It’s been well established in dozens of news articles that Kate Sharp of Birmingham used sharp practice and subterfuge to snatch a loved and wanted infant from his breastfeeding mother. The mother spoke out and online records from the Alabama Courts demonstrate that the essential facts given by the mother were true.
The Huffington Post broke the story and with mouths agape, it seemed we all were watching a legally sanctioned kidnapping unfold.
If you are unfamiliar with the Baby Elliott story, you can read more about it below or at links available in related stories on my blog. Elliott’s mother, Kimberly Rossler of Mobile had originally considered adoption but changed her mind prior to Elliott’s birth. She informed all involved she intended to keep and care for her little boy and as most of us would, assumed that notification was enough. After all, she was still pregnant. Elliott had not even entered the world.
The attorney involved, Donna Ames, withdrew from the case and Kimberly assumed the matter was closed. Weeks later Kimberly gave birth and took her precious boy home to begin their lives. Yet unknown to Kim, Kate Sharp lay in wait, knowing that Kimberly was required to file a final withdrawal with the court. Playing on Kim’s naiveté, Kate allowed the all deadlines to pass that would’ve given Kimberly any chance and then forcibly had Elliott taken. He was just three weeks old.
The story of this horrific child snatching went viral across the internet and television news. It was discussed in public and private forums; blogs were written, a Facebook page went up and it made news across the world. Readers expressed shock and disbelief that this was allowed to occur. “Surely there was more to the story,” some exclaimed. How could someone more powerful just enter your home and steal your breastfeeding child? How was this legal? It was the stuff nightmares are made of.
There wasn’t more to the story. Like a piece of meat, a parcel of land or the title to a beat-up car, Alabama law allowed this child’s fate to be reduced to a piece of paper and the concept of property.
There wasn’t more to the story. Like a piece of meat, a parcel of land or the title to a beat up used car, Alabama law allowed this child’s fate to be reduced to a piece of paper and the concept of property.
As Kimberly fought in the courts, discussion about the case and adoption law continued. Online petitions to legislatures were created, Alabama’s laws were contrasted with that of other states, and while a troll or two might occasionally rear their head, the discussions were overall beneficial as well as educational. Many found that they had made assumptions about child welfare and the law that simply weren’t true. Ideas were exchanged and a fundraising drive was started for the mother. As time went on and updates were scarce there was a waning of interest, but many were still transfixed. The idea that a baby could be taken by a stranger and from a mother who loved and cared for him was beyond aberrant to ethical people. It was a jarring assault on all we hold dear.
As I mentioned in a previous post, discussion on the Baby Elliott case seemed to take a sharp nose dive in 2017. There were accounts of online posts, comments and blog entries being deleted. Those who had previously supported Kimberly went suddenly silent. Then in December of 2017, the Facebook page “Bring Baby Elliott Home” disappeared.
Now we know why.
In a desperate effort to hide what she had done, Kate Sharp and her lawyer father were sending threatening letters to those who blogged about the case or created online petitions to change the law. And not only was she threatening, she brought suit against Facebook as well as individuals. Presumably, these individuals had supported Kimberly Rossler or had spoken out against the child snatching.
In the suit, Kate claimed she was “cyber-bullied.” It’s not unusual for perpetrators of horrible acts to claim victimhood in order to justify or take attention away from what they’ve done. They often point fingers but offer few details about their own actions.
Like Teacher78 who commented on this blog almost three years ago, I would question the judgement and morals of anyone who wasn’t deeply disturbed by what Kate Sharp has done and has been allowed to get away with. The snatching of a child she knew was loved and wanted was beyond diabolical and horribly inhumane. But feeling so further grandiose and entitled as to intimidate or sue those who called her out? That’s pathological.
The sad paradox is that the Alabama Supreme Court allowed Kate Sharp to use a poorly constructed, unethical law to steal a loved and wanted infant. That’s simply unthinkable – yet in the end that same Court did not prevent her from using that law without consequence.
You can read the Supreme Court decision here.
Story on the decision in Birmingham News
Links for more information
One Year Later Mother Continues Fight for Son
Huffington Post – Wrongful Adoption
Loving Families 
So it sounds like a entitled spoiled brat pitched a fit because she was caught stealing a baby. If the courts let her get away with it, why didn’t she just change her name and move across the country? Why did she sink all the $$$ and energy in a coverup when she could have just disappeared from the media? Why stir the pot? Revenge? Greed? This is so twisted.
LikeLiked by 1 person
These are all very good questions. It also indicates we, as a society, need to be doing much more screening of potential adoptive parents and that adoption law needs child-focused reform.
LikeLike
I just read the rest of your blog stories on this. This is the most awful thing I have ever heard of happening in my home town. We need to all pray for little Elliott and his mother, Kimberly. I am so sad that this awful woman has been allowed to do these terrible things. 😦
LikeLike
Like I’ve said all along… baby Elliot will find all of this, and realize what a scam Kate Sharp is. Can you imagine answering to him, as to why she didn’t give him back to his pleading mother?!?!! The truth will come out. I’ve followed this story for years, and am still hopeful for a reunion for Kimberly and Elliot!!
LikeLike
It is well known among psychological experts that adopted children need to know the truth of their origins while young. Adoptees almost always have challenges but those who fare best can’t remember being told of their adopted status because it was openly and age appropriately discussed with them from a very young age. It’s simply what’s best for their understanding of self, familial connection and their lifelong mental health. Given the heinous and inhumane nature of how Kate Sharp snatched him and the fact that he will discover the truth of what happened, Elliott not only needs to know, he needs to meet and know his mother while young, It’s the only way to mitigate the psychological trauma he will experience in finding out the truth of how his adoptive mother acquired him. That said, I fear Sharp isn’t the type of person to put his long term needs above her own short term gains. I’m guessing she believes she can somehow exonerate herself or whitewash it all to Elliott. For those of us that have watched our malleable little darlings grow into independent minded young adults, we know that’s highly unlikely.
I always try to make sure my adopted children have ongoing, meaningful contact with their respective first families. It is not easy. In fact, it is sometimes gut wrenching. It takes a lot of grace; and lots of prayer. I have seen their understanding of things evolve over the years and although it is painful at times, they are living in truth and we deal. I hope they know they will be loved and supported by all involved family and that is what matters.
LikeLike
If he is like others whose childhood and biological parents were stolen from them, yes he will have an abrupt awakening but it will be the first of many. As he grows older, greater realization will hit him of how an entire family; an entire life; was forcefully taken from him. I doubt that he will see it as being “better off.” Few adoptees do. Given the brutally of this case, I really fear for what this will do to him. 😦
LikeLike
Claudia D’Arcy wrote the bring home baby Elliot page. It’s right there in the court document. I’m wondering why isn’t the page back up?
LikeLike
I just googled. She seems more self-publicity seeking to me and if she was sued for the case, she is not going to put it back up.
LikeLike
I heard she was bought but that doesn’t make sense. Why would someone working for children suddenly care more about CYAing unless it’s like you say and she’s really all about herself.
LikeLike
I would not want to speculate. Motivators do change with some when money is involved.
LikeLike
I fully believe when the Lord tells us “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” yet I hope Facebook drags her through bankrupting litigation, taking everything she owns for malicious prosecution because there is no doubt of this woman’s maliciousness. Anyone who could grab a tiny baby from their mothers breast and then act like the victim is evil personified and the devils own. I could say so much more but I will leave it with PRAY FOR THIS BOY AND KIMBERLY HIS MOTHER. Send up prayers that this baby is protected until mother and son are reunited. My heart just aches that Kate Sharp has gotten away with this. 😢
LikeLike
Any Lawyer I know would have advised her it was too risky, she likely to lose and to leave well enough alone. This is blind arrogance, aggression and/or greed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, I agree. But as was mentioned elsewhere, the psychopathology of someone capable of baby snatching isn’t exactly going to allow for rational decision making. They often play victim to avoid an honest self-appraisal. She was so caught up in denial and invested in her righteous narrative, she didn’t “see” the predicable reaction of good and moral people. She could not leave well enough alone. For example it is doubtful that I would have written any more on the subject had the Sharps not sent that absurd threatening letter. For that one act alone, they’ve gained notoriety with another few thousand people.
LikeLike