FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – 3/29/08

Jaliek Rainwalker’s Maternal Grandparents Seek Custody of Missing Boy

We believe in leaving no rock unturned in our search for the truth about what happened to our grandson, Jaliek Rainwalker.  He disappeared while in the care of our son-in-law, Stephen Kerr, who has been named a “Person of Interest” by the police.  We do not think that Jaliek ran away, a twelve year-old boy in his pajamas does not fall off the face of the earth without a trace without someone seeing him or knowing what happened to him.  We believe the note from Westchester was a hoax, since the writer did not have the courage to sign the note and it was sent to seven media outlets instead of the parents, grandparents or police.  The note was meant to draw attention away from the investigation of inconsistencies in statements from and behavior of the last known person to see Jaliek alive, Stephen Kerr.

While we believe that there is a very small chance that Jaliek is still alive and well after five months of searching and pleas through the media for help or clues regarding his  whereabouts or what happened that night, even that small chance deserves our attention.

Therefore, we have decided to pursue seeking custody of Jaliek so that he knows that he has a place to return to, if he is still alive, where he will be loved and protected from the emotional abuse we feel he was subjected to in the recent past.  His life and well being have been, and always will be, important to us.  Jaliek, like all our grandchildren, is a remarkable child who deserves no less.  It matters to us to know where he is and what happened to him on November 1st. We believe the truth will prevail and be known soon.

We also hope that there will be changes forthcoming in the aftercare for children that go through therapeutic foster care and then subsequent adoption.  Prior to adoption, the concerns and feelings of the child are as important as those of the foster care parents and counselors involved in the process to ensure the future well-being of the child. However, after adoption, advocacy and oversight for the child stops.  Help is there for the parents, if requested, but no one is there to watch out for the well-being of the child. Surely, if New York State feels it is important to continue paying the parents for caring for the child, some oversight would be appropriate, if not only for concern for the child, but also out of respect to the taxpayers who pay for this care.  Adoptive parents who need assistance in paying for the care of their children surely would not mind some type of review or aftercare in exchange for the help. We feel that money received, without continued advocacy for Jaliek, actually perpetuated a difficult living situation until things became untenable, because the need for the money outweighed the concern for the well-being of the child.

We feel that if you wish to adopt a child it should be out of love and no subsidy from the state should be required.  If we are successful in getting custody, we would not pursue or expect any subsidy and would be glad to participate in any aftercare programs that would benefit Jaliek.

Praying to see our grandson again,

Barbara and Dennis