Found Alive CA - Sherri Papini, 34, Redding, 2 November 2016 - #14

[katydid23]

Very tired ,so I probably was not clear... I did not feel manipulated by anything I saw on 20/20 this evening... Thanks again. Goodnight.[emoji8]

I guess I was confused by your post, which I replied to:


Quote Originally Posted by TigerLilly View Post
Wow Iona...bingo! Your post made me realize why something bothered me about the interview. I cant go into detail because it might be considered to be criticism of KP and I dont want to be critical of him. Im sure he is doing his best to deal with this tragedy.
I will say, IMO, there doesnt seem to be much concern by those involved about two women abductors being at large in the community.

I too wonder where the anger and outrage, pleading with the public for information and clues is. It's the same feeling I had after the search for SP stopped...like the public is being asked to believe certain things, accept the situation and move along. NOT directing this at anything in particular anyone in particular has said. Just the general tone of this case is different than any I have come across.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

posted by Iona:
Indeed... On all fronts, it feels very disconcerting as well as "Manipulative"...

 

[5CentsWorth]

You think KP is not angry with the perps?

I put myself in his place. The last thing he wants to do is call them out, place his focus on them, make them think he knows who they are, imo. He wants to keep his family safe. No need to poke the bear and make them want to cone after his family again.

Exactly!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bonjoviblonde]

This is one...all dated Nov 8 https://www.google.com/amp/www.lati...61108-story,amp.html?client=ms-android-att-us

If someone has mention of the earbuds before that day please reply, thx

I still don't see where that says they weren't found together. It states her husband found her phone and earbuds. That's been said in every article I've read as well as spoken by him and the Sheriff. They also showed a photograph of it on tonight's 20/20

 

[Classy1]

Beginning to think this case will never get solved.

I don't feel that way at all. If two women are involved, chances are they'll tell someone else. JMO

 

[AceDetective]

Sure it seems logical if a kidnapper tells you to drop your phone, you would just drop it and not care if it breaks but I don't think it's far fetched to believe she just placed it on the ground. It only takes a couple of seconds to bend down and back up. Why would you place it on the ground instead of just dropping it? I don't know exactly but you're probably in shock and not thinking clearly and it might just be instinct to not drop and break your phone. I don't know that I would do. It's hard to say when you're not in that situation but I could see myself quickly bending down maybe and laying my phone down. Maybe they held a gun to her and said "Put your phone down" instead of "Drop your phone" or told her to move slowly. We just don't know. I get why some are questioning it but I've thought about it and I don't think it's that odd now.

If somebody points a gun at you and says, "put down your phone," you're going to assume they're stealing your phone and put it down gently.

 

[RANCH]

This is one...all dated Nov 8 https://www.google.com/amp/www.lati...61108-story,amp.html?client=ms-android-att-us

If someone has mention of the earbuds before that day please reply, thx

Looks like poor writing. In the same article it says this.

He pulled the “Find my iPhone” mobile app, which led him to Old Oregon Trail and Sunrise Drive. There, he found his wife’s cellphone and earbuds with strands of hair attached to them, Sherri Papini’s sister, Sheila Koester, said.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-sherri-papini-missing-california-20161108-story.html

 

[Gardener1850]

This is one...all dated Nov 8 https://www.google.com/amp/www.lati...61108-story,amp.html?client=ms-android-att-us

If someone has mention of the earbuds before that day please reply, thx

From that link:

He pulled the “Find my iPhone” mobile app, which led him to Old Oregon Trail and Sunrise Drive. There, he found his wife’s cellphone and earbuds with strands of hair attached to them, Sherri Papini’s sister, Sheila Koester, said.

They were found all together and at the same time.

 

[Iona]

I guess I was confused by your post, which I replied to:


Quote Originally Posted by TigerLilly View Post
Wow Iona...bingo! Your post made me realize why something bothered me about the interview. I cant go into detail because it might be considered to be criticism of KP and I dont want to be critical of him. Im sure he is doing his best to deal with this tragedy.
I will say, IMO, there doesnt seem to be much concern by those involved about two women abductors being at large in the community.

I too wonder where the anger and outrage, pleading with the public for information and clues is. It's the same feeling I had after the search for SP stopped...like the public is being asked to believe certain things, accept the situation and move along. NOT directing this at anything in particular anyone in particular has said. Just the general tone of this case is different than any I have come across.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

posted by Iona:
Indeed... On all fronts, it feels very disconcerting as well as "Manipulative"...

No actually you replied to my answer to Tiger Lilly's post... And I answered you, goodnight...

 

[counterintuitive]

I don't see why the chord wrapped around a phone would necessarily untangle if someone dropped it on the grass from maybe three feet, anyway.

ETA: Unfortunately, I am a professional iPhone-dropper.

I just tried it with my phone, the cord came loose enough to not look placed there.

 

[bonjoviblonde]

I don't see why the chord wrapped around a phone would necessarily untangle if someone dropped it on the grass from maybe three feet, anyway.

ETA: Unfortunately, I am a professional iPhone-dropper.

True and in the photo it wasn't as if it was completely tightly wrapped. The ends were kind of loose on top. So it makes sense to me either way. Dropped or placed gently.

 

[gitana1]

If anyone is feeling worried about being abducted...

IF someone in a vehicle stops and asks you for assistance or directions regardless of their gender... do *not* approach the vehicle -- stay at a safe distance.

IF someone brandishes a weapon, learn what to do / not do by talking to your police department. Take a self-defense class. Become informed. Learn to use and carry pepper spray.

Many years ago Oprah had on an expert and his advice was: NEVER allow yourself to be taken to a 2nd location. If someone threatens you or has a weapon, you are better off running away, causing a scene...doing anything but complying with them to take you somewhere. Because the most harm that will likely befall you will occur wherever the perp takes you, which will be at their discretion and not to your advantage.

Yes! I wrote a long post all about that on one of Sherri's threads. The three T's - test, threaten and transport. That's what predators do. You have a better chance of surviving shot on the street than in the trunk of some psycho's vehicle.

 

[Cher352]

I''ve seen it in many cases and articles on politics where the reporter does indeed try to protect their sources... e.g.

The official, who was not authorized to speak about an ongoing investigation and......

The source, who is not authorized to speak on the record due to the sensitivity of the ongoing investigation, said Pagliano has provided.....

It appears when the sheriff backlashed against the reporter, he went back and put in the name of the person

To me I see the problem is that the reporter (before he revised his article) stated the person was the spokeswoman (unnamed) for the Sheriff's department instead stating it was just someone in the department. And since she wasn't even willing to give the reporter her last name he should have realized he was getting a personal opinion.

So I say he was very unethical in his original story and only came clean after the sheriff called him on it.

 

[kaen]

Thanks, mods. I haven't been here this late at night. You are doing great work!

 

[Tricia]

Hey Everyone,

Thanks for keeping the discussion lively and sticking to the facts. It was a very interesting night.

This thread will open in the morning.

Remember, the final two episodes of The Killing Season on A&E featuring Websleuths members airs tonight ( Saturday) 9:00 pm Eastern. Discuss The Killing Season Cases RIGHT HERE

Tricia

 

[Sillybilly]

Thread is open folks :sunshine:

 

[indridcold]

I'm glad this is getting so much attention on Websleuths, the general media hasn't seemed to care too much about this case...which really is a shame, the more eyes on it, the closer we are to getting answers in an absolutely horrific and puzzling story. Keep it going you guys!

For the time being, I will go with what the victim has said until more facts are in.

 

[bluesneakers]

Hey Everyone,

Thanks for keeping the discussion lively and sticking to the facts. It was a very interesting night.

This thread will open in the morning.

Remember, the final two episodes of The Killing Season on A&E featuring Websleuths members airs tonight ( Saturday) 9:00 pm Eastern. Discuss The Killing Season Cases RIGHT HERE

Tricia

The FINAL two? I'm not ready!

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

I took it as; sometimes Sherri was hooded, other times the woman were masked in some way.

(Post MM is referencing): http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ng-2-November-2016-14&p=12975381#post12975381


So if I understand you correctly, you believe that sometimes she was not hooded? And that would explain why she could then see the women’s eyes/bandanas/earrings. To me that makes sense, too.

But, if unhooded, why couldn’t she then also see their clothing, shoes, hands, skin color, comparative height, weight, etc.?

The point I’m making is, if she were unhooded in their proximity at any time (or, hooded with eyeholes), it seems she would see more than just their characteristics from the neck up. So we’d expect to have a description of not only the women’s bandanas, eyes, and hair, but also their relative sizes, clothing, skin color, etc., unless those women also had their clothes covered from the neck down, (eg. wearing sheets).

*And, to add to the muddle, it has been reported (KP has relayed) that she was hooded THE ENTIRE TIME:

Papini's head was covered with a hood the entire time, making it hard to see anything but the women's eyes as they abused her. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz4RknNyCMT

So that’s my question: I’m curious to know how she would see only their eyes if wearing a hood (all the time). Whatever position I’m in, if I have a pillowcase over my head, I can’t see someone’s eyes...though possibly I could see their feet, shoes, legs, or slacks through a crack of light at the bottom of my hood.

JMO, but to me, whichever way you look at it, this sentence still makes no sense:

"A hood was also placed over her head so she could only see the eyes of her captors, who police describe as two Hispanic women"

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz4RkawKj5p
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

[Dee10]

I found this article extremely interesting (comparing with other cases):

http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article118614788.html

Since detectives are releasing few new details in the Papini investigation, experts said they’re watching the case closely for updates – just like everyone else. But unlike some of the armchair denouncers who have raised the “Gone Girl” storyline and accused Papini of lying, they’re keeping an open mind.

“There’s no one thing that you can look at that says, ‘Oh, this didn’t happen,’ ” O’Toole said. “Although it’s very unusual, you can’t say that unusual (equates) to it didn’t happen.”

 

[daninillinois]

I am trying to understand some facts about this case. I have some questions. Maybe other people have the same questions. Perhaps people who have followed the case more closely than I will be able to answer them.

-- I am intrigued by the Daily Mail story about Christine Everson spotting a woman who looked like SP in a pickup truck driven by a Hispanic man and a Caucasian man. The story says Ms. Everson belongs to “a sex-trafficking coalition in Redding.” (I presume that means anti-sex-trafficking.) Question 1: Does anyone know if said coalition is, or is connected to, Project Taken, or is connected to CG in some way? The story also says she provided the plate number of the pickup to authorities. Question 2: Has anyone in the media asked the sheriff if he believes the owners of this plate are involved in the crime, or asked him simply whether the owners were tracked down and checked out?

I understand we have reason to read the Daily Mail with a jaundiced eye, and also to be skeptical about people who sell exclusive stories to the DM. Here’s how I look at it. If we think Ms. Everson is credible, Question 2 above would be critically important. It’s the closest thing we have to a sighting of SP during her captivity—and it comes with a license-plate number. If we think Ms. Everson is not credible, then I think it’s important for us to figure out why she approached the media with her story. Many posters here on WS have pointed out the amazing coincidence that a famous anti-sex-trafficking expert and kidnapping-release consultant happened to run in the same circles in Redding as the Ps. Take that as you will. I would add that it is also a startling coincidence that a woman who belongs to an anti-sex-trafficking coalition in Redding is the only person to have come forward with an eyewitness account of seeing SP in her captivity. Speaking just for myself, I might be able to believe one of these coincidences; the two of them together are hard for me to comprehend.

--I read the exchanges in the last thread about FBI involvement. I understand that KP thanked the FBI in his GMA statement and that the sheriff in mid-November said the FBI was involved, but not very much. Question 3: Why hasn’t the FBI been involved more? Question 4: Is the FBI still involved? Usually in kidnapping cases reporters will go the local FBI and ask for details. I haven’t seen any evidence that reporters have. Has anyone seen such a reference? Typically the FBI will say that they can’t provide details in an ongoing investigation. That doesn’t tell you much, but it provides the important fact that there in fact is an ongoing probe. I am surprised that no journalists have gotten at least to this level of inquiry. Or maybe I missed it.