Learn some real facts that The Curious Case of Natalia Grace show didn't show.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about The Curious Case of Natalia Grace.

This is to provide an additional layer of publicly available information and hopefully clear up some of the misinformation based on the TV show.

I’m a criminal defense attorney. I represent people accused of crimes, from murder to misdemeanors. I fight hard for all my clients and the fact that I win cases upsets people that want my clients to be convicted. 

The truth is, sometimes people are falsely accused of crimes as in this case. Our client was innocent of the crimes charged. Unfortunately, some people are upset because we won.

The people upset have watched a TV show, The Curious Case of Natalia Grace, and naively think they know everything there is to know about the case. They have had no part in the case, were never our client, and don’t even know me. They falsely accused me of engaging in some sort of trickery to win the case or not caring about the truth only about winning. 

Actually, because I cared about the truth, we proved the facts to the courts and the prosecutors and these facts forced them to dismiss the criminal charges and eventually the entire case.

The following information is from publicly available documents.

No one likes losing and the prosecutors hate the fact they lost the case against the truth. Even the court of appeals mentioned how unhappy the prosecutors were in losing based on the law and the facts. See, the court order, page 24.

1. Was our office involved in changing the age of Natalia?

No, we were not. I don’t practice in that area of the law (adoptions, age changes, etc.). I have never met the attorney, Michele Jackson, that was involved in the age change.

2 Did Kristine Barnett have court-appointed attorneys, Public Defenders?

Yes, Kristine initially hired us but she was found to be indigent (poor) by the court. Therefore, our firm and another firm were court-appointed to represent her. 

3. Did the prosecutors appeal the court’s decision to grant a motion to dismiss several charges against our client, Kristine Barnett?

Yes, the prosecutors did file an appeal and lost. They filed for transfer to the Indiana Supreme Court. The Indiana Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s decision, effectively dealing another defeat to the prosecutors. You can read the Indiana Court of Appeals opinion by here. 

4. Was there a hearing regarding changing the date of birth of Natalia?

Initially, no. It was granted based on the filing of documents by the previous attorney, Michele Jackson, (not me).

Later, there was a hearing regarding Natalia’s change of birth. Testimony was given by experts and the court determined that Natalia was an adult, affirming her 1989 date of birth. I was not involved in that case either.

5. Did the Barnetts pick the age for Natalia?

To my knowledge, no. I am unaware of any court documents or court testimony showing the Barnetts specifically requested Natalia’s age to change to 22. 

6. Did the TV show/documentary, The Curious Case of Natalia Grace, reveal all the facts of the case?

No, there were many facts that were not mentioned in the documentary. Anyone that watches that TV show and thinks they know all the facts is clearly being misled. 

I worked on the case for over 3 years and watching some 30-second clip of a deposition or a 3-hour TV show cannot cover all the facts.

7. Did the Law Office of Mark Nicholson represent Michael Barnett?

No, our office did not represent Michael Barnett. Attorneys Terrance Kinnard and Vincent Scott represented Michael Barnett and I was not part of their team. Nor was I part of the documentary when they were interviewed.

8. Did the DNA results prove that Anna Gava was the birth mother of Natalia Grace?

The DNA results were not independently verified, there were issues with the chain of custody and the results were inadmissible in court.

I’ve worked on cases where the State’s DNA expert claimed my client’s DNA was present. However, when the results were independently tested, it was proven my client’s DNA was not present.

Therefore, in this case, since we never had the opportunity to depose Anna Gava, I don’t know what she would have said under oath. Also, we didn’t have access to have the DNA results independently verified, so I don’t know what the true results of the DNA show. 

I do know that the prosecutors didn’t call her, (the alleged mother) as a witness, which to me implies that there was something not credible about her statements and potentially the DNA results.

9. Was Anna Gava given money for claiming to be Natalia’s birth mother?

Yes, there was a report that Ana Gava was paid for her initial interview(s) claiming to be the birth mother of Natalia.

10. Was I paid by the TV show for the use of the deposition in The Curious Case of Natalia Grace?

No, I did not request nor was I offered any money.

11. Did our office provide documents for the show?

No, we did not provide documents for use in the TV show. We did not produce the show.

12. Who provided documents in the documentary?

The documents were released by the prosecutors, the court, Michael Barnett, his attorney and Natalia Grace. We did not release any documents for them to use for the show.

13. Did the X-Rays prove Natalia’s date of birth?

No, the X-Rays didn’t prove Natalia’s date of birth. Natalia suffered from a bone disorder that impacted the growth of her bones. It is absolutely false to claim that some X-ray proved her date of birth to be in 2003. The physical evidence didn’t prove that conclusion.

14. Did I claim that the prosecutors lied to the court?

Yes, in my motion to dismiss and in court I claimed the prosecutors were lying to the court and that I could prove it. You can read the public transcripts of the Motion To Dismiss Hearing on July 27, 2020, page 12, lines 17-19.

15. Did Kristine and Michael Barnett choose the new date of birth for Natalia Barnett?

No, the Barnetts did not choose the date of birth of Natalia.

16. Did police Detective Clouse tell the Barnetts to hire an attorney to re-age Natalia?

Yes, according to the police reports he wrote and public court documents. Also, see page 15 of the Defense Memo to Dismiss that law enforcement suggested Natalia be re-aged.

17. Did police Detective Clouse suggest they hire attorney Michele Jackson to re-age Natalia?

Yes, according to the police reports he wrote, and public court documents.

18. Is the original prosecutor still working for the Tippecanoe County prosecutor’s office?

No, as the writing of the post, prosecutor Jackie Starbuck was relieved of her duties. Whether it was voluntary or involuntarily I don’t know.

19. Did any attorneys for Kristine Barnett violate any rules to win the case?

No. Some people may not like the fact that we won but the law was followed and reviewed by various courts over a period of several years.

When all the facts came out, the prosecutors finally realized that they didn’t have a criminal case and filed a motion to dismiss the case. 

We filed our first motion to dismiss on January 29, 2020 over three years before the prosecutors did. In other words, it took the prosecutors over three years to figure out what we knew from the start…the case should be dismissed!

20. Did the jury want to convict Kristine Barnett?

No, Kristine Barnett’s case never went to trial. The prosecutors dismissed her case due to a lack of evidence to prove their case.

21. Who represents Kristine Barnett now?

After her case was dismissed, our court appointment ended. Currently, it is not known if she has an attorney representing her.

22. Was this case about allegations of physical abuse?

No. There were no allegations of physical abuse. Therefore, the prosecutors never filed any physical abuse (battery) charges.

23. Did the prosecutor try to submit jury instructions that were contrary to the law and the facts?

Yes and the court said what they were doing didn’t make sense. Read the public transcript of the Motion To Dismiss Hearing on July 27, 2020, page 134, lines 15-19. Also, read the Dismiss for Brady Violations based on the prosecutor's withholding evidence and ignoring key facts.

24. What about those people claiming the physical evidence proves she was a child?

First, the people claiming that the physical evidence proved Natalia was a child have probably only watched the TV show and have not seen or heard all the evidence.

Second, they don’t even know what the evidence shows. They only know what they were told by someone on a TV show. Now they’re upset, making threats, false allegations and acting like they know everything about the case.

Unfortunately, some people don't want to know the truth, they can't handle the truth because they just want a conviction. They can believe what they want and say what they want without consequences.

I'm bound by the law, facts, a code of ethics and my faith in GOD. Those things helped us win this case, not lies, deceit or mistruths.

The doctor that mentioned X-Rays don’t lie, may seem like a good sound bite for the TV show. However, people lie and the doctor was not an expert on age. He was trying to violate the law and the court order. Therefore, I challenged him on his improper statements.

Ultimately, when all the facts came out, the prosecutors had to dismiss the criminal case because they had no case. The evidence just didn't support what they were trying to do. Here is a copy of the prosecutor's motion to dismiss. And here is a copy of the court's order dismissing the case.

25. Is there more to come?

Yes, Natalia (Grace) Barnett is giving her version of events this summer. Then there will be a movie with Ellen Pompeo scheduled to play Kristine Barnett and Imogen Reid is supposed to play Natalia Grace.