no commercials. 
I have many words for Michael, selfish, narcissistic, overly dramatic, vengeful, douche bag. He made everything about himself. And he’s a liar, he changed his story about stuff, like the farm incident, from the interview from 2019 to 2022. Also saying Kristine was weak because she had Lupus but later said she beat up Natalia and HE was afraid of her. And was he making up the stuff about the knives and telling Jacob to go along with his stories? It appears so considering the stuff he was saying when he didn’t realize his mic was still recording. 

But then you had the psych home workers and neighbors at Natalia’s first apartment kind of agreeing about how disturbed she was. Plus the one neighbor said she was wearing a bra. And she was caught molesting the little boy. And she called the police on herself for stalking the neighbors.

The first time the PI went to Ukraine and talked to the aunt and Bio mom they said she was older too, so that confusing. They said she had been passed around to other families and finally an orphanage. My guess is Natalia was sexually abused. And probably by the first adopted family in the US too. So that’s why she talked and acted older and sexualized. Still don’t understand why any of her doctors didn’t do tests to determine her real age. 

That trial was a joke. I almost stopped watching because of Michaels histrionics and gloating. And both Michael and Kristine got away with abuse. And there is something sinister about all this. At the end with the little person guy, Freddie Gill, I think that was his name. Hinting about a sex ring, something about Kristine and Natalia and Michael freaking out at something they didn’t show us when they handed him that laptop.

So there will be Natalia’s side of this story they are going to air ‘at the end of this summer’. They showed a short clip of her saying ‘they were lying’. I’ll be watching but it pisses me off I have to wait so long. 

[SunnyBeBe]

 

Michael just seems really fake. He may be telling the truth about some things, but if you stand by while a person in your family is abused, you get no brownie points for being a nice guy.  He is proud of being an enabler.  Pathetic.  I hope he gets no more screen time.  
 

I just have no faith in what anyone says about the birth date of Natalia.  Whether it’s her birth mom, adoption agency, Barnetts, etc. 
 

 

Edited June 1, 2023 by SunnyBeBe

[libgirl2]

3 minutes ago, Straycat80 said:

That trial was a joke. I almost stopped watching because of Michaels histrionics and gloating. And both Michael and Kristine got away with abuse. And there is something sinister about all this. At the end with the little person guy, Freddie Gill, I think that was his name. Hinting about a sex ring, something about Kristine and Natalia and Michael freaking out at something they didn’t show us when they handed him that laptop.

So there will be Natalia’s side of this story they are going to air ‘at the end of this summer’. They showed a short clip of her saying ‘they were lying’. I’ll be watching but it pisses me off I have to wait so long. 

Yes, something is up with that. Nothing surprises me with this case. 

I also wish we didn't have to wait so long! 

[For Cereals]

4 hours ago, libgirl2 said:

I didn't catch that! I wanted to know more about how she is doing now. The ending was very unsatisfactory. I hope she is settled well with that family, though I still don't know what to think!

I missed that preview too.  My recording from ID wasn’t great so I gave up and watched on MAX.

It looked like she was still with the one family who took her in.  I didn’t have the best feeling about them either how they immediately took over her finances, but if they are caring for her, I hope she’s getting all the services she needs.  I really hope they can have her age legally proven/corrected.

I’m not a clinician, but Michael sure fits the Uncle Google sociopath definition to me.  Narcissistic at the very least.

I also didn’t like how angry and defensive that one prosecutor got in those zoom calls.  It was really odd.
 

[libgirl2]

4 minutes ago, For Cereals said:

I missed that preview too.  My recording from ID wasn’t great so I gave up and watched on MAX.

It looked like she was still with the one family who took her in.  I didn’t have the best feeling about them either how they immediately took over her finances, but if they are caring for her, I hope she’s getting all the services she needs.  I really hope they can have her age legally proven/corrected.

I’m not a clinician, but Michael sure fits the Uncle Google sociopath definition to me.  Narcissistic at the very least.

I also didn’t like how angry and defensive that one prosecutor got in those zoom calls.  It was really odd.
 

Did it strike you that they might be religious? I remember Natalia saying something like "God willing". Yes, the finance angel is fishy but she looks healthy, well fed and clean. I hope they have the best intentions. 

[Cobb Salad]

15 minutes ago, For Cereals said:

It looked like she was still with the one family who took her in.  I didn’t have the best feeling about them either how they immediately took over her finances, but if they are caring for her, I hope she’s getting all the services she needs.  I really hope they can have her age legally proven/corrected.

Hopefully the upcoming show about Natalia’s response will explain more about that.  There was so much they were telling us that these other people coming in all of a sudden got glossed over.  From what I interpreted it looked like the woman saw her and took her in like she found a stray animal on the street.  If I was seeing this child/little person with obvious issues wandering around alone all the time I’d be calling the police to find out if there was anything amiss.  You don’t know what’s going on with people and for all anyone knows the woman could have been risking being charged with kidnapping a child.  

[Gemma Violet]

If Natalia was 13 years old when she was adopted (according to what the biological mother said), she was about 13 1/2 or 14 when she was put in the apartment.  Certainly abandonment, but it at least explains how she was able to live alone all that time and run a household (sort of).  (As Dr. Phil said on his show, it would be near impossible for a six-year-old to live alone.)  That also explains other things like the neighbor saying she was wearing a bra and talking in an adult manner. 

So, she wasn't six and she wasn't an adult.  She was a young teenager.  Why did Michael and Christine automatically latch onto the she-is-an-adult mantra?  Why didn't they just say they thought she was a teen?  I guess they figured the only way they could be free of her was to publicly declare she was an adult, and then they could (or so they thought) wash their hands of her.  I agree with those who said there would have been easy ways to figure out her approximate age, i.e. her molar teeth coming in or a bone scan.  Natalia said on Dr. Phil that she did get a bone scan later (after she starting living with that couple), but said there was no bone scan when she lived with Michael and Christine, although, according to Natalia, they told people they did a bone scan.  

By the way, that couple (the ones who had her move in a few days after meeting her) still have her living with them.  It's been a few years now.  They were on Dr. Phil with her.  

[libgirl2]

4 minutes ago, Gemma Violet said:

By the way, that couple (the ones who had her move in a few days after meeting her) still have her living with them.  It's been a few years now.  They were on Dr. Phil with her.  

I think they said she has been with them for 5 years. 

[SunnyBeBe]

It’s surprising that almost every person who spoke seemed questionable in their veracity.  Michael, the police detective, the neighbors, the women who defended Natalia…….IDK.  An odd cast of characters.  I’m undecided about the dwarf male who claimed he had receipts of Kristine sort of sexting with him.  What was his name?  Didn’t he claim to be an actor?  

[libgirl2]

13 minutes ago, SunnyBeBe said:

It’s surprising that almost every person who spoke seemed questionable in their veracity.  Michael, the police detective, the neighbors, the women who defended Natalia…….IDK.  An odd cast of characters.  I’m undecided about the dwarf male who claimed he had receipts of Kristine sort of sexting with him.  What was his name?  Didn’t he claim to be an actor?  

That was one of the things that confused me, I wasn't sure who to believe..... 

I think that guy was a singer of some kind? 

[sagittarius sue]

1 hour ago, Gemma Violet said:

If Natalia was 13 years old when she was adopted (according to what the biological mother said)

In last night's episode her mother stated that she gave her up at birth which occurred in 2003.  It appears everyone contradicts themself in this series!

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Gemma Violet said:

Why did Michael and Christine automatically latch onto the she-is-an-adult mantra? 

So they could never be charged with child abuse. Which seemed to have worked out just fine for them in the end. 

23 minutes ago, SunnyBeBe said:

I’m undecided about the dwarf male who claimed he had receipts of Kristine sort of sexting with him.

His name was Freddie Gill and I absolutely believe his claims were true. I have no doubt that Natalia was not only trafficked by the Barnetts but also trafficked by the Ciccone's who seem to have gotten off scot free of responsibility in this series. 

There's a reason why insane Michael got more insane after they played what Freddie revealed what Kristine had told him about Michael—because Michael knew it was fucking true and he ratcheted his bullshit up to 1000 to try to cover it up. And I believe what Freddie said, that shitty ID decided to edit out for fear of legal reprisals, is that Michael sexually abused/assaulted Natalia. Again, another good reason for changing her age to that of an adult. 

Michael Barnett is the scum of the earth. 

ETA:

5 minutes ago, sagittarius sue said:

In last night's episode her mother stated that she gave her up at birth which occurred in 2003.  It appears everyone contradicts themself in this series!

This is important to note! Natalia WAS born in 2003 which made her NINE YEARS OLD when she lived at the first apartment by herself. Full stop. NINE YEARS OLD. There is no mystery here. 

Edited June 1, 2023 by Guest

[libgirl2]

5 minutes ago, Giant Misfit said:

So they could never be charged with child abuse. Which seemed to have worked out just fine for them in the end. 

His name was Freddie Gill and I absolutely believe his claims were true. I have no doubt that Natalia was not only trafficked by the Barnetts but also trafficked by the Ciccone's who seem to have gotten off scot free of responsibility in this series. 

There's a reason why insane Michael got more insane after they played what Freddie revealed what Kristine had told him about Michael—because Michael knew it was fucking true and he ratcheted his bullshit up to 1000 to try to cover it up. And I believe what Freddie said, that shitty ID decided to edit out for fear of legal reprisals, is that Michael sexually abused/assaulted Natalia. Again, another good reason for changing her age to that of an adult. 

Michael Barnett is the scum of the earth. 

ETA:

This is important to note! Natalia WAS born in 2003 which made her NINE YEARS OLD when she lived at the first apartment by herself. Full stop. NINE YEARS OLD. There is no mystery here. 

Sadly, it did but at least this got out and we know what f-ing liars they are. 

Freddie Gill--- he was pretty straight forward about who and what he is. I wish we could have heard more. 

Michael and Kristine are both scums. I can't decide who is worse. I wasn't so sure what to believe early on the series but this last capped it all off. I feel bad for their sons, especially the oldest, who seems to carry a lot of guilt and anxiety over what happened and what he was made to do and how he felt about it at the time. It looks like it ruined a once bright life. I know he is autistic but he looks defeated and dead in the eyes. 

[SunnyBeBe]

But, Natalia’s birth mother may not be an accurate reporter of information.  There could be all kinds of reasons for her to misreport the birthdate, like legal, financial, extortion, etc.  

Edited June 1, 2023 by SunnyBeBe

[Guest]

Just now, SunnyBeBe said:

But, Natalia’s birth mother may not be an accurate reporter of information.  There could be all kinds of reasons for her to misreport the birthdate, like legal, financial, extortion, etc.  

They showed her birth certificate on the last episode. She was born in 2003. 

[Gemma Violet]

25 minutes ago, Giant Misfit said:

This is important to note! Natalia WAS born in 2003 which made her NINE YEARS OLD when she lived at the first apartment by herself. Full stop. NINE YEARS OLD. There is no mystery here. 

Then I've got my dates wrong.  I thought she lived in the apartment in 2016, which would have made her 13 then.  You're saying she lived in the apartment in 2012, which would have made her 9 as you say.  My apologies for getting the date wrong.  

[Whimsy]

I know there was a lot of confusion over Natalia's age- mostly perpetrated by the Barnett's, but when the PI's (or whomever) went and talked with the mother she confirmed that Natalia was born in 2003.  To me, there is no question.  The Barnett's were lying liars who lie to get away with all of the atrocities they did to this poor child.

[Gemma Violet]

My timeline was all mixed up, so here, according to what I've found, is a timeline:

2003 - Natalia born

2010 - Adopted by the Barnetts

2012 - Age legally changed by the court

2013 - Natalia put in the first apartment

2014 - Natalia put in the second apartment

2016 - The Mans become her legal guardians

[DanaK]

Press release on follow up doc coming this Summer with Natalia apparently telling her side of the story http://thefutoncritic.com/news/2023/06/01/id-greenlights-new-documentary-featuring-exclusive-bombshell-revelations-from-natalia-barnett-538411/20230601id01/

[Straycat80]

23 minutes ago, Whimsy said:

I know there was a lot of confusion over Natalia's age- mostly perpetrated by the Barnett's, but when the PI's (or whomever) went and talked with the mother she confirmed that Natalia was born in 2003.  To me, there is no question.  The Barnett's were lying liars who lie to get away with all of the atrocities they did to this poor child.

The first PI who went to find Natalia’s bio mom but found the aunt instead (looked like it was filmed on a cellphone), don’t remember what year it was. The aunt called the bio mom on the phone, she screamed something like ‘I’ve been putting up with this for 17 years’. I think that’s another reason they thought Natalia was older at that time. Oh, she’s really 17. 
The women were speaking Ukraine or Russian, maybe the translator misheard? 
Then the second PI found the bio mom and she confirmed the birthdate was 2003. 

[Anela]

I thought this was the case of the real “orphan” girl, but now I don’t think I can watch. I’m glad I read the posts here before starting. It sounds horrific.  

Edited June 1, 2023 by Anela

[sagittarius sue]

28 minutes ago, Anela said:

I thought this was the case of the real “orphan” girl, but now I don’t think I can watch. I’m glad I read the posts here before starting. It sounds horrific.  

It's a real shit show, but I found that I couldn't turn away from it except by the last episode I couldn't bear to watch Michael.  I would avert my eyes and just listen.

[SunnyBeBe]

This is a summary of the series. It says that Natalia’s side will be aired this summer, as someone posted upthread. I wonder if they’ll have re-enactments like in this one and if so, who’ll play Michael. Ha!  I bet he has a lot of broken things in his house.  
 

https://toofab.com/2023/06/01/orphan-natalia-grace-coached-about-age-adoptive-mother-set-up-with-adult/

 

 

 

[Notabug]

I'm a gynecologist, and, when Michael claimed Natalia had pubic hair and was menstruating at age 6; my first thought was 'what did the doctor say?' I cannot imagine any mother thinking that that was normal for a 6 year old and most would be on the phone with the pediatrician in a heartbeat to schedule an appointment for further evaluation.  In the US, caucasian girls get their first period around 12 and would start to develop pubic hair maybe 2 years earlier.  Any little girl getting her period before age 9-10 has precocious puberty, a recognized medical condition that could be due to any number of factors and requires investigation to discover the cause and treat it.  I think the Barnetts were in cahoots with their 'family doctor' who supposedly wrote the letter claiming Natalia was older and they didn't take her for a full assessment because they decided early on that she was older than advertised and didn't want to be told otherwise.  They also realized aging her by a couple of years wasn't going to help them, she needed to be a legal adult from the get-go.

As others have said, it is pretty common knowledge that young children who speak and behave in sexually inappropriate ways have probably been sexually abused.  Natalia related to men, in particular, in inappropriate ways.  No wonder Michael shut down all talk of her having been molested as well as explains why he is so very sure she was a legal adult when she came to live with them.  Rot in hell, dude.

I don't know who the judge was who arbitrarily aged Natalia by 14 years, but, interesting, isn't it, that he aged her enough that she was clearly over 18 and an adult at the time of adoption.   I think Michael and Christine realized what could happen if their treatment of Natalia went public and wanted the judge to age her enough that they were off the hook for anything that happened while she was with them.  And, it seems it worked.  Impeach that judge.

All the BS about her not growing in 2 years was nonsense.  Measuring height in a healthy kid is hard enough and keeping consistent in how it is done is important.  In the case of Natalia, a kid with marked skeletal deformity, who, over the years became more and more kyphotic (hunched over), trying to measure her height over time would be more conjecture than truth.

The doctor who was being deposed and was talking about growth plates was apparently looking at Xrays or, more likely, MRI's, of Natalia's bones.  He made it clear she was NOT an adult when the films were taken.  That is more than enough evidence to prove she was not 22 when the birth certificate was altered.  It would be similar to using dental exams and records to assess age.  And, because the judge had already ruled that Natalia's age could only be determined by her birth certificate, which had been legally and shadily changed, the slimy defense attorney tried to claim the doctor was not telling the 'truth' if he said Natalia was a child when the films were done.

I do think Natalia may have been a few years older than they were told, no way she was anywhere close to adulthood, though.

Edited June 1, 2023 by Notabug

[babyhouseman]

I just don't understand why Natalia's bio mother's testimony or the doctor talking about her bones weren't good enough proof for her age. I wonder about the other sons with Kristine. There are more questions than answers. 

[nokat]

This is how my  brain doesn't get this. Her size says child. She acts in adult ways (and some troubling) I think she was abused in so many ways.

[Annber03]

9 hours ago, libgirl2 said:

I was talking to my husband about it this morning. He didn't watch it though but he agreed that she was mentally/emotionally/physically scarred by what happened and that, combined with her age, explains a lot about how she was behaving at that first apartment. She glommed onto those neighbors because she had no one. 

That's another thing that just makes this case all the more disturbing - Kristine and Michael were abusing and manipulating Natalia, and then they set her loose on the public at large and saw to it that she acted and talked as creepy as possible, thanks to all their manipulation tactics, so that other people would a) be just as freaked out by her, and b) be "witness" to her strange behavior so that Kristine and Michael could point to it and be like, "See? It's not just us, she was like this with everybody!" And if Natalia happened to break into people's homes and freak them out on that level, too, eh, well, so be it, just another piece of evidence Kristine and Michael can use to show how creepy she is. 

That's...downright diabolical, that is. On so many levels. If I were her neighbors in that apartment building, I'd be fucking PISSED that those two were willing to put so many people's privacy and lives at risk like that.

9 hours ago, Pi237 said:

Also, Kristina’s abuse and hatred toward Natalia makes sense if Michael was sexually abusing her…she saw her as competition. 

Excellent point. As sickening as that thought is, I think it would definitely explain that one text Kristine sent that said something to the effect of how Natalia was lying about things so that she could "let her husband sleep in her room". I was amazed more wasn't made of that part of that text exchange, 'cause, uh, yeah, that's not something to just gloss over.

8 hours ago, Straycat80 said:

Finished watching all six episodes, easier to watch the one episode at a time if you get MAX. And no commercials. 
I have many words for Michael, selfish, narcissistic, overly dramatic, vengeful, douche bag. He made everything about himself. And he’s a liar, he changed his story about stuff, like the farm incident, from the interview from 2019 to 2022. Also saying Kristine was weak because she had Lupus but later said she beat up Natalia and HE was afraid of her. And was he making up the stuff about the knives and telling Jacob to go along with his stories? It appears so considering the stuff he was saying when he didn’t realize his mic was still recording. 

That's another thing - he kept going on about all this stuff Kristine was doing during their divorce to get back at him, and all the while he was saying this, I kept thinking about that moment when he said that Kristine made him delete those videos of her abusing Natalia that he'd recorded, but he also said he's kept the phone in the hopes somebody could retrieve those videos someday.

And I was like, "Well, if ever there was a good time to whip out that phone and see if you could do that, your divorce would be a pretty perfect opportunity, no?" He wasn't married to her anymore, he was free to do whatever he wanted at that point, and lord knows she was pretty ruthless, so if I were him, I'd be like, "Okay, you want to play hardball? Let's play hardball." and use those videos to highlight just how horrible a mother she was to Natalia. That could've helped Natalia, it could've helped him ensure his sons got to stay in his life, it could've benefitted him in the divorce proceedings, so why not just go for the jugular and bring those in?

Unless, of course, his story about recording those videos is bull, and/or they exist, but he can't show them because there might be evidence on there of him abusing Natalia, too. Which seems a LOT more likely. 

(It's clear how much of a crash course he's gotten in how the law works, 'cause there was that one bit pre-trial where he was all, "If my attorney were here he'd say some lawyer-y things" and I was like, "He'd also tell you to shut the hell up, but hey, by all means, keep talking.")

Quote

My guess is Natalia was sexually abused. And probably by the first adopted family in the US too. So that’s why she talked and acted older and sexualized. 

I REALLY want to know more about the place in Florida where Michael and Kristine adopted her. Just how shady were they? Were they part of this sex trafficking thing that's being investigated, and people like Michael and Kristine, as well as the other adoptive parents who had Natalia before them, were aiding them in those crimes? 

I also think somebody should talk to and look more closely at the other foster children Michael and Kristine took in. I'd be interested to see what all they have to say about their time living with them. 

8 hours ago, SunnyBeBe said:

 

Michael just seems really fake. He may be telling the truth about some things, but if you stand by while a person in your family is abused, you get no brownie points for being a nice guy.  He is proud of being an enabler.  Pathetic.  I hope he gets no more screen time.  

I think his family either has blinders on or are in deep denial. The woman he's with now - anytime I saw her interacting with Michael, I just kept thinking, "RUN, lady. Run fast and run far." Even if she thinks he's innocent in all of this, who the hell wants to deal with THIS much drama in their everyday lives? 

5 hours ago, libgirl2 said:

Michael and Kristine are both scums. I can't decide who is worse. I wasn't so sure what to believe early on the series but this last capped it all off. I feel bad for their sons, especially the oldest, who seems to carry a lot of guilt and anxiety over what happened and what he was made to do and how he felt about it at the time. It looks like it ruined a once bright life. I know he is autistic but he looks defeated and dead in the eyes. 

He's clearly hiding and covering up a LOT. I kind of wondered if his "Oh, crap, I left my microphone on" moment was actually intentional, like, he pretended he'd forgotten it was on in the hopes that maybe he could sneak in a bit of a recording to give people an idea of just how manipulative Michael is. 

On that note, the fact that Michael made a point of telling Jacob that he was a minor when all of this happened absolutely has me thinking that Jacob was made to do more, or that Michael and Kristine were trying to make him do more, than what he admitted to here*. Which, again, is deeply disturbing to think about on a whole host of levels.

*My mom was immediately skeptical of Michael's claim that he'd just learned about Kristine making Jacob pee on Natalia's bed because, a) *Gestures at Michael in general*, and b) she was like, "Wouldn't he have been able to, y'know, smell the urine at some point?"

I would not be surprised if the other two sons washed their hands of this entire freakshow of a family, and if they have, good for them. I hope they're doing okay, wherever they are. 

1 hour ago, Notabug said:

I'm a gynecologist, and, when Michael claimed Natalia had pubic hair and was menstruating at age 6; my first thought was 'what did the doctor say?' I cannot imagine any mother thinking that that was normal for a 6 year old and most would be on the phone with the pediatrician in a heartbeat to schedule an appointment for further evaluation.

It's especially telling they didn't immediately go that route considering they had three young sons and thus would've already had a regular pediatrician they could instantly talk to. Even if the pediatrician was more familiar with health issues relating to boys, given they'd been treating the Barretts' three sons, they would absolutely know another pediatrician who was more knowledgeable about girls' health issues, and would've referred the Barretts to them. 

But they didn't do that, and as has been discussed in depth here, we know now exactly why they didn't do that. 

[libgirl2]

1 hour ago, nokat said:

This is how my  brain doesn't get this. Her size says child. She acts in adult ways (and some troubling) I think she was abused in so many ways.

Urinating around the house points me to CSA. 

[nokat]

Just now, libgirl2 said:

Urinating around the house points me to CSA. 

I had forgotten that. There was so much signs of abuse.

[libgirl2]

1 minute ago, nokat said:

I had forgotten that. There was so much signs of abuse.

Yes, there were.