Found Alive CA - Sherri Papini, 34, Redding, 2 November 2016 - #22

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

:seeya: I'm a little confused ... lol ... you mean the letters "CHP" may have been a mistake and backwards?

Oh, I googled CHP and the first thing that came up was "California Highway Patrol."

Sidenote: from following the Holly Bobo murder trial, "THP" was the "Tennessee Highway Patrol" ... so the HP for highway patrol is what I was thinking - like a statewide police LE.

:dunno: Makes any sense ?

:moo:

... obviously a youngster who doesn't remember the glory days of Erik Estrada...

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[RANCH]

:seeya:

Regarding KP's 9-1-1 call and transcript:

There is something that's been "bugging me" that I saw at the top of the transcript of the 9-1-1 call on the MSM site, linked below.

It reads:

Transcript of the 911 call, about five minutes long:

[CHP transfers Keith Papini to the 911 dispatcher.]

Papini: Yeah, um, so I just got home from work, and my wife wasn’t there, which is unusual, and my kids should’ve been there now from like day care, so I was like, “Oh, maybe she went on a walk.” Um, I couldn’t find her so I called the day care to see what time she picked up the kids. The kids were never picked up. So I got freaked out so I hit like the Find My iPhone app thing, and it said that — it showed her phone at like the end of our driveway, we don’t have really good service …

911: OK.


Link: http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/25/sherri-papini-abduction-911-audio-sketches-released/

---------------------------------------


RBBM: The CHP has to be the California Highway Patrol.

So why did KP call the CHP and not call 9-1-1 directly when he realized his wife was "missing" ?

Is that standard in California to call CHP first - then they transfer you to 9-1-1 ? Or is there another reason for calling CHP ? Any thoughts ?

All JMO and :moo:

Keith called 911 from his cell phone. In California all cell phone 911 calls go to the CHP. The CHP will then transfer calls to another agency if needed.

This system goes back when cell phones were primarily "car phones" and people using them typically called 911 to reports vehicular accidents. Obviously an outdated system.

JMO

 

[Liadan]

What did they want her for? Three weeks and no sexual assault/trafficking/slavery.

AND no ransom....

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

Just listened to the 911 tape again, and somethng is still niggling me. If, according to KP's account the phone was put down neatly with earphones carefully wrapped around it, why were there also "chunks of hair" attached?

The 'chunks of hair' thing would seem to imply a struggle. But the way I'm envisioning it, either the phone was flung to the ground during a desperate, vigorous struggle with 'chunks of hair' caught up and attached to some NOT-carefully-wrapped earphone cords - OR - the phone was set down neatly, with earphones carefully wrapped around it (for whatever the reason), and SP's separation from that phone did NOT involve a desperate struggle involving chunks of hair. But I'm not understanding how it could be both.

SP may have struggled with abductors, may have lost chunks of hair, even...but under what plausible scenario would those chunks of hair be carefully wrapped up with the earphones around her phone? I'm trying to envision this, but in my mind's eye there would be no "chunks of hair" attached if Sherri had simply set a carefully wrapped phone down to tie her shoelaces, and then got assaulted and hauled off. So are we to understand the abductors paused to wrap up her phone with those hair chunks after violently separating her from her phone? Or did they allow Sherri to wrap up her phone with those hair chunks post-struggle, prior to her getting into the getaway vehicle?

He did say chunks of hair. Not a few hairs but chunks of hair. This has bothered me too. So much so, that I tried several times to pull any hair by yanking my earbuds out, both with my hair down and in a pony tail. Nothing.
I wonder what kind of earbuds she had that could pull chunks of hair. :thinking:

 

[Deleted member 110058]

Whether or not it's intentional, KP seems (to me) to have this odd quality--whether calling 911 or being interviewed--of communicating as though he's narrating a story. Often with elaborate, sometimes dramatic embellishments. It's not necessarily disingenuous, though to be honest, it can come across that way, and I think it works against him. I have never in my long life come across someone who has this same communication style. It's almost as though he's perpetually outside the events looking on, and letting us as 3rd-party or audience know what's happening play by play, lest we miss something he feels is key.

He'd probably be a terrific sportscaster.

JMO, IMO

I really love this observation. It really struck a cord for me. There have been times in my life that I have been dealing with trauma and have felt much like you describe. In order to cope you disassociate....almost feeling like an out of body experience. It's as if you hear yourself talking but the voice isn't really yours. Given the trauma he was/is dealing with, I have to wonder if this might be part of what you are picking up on.

 

[Midge Montana]

See, I can't reconcile the chunks of hair with the neatly coiled cord.
The chunks of hair brings to mind the image of the headphones being 'ripped' off of her.
Not nicely taken from her or by her, so that they could be neatly coiled and set on the phone.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Keith called 911 from his cell phone. In California all cell phone 911 calls go to the CHP. The CHP will then transfer calls to another agency if needed.

This system goes back when cell phones were primarily "car phones" and people using them typically called 911 to reports vehicular accidents. Obviously an outdated system.

JMO

:seeya: Thank you for the info ... I was wondering WHY it didn't go straight to 9-1-1.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

... obviously a youngster who doesn't remember the glory days of Erik Estrada...

:floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: Oh yes, I remember him - was it CHIPS ?

LOL ... not a youngster ... LOL

:seeya:

 

[AzPistonsGirl]

chunks of hair... you know, in case she shows up missing some of her hair.

ugh, must stop wasting time here. <wink>

 

[JaneEyre]

:hilarious::floorlaugh: Haha... are you married to mine? It's his most annoying habit I'm sure. I find myself just making the calls because it's less painful to deal with issues myself than to listen to his life story again before getting to the point.




However, I do agree with this. There is telling too much information because you think people care (i.e. my OH takes his sweet time to tell our family that we are going to visit them briefly that day) and then there is setting the scene.

I haven't followed the thread as much just lately so I couldn't say where we are in the case now but the 911 call for Caliyah McNabb was a whole lot of setting the scene (I was asleep, my partner was asleep, I have a 2 year old and a 2 month old, my 2 year old was awake playing by herself....oh and by the way, my 2 month old is missing) ... Not saying it was a sign of guilt just that it's another one where it has raised questions.

The very few times that I have called 911, the first thing I said was "my friend has collapsed" or " ---- is having a heart attack, I need an ambulance."

I get that, but I guess I'm thinking that, yeah, if she was collapsed right in front of him, he would probably cut to the chase. But we all know that a missing adult is possibly not going to seem like an absolute emergency to LE without very compelling evidence. She had not been gone very long yet, and I'm guessing he was trying to set the scene so they would understand why he was concerned about foul play. That's why I think he had such an awkward 911 call - that, and the fact that he probably is just wired in such a way to get to the point in a different way.

I'm glad I'm not alone, by the way, in being driven nuts by a husband who can't just get straight to the point on the phone.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[JaneEyre]

He did say chunks of hair. Not a few hairs but chunks of hair. This has bothered me too. So much so, that I tried several times to pull any hair by yanking my earbuds out, both with my hair down and in a pony tail. Nothing.
I wonder what kind of earbuds she had that could pull chunks of hair. :thinking:

The kind with the little added clip, maybe? IDK, but I am always pulling hair out with my glasses and anything else in the vicinity of my head.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[JaneEyre]

See, I can't reconcile the chunks of hair with the neatly coiled cord.
The chunks of hair brings to mind the image of the headphones being 'ripped' off of her.
Not nicely taken from her or by her, so that they could be neatly coiled and set on the phone.

I can't, either. But I do suspect what another person posted, that possibly KP didn't actually photograph the phone first, but picked it up to scroll through it, realized it was evidence, and then set it back down. Perhaps in doing so, he did what he normally would have done with it when setting it down carefully, and neatly wrapped the headphones around it.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[gitana1]

Her "cultural differences" pinterest board was pretty interesting IMO. Then again, I only use pinterest for saving recipes and home decor pics, so maybe that influenced me being so surprised that someone would have a board dedicated to "cultural differences" memes.

Ugh. I forgot about that.

:seeya: I'm a little confused ... lol ... you mean the letters "CHP" may have been a mistake and backwards?

Oh, I googled CHP and the first thing that came up was "California Highway Patrol."

Sidenote: from following the Holly Bobo murder trial, "THP" was the "Tennessee Highway Patrol" ... so the HP for highway patrol is what I was thinking - like a statewide police LE.

:dunno: Makes any sense ?

:moo:

I meant that maybe the transcript was wrong and it went from 911 transferring to the CHP. But RANCH cleared it up.

 

[Elle*Bee]

The Verified Insider hasn&#8217;t posted here since the thread was reopened, correct?

 

[Jethro4WS]

:seeya:

Regarding KP's 9-1-1 call and transcript:

There is something that's been "bugging me" that I saw at the top of the transcript of the 9-1-1 call on the MSM site, linked below.

It reads:

Transcript of the 911 call, about five minutes long:

[CHP transfers Keith Papini to the 911 dispatcher.]

Papini: Yeah, um, so I just got home from work, and my wife wasn&#8217;t there, which is unusual, and my kids should&#8217;ve been there now from like day care, so I was like, &#8220;Oh, maybe she went on a walk.&#8221; Um, I couldn&#8217;t find her so I called the day care to see what time she picked up the kids. The kids were never picked up. So I got freaked out so I hit like the Find My iPhone app thing, and it said that &#8212; it showed her phone at like the end of our driveway, we don&#8217;t have really good service &#8230;

911: OK.


Link: http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/25/sherri-papini-abduction-911-audio-sketches-released/

---------------------------------------


RBBM: The CHP has to be the California Highway Patrol.

So why did KP call the CHP and not call 9-1-1 directly when he realized his wife was "missing" ?

Is that standard in California to call CHP first - then they transfer you to 9-1-1 ? Or is there another reason for calling CHP ? Any thoughts ?

All JMO and :moo:

Generally speaking, unless it is a child that is missing most people don't call 911 to report people missing. They call the non-emergency number of whichever police agency handles their locality as it isn't necessarily an emergency. Especially with adults LE isn't likely to do much of anything until some period of time has gone by unless something comes up in the initial interview with the person reporting it or another person calls and reports the same person missing with information that differs from what another reported.

ETA: This transfer of the call also can explain the way Keith was giving a lot of backstory as he may have already gone through much of it with the CHP call taker. Pretty much like if you call your bank or a company explaining some issue and then they transfer you around and you end up having to explain it all again.

 

[Jethro4WS]

The Verified Insider hasn&#8217;t posted here since the thread was reopened, correct?

No she hasn't.

 

[gitana1]

Has anyone read the FBI wanted poster? Seems some things are missing from it that are interesting:

1. It never uses the word "abduction". It describes the ordeal as SP's "disappearance".

2. It does not state SP was battered or assaulted. It just says she was found on the side of the road.

3. It does not say these people are suspects or harmed SP in any way. It merely says they "may" have some information about the case.

4. It does not say that a reward is offered for info leading to an "arrest." Just to identification of these people.

5. It does not use the word "crime". It refers to her disappearance as a "matter".

Hmmm.

https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/seeking-info/unknown-individuals/@@download.pdf

 

[Lilibet]

Just listened to the 911 tape again, and somethng is still niggling me. If, according to KP's account the phone was put down neatly with earphones carefully wrapped around it, why were there also "chunks of hair" attached?

The 'chunks of hair' thing would seem to imply a struggle. But the way I'm envisioning it, either the phone was flung to the ground during a desperate, vigorous struggle with 'chunks of hair' caught up and attached to some NOT-carefully-wrapped earphone cords - OR - the phone was set down neatly, with earphones carefully wrapped around it (for whatever the reason), and SP's separation from that phone did NOT involve a desperate struggle involving chunks of hair. But I'm not understanding how it could be both.

SP may have struggled with abductors, may have lost chunks of hair, even...but under what plausible scenario would those chunks of hair be carefully wrapped up with the earphones around her phone? I'm trying to envision this, but in my mind's eye there would be no "chunks of hair" attached if Sherri had simply set a carefully wrapped phone down to tie her shoelaces, and then got assaulted and hauled off. So are we to understand the abductors paused to wrap up her phone with those hair chunks after violently separating her from her phone? Or did they allow Sherri to wrap up her phone with those hair chunks post-struggle, prior to her getting into the getaway vehicle?

He did say chunks of hair. Not a few hairs but chunks of hair. This has bothered me too. So much so, that I tried several times to pull any hair by yanking my earbuds out, both with my hair down and in a pony tail. Nothing.
I wonder what kind of earbuds she had that could pull chunks of hair. :thinking:

I&#8217;m not hearing anything about &#8220;chunks&#8221; of hair on the 911 call. Just that it looked like hair had been &#8220;ripped out.&#8221; But I do remember &#8220;chunks&#8221; being mentioned at the beginning of the case. Did Keith say that in an interview? Where are the &#8220;chunks&#8221; coming from? Not the 911 call. LE said early on that it was strands of hair IIRC.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/25/sherri-papini-abduction-911-audio-sketches-released/

ETA: Here&#8217;s a post from the first thread with a flier from &#8220;Missing Pieces&#8221; saying that a neighbor said that chunks of hair were found. This is not an official flier, however.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ing-2-November-2016-1&p=12910937#post12910937

 

[cryscrys]

also odd that he follows up the chunks of hair comment with "like they" interesting early insight into multiple people being involved if you ask me

 

[RANCH]

Has anyone read the FBI wanted poster? Seems some things are missing from it that are interesting:

1. It never uses the word "abduction". It describes the ordeal as SP's "disappearance".

2. It does not state SP was battered or assaulted. It just says she was found on the side of the road.

3. It does not say these people are suspects or harmed SP in any way. It merely says they "may" have some information about the case.

4. It does not say that a reward is offered for info leading to an "arrest." Just to identification of these people.

5. It does not use the word "crime". It refers to her disappearance as a "matter".

Hmmm.

https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/seeking-info/unknown-individuals/@@download.pdf

I believe that when the Feds say they are investigating a "matter" it means they feel that no crime has been committed. JMO