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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just a few questions I am trying to make sense of.
*10:37 she texted her husband to ask if he was coming home for lunch. I wonder why she even sent him a text when he usually leaves his phone in the car. She would know he does not bring his phone into work....
* Why would she stop in the middle of wrapping a gift and go for a run? Maybe before she began wrapping or maybe after she's done wrapping then going for a run makes sense but to not even finish wrapping it.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
AceDetective said:
If she was at home, the phone would have been at her home as well, right? If a person didn't want the phone, they wouldn't take it with and then throw it on the side of the road, they would just leave it there.

Yes, it's not 100% certain, but it is certainly a strong indication that she was not abducted from her home.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily She may have had the fanny pack on, with the phone inside. Once he got her to the car he realized she had the phone and he dumped it out of a moving vehicle?
 
said_it_and_meant_it said:
Just a few questions I am trying to make sense of.
*10:37 she texted her husband to ask if he was coming home for lunch. I wonder why she even sent him a text when he usually leaves his phone in the car. She would know he does not bring his phone into work....
* Why would she stop in the middle of wrapping a gift and go for a run? Maybe before she began wrapping or maybe after she's done wrapping then going for a run makes sense but to not even finish wrapping it.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

She texted him because he MIGHT have been between jobs and able to answer the texts. She knows he will eventually read and respond. My son has the same situation with 2 phones, and his wife texts him all the time. He answers when he gets the chance.

Maybe she finished her run , returned home, began wrapping and was surprised by an intruder who had followed her home ?
 
said_it_and_meant_it said:
Just a few questions I am trying to make sense of.
*10:37 she texted her husband to ask if he was coming home for lunch. I wonder why she even sent him a text when he usually leaves his phone in the car. She would know he does not bring his phone into work....
* Why would she stop in the middle of wrapping a gift and go for a run? Maybe before she began wrapping or maybe after she's done wrapping then going for a run makes sense but to not even finish wrapping it.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Maybe that was common for them. She would text knowing he would reply when he could
 
I just can't believe there is nothing to go on. I am praying LE has information they are holding close , but If they are I am not sure it's going to turn out good


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
said_it_and_meant_it said:
Just a few questions I am trying to make sense of.
*10:37 she texted her husband to ask if he was coming home for lunch. I wonder why she even sent him a text when he usually leaves his phone in the car. She would know he does not bring his phone into work....
* Why would she stop in the middle of wrapping a gift and go for a run? Maybe before she began wrapping or maybe after she's done wrapping then going for a run makes sense but to not even finish wrapping it.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

As many have said, there are lots of people who text their spouses knowing that they may or may not answer, or will answer when work circumstances are appropriate.

"Partially wrapped" can mean lots of things and I don't think it necessarily means anything. Maybe the gift was in a bag but she hadn't put the tissue paper around it or something. Or maybe the phone rang or the doorbell rang or...squirrel.
 
AceDetective said:
If she was at home, the phone would have been at her home as well, right? If a person didn't want the phone, they wouldn't take it with and then throw it on the side of the road, they would just leave it there.

Yes, it's not 100% certain, but it is certainly a strong indication that she was not abducted from her home.
Click to expand...

That would depend on what they are trying to accomplish, like if she was in her home at the time of the events, the perp(s) certainly has done a good job to make it look like an abduction outside. If you want to avoid getting caught putting out misleading red herrings is a great way to do that, like if you murdered someone in their house why wouldn't you instead want to make it look like something else happened a mile away? DNA and other such evidence could be rapidly being destroyed and degraded if everyone is walking through and using the house on the assumption that nothing happened there but if the phone was left there you'd instantly have LE treat the house like a crime scene.
 
spiritseeker31 said:
Possibly found her checkbook casa/sunrise streets?? Why would she have her checkbook but not her keys? It's number 16-41530 on the report.

A person who is keeping an eye on a house who's owners are out of town found the house to be unlocked, lights on and guest bedroom slept in. Blond hairs found on/in bed. Reporting person believes it has to do with Papini case. This sounds familiar - like its happened before and I've read it on WS. Report number is 16-41556
Click to expand...
Do people in their 30's still use checkbooks? I haven't written one since 2007!
 
said_it_and_meant_it said:
Just a few questions I am trying to make sense of.
*10:37 she texted her husband to ask if he was coming home for lunch. I wonder why she even sent him a text when he usually leaves his phone in the car. She would know he does not bring his phone into work....
* Why would she stop in the middle of wrapping a gift and go for a run? Maybe before she began wrapping or maybe after she's done wrapping then going for a run makes sense but to not even finish wrapping it.....
Click to expand...

On the text, first of all if he's travelling or otherwise between calls he'll get the text immediately. So she could get lucky. Secondly, if he were coming home for lunch, then he can text her back when he starts the trip home.

It says the gift was labelled. Who labels a gift that they haven't finished wrapping? Doesn't seem to make sense. Maybe she ran out of wrapping paper. Or maybe 'partially wrapped' means it just doesn't have a bow yet, which people often don't add until later because they don't want it to get squished, or she didn't have it yet. This does seem to need some clarification. Whatever the reason, I certainly wouldn't jump to the conclusion that she was interrupted while wrapping. Obviously Keith didn't, and LE didn't, so why would we?
 
steelman said:
The lack of LE continuing the search right there in that area makes total sense to me. All of the properties that line Sunrise Drive are privately owned. All the homes that line Old Oregon trail are privately owned. LE can't just go traipsing across peoples private property while looking in storage buildings, out buildings, garages, and backyards. Sure, if the owner allows them to search their entire property, then LE is free to do so.

In response to calling off the search, LE should reword their statement something along the lines of , "We've searched all the areas we can legally search as well as areas we were granted permission to search".

Have they searched the entire area where she disappeared ? No.........because they can't. They can look at homes and properties from the street and from the air, but that's about all they can do without a warrant. If you exclude all the private property and all the land mass that is privately owned, then the search zone drops down to about half a dozen acres, mainly city streets and right-of-ways.
Click to expand...

This is interesting Steelman...are the FBI involved in this case? Do they have jurisdication to search outbuildings without owners permission if looking for a person that could be in grave danger?
I am remembering with Sierah..when the feds got there they searched a 2 mile radius of where she was kidnapped in less than a day. They searched EVERY barn/outbuilding in a 2 mile radius. I was not there then but Josh told me that it was incredible to see how quickly they did it. He said they just lined up and fanned out and bam! Like a swarm of locust thru the cornfields out. I'm pretty sure they didn't have permission from everyone so does that mean if the Feds are involved they CAN search outbuildings without permission?
Is that significant that LE has not invited FBI?
 
OldSteve said:
Just some thoughts .... since it was mentioned she was a person who followed the same routine of running each day - that exposes her to a perp who notes that. Probably someone local. Probably a loaner. LE needs to know who in the area has a record and/or any reports of suspicious activity... odds are it's not first time he attacked. He's left cellphone at the scene to avoid tacking.. Most common way of abducting is using a vehicle to strike the victim, obviously the need to check all surveillance branching away from where she was taken...
Click to expand...

Just jumping off your post...

A few Ideas...

It would seem LE would be requesting employers/co-worker/spouses/friends/etc. If anyone they are in connection with has:

- Taken a day off from work the day SP went missing... (And/or day/s after...)?...

- Unusual clothing stains or loss...?...

- Changes in behaviors/affect/moods?...

- Unusual marks on body?...

- Unusual vehicle use and/or signs of unusual activity in and on the vehicles?
(I.E. Rips, tears, scratches, foliage, dirt not accounted for?)

- Excessive cleaning of vehicle right around the time SP went missing...

More???

all... JMO...

:websleuther:
 
katydid23 said:
Not necessarily She may have had the fanny pack on, with the phone inside. Once he got her to the car he realized she had the phone and he dumped it out of a moving vehicle?
Click to expand...

Or it was tossed out when her husband tried to text her back. Her phone maybe beeped.
 
jashrema said:
This is interesting Steelman...are the FBI involved in this case? Do they have jurisdication to search outbuildings without owners permission if looking for a person that could be in grave danger?
I am remembering with Sierah..when the feds got there they searched a 2 mile radius of where she was kidnapped in less than a day. They searched EVERY barn/outbuilding in a 2 mile radius. I was not there then but Josh told me that it was incredible to see how quickly they did it. He said they just lined up and fanned out and bam! Like a swarm of locust thru the cornfields out. I'm pretty sure they didn't have permission from everyone so does that mean if the Feds are involved they CAN search outbuildings without permission?
Is that significant that LE has not invited FBI?
Click to expand...

I think if you dug into it a little bit, you would find out that they did in fact contact the property owners and ask for permission to scour their land. Most property owners, and in your case, farmers, wouldn't object to it as long as the land wasn't destroyed and torn up in the process.

If I had to take a wild guess, I'd say that the local LE had already been granted permission from the local property owners, and so when the FBI showed up with a bunch of manpower, it appeared that they just went off searching and trespassing any place they felt like.

No FBI involved in this case as far as I know......if it is ruled a kidnapping however, that will change rapidly.
 
AceDetective said:
It says the gift was labelled. Who labels a gift that they haven't finished wrapping? Doesn't seem to make sense. Maybe she ran out of wrapping paper. Or maybe 'partially wrapped' means it just doesn't have a bow yet, which people often don't add until later because they don't want it to get squished, or she didn't have it yet. This does seem to need some clarification. Whatever the reason, I certainly wouldn't jump to the conclusion that she was interrupted while wrapping. Obviously Keith didn't, and LE didn't, so why would we?
Click to expand...

I would assume since he could see the gift (knew it was an american flag pillow) it was only partially covered. However, that doesn't rule out a gift bag.
 
creepcrusher said:
They HAVE to have evidence that would lead them to believe she's not in the area. It's the only logical explanation for them to stop the ground searches so early on in the investigation. Could it be something they found on her phone, or in her email? I don't know. It just doesn't make sense unless they have some solid evidence that they're not willing to share with the public. I believe the family has this information since they're not raising a stink and organizing their own ground searches.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I recognize we are not allowed to sleuth him (for good reason!)....


But I wonder if LE has cleared the ex-husband?

:thinking:
 
jashrema said:
This is interesting Steelman...are the FBI involved in this case? Do they have jurisdication to search outbuildings without owners permission if looking for a person that could be in grave danger?
I am remembering with Sierah..when the feds got there they searched a 2 mile radius of where she was kidnapped in less than a day. They searched EVERY barn/outbuilding in a 2 mile radius. I was not there then but Josh told me that it was incredible to see how quickly they did it. He said they just lined up and fanned out and bam! Like a swarm of locust thru the cornfields out. I'm pretty sure they didn't have permission from everyone so does that mean if the Feds are involved they CAN search outbuildings without permission?
Is that significant that LE has not invited FBI?
Click to expand...
Perhaps they did get permission from landowners. All police can search without a warrant in emergencies or Exigent Circumstances they call it. So that would include lost child in eminent danger and perhaps endangered adult. I think it would be limited to what could be used to hide them. You could not look in drawers or computers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 199 more.
Total: 2,187 (members: 200, guests: 1,987)

Online statistics

Members online
200
Guests online
1,987
Total visitors
2,187
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,347
Messages
18,094,838
Members
230,851
Latest member
kendybee
Back
Top