I'm wondering if they branded her face? Sherri may feel uncomfortable letting others see her. Just one possibility.
I HEAVILY lean away from that possibility for 2 reasons.
1) Keith's words:
“The officers warned me to brace myself.
My first sight was my wife in a hospital bed,
her face covered in bruises ranging from yellow to black because of repeated beatings, the bridge of her nose broken.
<addresses weight, bruises, chain marks, hair>
“She has been branded and
I could feel the rise of her scabs under my fingers. <addresses thrown from vehicle, etc.>
Visually, when describing seeing her, there is
NO mention of a visible facial brand - yet he is specific on multiple other things he sees on her face.
THEN he discusses other injuries, specifics.
THEN he mentions the brand. And it comes in the context of FEELING it under his fingers vs outright stating or even simply inferring he finds it by sight initially.
2) The CHP dispatch info:
So far the visual things they relayed appear to all have been correct and corroborated - restrained, at least in part, with or to something, and heavily battered.
If she had visible burns / etching / or even a tattoo visible on her face that hadn't been there prior, I'm quite confident that we'd have heard that included - even if 'only' in the context of "heavily battered w/ burns or cuts to her face" (as in not using the phrase tattoo or something)
And at that point, not being the primary agency of investigation, and that early on scene, it's not like they'd have been censoring what they were saying quite as much as the Sheriff would be now. Plus for all they knew it was possible it wasn't even SP just someone that looked like her, so something distinctive or fresh on her face would have almost certainly been transmitted.
Nor is CHP an agency (from my experience) one who does extensive "go to cars" / "give me a 10-21 (call)" / "D2" (dispatch 2 which doesn't air on things like Broadcastify) especially immediately on scene, meaning they're not an agency who naturally or by protocol tends to withhold items of potential major significance from the get go on scene.
And it's certainly not uncommon to have rather graphic and/or specific traffic from them early on scene - so again - the absence of any mention of something like burned/cut/carved/deep wounds/tattooing in that early traffic would make me lean away from a visible facial branding being a component.
But really, it's KP's own words themselves that most point away from a facial brand to me.
His specificity otherwise with details regarding facial or immediately visual wounds/changes lead me to believe he'd have either stated that outright - branded on the face or front of her neck - or else at least not referenced in the context of "feeling" the scabs of the brand.
I suspect elsewhere other than face / front of the neck - side or back - of the neck (possibly why they chopped off what seems to be perhaps be 'only' some of her hair - maybe doing so to make it visible) or somewhere likely to have been covered by clothing and/or a hospital gown and possibly blankets
But that's JMO.
Even traveled it at all hours of the night and day during moves & visits to friends and family. WAY less traffic at 4-5 in the morning than at any other time of day. Meaning, way less pings to cross ref with the towers near her abduction site.
