MI MI - Danielle Stislicki, 28, Southfield, 2 Dec 2016 #10

[BloodHoundSleuther]

But he has not been arrested Yet .....

Yes, because law enforcement is still processing the evidence!

 

[Bird of Paradise]

I didn't say they were not supporting him. But their making it damn obvious what he's done. Even if unintentional.

Okay, to make everyone happy... if he killed her.. he's a psychopath.

IIRC the only place the SG was mentioned was by the news reporter who said the house that was searched is where a SG who worked at Met Life lived. One news reporter. One sentence and that's all it took for social media to become consumed with this one person.

I could throw out that the SG's wife found out something was going on and ordered a hit on DS. Crazy? Yep. Or is it? Just trying to amplify how easy it is for us to get stuck with one scenario.

If the family you're referring to that has made it obvious what he has done is who I think you are referring to, then you cannot provide a link to their statement.

Karina Vetrano's POI has been arrested. Hoping the same happens next for DS. That is the one thing I believe we ALL can agree on.

 

[DakotaMayi]

IIRC the only place the SG was mentioned was by the news reporter who said the house that was searched is where a SG who worked at Met Life lived. One news reporter. One sentence and that's all it took for social media to become consumed with this one person.

I could throw out that the SG's wife found out something was going on and ordered a hit on DS. Crazy? Yep. Or is it? Just trying to amplify how easy it is for us to get stuck with one scenario.

If the family you're referring to that has made it obvious what he has done is who I think you are referring to, then you cannot provide a link to their statement.

Karina Vetrano's POI has been arrested. Hoping the same happens next for DS. That is the one thing I believe we ALL can agree on.

I have no idea what family statement you are referring to. I wasn't aware they made a statement.

You COULD throw out all sorts of stuff but no. It wouldn't work like that. This works because stuff has been confiscated from his home. He refused to speak. And we know he worked with her. It is not all because of that one sentence. Add everything up and there is no other route to go on.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Was just looking back at some articles about Danielle's disappearance. Noticed that her birthday is February 28 (1988). Wouldn't it be wonderful if Dani returned to her family for her birthday? If not, I hope there is an arrest and charges filed in the case on or before February 28 raying:

 

[DakotaMayi]

Was just looking back at some articles about Danielle's disappearance. Noticed that her birthday is February 28 (1988). Wouldn't it be wonderful if Dani returned to her family for her birthday? If not, I hope there is an arrest and charges filed in the case on or before February 28 raying:

Awh, she's a Pisces like me (Feb 21.)

Happy nearly Birthday, Danielle.

 

[Rachel1]

It's clear that some are very uncomfortable with people believing SG is the key disappearance.
I certainly believe it and will continue to believe it until evidence proves otherwise.
I just reread back some and really don't see anywhere that someone claimed their statement was fact.
Arguing semantics isn't going to change my opinion on this case.

 

[RunVert]

Or say nothing and get deeper anyway. Which is what he's done.

When should an innocent person proclaim their innocence? When your lawyer tells you!

If a POI has previously been convicted of a felony or has had issues with LE in the past, the public may be able to attack that persons credibility by offering evidence of the conviction. Also, a POI may have a poor demeanor when speaking in public. A judge or jury or public opinion may not believe someone who, though telling the truth, is nervous and makes a bad impression. This just means that if you assert your innocence very aggressively — people think you’re lying..... if your voice shakes when you testify — people also could think you’re lying. People can also think you’re lying if you make too much eye contact, make too little eye contact, look at the floor, look at the judge, look at someone in the audience, look at your lawyer, look at the alleged victim (if any) and on and on and on. The bottom line is that professing your innocence can work — but it’s usually a lose-lose situation.

It is virtually impossible to convince someone you are innocent of a crime, screaming from a "rooftop" or not. There is no “right way” to behave when you’re proclaiming your innocence. Until PROVEN (not IMO or hunches or theory or guesses or what makes sense or what was or wasnt searched). It is the prosecution that has the burden of convincing jurors of someones guilt, not the other way around. Putting the burden of proof on the government and forcing them to prove their case is simply the fairest way to determine someones innocence or guilt . Our founding father’s knew a lot about human nature and our natural rush to judge people.

Maybe SG is guilty, but it is data, facts and proof that we need. We cant just look at a situation and just say guilty and label someone a murderer.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

^ Well said.

 

[Eileen730]

When should an innocent person proclaim their innocence? When your lawyer tells you!

If a POI has previously been convicted of a felony or has had issues with LE in the past, the public may be able to attack that persons credibility by offering evidence of the conviction. Also, a POI may have a poor demeanor when speaking in public. A judge or jury or public opinion may not believe someone who, though telling the truth, is nervous and makes a bad impression. This just means that if you assert your innocence very aggressively — people think you’re lying..... if your voice shakes when you testify — people also could think you’re lying. People can also think you’re lying if you make too much eye contact, make too little eye contact, look at the floor, look at the judge, look at someone in the audience, look at your lawyer, look at the alleged victim (if any) and on and on and on. The bottom line is that professing your innocence can work — but it’s usually a lose-lose situation.

It is virtually impossible to convince someone you are innocent of a crime, screaming from a "rooftop" or not. There is no “right way” to behave when you’re proclaiming your innocence. Until PROVEN (not IMO or hunches or theory or guesses or what makes sense or what was or wasnt searched). It is the prosecution that has the burden of convincing jurors of someones guilt, not the other way around. Putting the burden of proof on the government and forcing them to prove their case is simply the fairest way to determine someones innocence or guilt . Our founding father’s knew a lot about human nature and our natural rush to judge people.

Maybe SG is guilty, but it is data, facts and proof that we need. We cant just look at a situation and just say guilty and label someone a murderer.

Excelent Post!
Thank you!

 

[ChazAldi]

Not proclaiming your innocence is not proof of guilt. Proclaiming your innocence is not proof of innocence. Ted Bundy claimed he was innocent for a very long time. Most guys in prison say they didn't do it, and many people have been wrongly convicted. So it could mean something or it could mean nothing.

All that being said, I think based on LE activity (raid, search warrant, statements made) it is not unreasonable to assume that the SG is the POI. He isn't the POI on a guess or a whim. Something led to LE's activity. Evidence is being analysed and it is highly probable that LE will make their move one day.

It is hard not to get emotional in a situation like this. She seems like such a sweetheart who deserves better. Her family seem like amazing people. We want resolution. We want justice. Hell, I even get pissed off when someone suggests they were romantically involved. Like I know she wouldn't do that with a married man with a wife fighting cancer, based on what I know about her (and I do believe that I am correct in my thinking). But at the end of the day, WE JUST DON"T KNOW. So all we can do is speculate based on the information available to us. That information tells me that SG is the POI and it is just a matter of time.

 

[Momma2cam]

It's clear that some are very uncomfortable with people believing SG is the key disappearance.
I certainly believe it and will continue to believe it until evidence proves otherwise.
I just reread back some and really don't see anywhere that someone claimed their statement was fact.
Arguing semantics isn't going to change my opinion on this case.

I'm not uncomfortable with believing he is the key at all. I certainly agree with that theory and because it is the only information we have- all evidence known in msm points to him being involved at this point and if we go with the simplest explanation, he's the most likely suspect. My two theories have not changed from the beginning, he being the most probable.

I just think there are many possibilities of what happened that lead to her disappearance, all that could include him alone or with others as the suspect. It is hard to label someone a psychopath without knowing what crime was committed and the circumstances around it.

I was listening to the Serial podcast several weeks ago and was reminded that the majority of murders are committed out of passion and not premeditated in the way a serial killer would be defined, for example. It reminded me that murderers are therefore among, or even within, us.

I'm not arguing semantics at all. I think it is very appropriate to believe SG is involved. I just think without more info, it is smart to not close our mind to other possibilities. I'm hopeful LE has a lot more information that clearly points to SG, or whoever, as the suspect and they are just waiting until they have a solid case to move toward an arrest.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

 

[tmmac]

I'm happy to read that some folks have the same theories as myself. I think there is reason to think that SG and Dani had some sort of a relationship, whether it be friendly banter/flirting at beer pong tournaments to possibly something more. Her friend was not that concerned that Dani missed their dinner date, making it feasible to believe she may have known Dani had other plans before their meeting.
IMO: 27 year old females do not always tell their Mother their relationship status.

Parents and investigators read her journal though. You would think it would be mentioned in there if she had a boyfriend or any sort of intimate relationship with another person.

 

[tmmac]

I followed this case. Interesting that Dani's dad said it parallels her case. In Garrett's case, they had zero forensic evidence, and the accused walked free. That scares me a bit. Here's a brief synopsis of the case:

https://www.google.com/amp/www.nbcn...y-garrett-phillips-case-n657616?client=safari


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Danielle's dad did say he thought the story had parallels before he saw the ending (which was the guy walking free). I really hope that isn't the case for Danielle.

 

[DakotaMayi]

When should an innocent person proclaim their innocence? When your lawyer tells you!

If a POI has previously been convicted of a felony or has had issues with LE in the past, the public may be able to attack that persons credibility by offering evidence of the conviction. Also, a POI may have a poor demeanor when speaking in public. A judge or jury or public opinion may not believe someone who, though telling the truth, is nervous and makes a bad impression. This just means that if you assert your innocence very aggressively — people think you’re lying..... if your voice shakes when you testify — people also could think you’re lying. People can also think you’re lying if you make too much eye contact, make too little eye contact, look at the floor, look at the judge, look at someone in the audience, look at your lawyer, look at the alleged victim (if any) and on and on and on. The bottom line is that professing your innocence can work — but it’s usually a lose-lose situation.

It is virtually impossible to convince someone you are innocent of a crime, screaming from a "rooftop" or not. There is no “right way” to behave when you’re proclaiming your innocence. Until PROVEN (not IMO or hunches or theory or guesses or what makes sense or what was or wasnt searched). It is the prosecution that has the burden of convincing jurors of someones guilt, not the other way around. Putting the burden of proof on the government and forcing them to prove their case is simply the fairest way to determine someones innocence or guilt . Our founding father’s knew a lot about human nature and our natural rush to judge people.

Maybe SG is guilty, but it is data, facts and proof that we need. We cant just look at a situation and just say guilty and label someone a murderer.

Yeah that's all fine but my point is. He's not innocent.

 

[ashhole88]

Was just looking back at some articles about Danielle's disappearance. Noticed that her birthday is February 28 (1988). Wouldn't it be wonderful if Dani returned to her family for her birthday? If not, I hope there is an arrest and charges filed in the case on or before February 28 raying:

She's only two days younger than me. The list of similarities between us is grows. That's why I'm so emotionally invested in this case. She could easily be me. I think about her every time I'm driving down Telegraph or leaving work alone at night or shopping at the Trader Joe's right there. I hope they find you soon, Dani.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RunVert]

...You COULD throw out all sorts of stuff but no. It wouldn't work like that. This works because stuff has been confiscated from his home. He refused to speak. And we know he worked with her. It is not all because of that one sentence. Add everything up and there is no other route to go on.

1- "This works because stuff has been confiscated from his home." --- Does not prove guilt

2- "He refused to speak" -- I touched on this in a previous post.....Does not prove guilt

3 - "he worked with her" ---- Does not prove guilt

4 - "Add everything up and there is no other route to go on" --- Sure about that? Maybe SG and DS met up for lunch that day. Do we know what DS did during her lunch break? Maybe she had lunch with him at his place for whatever reason. Her DNA would be there, they would have been seen together in a car that day too, and she would have been seen at his place also ----- perhaps during lunch time. I dont recall what time witnesses said they saw her at his house that day....was it 12:30pm at lunch or 5:30pm? who knows!? There are lots of routes to go on actually.

LE will build their case, and the evidence will determine guilty or innocent in due time.

 

[DakotaMayi]

1- "This works because stuff has been confiscated from his home." --- Does not prove guilt

2- "He refused to speak" -- I touched on this in a previous post.....Does not prove guilt

3 - "he worked with her" ---- Does not prove guilt

4 - "Add everything up and there is no other route to go on" --- Sure about that? Maybe SG and DS met up for lunch that day. Do we know what DS did during her lunch break? Maybe she had lunch with him at his place for whatever reason. Her DNA would be there, they would have been seen together in a car that day too, and she would have been seen at his place also ----- perhaps during lunch time. I dont recall what time witnesses said they saw her at his house that day....was it 12:30pm at lunch or 5:30pm? who knows!? There are lots of routes to go on actually.

LE will build their case, and the evidence will determine guilty or innocent in due time.

Yep. I'm sure about that.

 

[Coldpizza]

A healthy debate is fine. Personalizing posts is not.

Address the post and not the poster please.

Thanks

 

[LBee]

It's clear that some are very uncomfortable with people believing SG is the key disappearance.
I certainly believe it and will continue to believe it until evidence proves otherwise.
I just reread back some and really don't see anywhere that someone claimed their statement was fact.
Arguing semantics isn't going to change my opinion on this case.

I'm also not uncomfortable believing that he is the key (or at least a huge puzzle piece) to the answers to her disappearance. I just think that until it's been proven that he is in FACT the perpetrator, that we aren't doing Danielle justice by looking no further. I kind of operate under the "exhaust all options" philosophy, including here.
Bottom line, we don't have all of the facts, we actually have very little to go on that has come directly from LE.
Some people don't like having holes poked in their theory, I get that, but I kind of think that if our theory is correct, the holes can be plugged up pretty easily.

 

[newwe]

Parents and investigators read her journal though. You would think it would be mentioned in there if she had a boyfriend or any sort of intimate relationship with another person.

Unless you're a 12 year old girl, I don't think that's necessarily true. I have a journal and I write about prayers, dreams, goals, ideas, personal growth, ect. It looks like Danielle is a girl with lots of goals and dreams, so I don't think she was really using a journal to write about boys. Of course I could be wrong. I think my husband was disappointed to find out I wasn't writing about him in my journal...lol Someone (Danielle's dad or friend, I can't remember) even mentioned that police seemed confused about her love for duck fat, thinking it was a person. I think people assume a journal is used for personal, intimate feelings, like the kind you had a little key and lock for when you were a kid. But some people have them for fun and to just write down things...like your love for a new cooking ingredient.

However, I do hope she wrote something in there that could help with this case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk