IA IA - David Schultz, 53, Wall Lake, 21 November 2023 #2

[abanddb123]

Tarabull posted one that says towel, thanks. I guess dna is totally possible. Hopeful, thx.

This is a screenshot, but when I open the gazette, it won't let me read the whole article without buying. Sorry. If anyone else could find a link it would much be appreciated. I'm having trouble. If not allowed , my apologies.

 

[Lisbeth_S]

And that makes sense. It would be a theory on their part, not based on anything factual. His phone data may have come back negative but maybe he had a burner Phone, if that’s the situation.

If he decided to leave voluntarily and got himself a burner phone, why not take the $2k from his wallet then? Surely he would need cash to survive and, as per SS, he was not one to use credit/debit cards, so I doubt he got himself one under false name.

This theory does not add up IMO.

I keep going back to the "broken" relationship DS had with local LE and SS's complaints of not being kept in the loop. I wonder if they are just being dismissive of the situation or just keeping the info they have for themselves.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

Again, not blaming Sarah for doing what she was advised to do. But I've wondered if it's likely LE aren't very happy with her because she did perhaps mislead them when she first reported Dave missing.

I've defended the way LE first handled the situation, because they believed they were looking for a man with a medical issue and not a potential victim of foul play. But I also wouldn't blame them if they're quite upset about all the potential evidence that was lost because they didn't know to look for it.

 

[Seattle1]

Again, not blaming Sarah for doing what she was advised to do. But I've wondered if it's likely LE aren't very happy with her because she did perhaps mislead them when she first reported Dave missing.

I've defended the way LE first handled the situation, because they believed they were looking for a man with a medical issue and not a potential victim of foul play. But I also wouldn't blame them if they're quite upset about all the potential evidence that was lost because they didn't know to look for it.

Respectfully, once the deputy located the empty tractor and trailer parked in the roadway with a load of piglets, the driver's phone, wallet, cash, inside the cab, and no sign of the driver, it was the job of LE to assess the scene as suspicious and worth protecting the scene. It was hardly the wife's place to tell LE how to do their job!

The deputy phoned Sarah using David's phone -- at this point, LE responded quickly as Sarah had hoped and found the truck -- and when David wasn't found slumped over inside the cab, but instead the rig parked in the roadway, shut-off with the piglets still in the trailer, this wasn't a medical event!

In other words, claiming a medical event was intended for the call to be given priority status and additional resources searching for the truck and driver, and it worked -- with the exception the driver is still missing. MOO

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

Respectfully, once the deputy located the empty tractor and trailer parked in the roadway with a load of piglets, the driver's phone, wallet, cash, inside the cab, and no sign of the driver, it was the job of LE to assess the scene as suspicious and worth protecting the scene. It was hardly the wife's place to tell LE how to do their job!

The deputy phoned Sarah using David's phone -- at this point, LE responded quickly as Sarah had hoped and found the truck -- and when David wasn't found slumped over inside the cab, but instead the rig parked in the roadway, shut-off with the piglets still in the trailer, this wasn't a medical event!

In other words, claiming a medical event was intended for the call to be given priority status and additional resources searching for the truck and driver, and it worked -- with the exception the driver is still missing. MOO

BBM

Nobody could possibly know it wasn't a medical event. We still don't know it definitely wasn't a medical event!

LE treated it as a medical issue because that was the information they'd been given. They weren't looking for third parties, fingerprints, DNA... they were looking for David.

There's nothing i've personally heard about the scene that would be immediately suspicious if I had been told there was a possible/likely medical issue.

 

[Knox]

If he decided to leave voluntarily and got himself a burner phone, why not take the $2k from his wallet then? Surely he would need cash to survive and, as per SS, he was not one to use credit/debit cards, so I doubt he got himself one under false name.

This theory does not add up IMO.

I keep going back to the "broken" relationship DS had with local LE and SS's complaints of not being kept in the loop. I wonder if they are just being dismissive of the situation or just keeping the info they have for themselves.

This case attracted a lot of attention, so I don’t think LE can be dismissive. But they may have information they are keeping to themselves. Surely the info from the warrants they sought on cell phone and finances have came back by now? No additional requests for help from the public have been made, Jake has virtually went silent and is no longer posting anything at all in reference to David. It’s all very strange, I wonder what the locals are currently saying?

 

[JerseyWasHome2]

This case attracted a lot of attention, so I don’t think LE can be dismissive. But they may have information they are keeping to themselves. Surely the info from the warrants they sought on cell phone and finances have came back by now? No additional requests for help from the public have been made, Jake has virtually went silent and is no longer posting anything at all in reference to David. It’s all very strange, I wonder what the locals are currently saying?

Sarah posted on her page that she did an interview the other day with FreightWaves that she will post soon. She and others are still trying to get the FBI involved.

 

[Knox]

SAC CITY, Iowa -- The Sac County Sheriff's Office reiterated Friday in a Facebook comment that investigators are "using every resource available" in David Schultz's missing persons case.

"The Sac County Sheriff's Office and the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation have and are using every resource available to us. We have not and will not release details of this investigation while it is ongoing, which leads to wild speculation that we are not doing anything. This could not be further from the truth," the comment, which was posted to the sheriff's office's Facebook page, said.

That same day, Sac County Sheriff Ken McClure told The Journal he is confident his office and the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation will eventually solve the case.

Sac County Sheriff: 'Using every resource available' in David Schultz case

Schultz, a 53-year-old Wall Lake truck driver and father of 10-year-old twin boys, disappeared under mysterious circumstances shortly before Thanksgiving.

siouxcityjournal.com

 

[Knox]

Sac County Sheriff's Office​

Late last week, the Sac County Crime Stoppers was re-organized.

Donations to the Crime Stoppers Fund can be made directly to the Iowa State Bank in Sac City, Odebolt, and Lake View. Currently, we are offering a $2,000.00 reward for information regarding the disappearance or whereabouts of David Schultz.

Anyone with information can contact the Sac County Sheriff's Office at 712-662-7127 or the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation - DCI at 712-262-1873.



Sac County Sheriff's Office
The Sac County Sheriff's Office and the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation have and are using every resource available to us. We have not and will not release details of this investigation while it is ongoing, which leads to wild speculation that we are not doing anything. This could not be further from the truth.

This is the comment referred to in the news story above.

 

[mst]

i think the initial medical emergency is key here. Once the scene was contaminated, any finger print, dna match, etc would never survive the court. I personally think LE is likely doing their job and until they can completely rule out any close friends or family, they aren't telling them much.

 

[Joe Friday]

There's nothing i've personally heard about the scene that would be immediately suspicious if I had been told there was a possible/likely medical issue.

SFSBM

You don't think the items found in the ditch a little bit suspicious? (coat, phone charger, towel)

You would think LE would have thought so. But apparently not, since LE let the truck be taken away apparently by the mechanic to an unsecured location and didn't bother to process the truck forensically until a few days later according to Sarah.

JMO

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

i think the initial medical emergency is key here. Once the scene was contaminated, any finger print, dna match, etc would never survive the court. I personally think LE is likely doing their job and until they can completely rule out any close friends or family, they aren't telling them much.

I probably haven't been explaining myself very well, but this has pretty much been my point.

LE have been criticised by a lot of people, including Sarah, for not doing enough. They've been criticised for not sealing the scene, for letting people climb in and out of the truck, for letting the mechanic drive it away, for not examining it until days after David disappeared. Etc. and so forth.

They were given particular information to elicit a particular response, but now they're being criticised from all sides because they responded accordingly. They thought it was a medical emergency.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

SFSBM

You don't think the items found in the ditch a little bit suspicious? (coat, phone charger, towel)

You would think LE would have thought so. But apparently not, since LE let the truck be taken away apparently by the mechanic to an unsecured location and didn't bother to process the truck forensically until a few days later according to Sarah.

JMO

Not really, because we don't know *how* those items were found--by that I mean their proximity to each other. If the other items simply fell out of the jacket pocket, the only item that was actually dropped was the jacket.

People who are suffering from medical issues, physical or mental, could easily wander away and drop things as they go. I'd expect someone suffering from a medical problem to be found nearby, but until I had thoroughly searched the surrounding area I'm not sure I would see any reason to find it suspicious.

LE began to seriously investigate other possibilities after they searched the surrounding area without finding Dave. Which makes sense to me.

 

[SharonNeedles]

This is the comment referred to in the news story above.

I want to be careful about staying within our rules here... That article from the Sioux City Journal is just quoting what was posted on a social media site by the Sac County Sheriff's Department on Dec 26, then a subsequent comment of Friday Jan 6 in response to disrespectful criticism towards LE and the investigation.

 

[stickb0y7]

In a situation where a person goes missing but they actually just left on their own volition, has a crime been committed? Would LE have any obligation to disclose if they found a person who did that but didn't want to be found? What rights to privacy would the "missing" person have - for example if they were found or contacted by LE, could they tell them they're fine and to leave them alone?
I think realistically LE would release info saying the person was located and leave it at that but I'm just thinking hypothetically. Or for example if LE strongly suspects that is the case but they haven't confirmed it, would they keep putting resources into something that may not be a crime?

 

[JerseyWasHome2]

In a situation where a person goes missing but they actually just left on their own volition, has a crime been committed? Would LE have any obligation to disclose if they found a person who did that but didn't want to be found? What rights to privacy would the "missing" person have - for example if they were found or contacted by LE, could they tell them they're fine and to leave them alone?
I think realistically LE would release info saying the person was located and leave it at that but I'm just thinking hypothetically. Or for example if LE strongly suspects that is the case but they haven't confirmed it, would they keep putting resources into something that may not be a crime?

All good questions!

Aside from all of the emotional aspects, it also leaves a hefty financial responsibility on the remaining spouse if one of the parties walks away from shared debts like a mortgage or child care.

I found this, that touches on it a bit, but it's in the context of a divorce situation:

Abandonment and Desertion in Divorce

Learn what abandonment or desertion means in a marriage, how it can affect a divorce, and when it can lead to criminal charges.

www.divorcenet.com

What Is Criminal Abandonment?​

Spouses who desert their families might also be charged with criminal nonsupport. Although this crime is sometimes referred to as abandonment or desertion, it's not just about leaving the family home. Instead, it's focused on the failure to provide needed support after leaving.

All parents have a legal duty to support their minor children with necessary food, clothing, shelter, and medical care. And all states have some form of a law making it a crime to shirk that duty intentionally. In some states, these laws may apply even if a court hasn't issued a child support order. Generally, however, parents won't be guilty of criminal nonsupport if they don't have the financial ability to support their kids.

 

[TL4S]

In a situation where a person goes missing but they actually just left on their own volition, has a crime been committed? Would LE have any obligation to disclose if they found a person who did that but didn't want to be found? What rights to privacy would the "missing" person have - for example if they were found or contacted by LE, could they tell them they're fine and to leave them alone?
I think realistically LE would release info saying the person was located and leave it at that but I'm just thinking hypothetically. Or for example if LE strongly suspects that is the case but they haven't confirmed it, would they keep putting resources into something that may not be a crime?

In this particular case, would the abandonment of the pigs be criminal?

ETA: Especially because they were not his property.

 

[Laughing]

In this particular case, would the abandonment of the pigs be criminal?

ETA: Especially because they were not his property.

He is the custodian of the livestock.

That may not be the most up-to-date term, this old person hasn't had university Animal Science since 1983 or 84.

He does have legal responsibility for the livestock imho.

jmho ymmv lrr

 

[Chimera]

IMO, this has to be the most arrogant Sheriff Interview I've ever listened to. Keyboard detectives, Perry Mason, seriously?...

https://www.tiktok.com/video/7313265999040761134

It almost makes me think someone out there knows more than they're letting on ; and that could be anyone.
Omo.

 

[katydid23]

In a situation where a person goes missing but they actually just left on their own volition, has a crime been committed? Would LE have any obligation to disclose if they found a person who did that but didn't want to be found? What rights to privacy would the "missing" person have - for example if they were found or contacted by LE, could they tell them they're fine and to leave them alone?
I think realistically LE would release info saying the person was located and leave it at that but I'm just thinking hypothetically. Or for example if LE strongly suspects that is the case but they haven't confirmed it, would they keep putting resources into something that may not be a crime?

I don't think he can legally abandon financial responsibility for his minor children by just running off. The police would have to tell his wife about him being alive and well, and I think she could follow up to have him forced to pay support. IMO