Found Alive CA - Sherri Papini, 34, Redding, 2 November 2016 - #17

[thirdfrombottom]

I don't mind trying to answer. For me there are two interesting puzzles here.

Puzzle 1: What was the purpose of the abduction? The fact that it doesn't fit neatly in one of the standard scenarios ...

--mentally ill. For this puzzle I actually think we have more data to chew on--ransom offers, videos, URL registrations--and I don't think it's all speculation.

+1000

 

[Eileen730]

Dont you all think there has to be a reason he knew she was abducted right away?

She could have just dropped the phone while jogging.
She could have fallen and was hurt.
Maybe walked back tot he house.

What was going on?

 

[cady]

In contrast to the DB article, this author of this one actually contacts CG and LJ and lets them present their side of the story. It certainly looks like CG inflated his credentials. Otherwise, there's nothing to suggest he "inserted himself" into the case.

CG seems to be a person who wears many hats. JMO

 

[thirdfrombottom]

Remember that Keith found it after his suspicious had already been aroused that Sherri had met with foul play (i.e., empty home, children not picked up, no response from Sherri to phone calls and text messages, her car still in the driveway, etc.). It wasn't like he came home and, before walking in the house, found her phone sitting in the lawn.

I have an iPhone with a headset and have thrown it over one-hundred (100) times. Not once did the headset land directly over the phone in the position of KP's photo. However, if one has the headset wrapped tightly around the phone, then the headset will depict a photo similar to KP's.

 

[sumzero]

I still think this was a for hire kidnapping.. I think someone hired two females (now maybe they work in trafficking, maybe their gangbangers, maybe both), but I think they were hired to rough her up. To terrorize her, and to scare the bejesus out of her. I just don't think SHE herself is the ultimate target. I think it is someone or multiple someone's in her family or life. I think when the person or persons behind the abductions was satisfied that the message was sent, or got what he/she wanted, I think SP was released as planned. I don't know if money changed hands. I don't know if some kind of agreement was reached. I just feel very much like what it right in front of us: victim SP, perps Two Latina women, are just the surface scenery. I hate anything to nr complicated or conspirital sounding, but I really think this whole damned thing was to hurt her for a reason.

Sorry for the repeated run on theory. I'm supposed to be decorating my tree before work and this case has just jammed up my noodle.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Do you think the people who were really the target got the message? Did they understand it was meant for them? If so, don't you think they explained it to LE? If so, LE should know the motive.

 

[Prahasaurus]

Remember that Keith found it after his suspicious had already been aroused that Sherri had met with foul play (i.e., empty home, children not picked up, no response from Sherri to phone calls and text messages, her car still in the driveway, etc.). It wasn't like he came home and, before walking in the house, found her phone sitting in the lawn.

People act differently in different situations. I don't think you can draw much from the fact he took some photos but didn't touch the phone.

But yes, I found it very strange. For starters, how did he know it was her phone without picking it up and examining it? Perhaps there were vital clues on the phone, a dialed number, an SMS, a picture, something. I would never have assumed there would be fingerprints on a mobile phone other than my wife's, even if I thought she was abducted. I would just have assumed she dropped it while running, or being grabbed, or perhaps even left something there for me to find. Criminals, after all, rarely leave these valuable things behind.

But again, we all act differently, so I wouldn't read my approach into anything he did, especially under such extreme stress.

 

[yllek]

Is it possible to point out where this has been discussed?
I know there are so many threads , so don't worry if you can't
Never heard anything about KP thinking like LE before

According to Redding’s local news outlet, The Record Searchlight, Keith works as a home theater specialist at Best Buy. His LinkedIn reveals that he has worked as an Elite Services Specialist at the store since October 2005, and graduated from Shasta College with an Associates Degree in Administration of Justice.

http://heavy.com/news/2016/12/keith...0-missing-california-mother-abducted-hostage/

 

[Rayemonde]

Thanks for this. My "hinky meter" has been pegging in the red since reading the Daily Beast article about CG the other day.

This new article, I haven't finished yet but was struck by the comment that the donor himself bought the Sherri Papini website domain.

Isn't it pretty simple to find out who registered a domain? One of you sleuthers want to take a crack at it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Someone did in an earlier thread, and found it was CG himself that registered the domain.

This admission stands out:

Gamble acknowledges that despite a claim he made in a tweet, Project TAKEN is “just a name” and does not have official status as a 501(c)(3) charity.

Gamble said while he applied the status, he never completed the application process. While he receives donations through Redding's Bethel Church, that money does not go to the organization itself, but to Gamble and his wife, he confirmed.​

The tweet where he announced this is still live, and he hasn't made any sort of retraction on the Facebook page.

Wow, that was a blatant lie, then
Why would you tweet that you just got charity status when you didn't, if not to mislead and scam people.

 

[sumzero]

I have an iPhone with a headset and have thrown it over one-hundred (100) times. Not once did the headset land directly over the phone in the position of KP's photo. However, if one has the headset wrapped tightly around the phone, then the headset will depict a photo similar to KP's.

KP's photo? It is displayed somewhere? If so, I missed it.

 

[Knox]

KP has some type of criminal justice related associates degree. When discussed, most thought that he took photos of the phone because he was aware that it might help. Basically, he thinks like LE.

BBM- struck me when you said "he thinks like LE".

I think we as WS members, also think like LE. Matter of fact, if you've been here any length of time. You've probably earned multiple honorary degrees in; criminal profiling (hinky meter), collection and preservation of evidence, jurisprudence, investigative techniques, electronic trails (rabbit holes), minutia expert, etc.

As a collective brain, and given the right resources. I wonder if we could solve this case? :thinking:

 

[sumzero]

People act differently in different situations. I don't think you can draw much from the fact he took some photos but didn't touch the phone.

But yes, I found it very strange. For starters, how did he know it was her phone without picking it up and examining it? Perhaps there were vital clues on the phone, a dialed number, an SMS, a picture, something. I would never have assumed there would be fingerprints on a mobile phone other than my wife's, even if I thought she was abducted. I would just have assumed she dropped it while running, or being grabbed, or perhaps even left something there for me to find. Criminals, after all, rarely leave these valuable things behind.

But again, we all act differently, so I wouldn't read my approach into anything he did, especially under such extreme stress.

He used the Find My Phone app to locate the phone. Whose phone would it be but hers? It's not like a jogging trail is strewn with lost phones.

 

[robthomaseyes]

The sheriff, IIRC, thought it was placed there because it was face up and the earbuds were wound loosely around it. I'm sorry, but if the phone was tossed to the ground, it has a 50/50 chance of landing face up. Also, the cord, if it was already wound loosely around the phone in Sherri's hand, would not necessarily have come unwound when it hit the ground.

I agree. I really think the most likely scenario is that when she was confronted by the women, who had a gun, they saw the phone and told her to put it down. I doubt there's any reason for them to have abducted her elsewhere and risked coming back to place her phone neatly. They wouldn't have wanted that phone with them in that car, no matter how long or short the trip, where it would ping and give away their whereabouts at certain points.

 

[Cannonball3804]

Someone did in an earlier thread, and found it was CG himself that registered the domain.



Wow, that was a blatant lie, then
Why would you tweet that you just got charity status when you didn't, if not to mislead and scam people.

He could be in hot water legally for claiming to have non profit status and letting that claim stand.

If he did the domain himself, I think it wouldn't be a stretch to believe that CG and the "donor" might be one and the same? Unless this LJ turns out to be credible and attests to the two of them being separate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Suglo]

Wow, thanks for the link.

CG's claim that he had to be practically forced to get involved is laughable, knowing what we know about him. Interesting he is trying to distance himself from his early involvement in this case, make it seem as he was a reluctant participant. Curious and curiouser...

I also find it very interesting he keeps trying to push his "new model" for handling kidnappings, and I found the FBI expert's explanation of the differences between kidnappings in the US and in developing countries very illuminating. It's almost as if CG thought he could use the developing world model effectively in the US, and saw value in being the guy to bring this model here. Look at how he keeps bragging about that.

While the FBI expert is clear it can't work here, and finds CG to be something of an opportunist and a joke.

What I find interesting is that KP was skeptical for at least a week to ten days yet the anonymous donor purchased the SP website immediately as if he knew they would go with his offer. So much talk about CG but not much about the AD. Like to find out who he/she/they really are.

 

[Lake16]

Does anyone know approximately how long SP was under medical supervision after being found alive? Less/more than 24 hours?

I believe she was brought in somewhere around 5-5:30 am and did not leave until sometime mid afternoon. But I'm not sure of the exact times.

 

[thedonna1]

People act differently in different situations. I don't think you can draw much from the fact he took some photos but didn't touch the phone.

But yes, I found it very strange. For starters, how did he know it was her phone without picking it up and examining it? Perhaps there were vital clues on the phone, a dialed number, an SMS, a picture, something. I would never have assumed there would be fingerprints on a mobile phone other than my wife's, even if I thought she was abducted. I would just have assumed she dropped it while running, or being grabbed, or perhaps even left something there for me to find. Criminals, after all, rarely leave these valuable things behind.

But again, we all act differently, so I wouldn't read my approach into anything he did, especially under such extreme stress.

I have been following, but not posting. As a runner, who runs with a headset listening to music, I would definitely not just "drop" my phone without realizing it, as the music would stop. I think he knew there was foul play at that point. I think he was smart to take the photos.

 

[Prahasaurus]

He used the Find My Phone app to locate the phone. Whose phone would it be but hers? It's not like a jogging trail is strewn with lost phones.

Ok, fair point. But there is no reason to assume she was abducted. She could be having a medical emergency nearby, for example. And as I stated, my first reaction would be, "What is in that phone that could help me find my wife." Not, "I need to preserve evidence."

But in any case, as I clearly stated, we all act differently in these stressful situations.

 

[sumzero]

BBM- struck me when you said "he thinks like LE".

I think we as WS members, also think like LE. Matter of fact, if you've been here any length of time. You've probably earned multiple honorary degrees in; criminal profiling (hinky meter), collection and preservation of evidence, jurisprudence, investigative techniques, electronic trails (rabbit holes), minutia expert, etc.

As a collective brain, and given the right resources. I wonder if we could solve this case? :thinking:

I get what you're saying. But I've also seen (many, many times) WS members jump to the wrong conclusion and accuse innocent people of egregious criminal behavior.

 

[Prahasaurus]

What I find interesting is that KP was skeptical for at least a week to ten days yet the anonymous donor purchased the SP website immediately as if he knew they would go with his offer. So much talk about CG but not much about the AD. Like to find out who he/she/they really are.

If we're taking bets, I'd say AD = CG. Or at least AD = (CG + X)...

 

[robthomaseyes]

What I find interesting is that KP was skeptical for at least a week to ten days yet the anonymous donor purchased the SP website immediately as if he knew they would go with his offer. So much talk about CG but not much about the AD. Like to find out who he/she/they really are.

I am skeptical that there ever was a donor.