ARUBA - Robyn Gardner, 35, Maryland woman missing in Aruba, 2 Aug 2011 - # 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
No judgement against you, just curious ... would you leave a country knowing someone you arrived with was missing?

I wouldn't of course. I believe at the point he decided to leave was after he had given his statement, the searching had been called off (temporarily) and Robyn's mother was also leaving.
I'm certainly not taking his side but at present I don't see anything that makes him guilty of what ... no body ...
He sounds like a a classic unstable nut if one can believe the stories that are coming from people who are very intent to be in the media spotlight. Being a nut and unstable doesn't make him a murderer.
I do not believe Carrie and her dtr one bit. At the end of July according to statements on their facebook they were going to be going to new York for a big interview and that was before Robyn was missing. The only interviews they have done are on the case of Robyn. At the end of July would they have known Robyn was going to disappear? A lot of hinky stuff going on by some hinky people. R.Forester another one; was asked to keep quiet so he doesn't ruin the case and he keeps on talking. I really think Robyn was over him and his control too. There were at least two reported occasions that someone felt a need to call police on RF and Robyn. I can't imagine any female wanting to live like that, so I don't believe RF is genuine either. So far all the people who have inserted themselves seem to have had prior problems.
The big problem, imo, is that Aruba Prosecutors are basing some of their info on these media *advertiser censored* who are out for their 15 minutes of fame.
 
This photo was taken the evening of her disappearance. Does his hair look like it has been in the water there?

3f72dc50ada88fa607112f0.jpg



http://api.viglink.com/api/click?fo...di-su-senora&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13135463372341

Yes. That is pretty much what your hair would look like if you had been in the water. He is still in his swimming trunks as well, so he didn't get dressed or anything like that before calling for help.
 
No judgement against you, just curious ... would you leave a country knowing someone you arrived with was missing?

If you believed that they had been swept out to sea and it was a week later, ya. What would be the point of staying?
 
I spoke with the guy. Has a friend who is a neighbor of one of the women who was sexually assaulted in 2010. Says she didn't press charges because she has been assaulted before and didn't want to go through it all again, plus GG was putting nude pictures of her in the neighbor's mailboxes, etc. Not pressing charges made it all go away.

Of note is that this is NOT the same woman who filed the report in April of 2010, which I posted about up thread. But this woman was also beaten and choked.

That means there are two different women who were seriously sexually assaulted in 2010 (and perhaps more) but who did not press charges and put this man behind bars.

He also added that he knows GG paid for many things for Robyn, ie. a sugardaddy, such as rent, breast impants, dental work, bills, cash, etc. and is a known sugardaddy in the area.

So, you spoke to a guy who has a friend who was a neighbor to a woman who claims to have known GG? You don't supposed that information might have been distorted or just made up through all that convoluted route? And how would this guy know all about the relationship between two complete strangers? Or about GG's other relationships, particularly being a "known sugardaddy in the area". That is not something people talk about. I think your friend is just making stuff up.
 
So, you spoke to a guy who has a friend who was a neighbor to a woman who claims to have known GG? You don't supposed that information might have been distorted or just made up through all that convoluted route? And how would this guy know all about the relationship between two complete strangers? Or about GG's other relationships, particularly being a "known sugardaddy in the area". That is not something people talk about. I think your friend is just making stuff up.

He is not a friend. Believe what you want. I don't know him.
 
Authorities in Aruba are investigating an insurance policy taken out by Gary Giordano before his trip to Aruba as a possible motive in the disappearance of missing Maryland woman Robyn Gardner.


The investigation into the $1.5 million accidental death policy on Gardner -- which names Giordano as a beneficiary -- has been confirmed exclusively with ABC News by a police source in Aruba, as has the fact that he purchased the pricier one-year policy over the cheaper, more commonly purchased five-year policy.

http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=14321496
 
Other interesting titbits from the same source:

http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=14321496


Restaurant staff said that Gardner seemed woozy while the two ate; Giordano later told police they'd been drinking vodka at the Marriott before dining, and that she'd taken sleeping pills earlier in the day, the police source said.

Video also shows Giordano in his rental car parked in the back of the bar and restaurant. The Toyota Rav-4 had tinted windows, so no one else in the vehicle can be identified. Giordano parked the car in the back parking lot twice; he told police that he wanted to park in the shade, the police source told ABC News.

Authorities said that that they found blood on a rock behind the dive shop at the Rum Reef Bar & Grill, which is the last place the two were seen together.

Three days after the search for Gardner began, Giordano got within feet of leaving the country before he was stopped at Aruba's airport, after passing through security and U.S. customs -- where he told customs he had to change flights because of weather, and inexplicably told officials that his travel companion was "taking another flight." When arrested, authorities say Giordano was drenched in sweat.
 
Please don't flog me for saying this, but I believe it's only a matter of time before they let GG go, and unfortunately, I don't think LE has much of a choice but to do so. It seems way too convenient that Robyn goes missing while on vacation with a man with an abusive past dating back s0 many years, covering so many different women. It's clear that MOST LIKELY a crime was committed, and MOST LIKELY he was the one who committed it.

The sad thing is, there is no EVIDENCE (that we know of) that anything criminal happened to Robyn. We can speculate until the cows come home, but if no evidence exists, we don't have enough to continually hold GG.

It is at this point, during cases such as this one, that I think it is SOOO important to reiterate the need for us, as women, to make better choices for ourselves. No one deserves to be victimized, but we have to do a better job at choosing not to put ourselves in situations in which the likelihood of a crime being committed against us is increased.

Again, NO ONE deserves to be hurt or killed because of a bad decision, but that being said, it feels like it's long been an epidemic in this country to harm women who put themselves in risky situations. LE tries as hard as it possibly can in cases like these, but if no evidence of a crime exists, their hands are tied.

I try to teach my girls that no one will be able to protect them better than they are able to protect themselves. THINK before accepting invitations, etc. to go places with men we either hardly know, or who have a seedy past. If our gut says something is wrong, LISTEN TO IT. LE can only do so much after a crime has already been committed, especially if there's no physical evidence of anything actually happening. We have to do better at protecting us against becoming another statistic.
 
How can he get a insurance policy on someone he isn't married too and without her permission? I hope they solve this case soon and not have it drag on like the Holloway case.
 
The sad thing is, there is no EVIDENCE (that we know of) that anything criminal happened to Robyn.


Most people don't really understand the concept of "evidence". Evidence is anything that a court allows into a trial and a fact-finder considers relevant. Erratic behavior, inconsistent stories, even a nervous disposition or bags under one's eyes...all could be evidence. Along with many, many more things.

An accidental death insurance policy, taken out by the suspect in the name of the victim with the suspect as the beneficiary, is very much "evidence". Along with many more things.

All this talk about needing a "body" is also overstated. A person could certainly be convicted without a body. There are plenty of cases where remains were eventually found, but they yielded no real information on the cause of death, never mind who the perp was. Yet there was still a conviction.

All this talk about how RG should have been more careful makes me a bit nauseous. People are entitled to live their lives as they wish. Even in the worst case scenario, she was not doing anything illegal. She may have lived a bit on the edge, but many people do. They should be able to make that choice without society dismissing crimes committed against them as somehow their own fault.

Sorry...I am new around here and I don't normally get preachy. Just feeling a bit disgusted this morning, having read about some of the new developments in this case.
 
OK, I think it's all becoming more clear now. Accidental death insurance policy...sleeping pills...blood. The only question is, where did he take the body (or the then-unconscious victim, as the case may be)?

It has been said that LE were concerned about GG's version of events and the time difference. Perhaps this is all they have?

Everything else so far as been circumstantial, - The blood on the rock would have been a good piece of evidence if there was hair, brain tissue material. But we don't know. Even if it was her blood on the rock, it could be explained away as a nose bleed, or she may have fallen over because of the drink, sleeping meds. We don't know at this stage.

The insurance policy maybe explained by working for GG by doing modelling work?
Again it could be considered circumstantial or not even important.

It all points to GG but there is always the possibility that he's innocent?
 
It has been said that LE were concerned about GG's version of events and the time difference. Perhaps this is all they have?

Everything else so far as been circumstantial, - The blood on the rock would have been a good piece of evidence if there was hair, brain tissue material. But we don't know. Even if it was her blood on the rock, it could be explained away as a nose bleed, or she may have fallen over because of the drink, sleeping meds. We don't know at this stage.

The insurance policy maybe explained by working for GG by doing modelling work?
Again it could be considered circumstantial or not even important.

It all points to GG but there is always the possibility that he's innocent?


Of course, there is almost always the "possibility" someone is innocent.

All of those "explanations" you mention are, I suppose, possible. But they are in the nature of evidentiary rebuttals, at best. I suspect they are very close to enough for an indictment, then it would be a jury question, who they believed.

The blood, however, could be a lot more than you perhaps think. Her blood on a rock near where she was last seen acting groggy, under the circumstances, may well be the straw that broke the camel's back.
 
"Authorities in Aruba will now be focusing the search for Gardner on an area away from the beach where she went missing, but within the area where she could've traveled in that 4 p.m.to 6 p.m. timeline. The FBI is sending bloodhounds, while Curacao and Aruba riot cops and volunteers will comb the area."

It appears that LE is thinking the same thing posted by many on here, focusing on an area that they could've traveled in approx 2 hours where he could've dumped the bodies. Also seems like after the initial report and search, he seems to panic and tries to leave the country and says RG was taking another flight etc...
 
Most people don't really understand the concept of "evidence". Evidence is anything that a court allows into a trial and a fact-finder considers relevant. Erratic behavior, inconsistent stories, even a nervous disposition or bags under one's eyes...all could be evidence. Along with many, many more things.

An accidental death insurance policy, taken out by the suspect in the name of the victim with the suspect as the beneficiary, is very much "evidence". Along with many more things.

All this talk about needing a "body" is also overstated. A person could certainly be convicted without a body. There are plenty of cases where remains were eventually found, but they yielded no real information on the cause of death, never mind who the perp was. Yet there was still a conviction.

All this talk about how RG should have been more careful makes me a bit nauseous. People are entitled to live their lives as they wish. Even in the worst case scenario, she was not doing anything illegal. She may have lived a bit on the edge, but many people do. They should be able to make that choice without society dismissing crimes committed against them as somehow their own fault.

Sorry...I am new around here and I don't normally get preachy. Just feeling a bit disgusted this morning, having read about some of the new developments in this case.

For the most part, I totally agree with you. Unfortunately, for some reason beyond my comprehension, the notion of "evidence" has been elevated to mean that without a body there can't be a murder, and without DNA or surveillance video showing the crime as it's committed, there isn't enough to go to trial. Personally, I'd like to see "common sense" reintroduced as part of probable cause.

I just feel that until the definition regarding what does and does not constitute "evidence" is changed, a lot of people- women and children in particular- suffer the consequences due to the criminal behavior of others. Every single day that I log on to this site, there seems to be 10+ new cases that involve missing women and children. Too often, no one is charged due to a lack of "evidence". It is horrifying.
 
For the most part, I totally agree with you. Unfortunately, for some reason beyond my comprehension, the notion of "evidence" has been elevated to mean that without a body there can't be a murder, and without DNA or surveillance video showing the crime as it's committed, there isn't enough to go to trial. Personally, I'd like to see "common sense" reintroduced as part of probable cause.

I just feel that until the definition regarding what does and does not constitute "evidence" is changed, a lot of people- women and children in particular- suffer the consequences due to the criminal behavior of others. Every single day that I log on to this site, there seems to be 10+ new cases that involve missing women and children. Too often, no one is charged due to a lack of "evidence". It is horrifying.

It can work both ways.

If GG behaviour has led LE to believe he is suspicious, it is their job to determine if there is enough evidence, behaviour or otherwise to convict him. You don't have to have a body but you do have to have evidence. Otherwise going to court is a waste of time and of course nobody wants to see an innocent go to jail.
 
In light of the life insurance policy, I will have to alter my original opinion that there was no reason for GVG to harm Robyn.
 
Have they confirmed the insurance policy and that it was Robyn's blood? The way I am reading it, it's they are investigating a policy. Do they have the actual policy?

I can't help but recall that they accused Dave and Beth and Max DeVries family of being involved in an insurance scam, and that Dave had a huge insurance policy on Natalee, which was completely false.

But I do have to keep reminding myself that there are new people in charge in Aruba then there was in '05.

If its true this time then it is a huge piece of circumstantial evidence that points towards a motive, why would he list himself as a beneficiary of that large a policy for a friend. If she had taken out the policy, she wouldn't have listed him as the beneficiary. I do recall reading that there was a policy but it was a trip policy with her mother as beneficiary, but that might have come from his lawyer so probably should be taken with a grain of salt as words from a defense attorney.

His story that she had taken sleeping pills and then drank vodka and then went snorkelling?!? Who would take someone they were with snorkelling in that condition?!? And who takes sleeping pills early in the day, knowing they would be going out for the day?!?


JMHO
 
Most people don't really understand the concept of "evidence". Evidence is anything that a court allows into a trial and a fact-finder considers relevant. Erratic behavior, inconsistent stories, even a nervous disposition or bags under one's eyes...all could be evidence. Along with many, many more things.

An accidental death insurance policy, taken out by the suspect in the name of the victim with the suspect as the beneficiary, is very much "evidence". Along with many more things.

All this talk about needing a "body" is also overstated. A person could certainly be convicted without a body. There are plenty of cases where remains were eventually found, but they yielded no real information on the cause of death, never mind who the perp was. Yet there was still a conviction.

All this talk about how RG should have been more careful makes me a bit nauseous. People are entitled to live their lives as they wish. Even in the worst case scenario, she was not doing anything illegal. She may have lived a bit on the edge, but many people do. They should be able to make that choice without society dismissing crimes committed against them as somehow their own fault.

Sorry...I am new around here and I don't normally get preachy. Just feeling a bit disgusted this morning, having read about some of the new developments in this case.


My bolding

Couldn't agree more. There hasn't been any evidence shown that she was even living on the edge, just assumptions and lots of speculation because of Giordano's past history, and that she met him on match.com.

JMHO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
100
Guests online
805
Total visitors
905

Forum statistics

Threads
589,927
Messages
17,927,759
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top