MI MI - Danielle Stislicki, 28, Southfield, 2 Dec 2016 #11

[monkeypants]

This is what confuses me. Typically if they are "interviewed" there was some give-and-take, otherwise they would say he "refused to comment", or something to that effect. Did his own words in the "interview" cause them to look further at him? When was he interviewed, before or after the house search, etc?
I don't recall it ever being stated that they even talked to him until this article. I'd love to have been a fly on the wall for that one.

No he stated interviewing and stopped in the middle and his attorney showed up and that's it. He has refused to even give an alibi

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

 

[monkeypants]

Me too.

I suppose he isn't refusing to comment, he is just saying he doesn't know anything.

No he isn't even saying that. He won't give them an alibi

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

 

[monkeypants]

Technically he played beer pong the next day....

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

 

[LBee]

No he stated interviewing and stopped in the middle and his attorney showed up and that's it. He has refused to even give an alibi

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

Sorry, who is "he?" I'm not following...
Which attorney, the one on the MSM videos throwing up red herrings when they were searching the house?

 

[Rachel1]

From my understanding ( what I gathered from the article, but I can't link right now. I'll do it from home later) is that the SIL was told that he refused to give any detailed statements, did not give an alibi for the time and date in question and invoked his right to remain silent .

 

[LBee]

From my understanding ( what I gathered from the article, but I can't link right now. I'll do it from home later) is that the SIL was told that he refused to give any detailed statements, did not give an alibi for the time and date in question and invoked his right to remain silent .

I
I was more trying to figure out what attorney showed up. How long ago was it that he invoked his right to remain silent? Because, if he knew he was going to be questioned, why in the world would an attorney not be present from the beginning...unless he was arrested and then made his one phone call? Some of her details aren't making sense to me.

 

[Rachel1]

I'm not sure, I can't answer that without speculating. In fact, I can't find the article I'm referring to off hand so please take that as hearsay and not fact for now.

Since he hasn't been arrested though, he wouldn't get the one phone call. IMO, it looks like he went voluntarily and left voluntarily. So wouldn't need to worry about making a one phone call.

 

[thekarmabus]

I
I was more trying to figure out what attorney showed up. How long ago was it that he invoked his right to remain silent? Because, if he knew he was going to be questioned, why in the world would an attorney not be present from the beginning...unless he was arrested and then made his one phone call? Some of her details aren't making sense to me.

Perhaps he had a close relationship with the attorney such as family friend, personal friend. If this is the case SG may have remained quiet to friends and family until he realized he was going to be questioned. Called attorney friend on way to or at LE dept. the attorney stated don't say a word and I'll be right there. SG stated nothing, attorney showed up and said unless you are making an arrest we are out of here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rachel1]

LE has not named him as a suspect or even a poi at this point.
They have been very tight lipped.
If he had been arrested around the time after her disappearance, that would've shown up on public records ( which it does not) so I would say they in my opinion, he was never arrested and probably went in to be questioned voluntarily.
The police have stated that they are making progress with this case and are waiting for testing to come back from the state crime lab. They even recently stated they received new evidence that was recently sent. So from that, I took it as there has been no arrest but that they are building a case.
While LE builds their cases, they will often ask people to come in and give voluntarily statements. Those people can show up and refuse to answer questions. (That is their right and they do not have to answer any questions if they do not want to)
So maybe he just went in, said" I have nothing to say" and then left?!?! So then police have no choice but to build their case without that persons statement.

 

[Owl4]

I would have all the compassion in the world for the other families if they were doing tough love to get him to speak to the police. Because they allow him to live under their roof without that stipulation, I'm finding my heart cold to them. Force him to do the right thing. Let them interview him he knowsSOMETHING that's obvious to a blind man.

Couldn't of said it any better! 😊

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J320AZ using Tapatalk

 

[monkeypants]

LE has not named him as a suspect or even a poi at this point.
They have been very tight lipped.
If he had been arrested around the time after her disappearance, that would've shown up on public records ( which it does not) so I would say they in my opinion, he was never arrested and probably went in to be questioned voluntarily.
The police have stated that they are making progress with this case and are waiting for testing to come back from the state crime lab. They even recently stated they received new evidence that was recently sent. So from that, I took it as there has been no arrest but that they are building a case.
While LE builds their cases, they will often ask people to come in and give voluntarily statements. Those people can show up and refuse to answer questions. (That is their right and they do not have to answer any questions if they do not want to)
So maybe he just went in, said" I have nothing to say" and then left?!?! So then police have no choice but to build their case without that persons statement.

If I had to guess the "conversation" most likely took place during the first raid....

 

[DakotaMayi]

No he isn't even saying that. He won't give them an alibi

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

Newton said the truth is still out there, and she wants her brother-in-law to tell police everything he knows. The man — who is not being named as no one has been charged in the case — told police during interviews he knows nothing about the disappearance, she said.

http://www.theoaklandpress.com/gene...earched-in-danielle-stislicki-case-speaks-out

No...that is exactly what he is saying. Per the link and quote above.

 

[tmmac]

I agree the SIL interview sheds new light on things. I cannot judge the SG's wife or family though. Please remember them with compassion. Whomever committed this horrible crime will be a son (or daughter), husband (or wife), brother (or sister), etc. The family of a murderer is often taken completely by surprise at the accusations and charges, and find their world and everything they thought they knew completely torn apart. They likely won't condone the heinous act of murder yet may still love their son, husband, brother, etc.

Support means different things to different people, and not turning someone out into the street when they have yet to be accused of a crime is not a crime itself. It shows faith and love, hopefully not misplaced. A close relative of mine was accused and stood trial for a horrible crime and the judicial system found him guilty. I am not sorry about that, as much as it has devastated our family. His victim's family suffered infinitely more and deserves to see justice, though tragically nothing can undo his crime. I know the world is a safer place, though I still don't understand what happened. We can love a person while HATING something they have done (or continue to do).

This situation reminds me of the show on Discovery ID called Evil Lives Here. There are a few episodes where a family member had to turn in a sibling, son or daughter that they knew to have been a murderer. You can see the internal struggle but they did the right thing. I always admire that person because that is what you should do regardless of how hard it is.

 

[LBee]

If I had to guess the "conversation" most likely took place during the first raid....

See, this makes more sense to me. Why in the world would anyone who knows not to talk to LE without an attorney, voluntarily go to the police station to not make a statement?
I'm not disagreeing with anyone here, more questioning the details the SIL supposedly has. There are just some things that don't add up as they stand now. I don't doubt the SG's involvement, but I do doubt the "facts" being presented by the SIL. I've been saying it for ever, but I feel like there is just more to this than meets the eye. I don't know why, or what that is...but it (the whole thing) feels "off." to me.

 

[tmmac]

Imo this wasn't an abduction. I think it was a crime of passion. Requited or unrequited who knows...Again JMO

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

Are you saying you don't think there was premeditation?

 

[monkeypants]

Are you saying you don't think there was premeditation?

Yep. That's what I'm saying. I think a situation got out of control.

 

[tmmac]

See, this makes more sense to me. Why in the world would anyone who knows not to talk to LE without an attorney, voluntarily go to the police station to not make a statement?
I'm not disagreeing with anyone here, more questioning the details the SIL supposedly has. There are just some things that don't add up as they stand now. I don't doubt the SG's involvement, but I do doubt the "facts" being presented by the SIL. I've been saying it for ever, but I feel like there is just more to this than meets the eye. I don't know why, or what that is...but it (the whole thing) feels "off." to me.

Purely speculating but he could've went thinking they have nothing and when he saw where the line of questioning was going he skated out of there.

 

[monkeypants]

Purely speculating but he could've went thinking they have nothing and when he saw where the line of questioning was going he skated out of there.

Imo they said we know she was seen with you. We know you were in her car. We know she was here at your house. My guess is that shut him up quick. He has LE in his family...my guess is he is well coached

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

 

[loreet]

This situation reminds me of the show on Discovery ID called Evil Lives Here. There are a few episodes where a family member had to turn in a sibling, son or daughter that they knew to have been a murderer. You can see the internal struggle but they did the right thing. I always admire that person because that is what you should do regardless of how hard it is.

I have seen people do both: anything and everything to protect the one they loved, including cover up murder and become complicit themselves; and choosing what we all know to be right and turning their loved one in, sharing what they know with LE. I do not think most people can truly predict what they would do until confronted with the situation themselves.

If ANYONE has information that has not been shared with LE about the disappearance of DS, I do not believe they will be enticed by the reward money (they would have come forward before now) nor physical threat of their own arrest (usually this turning happens after the fact, as part of a deal). They will come forward because it is the right thing to do, and they have not yet done so because it is difficult for them. I believe that compassion (their own for the family of DS) and our compassion shown to them (as victims of a murderer, a liar, and his deceptions) may well be what finally gives them the strength to speak out.

 

[monkeypants]

I don't think anyone thought that Dani would invoke such an outrage and people would fall in love with her just hearing this story...I'm thinking SG was really dumbstruck when this took roots and grew to what it is.