Found Alive CA - Sherri Papini, 34, Redding, 2 November 2016 - #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes. I am starting to lean more to this being an abduction for ransom. The lack of public searches, urgency, warnings indicate there is a lot going on behind the scenes. I do not think she ran away at all. I think the family knows much more than they are telling and I think they have an indication of who did this. I initially though she may have had a stalker based on her multiple addresses in SoCal and the quotes on her pinterest gun board (" wish I had this 3 weeks ago"etc) but now that I know that the quotes may not be attributed to her and that the pricy addresses actually belong to a family member I think it is more likely to be a ransom situation. In any case poor family for going through this whether they do or don't have an idea of what has happened.

If it's an abduction for ransom why is her family still doing ground searches? Wouldn't someone contact them by now and try to work out an exchange for money?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Yes, so true. And under these circumstances where there are multiple possibilities, I invoke the "Occam's razor" methodology which generally proves out. It is believed she went jogging and was purportedly last since at "x" intersections. Some of her possessions were found at "x". This gives us two solid indicators to work with. Both Steelman and I appear to be working on the Occam theory, and our suggested search radius extend approx. 3 miles from those points, although mine extends up to the concrete facility. It is my strong, amateur hypothesis that she will, indeed, be found in that range. I am praying I am wrong, and that against the odds (and Occam), she will come home alive.

But that's just it in order to use Occam's Razor you have to know what the facts are, which the absence of solid facts means that Occam's Razor can point you in many different directions depending on the assumptions you use. Actually taking your own description of the situation, does that not seem the least bit suspicious to you? Like how could someone see her that day at the intersection yet not see what happened to her at that intersection? If we are to take the 2 PM sighting as correct, what then of the 11 AM time that her husband advanced and said there were witnesses to that? By all means apply Occam just recognize when you are making assumptions and how that if you plug in different assumptions, you can end up with different results under Occam. I don't accept either sighting as fact and that's why I'm saying depending on what the facts are, the scenarios can vary wildly.
 
<modsnip>

ITA!

LE doesn't eliminate someone based solely on their polygraph results anyway. There is much more they look at like his demeanor throughout, and his alibi being verified, and also talking to those who knew the couple well. I never felt this husband was involved in any of this so I am not surprised he has been eliminated.

When a married female goes missing or is even found murdered the statistics state only around 1/3 of the murderers were husbands who harmed their wives. That means the overwhelming majority of them, do not, and the murderer was someone else either a stranger or someone who knew them even if slightly. This is one of the things that often puzzles me when a wife goes missing or is found murdered. More often than not the offender isn't the spouse/husband yet most have instant feelings of guilt that it has to be the husband. :confused: In fact the last stats I read said spousal murders are declining whether the perp is the wife or husband.

I am going to face reality and then hope for a miracle. This was a crime of opportunity. This wasn't an act of willfully leaving her husband and children nor was it a suicide either, imo.

Like I said previously in Thread One, we have seen these kind of opportunist predators several times before who grabs an unsuspecting female without warning with the sole intent/motive to kidnap, rape, murder and then quickly discard their body.. Predators have often admitted after being caught they constantly cruised the streets looking for vulnerable prey. Imo, this is also going to be the case here.:(

Unfortunately, women who jog alone have become targets of these predators. They know they are vulnerable targets and it can happen anywhere including in what was perceived as safe neighborhoods. With them finding her phone and some of her hair I believe she was grabbed quickly and thrown in a vehicle before she had a chance to even fight back.

Now finding her is what is going to be the hardest for LE has no idea as to the location he took her to. It may be miles and miles away from the kidnapping site. Male predators have traveled further distances to discard their victim and yes, sadly, I do believe she is deceased, and has been for sometime now. While every once and awhile they will be found alive but the majority of them are not. He is not going to turn her loose so she will have an opportunity to tell LE what he looks like and what he has done. I wish I felt hopeful but I don't. I have seen how these tragic cases usually ends for those who hoped and prayed for a different outcome as well.

My heart is breaking for her husband and children. He is a man filled with overwhelming despair, imo. and I am sure all of her family, friends and loved ones are too. Cases like this is what real nightmares are made of because it shows all of us they can happen to anyone at anytime without warning.

I agree with you 100%


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
OK. Personally, I don't see the need to create a false crime scene if the real scene is spotless (and with no trace evidence left behind). I guess I'm not inclined to buy into theories that get overly complicated. But that's just me. ;)

It could also indicate that the perp had a need to cloud the investigation. For example : Leaving her belongings there creates a mystery of its own. By not leaving a body at the primary crime scene, there is no real way to know what happened. No definitive answers. As in : maybe she ran away, maybe this was suicide... It hinders LE badly. jmo
 
What is hanging me up is the times she was allegedly seen that day, which could all be accurate or just as well she people could be mistaken and she might not have jogged at all that day. Depending on what is actually accurate witness information, this could be anything from her staging a scene to her being kidnapped at the home without ever having gone jogging that day to all sorts of other things inbetween. It potentially greatly colors things if someone who wasn't a marathoner (she was merely training for a 5K) was seen out over a period of 3 hours and it could have meaning both if this was unusual for her as well as if this was a common occurrence. I say it's important regardless of how frequently she was seen out over those long periods (if she was frequently seen jogging over a period of hours by neighbors) as it could mean she was living some sort of secret life, which there's been absolutely no mention of her doing anything outside the home during daytime hours like having neighborhood friends that she hang out with. Unless and until the timeline gets nailed down, I see way too many possibilities of what could have happened to her.

I don't put much stock in these sightings. I read that while she went missing on the 2nd, people were not interviewed about seeing her that day until the 5th and 6th. The sightings may not be accurate, sadly. jmo
 
Most definitely. Personally and intimately acquainted with the topic, and can assure you that the human body is quite capable of sustained, vigorous exercise with a low BMI (even "painfully thin"), especially if the exercise habit has gone on for years (dance, ballet, long-distance running being favored activities, in fact). Only in advanced stages of the illness does that capacity begin to diminish (and at that point they are usually hospitalized and fighting organ failure).

That said, not sure how that sort of mental health diagnosis could be determined with any accuracy simply based on the random observation of strangers. (FWIW, she looks healthy to me.) And I'd agree it's probably peripheral and, at best, non-productive speculation for us to pursue in here.

I was anorexic, exercise-aholic for 6 years, it was a compulsion, a mental illness, it's insidious. I'm not saying she had it ... just confirming your observations.

ETA: The last year of it was so bad, so debilitating. I was 100% depressed and suicidal, I felt like I was losing my mind ... but "seemed great" on the outside. NO ONE knew I had it except for my husband. I always got compliments on my body. It was really sick, ya know? To be so ill, but get complimented? That's our culture.
 
What is hanging me up is the times she was allegedly seen that day, which could all be accurate or just as well she people could be mistaken and she might not have jogged at all that day. Depending on what is actually accurate witness information, this could be anything from her staging a scene to her being kidnapped at the home without ever having gone jogging that day to all sorts of other things inbetween. It potentially greatly colors things if someone who wasn't a marathoner (she was merely training for a 5K) was seen out over a period of 3 hours and it could have meaning both if this was unusual for her as well as if this was a common occurrence. I say it's important regardless of how frequently she was seen out over those long periods (if she was frequently seen jogging over a period of hours by neighbors) as it could mean she was living some sort of secret life, which there's been absolutely no mention of her doing anything outside the home during daytime hours like having neighborhood friends that she hang out with. Unless and until the timeline gets nailed down, I see way too many possibilities of what could have happened to her.

She was only seen "around 2:00 pm". All other times are filled in between when she sent the 10:37 am text to her husband. Is there a link that shows anyone says they saw her before 2:00 pm?
 
If it's an abduction for ransom why is her family still doing ground searches? Wouldn't someone contact them by now and try to work out an exchange for money?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The only abduction for ransom case I have ever experienced at WS was the Samantha Koenig case in Alaska. As it turned out, the man who abducted her was a serial killer. In Sam's case they were lucky enough to have security video of her abduction.

I have a problem speculating. There is not enough factual information to logically string together. I'm of the opinion the general public is one of LE biggest tools. The silence from SCSO is a huge mistake, MOO.
 
Oh, I totally agree. This is what we have and we need to look at everything we have.

I read in one of your earlier posts that you used to run in Redding, but that you found it to be an unsafe area. can you share what made the area feel unsafe to you ? And thank you for posting here, local perspective is very valuable. jmo
 
Deleted. Decided not to share this. Won't bring Sherri home.
 
But that's just it in order to use Occam's Razor you have to know what the facts are, which the absence of solid facts means that Occam's Razor can point you in many different directions depending on the assumptions you use. Actually taking your own description of the situation, does that not seem the least bit suspicious to you? Like how could someone see her that day at the intersection yet not see what happened to her at that intersection? If we are to take the 2 PM sighting as correct, what then of the 11 AM time that her husband advanced and said there were witnesses to that? By all means apply Occam just recognize when you are making assumptions and how that if you plug in different assumptions, you can end up with different results under Occam. I don't accept either sighting as fact and that's why I'm saying depending on what the facts are, the scenarios can vary wildly.

Yes, good logic, true. I am basing my hypothesis on the assertion that she was seen at 2pm. She's distinct looking enough to where I believe this to be right, and that's what I'm basing my hypothesis on. However, you are correct, there are many unknown variables.
 
She was only see "around 2:00 pm". All other times are filled in between when she sent the 10:37 am text to her husband. Is there a link that shows anyone says they saw her before 2:00 pm?

Yes, it was the husband himself who said she was seen at around 11 AM based on witnesses he talked to plus something she said in the text gave the impression as well:
Keith says he believes his wife went jogging around 11 a.m., shortly after he didn’t return her text. “I am putting her leaving around that time,” he says. “That is based on the text I got, and there were some people I spoke with that were cutting down a tree, and they informed us that they saw my wife running. ”
http://people.com/crime/missing-sherri-papini-update-husband-keith-interview/
That is what makes a sighting around 2 PM rather concerning, especially if it is accurate. If indeed the last sighting of her was at the corner in the afternoon and the husband has correct information that would point to her being up to something, especially if she was last seen where the phone was found where the witness didn't see her being kidnapped there.
 
Yes, it was the husband himself who said she was seen at around 11 AM based on witnesses he talked to plus something she said in the text gave the impression as well:
Keith says he believes his wife went jogging around 11 a.m., shortly after he didn’t return her text. “I am putting her leaving around that time,” he says. “That is based on the text I got, and there were some people I spoke with that were cutting down a tree, and they informed us that they saw my wife running. ”
http://people.com/crime/missing-sherri-papini-update-husband-keith-interview/
That is what makes a sighting around 2 PM rather concerning, especially if it is accurate. If indeed the last sighting of her was at the corner in the afternoon and the husband has correct information that would point to her being up to something, especially if she was last seen where the phone was found where the witness didn't see her being kidnapped there.

I thought the tree cutting sighting was "around 2:00". Hmmmm
 
Kidnapping for ransom is very, very rare in the U.S.
Doubt it happened here.
Also, I live in a smaller-mid-sized city and the FBI gets involved in almost any case not immediately solved. It does not have to meet the old criteria of "crossing state lines" etc...

No idea what happened here, can't even guess.
Jmo
 
Yes, good logic, true. I am basing my hypothesis on the assertion that she was seen at 2pm. She's distinct looking enough to where I believe this to be right, and that's what I'm basing my hypothesis on. However, you are correct, there are many unknown variables.
What if the person that saw her at 2 is the person who took her?
Just a thought.
 
Sheriff's Log 11-12-2016:

"RP CONTACTING. IS FAMILY FRIEND OF MP. STATES HE REC'D INFORMATION FROM SUBJ TONIGHT THAT DIDN'T WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN LEO CONTACT. REC'D INFO THAT LISTED MALE IS HOLDING A FEM AGAINST HER WILL IN A STORAGE CONTAINER/SHED".

http://www.co.shasta.ca.us/docs/Sheriff/daily-logs/11-12-2016.pdf?sfvrsn=2
I saw this as well. I think that it is only on the public log because it has been checked out and cleared. It would be nice if we had an insider to confirm what gets posted to the daily log when a case is active.

I say this because they have reported that they have received 150 to 200 tips and we're not seeing that level of activity on the logs.

Sent from my SM-G928T using Tapatalk
 
Yes, good logic, true. I am basing my hypothesis on the assertion that she was seen at 2pm. She's distinct looking enough to where I believe this to be right, and that's what I'm basing my hypothesis on. However, you are correct, there are many unknown variables.

But what about the 11 AM sighting and text from Sherri herself to her husband? If both her family is right and that witness seeing her in the afternoon is correct that means people saw her jogging over a period of around 3 hours, which to me would point her jogging over to someone's house to be there for a number of hours (which there's been no mention of her visiting neighbors during the daytime as one of her activities), it could mean she was staging her disappearance so she was seen multiple times due to that, etc. If either 11 AM or 2 PM is correct that means something, but I haven't heard any specific information that would call into question the credibility of family nor any specific information to call into question the credibility of the afternoon witness. Since I have no specific basis to exclude one but not the other sighting that means I look into them both being correct, them both being wrong as well as only one sighting being correct but don't see a way of giving one scenario any more weight than any of the others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
75
Guests online
2,461
Total visitors
2,536

Forum statistics

Threads
602,415
Messages
18,140,221
Members
231,384
Latest member
lolofeist
Back
Top