Found Alive CA - Sherri Papini, 34, Redding, 2 November 2016 - #18

[northXnorthwest1]

I guess I don't understand what you're getting at. Do you think Sherri is fabricating the details of her abduction? I've seen no evidence of it. The sheriff has given no indication that he doesn't believe her story. He's even commended her for doing her best under difficult circumstances to help the investigators. I also don't see a compelling need on Sherri's part not to be honest with LE. Most victims want to bring their victimizers to justice. I see nothing to indicate otherwise in this case.

Some details, yes - perhaps. Again, I'm just theorizing. It may turn out to be exactly as she described. But when you look at how rare it is for women to abduct women at all, much less keep the woman for 3 weeks then return her, and the vague "dark SUV", the fact that the sheriff showed her surveillance video from the day of abduction and she couldn't identify a vehicle. Also, KP on Nov 10 said "two people" might have abducted her, so I thought maybe the actual abductor saw that and told SP to say that as a condition for freeing her. And maybe she's keeping her word out of fear.

To me it's no less likely than the ST angle.

 

[natsound]

Not if she isn't sure who took her or why.

So she's abducted for three weeks and tortured, and they brand her with a message meant to mislead LE on their purpose, and SP is not going to be able to tell LE that the message is misleading?

 

[Aeronomy]

I guess you'll have to explain what you mean. It's not clear to me. :-\

Played Mr. Gamble, like, played him for a fool.

 

[vlpate]

Also we need to be respectful of the HIPAA laws. Some of these people wanting medical info is borderline being disrespectful and as a Nurse if you asked me I would not disclose anything. LE cannit disclose anything they cannot break HIPAA laws or else lawsuit city and neither in my opinion should KP. He crossed a line in my opinion...while it is his wife he does not and did not have the right to.disclose certain things, becaus ethat was SPs legal and medical right to.do.so even if she gave him permission. I totally agree with LE when he said he compromised the case doing so.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

LE is not an entity under HIPPA, nor is KP

 

[sumzero]

Played Mr. Gamble, like, played him for a fool.

Still too cryptic for my poor brain.

 

[sumzero]

Some details, yes - perhaps. Again, I'm just theorizing. It may turn out to be exactly as she described. But when you look at how rare it is for women to abduct women at all, much less keep the woman for 3 weeks then return her, and the vague "dark SUV", the fact that the sheriff showed her surveillance video from the day of abduction and she couldn't identify a vehicle. Also, KP on Nov 10 said "two people" might have abducted her, so I thought maybe the actual abductor saw that and told SP to say that as a condition for freeing her. And maybe she's keeping her word out of fear.

To me it's no less likely than the ST angle.

But why would she need to lie? I doubt the captors gave her a stern warning not to reveal their identity. What possible leverage could they have? If they thought she could identify them, they would probably not have released her.

 

[proctorelites]

I just don't think this is a sex trafficking abduction. I think it was pure anger maybe jealousy. I'm telling you after I read the story about the woman in NY.
I think this is similar. Maybe the "branding" message was 1 word scratched into her back or arm like the word "*advertiser censored*" or "*advertiser censored*" or "pig". These women may have wanted to destroy her beauty, her entire being. They derived sick pleasure out of this. If you can get a group of 6 women to help you abduct someone and 3 of them to help you beat her, wow. I can see how this went down just based on that story.
I've been a non-believer until early this morning. This made me sit up and take notice. Maybe after a while 1 captor realised that the other captor could turn her in and collect the money. Or 1 of them talked about how they could go about collecting it. So the captor got scared & decided; I better get rid of SP before I get turned in. They just weren't ready to end someone's life or maybe they haven't transgressed that far before & weren't willing to allow it & waited for the other captor to leave so they could release her. I know i'm grasping at straws. Yes it's happened 504 hours away I'm not even suggesting it's the same people. I'm saying it's happening all around us a similar type human being. And were all 6 of those women caught? Could 1 have somehow ended up in California? Are they members of a gang that do this and those gangs be affiliated in New York & California? We know gang members or groups of friends often think alike and have similar ideals or morals. Now we get into is it possible Sherri had a relationship with 1 of their boyfriends or a perceived relationship. Or did she look like a woman they'd once hated for tht reason. Sounds too fat out there to me. But so does the woman being abducted, beaten with brass knuckles, hair cut off & being threatened with a brand up in NY. Who knows

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[vlpate]

If that is true, then why are most drugged and beaten to force compliance?

Most girls (prospective prostitutes), are not drugged and beaten into compliance...they are drugged to get then addicted and beaten for non-compliance. Of course gang rape, date rape, and sickos with storage containers fit the "drugged and beaten into compliance category. JMO

 

[kanzz]

Perspective .... I wanted to post this late last night and thought I should sleep on it first, but I still feel I should post. Then I'll duck when y'all start throwing things.

Lake16 has chosen WS to communicate. This group has integrity and compassion that I've seen since I have been here. However, last night was hard to keep reading.

When Lake16, our Verified, keyword verified insider, says two women abducted Sherri, one released her .... it means two women abducted Sherri, one released her. It doesn't have to make sense to you, it just is. Same with the ST leanings and everything else. I sensed that there are some here bent on having it have happened a certain way when that is just not the case.

Lake16 is a "gift" to this group. Like he or she said they have more information /knowledge than what has been released to the public (Us) but not as much as LE. The fact that this "more" information is shared with WS, is also a gift, very graciously shared, imho.

It makes me sad when I sense some feeling entitled to more info, or taking a disagreeable tone, like no matter what Lake says to some things, either way, it with be picked apart and argued with over and over.

There are some very amazing and kind posters here (you know who you are ). However, others should remember when they post that there are "people with feelings" behind these names. Please be nice to one another.

Also, Tricia and her team do an amazing job in keeping this site what is is, stellar among sites like this. I am sure they put an enormous amount of time, and tons of heart into it, and for that I am appreciative.

MOO.

:thumb: Agree wholeheartedly.

Having Lake16 here truly is a gift. For that, being respectful is our responsibility.

 

[sumzero]

He didn't say no.

He said no at first. Then he had to be talked into participating. I see nothing to suggest he "jumped at" the chance to be involved.

 

[AceDetective]

I guess I don't understand what you're getting at. Do you think Sherri is fabricating the details of her abduction? I've seen no evidence of it. The sheriff has given no indication that he doesn't believe her story. He's even commended her for doing her best under difficult circumstances to help the investigators. I also don't see a compelling need on Sherri's part not to be honest with LE. Most victims want to bring their victimizers to justice. I see nothing to indicate otherwise in this case.

Sometimes a victim has been threatened with repercussions if they tell the truth after they are released. It can take weeks before they finally begin to tell the truth on certain key points.

The story could easily change. I'm not saying it's going to, but it easily could. It has happened before.

 

[Rayemonde]

If that is true, then why are most drugged and beaten to force compliance?

I don't know that most underage girls are, at least at first. The coerced ones may be beaten later if they try to leave, try to change pimps, try to keep money for themselves etc.

I just think that this misconception about all trafficked girls being abducted, chained up, forcibly injected with drugs and beaten is part of what allows the trade to continue, and leads to victim blaming. Just because an underage girl with low self esteem or a learning disability is convinced by a smooth-talking romeo pimps to prostitute herself, it doesn't make her any less a victim. Just because she willingly takes drugs he gives her, and willingly has his brand tattooed onto her, it doesn't make her any less a victim. Just because she's not actually chained up in a basement somewhere and claims that she enjoys her lifestyle and doesn't want to leave, it doesn't mean she's not a victim. These underage girls are often groomed, rather than being physically forced.

 

[bluesneakers]

So she's abducted for three weeks and tortured, and they brand her with a message meant to mislead LE on their purpose, and SP is not going to be able to tell LE that the message is misleading?

She's abducted for three weeks.

She only knows a few details about her abductors, based on the descriptions LE has given us. She doesn't know their names or nicknames.

The abductors brand her. They might tell her it means something it doesn't, or might not even tell her what it's meant to mean. It's left up to her to interpret the meaning.

LE (and KP and SP) see the brand and interpret it as a specific message.

The brand in fact means nothing, or is meant to mislead LE and the Papinis. As in it says "Snake Eyes was here" but Snake Eyes had absolutely nothing to do with SP's abduction.

...

I am not saying this is what happened, only suggesting SP might have been branded in a way that is meant to point LE in another direction rather than point them to SP's abductors.

I hope that clears it up for you.

 

[manormuskeg]

I don't have an opinion on whether or not SP was snatched initially for SP, simply because we don't have enough information. However, the use of masks or other forms of disguise doesn't rule it out, nor does it mean that they intended to keep her alive. SP might have escaped, or been rescued after she had been handed off to buyers/traffickers. Kidnapping is a crime that can earn you decades in prison. Disguises may only indicate caution, IMO.

 

[silversurvivor]

Brand yes, message no.

Yet if cigarette burns were done in a particular way/pattern it could be a message as well as a brand.
Based on former students in gangs with cig burned gang insignia

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

 

[kanzz]

Also we need to be respectful of the HIPAA laws. Some of these people wanting medical info is borderline being disrespectful and as a Nurse if you asked me I would not disclose anything. LE cannit disclose anything they cannot break HIPAA laws or else lawsuit city and neither in my opinion should KP. He crossed a line in my opinion...while it is his wife he does not and did not have the right to.disclose certain things, becaus ethat was SPs legal and medical right to.do.so even if she gave him permission. I totally agree with LE when he said he compromised the case doing so.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

N/A. HIPAA laws apply to health care providers and vendors. Once that info is out, others are not bound by any law from disclosing.

 

[bluesneakers]

Yet if cigarette burns were done in a particular way/pattern it could be a message as well as a brand.
Based on former students in gangs with cig burned gang insignia

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

True.

 

[sumzero]

Sometimes a victim has been threatened with repercussions if they tell the truth after they are released. It can take weeks before they finally begin to tell the truth on certain key points.

The story could easily change. I'm not saying it's going to, but it easily could. It has happened before.

Sure. But if the sheriff, or his detectives, had a hunch Sherri was withholding information or not being truthful, would they have gone public with the description?

 

[soanyway]

While it is rare, it's not out of the question. Sandra Harris from WA was kidnapped and killed a couple of weeks after SP was abducted. A woman was arrested shortly after collecting the ransom. Sadly, I don't think anything can be discounted these days

Some details, yes - perhaps. Again, I'm just theorizing. It may turn out to be exactly as she described. But when you look at how rare it is for women to abduct women at all, much less keep the woman for 3 weeks then return her, and the vague "dark SUV", the fact that the sheriff showed her surveillance video from the day of abduction and she couldn't identify a vehicle. Also, KP on Nov 10 said "two people" might have abducted her, so I thought maybe the actual abductor saw that and told SP to say that as a condition for freeing her. And maybe she's keeping her word out of fear.

To me it's no less likely than the ST angle.

 

[daninillinois]

For all we know the "negotiator" and AD could be one and the same person. I don't know. If the AD already had secured CG's services, why would he need Lisa Jeter's help in finding someone?

http://www.redding.com/story/news/l...n-local-hostage-negotiators-methods/95044410/

Jeter, a friend of the Papinis who says she connected*the*family*to the donor and*Gamble, said it all came together like a "divine trifecta." It started when Jeter posted about Papini on her personal Facebook page. Through a friend, she was connected to the anonymous donor. The offer to help was jarring to her at first, she said, and she questioned the donor's sincerity. The donor, too, “didn’t want to be perceived as someone who is crazy," she said. He was willing to put up money for Papini’s return. “I can’t even articulate my shock,” she said. “It was a significant amount of money he was offering.” The donor purchased the website, SherriPapini.com, and Jeter said on*Nov. 8 she*contacted Keith Papini.*He was appreciative and grateful, she said, but skeptical. “He wasn’t quite ready to go this route,” Jeter said. She decided it'd*be best to let him sit with the idea. Six days later, Keith Papini sent Jeter a text, saying he was “nervous” that his wife’s story wasn’t getting enough attention. Jeter decided to call*the anonymous donor again, and the man said he still wanted to help. To determine that the whole idea “wasn’t a hoax," she had the donor call*Keith Papini. The donor got to work, Jeter said, and said he needed**advertiser censored*spokesperson. It couldn’t just*be a family member. That’s when Jeter says she thought of Gamble. Gamble had done a presentation at the Rotary Club of Redding, talking about sex trafficking and abduction cases. Feeling that Gamble was willing to have “tough conversations” about the subject, Jeter reached out to him.

I am very glad to see that you believe the AD and the negotiator might be one and the same. That is what I think, too.

My personal opinion is that Mr. Gamble was involved in the writing and distribution of the November 6 reverse ransom letter and that Ms. Jeter’s account of the Gamble timeline to the Record Searchlight for its December 8 story was in error, or misreported by the paper. It would be gratifying to know if anyone else agrees with this.

Overall, I think this “by 11/6” vs. “after 11/14” discrepancy is a major flaw in the A Team narrative about this case. Just a wild guess, but I am going to predict that Ms. Jeter will come forth in the next week or two and say either that she misremembered or that the reporter misreported.