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

[Yeahbabs]

I have asked this before.. and cannot find it. I was new here and found the berkley fb page info from here on that night LE took items from house. I now look back and realize whoever popped in and posted it here is related to the case somehow .. even if it was a media person. It was such a needle in the haystack fb page. Someone wanted it leaked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That was bothering me, too. I just did some digging. I think the first time it came up was on post #409 on thread #3, which was made by Enchantment. I'd be curious if you look at that again if that's when you think you first saw it mentioned.

 

[DexterMorgan]

Snipped for space- I'm two days behind and have a lot to say LOL

For some reason, the word acquaintance has bothered me from the beginning. It was made clear that he was a SG at ML where DS worked. Why not just say they interacted at work? Coworker doesn't work, so maybe they just needed a word. But assuming it came from LE, it just seems like an odd choice to add. I think it bothers me because I feel like LE might use acquaintance to be respectful if there was a relationship (considering they have no definitive proof SG is responsible and SG is married) and they would obviously try to be as respectful as possible in regards to DS. It makes me feel awful that these thoughts are even in my head, but a relationship seems to answer a lot of questions, like how did they end up together, why would she have gone with him, etc, that everyone seems to have. I think DS could have told a friend about a relationship (if there was one), but not let her parents know. Adult or not, parental approval is important to many. I think that info could have certainly led them to the SG's home in a hurry. But seeing them together on video somewhere could as well.I'm really just not sure what I think about the whole situation.

I don't think SG met her at ML. Too much risk, even if this wasn't a planned abduction. He hadn't been there for months. He wouldn't know who might be patrolling, who might be leaving, if and where there were cameras, not to mention the possibility of neighboring buildings having cameras. I think he could have followed her somewhere or they could have agreed to meet somewhere. I know LE has said they don't think she drove to her apt. but I'm not ruling out the possibility that she did drive there and then left from there and her car was returned by someone else. With SG's wife in the hospital, there would have been an empty house, but I would think close proximity neighbors might question a strange vehicle in the driveway (again, maybe that's why LE searched so quickly) and they'd also run the risk of friends/family driving or stopping by. He could easily tell friends/family that DS had stopped by to bring something or he could hide her in a closet. Without a car, the risks would be much smaller, IMO.

If it wasn't consensual, why would he bring her to his house? It's not like she was a neighbor or would have been in the area otherwise.



Again snipped- SG's home, ML, multiple security cameras, DS's apt., 3 vehicles, and possibly family/friends homes? I can think of a lot of potential locations that might have evidence, but no way of knowing where they checked.



Aside from actually formally mentioning the SG by name, they pretty much unofficially named him a POI, right? Just by admitting they've searched his home at least twice and confiscated vehicles pretty much says "we have reason to believe SG is involved in her disappearance in some fashion". I think LE was kind of forced to make a statement once SM started acknowledging the search. I'm kinda curious if SG has friends/family in LE. It was media who leaked the address (and therefore outed the inhabitants). Not sure where the wife in the hospital info came from (maybe a neighbor?). I don't think LE intended for the public to know who they were looking at.

Maybe they are considered aquantances because he occasionally sold her weed?

Now I don't even know if she smokes weed on occasions. I don't even know if he has access to weed due to his spouses condition or whatever.

But imo. I would love to know more of why LE used the word Acquaintance as well.

 

[LBee]

I guess I never thought of why they used acquaintance because it's so widely used where I currently live (major city) and where I'm from (Northern MI.) It's just a word we use to describe someone you would recognize, but not someone who you are friends with. Interesting to hear it have so much potential connotation!

 

[Hoosier952]

I guess I never thought of why they used acquaintance because it's so widely used where I currently live (major city) and where I'm from (Northern MI.) It's just a word we use to describe someone you would recognize, but not someone who you are friends with. Interesting to hear it have so much potential connotation!

I don't think it was so much that they used the word acquaintance. Used alone, I don't think I would have given it a second though. It was the combo of acquaintance and him working in the same building that made me raise an eyebrow. And now finding out we have in-law LE, it just kinda adds to my eyebrow raising.

This whole time, I've felt SG has been very well protected. They pretty much raided his home (which was leaked/reported on) and yet we haven't been officially told a name, even though it doesn't appear to be a huge secret to anyone following the case. The minute his name is in print, there's really no way to take that back. Every google search result will connect him to DS for eternity. If they think he's involved and everyone already knows, why have they tried so hard to keep his name out of the news?

Anyone locals know if the media vans are parked outside the Berkley residence?

 

[DexterMorgan]

If she wasn't missing and he wasn't a poi. Then the word Acquaintances would be fine and dandy without too much thought needed.

But this is a possible murder case and he is possibly involved.

So LE should have been a little more specific.

But now that I think about it. Its 100% possible that FG fed them that word because it's obvious that he couldn't say; " I never seen or spoken to her in my life. "
Especially since they searched his home and cars for a possible connection.

Idk. It could be nothing. But it still baffles the hinky mind during these no update times.

 

[DakotaMayi]

He may not be guilty of a crime but may have knowledge. There is a difference. I believe he is key and central to finding Dani. I am confident he either did it or knows who else did. His home is ground zero.

<modsnip>

He may have knowledge? .... then he's still not innocent then. I don't know what you think guilty and innocent are but you're still guilty if you know something and don't come forward.

 

[DakotaMayi]

Just a random question. Does anyone think SG or family/friends are reading and posting here?

Yes! Definitely.

 

[mittenstate1988]

There was more than one reference by Mrs. Stislicki that Danielle did not have a boyfriend. I found this article rather quickly. It's entirely possible that DS and SG were more than just acquaintances in the building where they both worked, but until I learn differently, I will take Ann's word for it - Danielle did not have a boyfriend.

...The woman's mother, Ann, also works for MetLife but was not in the building on the day her daughter disappeared.

"Something extreme has happened," Ann Stislicki said after learning her daughter failed to meet a friend for dinner. "She did not have a boyfriend, there was no reason for Danielle not to be there." ...

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/01/0...-home-in-hunt-for-missing-michigan-woman.html

ETA: Same comment in this article, too: http://wlns.com/2017/01/04/parents-of-missing-28-year-old-ask-for-your-help/

I mean, I personally wouldn't tell my mom if I was ****ing around with a married co-worker/security guard for the building where my mom and I both work. Just saying. It would be kept on the DL.

 

[mittenstate1988]

If SG has nothing to hide then why not speak up and proclaim his innocence? If the media was insinuating that I had something to do with a missing persons, I'd be screaming from the rooftops about how innocent I was. I understand that all people may react differently under extreme pressure but still, what else are people left to believe here? We have to base our theories from the few facts that we have. To me, it doesn't sound unreasonable at all to assume that SG is probably responsible.

As a lawyer, I can tell you he is not speaking because he has been told not to. It has nothing to do with guilt or innocence and attorneys would rather make sure their client is protected than keep the folks on Websleuths happy. Him not talking to cops means he's being smart. You can say what you would do if t were you until you're blue in the face but when t actually IS you, I promise you will have change of heart.

That doesn't mean he is guilty or not guilty but your best bet is to stay silent. You never know what the cops' motives are and things can get very twisted, very fast.

 

[Eileen730]

What would be some reasons LE wouldn't officially name someone a POI? I know why they don't make an arrest, but I don't know what the implications would be for not officially naming someone. Is there any reason?

Alibi?

 

[Skigirl]

As a lawyer, I can tell you he is not speaking because he has been told not to. It has nothing to do with guilt or innocence and attorneys would rather make sure their client is protected than keep the folks on Websleuths happy. Him not talking to cops means he's being smart. You can say what you would do if t were you until you're blue in the face but when t actually IS you, I promise you will have change of heart.

That doesn't mean he is guilty or not guilty but your best bet is to stay silent. You never know what the cops' motives are and things can get very twisted, very fast.

Thanks for this post. If I were under suspicion of murder and kidnapping and was innocent, I would immediately retain an attorney and do exactly what he or she told me to do. Too much is at stake to make a mistake and risk a false conviction or even "just" imprisonment for a couple years while awaiting trial, bankrupting my family with my lack of wages and my legal fees in the meantime.

 

[Skigirl]

I mean, I personally wouldn't tell my mom if I was ****ing around with a married co-worker/security guard for the building where my mom and I both work. Just saying. It would be kept on the DL.

I wouldn't tell my mother either, but I would tell my best friend...and if I didn't tell my best friend for whatever reason, I would be super discrete and would not do anything to raise questions from her because I wouldn't want to have to lie. I definitely would not blow her off to go over to his house when she was expecting me to come and cook her dinner and knew I was getting off early from work.

 

[KWest51]

What would be some reasons LE wouldn't officially name someone a POI? I know why they don't make an arrest, but I don't know what the implications would be for not officially naming someone. Is there any reason?

They could be holding off until they have enough evidence so they don't face a civil lawsuit for going after him unjustly.

 

[Owl4]

I drove by the Berkley home on the way to my dentist and seen no activity on Monday. Maybe they were at work or maybe they aren't living there right now. I seen no vehicles, no activity at all.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J320AZ using Tapatalk

 

[newwe]

I'm not saying she wrote "I sure think this boy at work is cute" and then wrote her first name with is last name. It's not far-fetched to think when she talked about future plans or things that stressed her out, she would mention a love interest or whatever. Once you get married and you've went past dating and the honeymoon stage I don't think it would be at all surprising you didn't write about your spouse.

That true. If you're referring to my husband in your last statement, remember, we weren't just automatically married as soon as we met. For 4 months he was the cute intern at my work that I had major crush on and we dated for 2 years. And still nothing, poor guy. Lol anyway...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Enchantment]

That was bothering me, too. I just did some digging. I think the first time it came up was on post #409 on thread #3, which was made by Enchantment. I'd be curious if you look at that again if that's when you think you first saw it mentioned.

I just posted where to look for interesting info. Probably wasn't supposed to according to the rules. Sorry, but I'm in no way related to the case. Just an interested sleuther like you guys. I'm local, with a daughter in her 20's, so this piqued my interest and I became invested in finding Danielle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

I guess I never thought of why they used acquaintance because it's so widely used where I currently live (major city) and where I'm from (Northern MI.) It's just a word we use to describe someone you would recognize, but not someone who you are friends with. Interesting to hear it have so much potential connotation!

To me, the reference by LE to the SG and DS being "acquainted" simply meant that they knew each other. This could mean nothing more than they saw one another at the MetLife building where both worked at one time. Whether there's anything more to their relationship than being "acquainted" at the workplace remains to be seen. I think it's safe to say that LE knows how well SG and DS were acquainted.

 

[zencompass]

I agree. Law enforcement has the information. It will come out when it comes out. They are building their case and the results of the DNA will be received by them soon.

 

[AggieLou]

I mean, I personally wouldn't tell my mom if I was ****ing around with a married co-worker/security guard for the building where my mom and I both work. Just saying. It would be kept on the DL.

Many years ago and 3 yrs into a stressful bad marriage at age 28, I did have a short affair with a younger guy I worked with. Absolutely NO ONE on either side of the relationship was told anything. No closest friends and no family members and not even coworkers knew. it just depends on the 2 people involved and the reasons, as to how they handle that. Not saying anything was going on with these two at all. And at this time I don't really think there was. There is no evidence of it from LE or even leaks on social media.

 

[soanyway]

IMO, the SG is as you stated, very well protected. Without violating TOS, I believe it's very possible there are LE connections and the day MSM showed up at the Berkley house, there was already a family friend (coincidentally an attorney) present at the home. I'm curious to know if the SG is going on about his daily business. I think it's possible he's been advised to lay low, if he's even in the area. JMO

I don't think it was so much that they used the word acquaintance. Used alone, I don't think I would have given it a second though. It was the combo of acquaintance and him working in the same building that made me raise an eyebrow. And now finding out we have in-law LE, it just kinda adds to my eyebrow raising.

This whole time, I've felt SG has been very well protected. They pretty much raided his home (which was leaked/reported on) and yet we haven't been officially told a name, even though it doesn't appear to be a huge secret to anyone following the case. The minute his name is in print, there's really no way to take that back. Every google search result will connect him to DS for eternity. If they think he's involved and everyone already knows, why have they tried so hard to keep his name out of the news?

Anyone locals know if the media vans are parked outside the Berkley residence?