What happened to this California family?

[Anonymous]

can a local please confirm if a person close to the family lawyered up with a Merced law firm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The naïveté here astounds me.
Has anyone considered that not all women bond with their children? Or, even want them? Or attend to them properly?

Perhaps Gerrish was concerned baby M was being neglected during his office hours and employed a nanny so he could focus on his work without interruption and fear something might go wrong.

Maybe Chung didn’t want to “mother” and preferred screen and yoga time. Maybe she disliked dirty diapers, crying, snotty nosed, teething toddlers. Just because a few people say complimentary things doesn’t make it so. It only means what they observed appeared normal.

Off the top of my head I can list at least fifty cases of women
killing their kids. And most of the women had flattering comments about their parenting skills prior to murdering them.

You can list 50 cases of women killing their kids OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD?

Statistically it is not common, although yes it does happen, and is more likely to happen in the post partum period.

I am not saying that it is impossible she was a disconnected mother, or that Gerrish was a very connected father, but your post seems insane.

Cases, yes. Highly publicized cases. Postpartum psychosis is actually very common.

It is not "very common." It's actually quite rare - 0.1%-0.2% of births. Did you mean postpartum psychosis is a common reason given by women who kill their children and husbands?

You seem like a fairly nasty person, the way you are talking about this woman. It is positively ghoulish. It is possible to be interested in a case and speculate about what happened without being ghoulish.

. Thanks for the compliment. Wanna go back to pretending it got to hot for them?

It wasn't a compliment, I was never on Team Heatstroke, and try basing your theories on more than your own imagination if you want to sound like a thinking adult. You have zero basis for suggesting that this baby was neglected by either parent. The only basis you have for assuming that Chung was neglectful are statements about how involved Gerrish was as a father. They employed a nanny, which is something that probably 50% of the parents on this site do. He worked from home. She did other stuff. She didn't need to work to pay the bills, and there is no indication that that was a problem for anyone.

I 100% think that something strange happened here. Even if you are sure you are right, and even if you end up being totally right, it is still a very strange thing, and the length of time it's taking answers to arrive makes it all the stranger. That said, I think the heat was certainly implicated in at least one aspect of the deaths, if for no other reason than that as a person who has ever hiked in the heat before, I know it makes every dangerous situation that much more potentially dangerous. But I do not think it is the primary cause of the overall situation or likely no one on this site would ever have heard of these people.

It’s not about being right. It’s about the obvious and critical thinking. The length of time alone means one thing! Drugs or a toxic agent was found and deeper analysis is underway. A tox test can yield positive for meth. However, the presence of meth would not conclude a fatal dose was used, so back to the drawing board for quantitatives. If tox’ tests on this case had returned negative results, we’d know. Really quite simple.

Are you the poster who had issues with being moderated on other boards? Nothing about the tox results has been released so your speculation is baseless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:can a local please confirm if a person close to the family lawyered up with a Merced law firm.

What are you basing this on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is rivaling the Freedom of the seas baby story!

Not really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they moved to Mariposa (really outside Mariposa) BECAUSE she was having mental health issues. Also TBI has a definite link to suicide. It’s so easy to underestimate another persons true state of mind with depression. Especially when it’s brought on physically.

They moved because Jon was able to work remotely due to cv. He wanted the baby to have a rural childhood as he did.

You don’t know why they moved. He might have told people it was to work from home or let the kid grow up in the wild but other factors could have been at play. Namely, his wife.

Changing jobs so that he could continue to work from home is what enabled them to move out of SF, remote work expanded greatly due to cv. He already owned property in the Mariposa area and it was a bit reminiscent of where he grew up in the UK. I imagine with cv and a pregnant wife and soon to be newborn, living in the forest seemed healthier on many levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The naïveté here astounds me.
Has anyone considered that not all women bond with their children? Or, even want them? Or attend to them properly?

Perhaps Gerrish was concerned baby M was being neglected during his office hours and employed a nanny so he could focus on his work without interruption and fear something might go wrong.

Maybe Chung didn’t want to “mother” and preferred screen and yoga time. Maybe she disliked dirty diapers, crying, snotty nosed, teething toddlers. Just because a few people say complimentary things doesn’t make it so. It only means what they observed appeared normal.

Off the top of my head I can list at least fifty cases of women
killing their kids. And most of the women had flattering comments about their parenting skills prior to murdering them.

You can list 50 cases of women killing their kids OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD?

Statistically it is not common, although yes it does happen, and is more likely to happen in the post partum period.

I am not saying that it is impossible she was a disconnected mother, or that Gerrish was a very connected father, but your post seems insane.

Cases, yes. Highly publicized cases. Postpartum psychosis is actually very common.

It is not "very common." It's actually quite rare - 0.1%-0.2% of births. Did you mean postpartum psychosis is a common reason given by women who kill their children and husbands?

You seem like a fairly nasty person, the way you are talking about this woman. It is positively ghoulish. It is possible to be interested in a case and speculate about what happened without being ghoulish.

. Thanks for the compliment. Wanna go back to pretending it got to hot for them?

It wasn't a compliment, I was never on Team Heatstroke, and try basing your theories on more than your own imagination if you want to sound like a thinking adult. You have zero basis for suggesting that this baby was neglected by either parent. The only basis you have for assuming that Chung was neglectful are statements about how involved Gerrish was as a father. They employed a nanny, which is something that probably 50% of the parents on this site do. He worked from home. She did other stuff. She didn't need to work to pay the bills, and there is no indication that that was a problem for anyone.

I 100% think that something strange happened here. Even if you are sure you are right, and even if you end up being totally right, it is still a very strange thing, and the length of time it's taking answers to arrive makes it all the stranger. That said, I think the heat was certainly implicated in at least one aspect of the deaths, if for no other reason than that as a person who has ever hiked in the heat before, I know it makes every dangerous situation that much more potentially dangerous. But I do not think it is the primary cause of the overall situation or likely no one on this site would ever have heard of these people.

It’s not about being right. It’s about the obvious and critical thinking. The length of time alone means one thing! Drugs or a toxic agent was found and deeper analysis is underway. A tox test can yield positive for meth. However, the presence of meth would not conclude a fatal dose was used, so back to the drawing board for quantitatives. If tox’ tests on this case had returned negative results, we’d know. Really quite simple.

Are you the poster who had issues with being moderated on other boards? Nothing about the tox results has been released so your speculation is baseless.

.
You’re pathetically behind. If you’re going to comment you should be versed in the subject matter.

In response to a question during Thursday's sheriff update, about whether toxicology results were back yet, Briese said, "Some are, yes. But we still do not have an exact cause of death yet."

Authorities say they have not been able to rule out the possibility of foul play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they moved to Mariposa (really outside Mariposa) BECAUSE she was having mental health issues. Also TBI has a definite link to suicide. It’s so easy to underestimate another persons true state of mind with depression. Especially when it’s brought on physically.

They moved because Jon was able to work remotely due to cv. He wanted the baby to have a rural childhood as he did.

You don’t know why they moved. He might have told people it was to work from home or let the kid grow up in the wild but other factors could have been at play. Namely, his wife.

Changing jobs so that he could continue to work from home is what enabled them to move out of SF, remote work expanded greatly due to cv. He already owned property in the Mariposa area and it was a bit reminiscent of where he grew up in the UK. I imagine with cv and a pregnant wife and soon to be newborn, living in the forest seemed healthier on many levels.

Exactly and much simpler than explaining your spouse is a big polar nut job that wanted to party all night and sleep all day.
Y’all need to wake up to the “facts” and quit with the pussyfooting around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The naïveté here astounds me.
Has anyone considered that not all women bond with their children? Or, even want them? Or attend to them properly?

Perhaps Gerrish was concerned baby M was being neglected during his office hours and employed a nanny so he could focus on his work without interruption and fear something might go wrong.

Maybe Chung didn’t want to “mother” and preferred screen and yoga time. Maybe she disliked dirty diapers, crying, snotty nosed, teething toddlers. Just because a few people say complimentary things doesn’t make it so. It only means what they observed appeared normal.

Off the top of my head I can list at least fifty cases of women
killing their kids. And most of the women had flattering comments about their parenting skills prior to murdering them.

You can list 50 cases of women killing their kids OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD?

Statistically it is not common, although yes it does happen, and is more likely to happen in the post partum period.

I am not saying that it is impossible she was a disconnected mother, or that Gerrish was a very connected father, but your post seems insane.

Cases, yes. Highly publicized cases. Postpartum psychosis is actually very common.

It is not "very common." It's actually quite rare - 0.1%-0.2% of births. Did you mean postpartum psychosis is a common reason given by women who kill their children and husbands?

You seem like a fairly nasty person, the way you are talking about this woman. It is positively ghoulish. It is possible to be interested in a case and speculate about what happened without being ghoulish.

. Thanks for the compliment. Wanna go back to pretending it got to hot for them?

It wasn't a compliment, I was never on Team Heatstroke, and try basing your theories on more than your own imagination if you want to sound like a thinking adult. You have zero basis for suggesting that this baby was neglected by either parent. The only basis you have for assuming that Chung was neglectful are statements about how involved Gerrish was as a father. They employed a nanny, which is something that probably 50% of the parents on this site do. He worked from home. She did other stuff. She didn't need to work to pay the bills, and there is no indication that that was a problem for anyone.

I 100% think that something strange happened here. Even if you are sure you are right, and even if you end up being totally right, it is still a very strange thing, and the length of time it's taking answers to arrive makes it all the stranger. That said, I think the heat was certainly implicated in at least one aspect of the deaths, if for no other reason than that as a person who has ever hiked in the heat before, I know it makes every dangerous situation that much more potentially dangerous. But I do not think it is the primary cause of the overall situation or likely no one on this site would ever have heard of these people.

It’s not about being right. It’s about the obvious and critical thinking. The length of time alone means one thing! Drugs or a toxic agent was found and deeper analysis is underway. A tox test can yield positive for meth. However, the presence of meth would not conclude a fatal dose was used, so back to the drawing board for quantitatives. If tox’ tests on this case had returned negative results, we’d know. Really quite simple.

Are you the poster who had issues with being moderated on other boards? Nothing about the tox results has been released so your speculation is baseless.

.
You’re pathetically behind. If you’re going to comment you should be versed in the subject matter.

In response to a question during Thursday's sheriff update, about whether toxicology results were back yet, Briese said, "Some are, yes. But we still do not have an exact cause of death yet."

Authorities say they have not been able to rule out the possibility of foul play.

Wow. Obvy things are heating up. Who lawyered up, if you know?
Yeah foul play…could be selling/providing drugs or tainting water container, or even worse.

[Anonymous]

I love this thread. It's fascinating seeing DCumers try to dissect inland California culture, as well as the mindsets of people who transplanted TO then FROM the Bay Area.

As someone who grew up in SF and vacationed not in Mariposa County, but Tuolumne and Stanislaus, I am inclined to think this is a murder-suicide committed by or to a drug-abusing vegan. That, or some freak accident involving the government, or they were murdered by illegal pot growers. There are illegal pot growers ALL over California, and they can and do kill people who accidentally stumble upon their operations.

The fentanyl thing is hilarious. I guarantee the sheriff would be shouting fentanyl from the rooftops if that's what killed them. Yes, toxicology takes a while blah blah blah, but the cops probably know everyone who this couple interacted with and these people seem too bougie to buy stepped on pot. I can also guarantee if they wanted weed, they could find good stuff either at dispensaries or from a local or Bay Area dealer.

Murder suicide committed by pissy druggy vegans or they snuck up on an illegal grow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The naïveté here astounds me.
Has anyone considered that not all women bond with their children? Or, even want them? Or attend to them properly?

Perhaps Gerrish was concerned baby M was being neglected during his office hours and employed a nanny so he could focus on his work without interruption and fear something might go wrong.

Maybe Chung didn’t want to “mother” and preferred screen and yoga time. Maybe she disliked dirty diapers, crying, snotty nosed, teething toddlers. Just because a few people say complimentary things doesn’t make it so. It only means what they observed appeared normal.

Off the top of my head I can list at least fifty cases of women
killing their kids. And most of the women had flattering comments about their parenting skills prior to murdering them.

You can list 50 cases of women killing their kids OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD?

Statistically it is not common, although yes it does happen, and is more likely to happen in the post partum period.

I am not saying that it is impossible she was a disconnected mother, or that Gerrish was a very connected father, but your post seems insane.

Cases, yes. Highly publicized cases. Postpartum psychosis is actually very common.

It is not "very common." It's actually quite rare - 0.1%-0.2% of births. Did you mean postpartum psychosis is a common reason given by women who kill their children and husbands?

You seem like a fairly nasty person, the way you are talking about this woman. It is positively ghoulish. It is possible to be interested in a case and speculate about what happened without being ghoulish.

. Thanks for the compliment. Wanna go back to pretending it got to hot for them?

It wasn't a compliment, I was never on Team Heatstroke, and try basing your theories on more than your own imagination if you want to sound like a thinking adult. You have zero basis for suggesting that this baby was neglected by either parent. The only basis you have for assuming that Chung was neglectful are statements about how involved Gerrish was as a father. They employed a nanny, which is something that probably 50% of the parents on this site do. He worked from home. She did other stuff. She didn't need to work to pay the bills, and there is no indication that that was a problem for anyone.

I 100% think that something strange happened here. Even if you are sure you are right, and even if you end up being totally right, it is still a very strange thing, and the length of time it's taking answers to arrive makes it all the stranger. That said, I think the heat was certainly implicated in at least one aspect of the deaths, if for no other reason than that as a person who has ever hiked in the heat before, I know it makes every dangerous situation that much more potentially dangerous. But I do not think it is the primary cause of the overall situation or likely no one on this site would ever have heard of these people.

It’s not about being right. It’s about the obvious and critical thinking. The length of time alone means one thing! Drugs or a toxic agent was found and deeper analysis is underway. A tox test can yield positive for meth. However, the presence of meth would not conclude a fatal dose was used, so back to the drawing board for quantitatives. If tox’ tests on this case had returned negative results, we’d know. Really quite simple.

Are you the poster who had issues with being moderated on other boards? Nothing about the tox results has been released so your speculation is baseless.

.
You’re pathetically behind. If you’re going to comment you should be versed in the subject matter.

In response to a question during Thursday's sheriff update, about whether toxicology results were back yet, Briese said, "Some are, yes. But we still do not have an exact cause of death yet."

Authorities say they have not been able to rule out the possibility of foul play.

The complete results are not back, you just posted that yourself. Seems quite likely that you ARE that poster.

[Anonymous]

I think Jeff made a great call by not creating a True Crime Forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love this thread. It's fascinating seeing DCumers try to dissect inland California culture, as well as the mindsets of people who transplanted TO then FROM the Bay Area.

As someone who grew up in SF and vacationed not in Mariposa County, but Tuolumne and Stanislaus, I am inclined to think this is a murder-suicide committed by or to a drug-abusing vegan. That, or some freak accident involving the government, or they were murdered by illegal pot growers. There are illegal pot growers ALL over California, and they can and do kill people who accidentally stumble upon their operations.

The fentanyl thing is hilarious. I guarantee the sheriff would be shouting fentanyl from the rooftops if that's what killed them. Yes, toxicology takes a while blah blah blah, but the cops probably know everyone who this couple interacted with and these people seem too bougie to buy stepped on pot. I can also guarantee if they wanted weed, they could find good stuff either at dispensaries or from a local or Bay Area dealer.

Murder suicide committed by pissy druggy vegans or they snuck up on an illegal grow.

You got it.
Pssst CA culture isnt much stranger than any other just bigger with more pissy druggy vegans they all over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love this thread. It's fascinating seeing DCumers try to dissect inland California culture, as well as the mindsets of people who transplanted TO then FROM the Bay Area.

As someone who grew up in SF and vacationed not in Mariposa County, but Tuolumne and Stanislaus, I am inclined to think this is a murder-suicide committed by or to a drug-abusing vegan. That, or some freak accident involving the government, or they were murdered by illegal pot growers. There are illegal pot growers ALL over California, and they can and do kill people who accidentally stumble upon their operations.

The fentanyl thing is hilarious. I guarantee the sheriff would be shouting fentanyl from the rooftops if that's what killed them. Yes, toxicology takes a while blah blah blah, but the cops probably know everyone who this couple interacted with and these people seem too bougie to buy stepped on pot. I can also guarantee if they wanted weed, they could find good stuff either at dispensaries or from a local or Bay Area dealer.

Murder suicide committed by pissy druggy vegans or they snuck up on an illegal grow.

You got it.
Pssst CA culture isnt much stranger than any other just bigger with more pissy druggy vegans they all over.

Lol now that's the truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The naïveté here astounds me.
Has anyone considered that not all women bond with their children? Or, even want them? Or attend to them properly?

Perhaps Gerrish was concerned baby M was being neglected during his office hours and employed a nanny so he could focus on his work without interruption and fear something might go wrong.

Maybe Chung didn’t want to “mother” and preferred screen and yoga time. Maybe she disliked dirty diapers, crying, snotty nosed, teething toddlers. Just because a few people say complimentary things doesn’t make it so. It only means what they observed appeared normal.

Off the top of my head I can list at least fifty cases of women
killing their kids. And most of the women had flattering comments about their parenting skills prior to murdering them.

You can list 50 cases of women killing their kids OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD?

Statistically it is not common, although yes it does happen, and is more likely to happen in the post partum period.

I am not saying that it is impossible she was a disconnected mother, or that Gerrish was a very connected father, but your post seems insane.

Cases, yes. Highly publicized cases. Postpartum psychosis is actually very common.

It is not "very common." It's actually quite rare - 0.1%-0.2% of births. Did you mean postpartum psychosis is a common reason given by women who kill their children and husbands?

You seem like a fairly nasty person, the way you are talking about this woman. It is positively ghoulish. It is possible to be interested in a case and speculate about what happened without being ghoulish.

. Thanks for the compliment. Wanna go back to pretending it got to hot for them?

It wasn't a compliment, I was never on Team Heatstroke, and try basing your theories on more than your own imagination if you want to sound like a thinking adult. You have zero basis for suggesting that this baby was neglected by either parent. The only basis you have for assuming that Chung was neglectful are statements about how involved Gerrish was as a father. They employed a nanny, which is something that probably 50% of the parents on this site do. He worked from home. She did other stuff. She didn't need to work to pay the bills, and there is no indication that that was a problem for anyone.

I 100% think that something strange happened here. Even if you are sure you are right, and even if you end up being totally right, it is still a very strange thing, and the length of time it's taking answers to arrive makes it all the stranger. That said, I think the heat was certainly implicated in at least one aspect of the deaths, if for no other reason than that as a person who has ever hiked in the heat before, I know it makes every dangerous situation that much more potentially dangerous. But I do not think it is the primary cause of the overall situation or likely no one on this site would ever have heard of these people.

It’s not about being right. It’s about the obvious and critical thinking. The length of time alone means one thing! Drugs or a toxic agent was found and deeper analysis is underway. A tox test can yield positive for meth. However, the presence of meth would not conclude a fatal dose was used, so back to the drawing board for quantitatives. If tox’ tests on this case had returned negative results, we’d know. Really quite simple.

Are you the poster who had issues with being moderated on other boards? Nothing about the tox results has been released so your speculation is baseless.

Idk exactly what your posed question refers to but you’re wrong. Initial toxicology tests are back per Briese. He spoke to this on 08-26. One can infer more advanced tests are now underway. Initial results could have confirmed opioids for example. Next toxicology step is to determine the exact opioid. The good news is we are nearly a month beyond that date so any day we might expect to know the drug of choice used for MS.

[Anonymous]

I had not seen the comment regarding foul play. Now I do believe this to be FA.

https://asamnews.com/2021/08/23/foul-play-not-ruled-out-but-no-sign-of-trauma-found/
So far they’ve found no sign of trauma, although they have not ruled out foul play.