MI MI - Danielle Stislicki, 28, Southfield, 2 Dec 2016 #8

[Eileen730]

There is speculation that her friend last heard from her at 4:15. But the text posted earlier from her didn't show the time stamp.

DS' mom reported that she left the building at 5 p.m. It is possible this was early for her or she got caught up and didn't end up leaving much earlier than usual. No one can confirm this. But, 5 p.m. was noted by mother at the first press conference I believe. So, that's the time it seems we should stick to.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

Do they clock in and out?

 

[monkeypants]

Do they clock in and out?

I would assume the majority of employees are salary but there would be hourly employees as well that may or may not have a formal clock out policy.

 

[Lia_]

Oh that's sad lol....

Lol I've lived here my entire 29 years of life and it felt cold to me today. I wore boots, a sweater and a big giant white puffy down coat and I was still cold

I don't belong in michigan. Is it summer yet?

 

[soanyway]

Haha! I'm much too nosey for that "ignore" button. What if I accidentally block the perp or an accomplice? Besides, I think I'd be even more lost in conversation if it seemed like everyone else was in on something and I was all "WTH are they talking about?" And yes, I'm in the South and cannot begin to tell you how often I've passed on those blessings

Ya'll know what we say down here: "Bless your heart." :innocent:

A propos of nothing, there is an ignore function that can be a lifesaver. You click on the user's name, then click on "profile", then, "ignore user". After that, you just have to have the discipline not to peak ;-).

 

[Bravo]

I have not located the timeline. I am just going to go on what I remember. It was the 2nd search where the mattress was taken with a warrant correct???? They are not going to get a warrant to remove a mattress unless something was visible to the naked eye. IMO. Warrants are specific and as to the why.

 

[Skigirl]

I would assume the majority of employees are salary but there would be hourly employees as well that may or may not have a formal clock out policy.

I have never quite understood this, but we had admins who were salaried but who also still clocked in and out at my last company. Something about the distinction between management or not and something about being eligible for overtime. I don't think DS' job would have fallen in the category of hourly or salaried that clock in/out, though.

 

[Eileen730]

I would assume the majority of employees are salary but there would be hourly employees as well that may or may not have a formal clock out policy.

I believe salaried. Employees must clock
In and out also. I know I did. Still had to have a record of worked.

 

[Lia_]

Oh hey we might be neighbors. If you see eyes peering out from under the blinds or a pair of binoculars in the upstairs window that's just me :happydance:

LOL I actually laughed out loud at this...I think you are my neighbor lol, when I was a teen I walked into my neighbors house (my best friend lived next door) and her dad was legit sitting on top of his desk looking out the window across the street at the new neighbors with a pair of binoculars. I was reminded at that moment to always remember to close my blinds at night in my room lol

 

[Vresia]

Yes, but do we know if SG was there when they searched or if any conversations took place?

This doesn't answer your question but it relates to the SG. On the 2nd video at this link, http://bit.ly/2jsXQI6 , the reporter says:

An attorney representing the man who lives at this house "says that he has cooperated but that he has nothing to say to police..."

I don't know what cooperation refers to. Perhaps allowing an initial unwarranted search ?

 

[Skigirl]

I have not located the timeline. I am just going to go on what I remember. It was the 2nd search where the mattress was taken with a warrant correct???? They are not going to get a warrant to remove a mattress unless something was visible to the naked eye. IMO. Warrants are specific and as to the why.

I think they could have had a less specific warrant that specified evidence related to sexual activity or physical evidence that would establish DS' presence in the home, without specifically naming the mattress. I know I've seen pretty broadly-written affidavits before. I think what gets past a judge depends on how strong the evidence is as a whole.

 

[soanyway]

Yes, but with multiple warrants, we don't know for certain it was just the 2nd time they were out (but definitely not the 1st). So was a sample taken initially that led to the entire mattress being seized? If my math is correct, it would've been at least 2 weeks after the initial search (long enough to get forensics back?) and the mattress was taken 3 days after LE announced that DS was a victim of a crime. Ugh....I hate typing these words.

I have not located the timeline. I am just going to go on what I remember. It was the 2nd search where the mattress was taken with a warrant correct???? They are not going to get a warrant to remove a mattress unless something was visible to the naked eye. IMO. Warrants are specific and as to the why.

 

[charger]

1smile... you seem to "know things". Is this from personal knowledge or have I missed something in MSM about a sighting of SG?

 

[gam]

I have not located the timeline. I am just going to go on what I remember. It was the 2nd search where the mattress was taken with a warrant correct???? They are not going to get a warrant to remove a mattress unless something was visible to the naked eye. IMO. Warrants are specific and as to the why.

First page of this thread first post.

Says something like cujenn81 timeline of facts. It just a timeline bases on MSM articles and links to those. I would give you link, but my iPad is not letting me.

 

[Vresia]

A reasonable theory. I'm just trying to figure out how he would have known she was leaving early that day if he no longer worked there.

He may not have known she was leaving work early. 5PM is a reasonable time to expect someone would leave work. I have the impression, from DSs fathers comments, that the time she left work might vary.

And I totally agree with soanyway- if I were going to do something, I would show up long before I expected to encounter the person.

 

[Bravo]

This doesn't answer your question but it relates to the SG. On the 2nd video at this link, http://bit.ly/2jsXQI6 , the reporter says:

An attorney representing the man who lives at this house "says that he has cooperated but that he has nothing to say to police..."

I don't know what cooperation refers to. Perhaps allowing an initial unwarranted search ?

That's what I am trying to figure out. What was searched with permission and what was by warrant. Warrants as I said have to be specific. As we know. If something is seen during an initail search and not on the warrant it cant be seized, back you go for another warrant.

 

[monkeypants]

Haha! I'm much too nosey for that "ignore" button. What if I accidentally block the perp or an accomplice? Besides, I think I'd be even more lost in conversation if it seemed like everyone else was in on something and I was all "WTH are they talking about?" And yes, I'm in the South and cannot begin to tell you how often I've passed on those blessings

You can still choose to read a post by the person you've ignored tho. The last week or so has been outrageous and if I hadn't used it I would have left the thread.

 

[missgulfsouth]

The three homes across the street and three to the side ... I would know. It's my profession though. I'm extremely attuned to small details many might overlook.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My neighbors house was robbed in broad daylight while I was home, approx 50 yds from my front door and I saw nothing at all.

 

[Bravo]

If I was about to commit a crime I would be arriving early. Looking at surroundings, going over my plan etc. etc. For the record. I have no record LOL

 

[monkeypants]

I have not located the timeline. I am just going to go on what I remember. It was the 2nd search where the mattress was taken with a warrant correct???? They are not going to get a warrant to remove a mattress unless something was visible to the naked eye. IMO. Warrants are specific and as to the why.

Yes it was the second one. The first one wasn't covered by MSM. It was covered by the FB page the residents use

 

[Skigirl]

That's what I am trying to figure out. What was searched with permission and what was by warrant. Warrants as I said have to be specific. As we know. If something is seen during an initail search and not on the warrant it cant be seized, back you go for another warrant.

Geez, what a big misstep that would be on SG's part, then. If I got through an initial search and I knew there might be bio evidence on my mattress, my next stop would be Mattress Warehouse for an emergency delivery and mattress removal. Yes, it would look suspicious, but I would rather look like I was hiding something than let LE come back to seize my mattress and remove all doubt.