Found Alive CA - Sherri Papini, 34, Redding, 2 November 2016 - #13

[katydid23]

If the cellphone was planted by the perpetrator, as has been suggested, there'd be DNA and fingerprints on it that don't match Sherri or anyone else who'd have contact with her phone. But I'm venturing a guess they'll find no such evidence.

That's what gloves are for...:wink:

 

[citigirl]

I just got back after spending way too much time looking at Facebook & Instagram and blogs of some of the people involved. The reverse ransom is just so odd-it's tossed about like it's an actual thing. Horrible to say, but wow-everybody seemed to know all along that this was some sort of kidnaping, as opposed to what an expected outcome is after that length of time had passed. Does anyone have more info on Mr Gamble's military service? Length of time, branch etc? When I read one of his blurbs, it seemed lifted from the movie Taken-about him possessing a particular set of skills. Are there employees? Is he a one man show? It seems like a bunch of people promoting themselves in various social media platforms, yet they have minimal social media presence on their personal accounts. Most people I know who use social media for business purposes link heavily from their personal pages, with the theory that if a personal friend "likes" or "shares", it ends up spreading their business message much more readily. This is all so hinky.

Thanks for the summary. I don't have time to do all that reading, and I appreciate this little report.

 

[Mariposa]

You mean unknown to us, right? Unless Sherri, due to the trauma, doesn't recall those details, she most likely has provided them to LE. Or no?

I find it surprising that the info given so far is about the captivity and release and not the actual abduction. For public safety I would think knowing how they abducted her is a crucial detail.

 

[cluciano63]

I saw it early on. Definitely does not fit the 'supermom' vibe they want out in public.

Also it reminds me of the infamous blog post...

 

[sumzero]

JMO/MOO
I didn't read every RR III post. He assiduously defended KP in the posts I did read. I can't provide the links so I won't detail what I remember. To me, it was one of several red flags. Then, RR III was relatively silent. SP is found alive, and KP's actual FIL (also KP) is featured in the Daily Mail.

Do we know there actually was an anonymous donor?

EXCLUSIVE: Family of kidnapped California mom found bound and dumped at roadside speak out about her 'miracle' Thanksgiving return after she was mysteriously held captive for three weeks
Daily Mail - November 25, 2016

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...hanksgiving-promised-children-d-holidays.html

He defends Keith and it's a red flag? I'll bet, if he stayed silent, there'd be someone who'd make that an issue. "Why isn't someone defending Keith?" Know what I mean? Seriously, this family cannot win.

 

[Redcliff]

Ken P. is not KP's FIL. He is his biological father. KP's biological mom and dad have been divorced many years despite the DailyMail's atrocious reporting which even has the mother's name and the date of KP/SP's marriage wrong. Other than posts thanking people, the rest of the family is letting KP do all the talking about SP's horrific treatment for the most part, which seems only proper.

 

[daninillinois]

Wow, that looked more like an infomercial on the part of Lisa Jeter and Cameron Gamble than it did a news interview.

I'm all for creative solutions to help recover more missing persons.

But, advertising private ransom paying services, provided by individuals who make it known that they aren't concerned with justice, is something that LE has gotta find concerning.

How many for-profit kidnapping schemes (real or fake) would such a business inspire, especially in areas with serious drug problems?

How many legitimate kidnappings would initially be regarded as potential for-profit schemes if a service like that were to gain ground across the country, as Gamble seems to desire?

I'm a little surprised that interview was aired, actually.

Very well said, yllek. I will be surprised if CG's statement in that clip--that people sending a bunch of money to him and PT in order to get sex trafficking victims released ought to be "a model for future cases"--doesn't turn out to be the key to the entire SP case from the very beginning. I will add that in my opinion KP's rush to the cameras and microphones amounts to providing dramatic backdrop for the "infomercial," as you call it.

 

[Hope4More]

Seems exactly like a super-mom to me.

FWIW. I'm as anti-gun as it's possible to be. Didn't even want to allow my DS to have water guns (relented on that, lol). But... if I were ever subjected to even a fraction of what this woman went through, I'm pretty sure I'd reconsider that view, unapologetically.

 

[RANCH]

He's within his legal rights to be out there with his mission, even if no one likes it. I highly doubt there's going to be some sudden rash of kidnappings because of this guy.

On top of that, there's no guarantee this guy will pay $$$ and then the kidnapper gets a one way ticket to life in prison (they usually get caught in the end).

I was trying to figure out what kind of law was broken that could be used to "put the brakes on" to stop this guy. I couldn't think of anything.

Just because someone does something we may find objectionable doesn't mean they can be stopped from doing what they want to do. JMO

 

[IdeMae]

I think this was the work of the MS-13 gang folks!

Interesting. Connection?

❤

 

[DizzyB]

I did the LinkedIn on CG, ended up in a bunch of barely breathing websites that really provided no concrete info on this man's background. I'm chasing my tail...

 

[commonsenseuniverse]

Not sure why you're sure her nose was broken when she exited from the kidnapper's car. I haven't seen any info anywhere stating that "fact."

No, we don't know the extent of her injuries. It's possible, I guess, they're even worse than what her husband itemized and LE didn't refute.

Her not staying in a hospital doesn't mean much of anything, except perhaps a need to not be near strangers of any kind, which after her ordeal, I can easily imagine would be the case.

True, a lot of this is up to opinions based on limited information. There is conflicting information also. I am just going by the preponderance of information that I personally read. For instance, I could happen to read more information that had the information/facts wrong or right. I try to limit any opinions on a preponderance of information from main street media sources.

 

[creepcrusher]

BBM

I think that's a mischaracterization. Based on Gamble's public statements, he makes rescuing a victim his priority. He lets LE handle bringing the perps to justice. At least, that's how I understand it. As for the video, yes, he's an entrepreneur who, in addition to believing he made a difference in this case, probably hopes it gives his business/ministry more exposure. Personally, I highly doubt it had anything to do with Sherri's release. I did note that he said no money ever changed hands. So, he's confirming that no ransom was paid.

Okay that last statement he made about , "No money exchanging hands," made me pause. Why didn't he just say , "No money was exchanged?" I feel like his answer may have been a little tweaked. I could totally be wrong though. And I'm not angry at the man. I don't know how I could be, since Sherri is alive and home. I don't think the results would've been the same if he hadn't joined the picture- whether he paid the money or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[flightfulbird]

What has stuck in my mind from day one...On SP's wedding "blog" she states something about not knowing how to live with a man - or something along those lines. She was previously married and divorced. I don't know why I find that so odd - I guess my OCD is coming out.

It bothered me too. It was disingenuous to say the least. It (IMO) exhibited a need to persuade something other than reality, for some reason.

 

[Mariposa]

BBM

I think that's a mischaracterization. Based on Gamble's public statements, he makes rescuing a victim his priority. He lets LE handle bringing the perps to justice. At least, that's how I understand it. As for the video, yes, he's an entrepreneur who, in addition to believing he made a difference in this case, probably hopes it gives his business/ministry more exposure. Personally, I highly doubt it had anything to do with Sherri's release. I did note that he said no money ever changed hands. So, he's confirming that no ransom was paid.

CG said "we don't care about justice" in his video plea.
http://www.redding.com/news/local/Negotiator-posts-video-to-find-Sherri-Papini-402089545.html

He also basically promised on the ransom offer website (since taken down) that law enforcement would not get any info from him. And warns LE not to hassle him about it either.

Thats a bit different from saying he just lets LE handle the justice process. In fact it sounds kind of obstructive of that process-- and proud of it.

 

[mahoolin]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sherri-papini-abduction-husband-details-california-moms-rescue/

Per Bosenko, "the brand" was a message rather than "a symbol" Sounds like just one.

I hope so, yikes

 

[sumzero]

I find it surprising that the info given so far is about the captivity and release and not the actual abduction. For public safety I would think knowing how they abducted her is a crucial detail.

During his press conference after Sherri was found, the sheriff said he believed she was abducted while on an early morning jog. Whether he has changed his mind since then, I do not know.

http://abc7news.com/news/full-video...ence-on-safe-return-of-sherri-papini/1624387/

 

[flightfulbird]

Sherri is considered a victim. Someone with access to her accounts, presumably, took down that item on Pinterest, for whatever reason. Why is it being posted here?

I didn't post it but I will admit I was very interested in seeing it. I don't feel that this was victim blaming in any way shape or form - merely showing another side. If things can be posted that show the victim's lifestyle and habits and beliefs, it can show pieces of the puzzle that might not look like they fit, at first.

 

[katydid23]

It's almost like this strange phenom of questioning literally everything, that everyone says, has taken hold. I have "signature" long, dark, curly, insane hair. Everyone that knows me, every picture of me, displays my "signature" long, dark curly, insane hair. It's what people would immediately recognize me by. It's not an issue.

Oh, and for the record, I also have thin eye brows and pierced ears. But not a heavy accent. No relation, I assure you.

And I don't understand why the implication is of him using the term her 'signature blonde hair'----does it somehow imply he was involved or she was faking the abduction/beatings? I don't understand what the meaning behind the criticism is .

 

[creepcrusher]

It bothered me too. It was disingenuous to say the least. It (IMO) exhibited a need to persuade something other than reality, for some reason.

I'd read in a recent article that her first husband was in the military. They were only married for two years- possibly together less. I'm wondering if her response was laced with sarcasm for people that know her. Her ex may have been deployed most of their marriage. Just a thought.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk