Found Deceased CO - Gannon Stauch, 11, Colorado Springs, El Paso County, 27 Jan 2020 **ARREST** #35

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pianoturtle said:
All her word salad aside, I wouldn’t put any stock into her calling her SUV a car. I call my van “my car” half the time.
Click to expand...

It's not just that one word. It's a pattern of her using a noun that's vague (car is vague and generic) when she could be more specific (but that would tie her down further to a particular story).

I sure hope everyone would agree that TS's use of "my car" could mean any of the three vehicles attached to that Mandan home. Since she was claiming she was out of miles on "her car," then perhaps she took "the red truck" which, as you say, can be called a car by her. SUV's are classed as light trucks, but people misuse words all the time.

I am not going to build any theories around which car she took (although I think it's important) until we get a confirmation of which vehicle she took to the airport. It makes the most sense for her to take the truck so that Al cannot immediately see what's in it or not in it.

If she did take her own SUV, then she is lying about being worried about "too many miles," as she just put more on it by taking it out (when she didn't want to use the SUV, due to mileage, the day before). It's true that the airport is closer than the Petco, but then that begs of the question of why go to such a faraway Petco (or PIAS or bike shop?)

We know she used that trip to discard some evidence (a sock and a board, which flew out of the back of the truck) but was there a reason she didn't want AS to see that truck? I think so.

If she (stupidly) took her SUV to the airport and swapped cars, then perhaps it's because she wanted the least evidence in her own vehicle. But that would have made an already-suspicious AS have to use his own truck to do whatever he did that day, I do not believe that he accompanied TS in going "door to door" by driving a rental car slowly down the streets of their neighborhood..and then the next neighborhood. I do believe that if AS's truck was in the driveway, that he would have looked it over, although not as carefully as he would the following Saturday, when RD shows him the surveillance video.
 
Ontario Mom said:
Okay, fair enough.

So without using social media rumors and claims that we can't discuss anyway, how are we to be convinced she was ever there that day?
Click to expand...


Damn..trying to figure out how I can answer that.
I will say that there was someone that had an interaction with her that day at that place.
Inside of that place.
 
10ofRods said:
Well, you're asking a question that, if we were going to answer it fully, would require citing SM that's not allowed here. Personally, I find it very believable that she was at Petco, since the Female Interviewer specifically asked her about that SM information and TS confirmed that the SM rumor was true.

The fact that other humans state they saw her (and said so a month ago) makes me believe that TS had to confirm what they saw, since there's video and since she knows LE knows she went there. That's what TS does - tries to trickle truth, and she couldn't evade the Petco issue when directly asked.
Click to expand...

Based on your answer I'm going to assume there hasn't been any confirmation by LE to state that she was in fact at the Petco.

So we're all hanging this on:

1. her word
2. the word of random strangers on social media

I mean sure, it's possible she actually was there, twice, on the same day. But is this really what we're basing this info on? Honest question, and just trying to understand.
 
Ontario Mom said:
Based on your answer I'm going to assume there hasn't been any confirmation by LE to state that she was in fact at the Petco.

So we're all hanging this on:

1. her word
2. the word of random strangers on social media

I mean sure, it's possible she actually was there, twice, on the same day. But is this really what we're basing this info on? Honest question, and just trying to understand.
Click to expand...


As far as her being there twice?
I have not heard anything to back that up.
 
Ontario Mom said:
Okay, fair enough.

So without using social media rumors and claims that we can't discuss anyway, how are we to be convinced she was ever there that day?
Click to expand...

If we throw out everything TS has ever said, then we might as well remain quiet about the case here on WS, as there's very little in this case that isn't based on TS's own utterances (and the fact that somehow, LE has brought 4 major charges against her).

Perhaps you will need to wait until the Pre-Trial Hearing or the trial itself to become convinced. I'm sure the employees or video from Petco will be available at that time.

If a person has an identity on FB that seems real, mentions their own place of employment across various SM platforms, personally risks getting involved in a murder case, etc., I tend to believe they are not a kook - but YMMV.

Further, the Petco in question (which has been the subject of many a tweet and many a FB message) has not in anyway tried to say that said employee is an imposter or that they have no involvement in this case (you'd think they would). Instead, we get a hesitant TS trying to bluff her way through a question about Petco, which you can hear on the most recent audio. TS's surprise was obvious to me, and that was quite convincing.

Some of us are convinced, some of us are not.
 
FNG said:
We just got word the judge has allowed news stations to live stream the hearing online. We'll let you know when it's up and running.

Ashley Franco on Twitter


I'm glad the judge allowed this.
Click to expand...


YIPPEE!!
Except that's dinner time here and I have a family that insists on being fed. Daily! Nervy bunch they are. I guess I'll have to catch up later.
 
Ravenmoon said:
Damn..trying to figure out how I can answer that.
I will say that there was someone that had an interaction with her that day at that place.
Inside of that place.
Click to expand...

I know, it took numerous tries to word the question in a way where I didn't have to tattle on myself for even bringing it up (but I did anyway, because I honestly don't want to skirt the rules).

I've read the rumors too, and I'm asking, if we have to toss the rumors aside (and we do, per the rules) why are we taking TS's lying word for anything, since that's what she does, lie to cover lies, and invent crap to make her lying lies, more believable.

It's really hard to say what I'm trying to say without breaking the rules, so I hope I'm making sense.
 
10ofRods said:
If we throw out everything TS has ever said, then we might as well remain quiet about the case here on WS, as there's very little in this case that isn't based on TS's own utterances (and the fact that somehow, LE has brought 4 major charges against her).

Perhaps you will need to wait until the Pre-Trial Hearing or the trial itself to become convinced. I'm sure the employees or video from Petco will be available at that time.

If a person has an identity on FB that seems real, mentions their own place of employment across various SM platforms, personally risks getting involved in a murder case, etc., I tend to believe they are not a kook - but YMMV.

Further, the Petco in question (which has been the subject of many a tweet and many a FB message) has not in anyway tried to say that said employee is an imposter or that they have no involvement in this case (you'd think they would). Instead, we get a hesitant TS trying to bluff her way through a question about Petco, which you can hear on the most recent audio. TS's surprise was obvious to me, and that was quite convincing.

Some of us are convinced, some of us are not.
Click to expand...

Thank you, that was the kind of answer I was looking for :)

I heard the same interview others did, and came away with a different take. She almost seemed bored/annoyed with the topic.

jmo
 
I'm so torn today on how to feel over the hearing.

I'm happy for the judicial process to begin. I'm devastated for Gannon and his family.

I've been following this case from the beginning and at each morsel of information been trying to attach rational thought processes to an absolutely irrational person. It's frustrating to try and remind myself that I cannot begin to understand why TS says and does what she does.

But at the same time, I'm thankful that my head and heart cannot think like her.
 
Ontario Mom said:
I know, it took numerous tries to word the question in a way where I didn't have to tattle on myself for even bringing it up (but I did anyway, because I honestly don't want to skirt the rules).

I've read the rumors too, and I'm asking, if we have to toss the rumors aside (and we do, per the rules) why are we taking TS's lying word for anything, since that's what she does, lie to cover lies, and invent crap to make her lying lies, more believable.

It's really hard to say what I'm trying to say without breaking the rules, so I hope I'm making sense.
Click to expand...

I suppose that is certainly something to ponder.
My personal reasons for believing that she was there (at least once)
is because:
During the statement that she made to a certain online publication, never once did she mention a visit place in question.

During the phone call, the caller asked about whether she HAD been there.
TS seemed almost like she had been caught in something she did not want to become public knowledge.
She briefly addressed this, admitted it.. and quickly moved away from the subject.
Honestly..prior to the phone call, I saw little relevance to her visit to this establishment.
Now.. I feel like she was really hoping that the knowledge of her visit was forgotten and had hoped it would not resurface.

That makes me believe not only that she was there..but the reasons are much more relevant than I would have ever believed originally.

ETA:

AMOO JMO MOO
 
duckduck said:
I get that. But I'm talking about heavier sedatives that might prevent outbursts. Is that allowed? Or does that open the courts to liability that she wasn't in her right mind? Or chemically coerced?
Click to expand...

I just asked my husband and he said they prescribe whatever medications the doctor has listed/prescribed for them, especially when they go to court. They would not be liable as long as prescribed by a doctor. He said they also can not be forced to take if the inmates refused. He also said in his opinion and from his experience being around inmates or murderers she is probably not new to any psychological medications.
 
Kyte said:
Leigh said TS said 'I took my OWN car to the airport' which lead me to believe she was actually talking about her own car.
BUT who knows for real right!?
It's not like we can believe any words that come out of the mouth of a child murderer trying to cover her tracks!!
Click to expand...
You absolutely right! Only AS can attest to her statement. And unlike TS, AS remained silent to aid in the return of his son and to protect the investigation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 69 more.
Total: 2,053 (members: 70, guests: 1,983)

Online statistics

Members online
70
Guests online
1,983
Total visitors
2,053
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,662
Messages
18,127,921
Members
231,120
Latest member
GibsonGirl
Back
Top