Found Alive CA - Sherri Papini, 34, Redding, 2 November 2016 - #6

[bluesneakers]

To presume the phone was dropped during an abduction is contrary to probability.

I agree - I don't think it landed there during a struggle, but what about tossed?

 

[IllinoisMissing]

Yes, an iPhone can track your every move but you must turn must be enabled in settings.
Here's an article that explains:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterso...-this-is-how-t?utm_term=.mwxyQ0O6R#.jrG0NlkvM

Thanks. I knew that the IPhone could do it if set up that way but I was questioning whether the police could retrieve info if it wasn't. Since there are so few cell towers her phone would likely ping off of one tower no matter if she was home or a mile away. My question was whether they could know that if her phone was not set up to show.

Sent from my SM-G928T using Tapatalk

 

[wfgodot]

Why? I'm honestly curious.

Because more people leave voluntarily than are abducted. The presence of the phone itself means little to that argument, but since the husband allegedly found it in a place she might have been before disappearing, this obscures what otherwise might be a likelier explanation: she didn't want to be traced when she left, so she left it there.

 

[sumzero]

I agree - I don't think it landed there during a struggle, but what about tossed?

If you were an abductor with any brains at all, wouldn't you make it a priority to separate the victim from her phone? She could have dropped it during the struggle, had it ripped from her by the abductor, or been forced, perhaps at knifepoint, to drop it. The point is that it'd make sense for the abductor then and there to separate Sherri from her phone.

 

[Gardener1850]

I think it was an abduction too, but I question if someone close to the family arranged it for money. The offer of a ransom by a complete stranger who also arranged to have a professional negotiator just throws me off. Also because it's not common to have an unknown philanthropist convinced of an abduction to offer ransom money. I would think if this person liked to offer money to missing persons cases as his 'charity', we would of heard of this in prior cases.

How do we know it's a complete stranger offering the reverse ransom? My guess is this is a friend or family member of Sherri's that does not want her family nor the public to know who is offering the money. It could be anyone who knows Sherri from a former employer to KP's parents. Perhaps they want to remain anonymous because they don't want their identity to detract from bringing Sherri home. I do agree the reverse ransom is very strange (not common) and I don't know what to make of it in this case.

 

[soanyway]

I initially thought that maybe SP's former employer could be involved, but wants to remain anonymous. But it could be the family wanting to distance themselves from LE if they felt the abductor was more likely to work with them.

I think it was an abduction too, but I question if someone close to the family arranged it for money. The offer of a ransom by a complete stranger who also arranged to have a professional negotiator just throws me off. Also because it's not common to have an unknown philanthropist convinced of an abduction to offer ransom money. I would think if this person liked to offer money to missing persons cases as his 'charity', we would of heard of this in prior cases.

 

[sumzero]

Because more people leave voluntarily than are abducted. The presence of the phone itself means little to that argument, but since the husband allegedly found it in a place she might have been before disappearing, this obscures what otherwise might be a likelier explanation: she didn't want to be traced when she left, so she left it there.

You don't believe Keith found it there? Why would he make it up if it wasn't true?

 

[DexterMorgan]

I believe that the original poster is correct. Pinging (when a phone communicates with a cell tower) is not a very precise way to track a phone. As she said if there are few cell towers in the area, Sherri could have traveled 5 miles but would still be pinging to the same cell tower.
Regarding phones communicating with wifi signals... This would in theory be correct, however, the vast majority of wifi signals are password protected so her phone would not be able to connect to the WiFi signal by merely being within signal strength.

But her husband has the phone tracking app which will show her movement before the phone was dropped.

 

[Tuliptiptoe]

I agree - I don't think it landed there during a struggle, but what about tossed?

I could see an abductor tossing it at intersection on the way out.

I could also imagine a scenario she was meeting to leave with someone willingly. Maybe she didn't leave phone at home because it was a long walk, wanted to be able to communicate with someone picking her up. Ride arrives, she dumps the phone.

So little facts, at this point in time, almost anything is possible.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

 

[AceDetective]

Yes, they would.

Not necessarily. The phone was only a mile from her house. It's doubtful in that rural area that a mile of movement would be detectable via the tower logs.

And the phone doesn't normally log GPS position, that I'm aware of. As far as I know, you would need to specifically enable something to log the GPS data, which not a lot of people do.

On the other hand, the iPhone's by-the-minute step logging facilities would probably give them a nice amount of information. They would know exactly when she went running or walking and for how long, assuming she brought her phone along. They would also be able to see if there were steps recorded that were consistent with a walk or jog to the mailboxes and, if there were steps, precisely what time they ended. It seems likely it would log the tossing of the phone as a step, also.

Whatever the sources, I am sure LE has quite a bit of information.

 

[Tuliptiptoe]

How do we know it's a complete stranger offering the reverse ransom? My guess is this is a friend or family member of Sherri's that does not want her family nor the public to know who is offering the money. It could be anyone who knows Sherri from a former employer to KP's parents. Perhaps they want to remain anonymous because they don't want their identity to detract from bringing Sherri home. I do agree the reverse ransom is very strange (not common) and I don't know what to make of it in this case.

Didn't the letter state something about it being "their negotiatior" that has done this for them before?

Even weirder than it already is if Sherri, whose possibly been abducted, also happens to have a friend or family member that's done several negotiations. Jmo.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

 

[bluesneakers]

Well, it's easier for me to imagine she ran away and left her phone in a place she believed her husband would look than it is to imagine a stranger, a struggle, and a snatching.

Me too. I think it's completely possible she walked or jogged up to that intersection sometime around 11 (when she was seen), turned off her phone (it went off at noon), and got in a car with someone.

This would mean the spotting at 2pm is incorrect. Otherwise she turned the phone off at noon (at home, on her run, on a walk, whatever) and met up with someone closer to 2pm.

 

[wfgodot]

You don't believe Keith found it there? Why would he make it up if it wasn't true?

I did not say that. I think he probably did.

 

[Alexsea]

I'm on so many fences here I need a horse...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[JeannaT]

Because more people leave voluntarily than are abducted. The presence of the phone itself means little to that argument, but since the husband allegedly found it in a place she might have been before disappearing, this obscures what otherwise might be a likelier explanation: she didn't want to be traced when she left, so she left it there.

I do agree that more people leave voluntarily than are abducted.

But how many leave without a trace - leave with no apparent means to support themselves, with no warning, and aren't found in this amount of time with this amount of police work?

I think we've all seen baffling cases where people do disappear, and are found years later leading a life kind of under the radar. But from my observation, that's much more rare than stranger abductions.

And one thing that always surprises me - how very many people go missing and are never, ever found so we can't add them to this statistical pool of those who are abducted vs. those who leave voluntarily. There are a LOT of missing people.

 

[Shy1214]

The most straightforward explanation for the phone being drooped/discarded along her known jogging route is that it happened when Sherri was abducted. Other explanations, while possible, IMO, begin to get less credible the more you examine them. But that's just my opinion.

If Sherri was abducted at home, I doubt the abductor took the phone with him and then tossed it. Possible, but not likely, IMO. Nor do I think Sherri planted the phone there. If she wanted to pretend an abduction took place, she could've come up with a much better plan, one less ambiguous. The idea that her abductor spent hours in her home before whisking Sherri away also seems far-fetched. Without evidence that some stranger was in her home, I don't buy it.

It also doesn't look like she voluntarily left with a secret lover. Surely, LE would've found phone records or texts that connected her with someone else. Her life, from what we've been told, was wrapped up in being a mom.

If she just left on her own, planning to start a new life alone, she didn't seem to prepare herself with money, clothing, transportation, etc. Possible, but not likely.

The other viable possibility is suicide. But why go somewhere and do it where she wouldn't be found? And why wouldn't she just leave the phone at home? Again, suicide is possible, but unless we learn something specific about mental health concerns, I think it's unlikely.

If we take the text to her husband at face value, she apparently planned to be home at lunchtime. She wanted to know if he, depending on his schedule, might be home for lunch, too. Keith didn't express any surprise about the content of her text. So, it must be something that happened from time to time.

If she was wrapping presents (plural), she may have noticed the time and figured, if she hurried, she could do a quick jog and get back before lunch. If, by then, she heard back from Keith, she could plan lunch accordingly (and finish wrapping the presents).

While out, some people cutting down a tree saw her jogging (around 11 am as reported by Keith). Then, sometime shortly before noon, she was abducted near the mailboxes, dropping the phone during the struggle. (LE would know if that was the last time her phone was used.)

Abductions can happen so quickly. If Sherri was caught off-guard, someone could have gotten her into a vehicle under restraint (perhaps threatening her with a weapon) in no time at all. Except for the phone and earbuds, she disappears without a trace.

Very thorough and detailed.
This is what I am leaning toward as well, unfortunately

 

[sumzero]

I did not say that. I think he probably did.

OK. Where do you think Sherri went, if she left voluntarily?

 

[Deleted member 110058]

Thanks. I knew that the IPhone could do it if set up that way but I was questioning whether the police could retrieve info if it wasn't. Since there are so few cell towers her phone would likely ping off of one tower no matter if she was home or a mile away. My question was whether they could know that if her phone was not set up to show.

Sent from my SM-G928T using Tapatalk

Got it. The answer is, no. If the "frequent locations" option is not enabled, no data will be saved in the phone. This is in accordance to privacy laws.
Yes, they can easily tell if this is enabled or not.

 

[soanyway]

Sorry, Gardener. Just read this, I think we fell on the same page again.

How do we know it's a complete stranger offering the reverse ransom? My guess is this is a friend or family member of Sherri's that does not want her family nor the public to know who is offering the money. It could be anyone who knows Sherri from a former employer to KP's parents. Perhaps they want to remain anonymous because they don't want their identity to detract from bringing Sherri home. I do agree the reverse ransom is very strange (not common) and I don't know what to make of it in this case.

 

[Stormy415]

I agree - I don't think it landed there during a struggle, but what about tossed?

JMO, if it was tossed, there more than likely would be some damage to the phone. Perhaps some scratches, or, if it had a cover, perhaps some nicks of dirt or something else. I just think the LE know a lot more than us here. :tantrum: