Terri Horman's lawyers can't question investigator

Stepmother of missing boy now in divorce proceedings

PORTLAND — A Multnomah County judge denied a request by Terri Horman's divorce attorneys to interview the lead investigator in the disappearance of the woman's stepson, saying Oregon law makes clear that certain aspects of an ongoing investigation are highly privileged and confidential.

Judge Henry Kantor also said Monday that attorneys could not question young students who attended school with the missing boy. The judge, however, granted their request to subpoena and depose teachers, as well as workers from three businesses frequented by Terri Horman.

Kyron Horman was 7 when he vanished from his Portland school on June 4, 2010. A massive search came up empty and no arrests have been made. His biological mother, Desiree Young, is from Medford.

About three weeks after the disappearance, Kaine Horman, Kyron's father, filed for a restraining order against Terri Horman. He took the action after investigators told him that his wife had once approached a landscaper about killing her husband for money. Kaine Horman and the boy's biological mother then went public with an accusation that Terri Horman, the last person to see Kyron, was responsible for the disappearance.

The Hormans are going through a divorce, and Kantor's ruling was related to their dispute over custody for the child they share — a 4-year-old girl who has not seen her mother since Kaine Horman got the restraining order.

Terri Horman's lawyers said they must obtain evidence to counter claims that she is not fit for parenting time, and should be privy to the same information her husband has been given about the criminal investigation.

Kantor said he saw no reason to deny the depositions of the teachers or the workers at nearby businesses.

The students, however, are off-limits because they are minors, he has not heard from their parents, and he doesn't know if they have attorneys.

Moreover, "the court is concerned about a student's ability to limit an answer in a way which would prevent the questioner from learning about what was said before the grand jury (in the criminal inquiry)," the judge wrote.

Reader Reaction
We reserve the right to remove any content at any time from this Community, including without limitation if it violates the Community Rules. We ask that you report content that you in good faith believe violates the above rules by clicking the Flag link next to the offending comment or fill out this form. New comments are only accepted for two weeks from the date of publication.