OH BRAYLEN NOBLE: Missing from Toledo, OH - 4 Sept 2020 - Age 3 *Found Deceased*

1599250867614.png
Police, firefighters searching Swan Creek near Byrne Road for missing 3-year-old

Toledo Police and Fire & Rescue crews are searching for a 3-year-old boy who went missing at Friday afternoon at Hunter's Ridge Apartments.

According to police, Braylen's mother suspects he fell out of a third-story window.

Crews including divers and K-9 are currently searching in the woods and creek nearby.


TPD, Toledo Fire searching for missing nonverbal 3-year-old

Toledo Police and Fire are searching for a missing 3-year-old boy this afternoon and also are asking for the public's help in locating the missing toddler in south Toledo.
Braylen Noble, 3, was reported missing on Friday from the 3400 block of Gibraltar Heights Drive at the Hunters Ridge apartments. His mother called police to say the boy apparently fell out of a third-floor window and she couldn't find him, police said.

The child last was seen wearing a long-sleeved red and white Mickey Mouse shirt.

Toledo Police and Fire personnel have been searching for the boy since 12:25 p.m. Friday.

Braylen is nonverbal, police said. Toledo Police and Fire personnel are searching the areas of South Byrne Road and Airport Highway, and the area by the apartment complex in the 3400 block of Gibraltar Heights Drive.

Officers and detectives are now conducting door-to-door searches of the entire apartment complex, police said at 2:42 p.m.

Also assisting police and fire personnel with the search are Toledo Metroparks Officers. Teams are conducting an area search of surrounding buildings, dumpsters, under vehicles and more, police say.

Drones have been deployed to assist the search and Toledo Fire and Rescue Department's water rescue unit is also on Swan Creek to help search. K9 units are also being employed to help search.

Police say the child's mother has been taken to the Safety Building as a matter of protocol in such search situations.


MEDIA - BRAYLEN NOBLE: Missing from Toledo, OH since 4 Sept 2020 - Age 3
 
Last edited:

Community responds to guilty pleas in the case of Braylen Noble​

“What is important to know in the end is that neither of these women were charged with the actual death. It was indeed an accident. I don’t think there’s anyone involved in this case that would think otherwise,” said Kurt Bruderly, Johnson’s lawyer.”

Both Ms. Johnson as well as Ms. Cox have suffered an inordinate amount of pain and suffering, and they are still grieving.

“I know it may be difficult for some people to understand. Some people believe that they were involved in his passing, but to know you essentially lost a child. He ended up coming up deceased is every parent’s greatest fear,”


At Hunter’s Ridge Apartments, the scene of the crime, some people in the community feel like the two should be facing a harsher punishment.

“I feel like they could’ve gotten a longer time because it innocent child got killed. Two years, I don’t think it’s enough,” said a community member who preferred to remain anonymous.

“I’m glad that they’re finally getting something, but because of the obscurity that the story has, I feel like they definitely could have a much longer sentence,” said Andrew Reed, who lives at Hunter’s Ridge.

Both Cox and Johnson are scheduled to be sentenced on November 14th.
 

Community responds to guilty pleas in the case of Braylen Noble​

“What is important to know in the end is that neither of these women were charged with the actual death. It was indeed an accident. I don’t think there’s anyone involved in this case that would think otherwise,” said Kurt Bruderly, Johnson’s lawyer.”

Both Ms. Johnson as well as Ms. Cox have suffered an inordinate amount of pain and suffering, and they are still grieving.

“I know it may be difficult for some people to understand. Some people believe that they were involved in his passing, but to know you essentially lost a child. He ended up coming up deceased is every parent’s greatest fear,”


At Hunter’s Ridge Apartments, the scene of the crime, some people in the community feel like the two should be facing a harsher punishment.

“I feel like they could’ve gotten a longer time because it innocent child got killed. Two years, I don’t think it’s enough,” said a community member who preferred to remain anonymous.

“I’m glad that they’re finally getting something, but because of the obscurity that the story has, I feel like they definitely could have a much longer sentence,” said Andrew Reed, who lives at Hunter’s Ridge.

Both Cox and Johnson are scheduled to be sentenced on November 14th.
I don't know how to feel and NOTHING convinces me this was an accident either.

At least grandma says she is guilty, mom won't even go there.

So wiped and tired, I can't quite wrap my head around what the pineapple means as it relates to this case. Or what it proves...

This little boy deserves justice, I guess he got or will get a very SMALL measure of it.

The defense atty. says he doesn't think anyone related to this case thinks this was anything but an accident. Really? I haven't seen any such proof of that.
 
Obstruction of justice. ATTEMPTED child endangering?
If he really "fell out a window", I'm pretty sure that was successful child endangerment.
2.5 years max. :(
He would have gotten hurt falling out of a window. And would be screaming. 30 MONTHS?! AND ALFORD PLEAS ALLOWED?! WTH?!!!. And for it to be the mother and grandmother. Nice family values. How about 30 YEARS?!.
 
So wiped and tired, I can't quite wrap my head around what the pineapple means as it relates to this case. Or what it proves...
The only thing the pineapple really tells us is that he died within a few hours of eating it. They said he had pineapple for breakfast, so that would put a time of death a few hours after breakfast, whenever that was.
He was apparently last seen around noon that day, so it doesn't really tell us much. If he had eaten it for breakfast but the story was that he disappeared that evening, that would be a red herring.
 
The only thing the pineapple really tells us is that he died within a few hours of eating it. They said he had pineapple for breakfast, so that would put a time of death a few hours after breakfast, whenever that was.
He was apparently last seen around noon that day, so it doesn't really tell us much. If he had eaten it for breakfast but the story was that he disappeared that evening, that would be a red herring.
and that at least they were telling the truth about that part of whatever happened.
 

Braylen Noble's mother, grandmother avoid jail time in 3-year-old's death​

The mother and grandmother of Braylen Noble avoided jail time Monday in Lucas County Common Pleas Court.

Dajnae Cox, Braylen's mother, was sentenced to two years of probation. Bobbie Johnson, Braylen's grandmother, received one year of probation.



Johnson was first to appear in front of Judge Ian English on Monday. Her attorney Kurt Bruderly told the court that this is her first time in trouble with the law and that she has held a steady job, calling her a model citizen. He argued that her obstruction of justice charge did not contribute to Braylen's death.

Bruderly asked for a probationary sentence for Johnson, which is what she ultimately received.

"This has been a long process and our family has grieved, we're still grieving," Johnson said. "It's going to take a long time to get over, we'll probably never get over it."

After Johnson spoke, English said that the case was pending for so long because the court needed to investigate all of the allegations that came in. "The sentence will fit the obstructing justice crime," English said.

Dajnae Cox was up next.

In court, Cox's attorney said that Braylen got out of the house and into the pool, which is where his body was found.

"The dispute from her statement is that she was trying to extrapolate how it was possible for the child to escape the house," English said. "And from the state's perspective, they believe that she was denying the fact that there was some type of accidental event in locking the door and preventing this child from escaping."

Cox's attorney added that it was a negligent act and that Cox has PTSD from it.

"He was my pride and joy and now we don't have him anymore," Cox said. "I would never ever do anything intentionally to hurt him."


The prosecutor then told the court the investigation into Braylen's disappearance was complicated by Cox's refusal to take responsibility for her actions.

"The reason for the investigation as a homicide is because this woman [Cox] lied, simply for the reason she didn't want to take responsibility that the child got out of the house on her watch and died and it was her fault, and she exacerbated the situation by coming up with a preposterous story about what happened," prosecuting attorney John Weglian said.

Cox's attorney asked for that she be sentenced to community control, which is similar to probation.

"Here's the bottom line: it's not easy to supervise a child or adult," English said during Cox's sentencing. "We cannot as a society start jailing parents who suffer the accidental death of children."

English sentenced Cox to community control for two years. She is required to hold a job, work towards her GED and be screened for counseling for her mental health.

"This was accidental and our society needs to know that you have two grieving women and a grieving family here because of an accident," Bruderly said. "So I know everyone wants justice for Braylen and where that is a fantastic idea, it's really hard to get justice when it's an accident."
 
IF this was all true, I MIGHT agree with it all.

BUT is it true?

That child was NOT in the pool or there were a LOT of screw ups in this case.

Grandma is one thing but at a point after being charged, she took responsibility or changed her plea. Mom NEVER did to my knowledge.

The judge's remark about hard to watch an adult or child is true, however, what does that have to do with LYING to the police and obstructing an investigation? That's a choice she made. Did mom and grandma even know he was in the pool when they did that (IF he was)? Probably not. So obstructing actually for all they knew could have been the difference in her son's life or death and finding him.

I have not forgotten what went on during this case and it sure seemed that child's body was moved.

They talk of grandma being a model citizen but nothing of that is said about mom. Not that she should be convicted on that basis but maybe her word for what happened shouldn't be taken at face value.

This case was HOKEY throughout and still is. It abruptly changed at a point in the investigation. And their obstruction made it about impossible to be sure what happened and thanks to that, I guess they basically got away with it if things are not as stated didn't they?

If that child had been found in the pool the first search or even the second, etc. MAYBE I could buy all this but it wasn't the case.

But even giving the entire benefit of the doubt, I agree to a point no one should be jailed over a sheer accident BUT they LIED AND COST all involved looking for him and investigating AND they lied to LE and obstructed justice. And for that they don't even do COUNTY jail time??? THAT part was not an accident.

What time did this happen? Was it daylight or night time? Could he have been found or saved had they told the truth, BEFORE he entered the pool? No one saw it? Or him? Really? WHERE are these answers? Huh? Seriously? Where are they? WHO last independently saw this child? WHEN? I'm serious.

This case LACKS answers. Basic ones.

RIP baby boy.
 
Sorry if I've missed info or misunderstand it, but has the mother and grandmother said anything different from what they'd reported at the time?
 
Sorry if I've missed info or misunderstand it, but has the mother and grandmother said anything different from what they'd reported at the time?
They stated from the beginning that he "must have fallen out the window".
Only now are they "admitting" that they "may have been negligent" and not watched him so he slipped out.

Like GrandmaBear, I would be understanding if I believed that's what actually happened. I don't want to vilify a family who made a mistake. But if it's a mistake you don't lie about it when your child is MISSING. If he's really missing, don't make up a story about him falling out a window because you're afraid to get in trouble about not locking a door?

And it's really hard, if not impossible, to believe that he was in that pool the whole time.
 
They stated from the beginning that he "must have fallen out the window".
Only now are they "admitting" that they "may have been negligent" and not watched him so he slipped out.

Like GrandmaBear, I would be understanding if I believed that's what actually happened. I don't want to vilify a family who made a mistake. But if it's a mistake you don't lie about it when your child is MISSING. If he's really missing, don't make up a story about him falling out a window because you're afraid to get in trouble about not locking a door?

And it's really hard, if not impossible, to believe that he was in that pool the whole time.
Forgive me, you're saying that they did or didn't say something different?

For me, it's never been hard all to believe that he was in the pool the whole time.
 
Forgive me, you're saying that they did or didn't say something different?
Yes, they are saying something different.
The original story was that he must have fallen out of a third-story window, sustained no injuries, and walked away.
Now they're saying he must have slipped out of an unlocked door and walked directly into the pool. (Which I'll admit is WAY more believable. But the story should not have changed!)
 
They stated from the beginning that he "must have fallen out the window".
Only now are they "admitting" that they "may have been negligent" and not watched him so he slipped out.

Like GrandmaBear, I would be understanding if I believed that's what actually happened. I don't want to vilify a family who made a mistake. But if it's a mistake you don't lie about it when your child is MISSING. If he's really missing, don't make up a story about him falling out a window because you're afraid to get in trouble about not locking a door?

And it's really hard, if not impossible, to believe that he was in that pool the whole time.
Yep. Entirely agree with all parts of this. See it exactly the same way.

We said back when this boy was not going to likely see any justice and sadly it appears he isn't. Not even minor county jail time for lying.

And then I'd add also that once they found him they basically acted and talked as if the case was closed without any kind of extensive autopsy. The entire case felt as if from that point on they would have let it go but for some of the public that kept complaining and talking of it.

There is something truly wrong in this one. The way LE just accepted that he was found where it was determined more than once he was not is just beyond belief.

It felt as if more than once a favor was being done here and it feels that way again. I remember saying and thinking who are these people that a break was being cut or so it seemed or something like that. There is no indication at all they are anyone of import and yet here again we hear grandma is a model citizen, etc., etc. Where is it she works...

I don't know. Probably nothing to do with anything but just saying SOMETHING is wrong in this one. We watched this immediate search basically live over the days. I was impressed with the way the area was basically cordoned off, the apartment complex, etc. and police were ever present or so it seemed and yet it still seemed someone managed to move him...

Falling out of that window was one of the dumber stories I have heard.

I don't trust the findings in this one whatsoever. There are people who have done more jail time over a minor traffic violation than these two who did NONE. Lying when their own baby is at risk for all they knew right? Who would do that? You would tell the truth so that he was found. Seems to indicate to me they must have known he was dead. And if they knew he was dead, this was NOT a child who went out an unlocked door alive.
 
Yes, they are saying something different.
The original story was that he must have fallen out of a third-story window, sustained no injuries, and walked away.
Now they're saying he must have slipped out of an unlocked door and walked directly into the pool. (Which I'll admit is WAY more believable. But the story should not have changed!)
I don't see that the story's changed and it seems to me that the Alford pleas reflect that.

Yes, I recall the original story, but my takeaway was simply that they hadn't see it happen. Now do I believe it's even possible? Indeed, because it's happened where children have fallen from equal or farther heights and yes, sustained either no injury or only minor injuries.
 
I don't see that the story's changed and it seems to me that the Alford pleas reflect that.

Yes, I recall the original story, but my takeaway was simply that they hadn't see it happen. Now do I believe it's even possible? Indeed, because it's happened before where children have fallen from equal or farther heights and yes, sustained either no injury or only minor injuries.
There are many reasons it isn't believable. I am also going to guess LE saw and examined the window and the state of it and more. No one saw this child fall out of a window. No one saw him on the ground. No one saw him playing or heading for the pool. No one saw him go through the FENCE to the pool. No one saw him go into the pool. No one heard him yell. And the actual window, what is below it and more has been talked of, etc.

I'll go with LE who does not believe at least that much nor did the judge. Who knows what was said in any interviews or deals and pleas? We sure aren't privy to it. They may well have changed their story.

My emphasis is not at you but at the case.

We can differ. For me, I don't buy it and I'm not even sure I buy that he left the apartment on his own AT ALL. IF he did, any caring parent would give cops EVERY BIT of truth so he could be found safe as QUICKLY as possible. And they didn't.

They were charged with obstruction for a reason. Their story wasn't true.

This child is DEAD and even after he "escaped" mom and grandma apparently did not want him found alive. and quickly. Why? IF that were true and I don't think it is.
 
Actually, it's both, but what I'm trying to get at is how is the use of such even suggestive that the story changed?
I do not understand the point and when did someone say it was?

From the article in post #228:

"The dispute from her statement is that she was trying to extrapolate how it was possible for the child to escape the house," English said. "And from the state's perspective, they believe that she was denying the fact that there was some type of accidental event in locking the door and preventing this child from escaping."
Cox's attorney added that it was a negligent act and that Cox has PTSD from it.

Their own attorney added that not locking the door was a negligent act it appears. They are not saying it was the window any longer I take it.

In addition, they pled to the charge of obstruction which is lying. They did not plead not guilty.

I can't believe the PTSD remark. The child is dead and what she allegedly suffers is brought up? SMH.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
3,038
Messages
246,136
Members
985
Latest member
teatalkswiththeresa
Back
Top Bottom